) 


I 


\ 


CYCLOPEDIA 
OF  AMERICAN 
GOVERNMENT 


CYCLOPEDIA  f/ 
AMERICAN 
GOVERNMENT 


EDITED  BY 


Andrew  c.  McLaughlin,  a.m.,  ll.b.,  ll.d. 

PROFESSOR  OF  HISTORY,  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO 

AND 

ALBERT  BUSHNELL  HART,  PH.D.,  LITT.D.,  LL.D. 

PROFESSOR  OF  THE  SCIENCE  OF  GOVERNMENT,  HARVARD  UNIVERSITY 


VOLUME  III 

PRESIDENT-YUKON 


NEW  YORK  AND  LONDON 

D.  APPLETON  AND  COMPANY 


1914 


Copyright,  1914,  by 
D.  APPLETON  AND  COMPANY 


Printed  in  the  United  States  of  America 


MAPS  AND  CHARTS 


MAPS 

PAGE 

Railroads  and  Canals  in  1840  142 

Railroads  and  Canals  in  1800  143 

Railroads  and  Canals  in  1880  144 

Railroads  in  1900  140 

Rhode  Island  224 

Principal  Highways  and  Canals  in  1830  231 

Slavery  in  the  United  States  318 

Settlement  of  Boundaries  in  South  America  355 

South  Carolina  359 

South  Dakota  301 

Tennessee  515 

Texas  530 

Utah  602 

Vermont  609 

Virginia  618 

Indian  Wars  of  the  United  States  650 

Washington  656 

Internal  Waterways  of  the  United  States  662 

West  Indies  667 

West  Virginia  679 

Wisconsin  691 

Wyoming  702 

CHARTS 

Internal  Organization  of  the  Department  of  State  380 

Internal  Organization  of  the  Treasury  Department  562 

Internal  Organization  of  the  Department  of  War  642-643 

INDEX  707 


Y 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


https://archive.org/details/cyclopediaofamer03mcla_0 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF 
AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 

VOLUME  III 


PRESIDENT  OF  THE  SENATE.  In  32 

states  the  lieutenant-governor  is  ex  officio  pres- 
ident of  the  upper  branch  of  the  state  legis- 
lature. In  14  states  the  senate  elects  its  own 
presiding  officer,  called  the  “Speaker  of  the 
Senate”  in  Tennessee — elsewhere  the  “Presi- 
dent.” Eight  states  have  no  lieutenant-gov- 
ernor, and  upon  the  president  of  the  senate 
devolve  the  governor’s  duties,  in  case  that  office 
becomes  vacant.  In  Oregon  the  president  of 
the  senate  follows  the  secretary  of  state  and 
the  attorney  general  in  the  gubernatorial  suc- 
cession; in  Utah  he  follows  the  secretary  of 
state.  In  14  states,  where  the  lieutenant-gov- 
ernor presides  over  the  senate,  the  president 
of  the  senate  pro  tempore  is  placed  next  in 
succession  to  the  governor. 

This  office  is  closely  analogous  to  that  of  the 
president  of  the  United  States  Senate  (see), 
but  the  state  officer  has  relatively  more  power 
than  the  national  Vice-President  (see).  In 
the  states  where  he  is  elected  by  and  from 
the  senate,  he  has,  of  course,  the  rights  of  a 
member.  In  Michigan,  Mississippi  and  Texas, 
the  lieutenant-governor,  acting  as  president  of 


the  senate,  is  given  the  right  to  debate  any 
question  in  committee  of  the  whole,  and  in 
Kentucky  he  may  also  vote.  In  the  other 
states  he  has  a casting  vote  in  case  of  a tie 
in  the  senate,  and,  in  some  instances,  in  joint 
assembly,  of  which  he  is  ordinarily  president. 
In  some  states  he  appoints  the  senate  commit- 
tees. But  his  position  is  less  autocratic  than 
that  of  the  speaker,  for  the  senate’s  smaller 
numbers  do  not  call  for  so  rigorous  a rule. 
A much  larger  proportion  of  its  members  are 
men  of  legislative  experience,  and  hence  less 
in  need  of  and  less  tractable  under  party  dis- 
cipline. The  office  of  president  of  the  senate  is 
one  of  more  dignity  than  influence,  and  is  often 
sought  as  a stepping-stone  to  the  governor- 
ship. 

See  Legislature  and  Legislative  Reform; 
Lieutenant-Governor;  Rules  in  State  Leg- 
islatures; Senate,  State;  State  Assembly; 
State  Legislature. 

References:  P.  S.  Reinsch,  Am.  Legislatures 
(1907)  ; S.  P.  Orth,  “Am.  State  Legislatures” 
in  Atlantic  Monthly,  XCIV  (1904),  728-739. 

G.  H.  Haynes. 


PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  AUTHORITY 

AND  INFLUENCE  OF 


Foundation  of  the  Presidency. — A remark- 
able and  in  many  ways  unexpected  result  of 
the  Federal  Convention  of  1787  was  the  provi- 
sion for  a President  of  the  United  States.  In 
general  the  people  of  the  colonies  distrusted 
executive  power.  Except  in  Connecticut  and 
Rhode  Island  the  governors  were  appointed 
by  a higher  authority  and  were  looked  upon 
with  more  or  less  suspicion  and  dislike.  This 
feeling  was  reflected  in  the  new  government 
of  the  revolutionary  period.  Massachusetts 
had  no  governor  till  1780;  Pennsylvania  till 
1790  had  an  executive  council.  The  Continen- 


tal Congress  and  the  Congress  of  the  Confeder- 
ation were  examples  of  a parliamentary  gov- 
ernment, in  which  every  executive  and  judicial 
officer  was  appointed  by  Congress  and  remov- 
able by  Congress. 

On  the  other  hand  the  experience  with  Con- 
gress from  1775  to  1787  aroused  popular  pre- 
judice against  that  form  of  national  govern- 
ment. One  of  the  earliest  resolutions  adopted 
by  the  convention  provided  for  a government 
of  three  departments.  The  outcome  of  the 
convention  was  the  creation  of  a very  powerful 
and  highly  concentrated  executive;  and  it  is 

1 


PRESIDENT  OE  THE  UNITED  STATES,  AUTHORITY  AND  INFLUENCE  OF 


impossible  to  resist  the  belief  that  the  con- 
vention was  willing  to  provide  for  a strong 
presidency  because  everybody  knew  that  the 
first  President  would  be  George  Washington. 

Constitutional  Powers. — Significantly  the 
President,  in  the  first  article  of  the  Consti- 
tution (Sec.  vii,  2),  is  endowed  with  the 
great  function  of  vetoing  acts  of  Congress, 
subject  to  the  overruling  of  a two-thirds  vote 
of  both  houses.  The  main  authority  of  the 
President  is  usually  derived  from  Article  II, 
in  which,  however,  more  than  half  the  text 
is  given  up  to  provisions  as  to  his  choice,  com- 
pensation, and  oath  of  office.  The  President 
has  ten  carefully  enumerated  powers:  (1) 
command  of  the  army,  navy,  militia;  (2)  re- 
quiring opinions  of  heads  of  departments;  (3) 
pardons;  (4)  treaty  making  (two-thirds  of  the 
Senators  concurring)  ; (5)  appointment  of  offi- 
cials (a  majority  of  the  Senate  confirming)  ; 
(6)  information  to  Congress  and  recommenda- 
tion of  measures;  (7)  calling  the  houses  in 
extra  session  and  adjourning  in  case  of  dis- 
agreement; (8)  receiving  public  ministers; 
(9)  taking  care  that  the  laws  be  faithfully 
executed;  (10)  commissioning  officers.  The 
President  also  has  a sphere  of  duty  in  guar- 
anteeing to  the  states  a republican  form  of 
government,  and  in  protecting  them  from  in- 
vasion and  from  domestic  violence. 

Extent  of  Powers. — Who  could  deduce  from 
these  few  and  moderate  powers  the  real  place, 
weight  and  authority  of  the  President  of  the 
United  States  accorded  directly  by  the  Con- 
stitution, or  indirectly  by  the  development  of 
executive  power  ? As  commander-in-chief  of  the 
military  forces  and  vested  with  the  power  of 
nomination  and  commission,  the  President  di- 
rects all  the  military  operations  in  time  of 
war.  He  has  control  over  the  foreign  relations 
of  the  United  States.  His  appointing  power, 
authority  to  require  opinions  of  heads  of  de- 
partments and  commissioning  power  put  him 
at  the  head  of  a hierarchy  of  public  servants 
numbering  more  than  two  hundred  thousand. 
His  power  to  summon  Congress  in  extra  ses- 
sion and  recommend  measures  gives  him  a 
legislative  initiative  of  great  significance.  His 
relations  to  state  governments  in  times  of 
disorder  practically  make  him  the  arbiter  be- 
tween rival  governors  or  legislators.  The  sim- 
ple clause  “he  shall  take  care  that  the  laws 
be  faithfully  executed”  makes  him  the  super- 
visor of  the  federal  service,  the  inciter  of 
federal  prosecutions,  and  the  center  of  asser- 
tion of  national  authority  in  case  of  revolu- 
tion or  rebellion.  Conjoined  with  these  offi- 
cially described  powers  is  a vast  field  of  au- 
thority founded  on  unwritten  principles  and 
practices  which  in  the  course  of  time  come  to 
have  almost  the  force  of  law. 

Power  of  Removal. — Grouping  these  express, 
implied  and  traditional  elements  together,  per- 
haps the  most  important  authority  of  the 
President  is  his  headship  of  the  executive  serv- 


ice. Ilis  great  influence  over  this  service  turns 
upon  the  adoption  in  1789,  by  the  casting  vote 
of  the  Vice-President,  of  a statute  which  rec- 
ognized the  power  of  the  President  to  remove 
heads  of  departments  without  reference  to  the 
Senate  ( see  Removal  of  Public  Officers), 
though  the  consent  of  that  body  was  necessary 
for  the  confirmation  of  the  appointment. 

The  power  to  block  removals  from  offices  in 
appointments  to  which  they  participate  is  ex- 
ercised by  many  state  senates  and  by  boards 
of  aldermen  and  governor’s  councils;  but  has 
never  been  recognized  in  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment except  for  the  brief  period  of  the  Tenure 
of  Office  Act,  passed  in  1867,  modified  in  1869 
and  repealed  in  1887.  The  power  of  removal 
throughout  the  federal  system  is  exercised,  in 
like  manner,  by  the  appointing  power,  for 
whatever  reasons  seem  good;  except  that  under 
the  Civil  Service  Act  of  1883  no  person  can 
be  removed  for  refusing  to  contribute  to  a 
political  fund.  Here  is  the  key  to  the  effi- 
ciency of  the  Federal  Government.  Every  per- 
son who  draws  a salary  from  the  United  States 
government  must  obey  legal  directions  given 
to  him  and  is  expected  to  be  honest  and  active 
on  pain  of  removal.  Inasmuch  as  nearly  the 
whole  federal  executive  service  is  subdivided 
into  ten  departments,  this  system  in  the  hands 
of  a capable  President  makes  a steady  and 
elective  policy  possible. 

During  the  last  thirty  years  all  the  Presi- 
dents, partly  acting  under  the  statute  of  1883, 
partly  under  rules  which  they  themselves  au- 
thorized, have  provided  for  the  appointment  of 
subordinates  by  competitive  examination;  and 
that  system  now  covers  all  but  about  50,000  of 
the  persons  in  the  service  of  the  government. 
This  system  has  to  a large  degree  removed  the 
temptation  to  remove  officials  simply  for  po- 
litical reasons;  but  it  leaves  the  authority 
to  discipline  public  officials  undiminished. 

Military  Powers. — The  military  powers  of 
the  President,  together  with  his  authority  to 
keep  order  and  assist  the  states  against  ri- 
oters, when  necessary,  give  him  control  of  the 
most  powerful  physical  force  in  the  country. 
He  acts,  of  course,  under  the  general  limita- 
tions of  the  Constitution,  such  as  the  neces- 
sity of  congressional  appropriations  for  the 
support  of  the  military;  and  the  power  of 
Congress  to  declare  war.  Except  during  Pres- 
ident Johnson’s  administration  from  1865  to 
1869,  and  in  a long  struggle  with  President 
Hayes  over  the  use  of  troops  at  the  polls  in 
the  South,  Congress  has  never  sought  to  bring 
the  President  to  terms  by  refusing  to  authorize 
the  necessary  organization  of  military  forces. 
In  all  the  wars  since  the  Revolution,  the  power 
of  the  President  to  appoint  military  officers 
among  whom  members  of  Congress  and  their 
friends  have  always  been  included,  has  given 
him  a considerable  advantage  in  dealing  with 
Congress.  In  general,  Congress  is  willing  to 
vote  for  increases  of  military  force  for  which 


PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  AUTHORITY  AND  INFLUENCE  OF 


the  President  asks,  though  it  is  by  no  means 
so  ready  to  approve  military  reforms  which 
involve  a reduction  of  officers  or  a reduction 
of  expenses. 

Administrative  Powers. — Another  great 
presidential  force  comes  through  the  Presi- 
dent’s relations  to  the  Cabinet,  a body  nowhere 
mentioned  in  the  Constitution,  even  the  heads 
of  departments  being  alluded  to  only  in  two 
incidental  clauses  (Art.  II,  Sec.  ii,  Tflf  1,  2). 
The  Federal  Convention  abandoned  its  first 
plan  of  an  executive  council,  and  left  the 
organization  of  the  business  of  the  government 
to  be  determined  by  statute.  Inasmuch  as 
there  were  in  operation  in  1787  several  federal 
executive  departments,  established  by  Congress, 
everybody  expected  that  there  would  continue 
to  be  such  departments.  Accordingly  in  the 
first  Congress  bills  were  passed  organizing  the 
Departments  of  State,  War,  and  the  Treasury; 
subsequently  by  subdivision  and  by  the  coming 
in  of  new  fields  of  activity,  the  departments 
have  been  increased  to  ten,  each  created  by 
act  of  Congress.  Inasmuch  as  the  President 
under  the  Constitution  appoints  the  heads  of 
departments,  the  ultimate  right  to  make  de- 
cisions with  regard  to  the  work  of  all  the  de- 
partments is  in  the  hands  of  the  President. 
Congress  controls  the  number  of  subordinates 
by  its  detailed  appropriations  and,  particularly 
in  the  case  of  the  Treasury  Department  (see), 
prescribes  some  duties  for  the  Secretary  by 
statute.  New  federal  services,  the  extension  of 
the  post  office  and  other  federal  advantages, 
come  from  legislation;  but  it  is  the  President 
who  follows  up  the  legislation  and  controls, 
if  he  so  desires,  the  discretion  of  the  heads 
of  the  departments  within  the  boundaries  of 
the  law. 

The  President  also  harmonizes  the  adminis- 
tration and  thus  supplies  the  governmental 
solvent  which  is  so  lacking  in  all  the  state 
governments.  For  instance,  the  Secretary  of 
State,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  and 
the  Secretary  of  Commerce  cannot  have 
different  policies  with  regard  to  the  import 
trade,  because  the  President  sees  to  it  that 
they  act  on  the  same  principle  or  that  some- 
body resigns.  The  Cabinet  meetings  are  a 
kind  of  clearing  house  for  the  general  business 
of  the  executive.  Every  sensible  President 
leaves  plenty  of  leeway  to  his  secretaries  and 
interferes  in  details  as  little  as  possible;  but 
his  is  the  final  authority  in  the  decision  of  all 
questions,  whether  involving  discretion  or  the 
application  of  the  law;  hence  the  public  looks 
to  the  President  if  something  goes  wrong  in 
one  of  the  departments;  and  in  many  cases 
heads  of  departments  have  been  forced  to  re- 
sign because  the  President  could  not  or  would 
not  stand  against  the  popular  pressure. 

Legislative  Powers. — Nominally  the  Presi- 
dent has  no  express  power  to  draft  or  intro- 
duce legislation.  He  may,  under  the  Constitu- 
tion, “recommend  to  their  consideration  such 


measures  as  he  shall  regard  as  necessary  and 
expedient”  (Art.  II,  Sec.  in)  but  the  cases 
are  very  few  in  which  the  President  submits 
the  text  of  a bill,  and  asks  Congress  to  enact 
it.  Nevertheless  many  measures  have  been 
drafted  by  heads  of  departments  and  intro- 
duced through  committees  or  members  of  Con- 
gress, as  for  instance  the  Second  Rank  Act  of 
1816  and  the  Walker  tariff  of  1846.  A more 
direct  process  is  not  necessary,  inasmuch  as 
the  President  powerfully  affects  the  prepara- 
tion of  the  laws.  He  tells  members  of  Congress 
what  he  would  like  and  further  informs  them 
what  he  would  not  like  and  probably  veto. 
He  sometimes  cuts  off  or  threatens  to  cut  off 
their  influence  on  the  President’s  patronage. 
He  arranges  with  heads  of  departments  to 
present  the  views  of  the  administration,  and 
to  press  measures  upon  committees  and  lead- 
ing members  of  Congress.  He  sends  in  argu- 
mentative messages,  sometimes  repeatedly. 
When  a bill  is  framed  and  under  discussion  he 
may  allow  his  opinions  of  it  to  be  known; 
and  in  a last  resort  may  use  his  veto  power 
(see),  which  practically  gives  him  a final 
weight  in  legislation  all  but  equal  to  that  of 
two-thirds  of  the  members  of  both  houses. 

Since  1885,  all  Presidents  have  occasionally 
appealed  to  the  people  by  direct  addresses,  by 
messages  to  Congress,  or  through  their  friends 
in  the  public  press  in  order  to  put  a pressure 
upon  their  Representatives  and  Senators  to 
vote  for  measures  which  the  President  is  urg- 
ing. During  the  administrations  of  President 
Roosevelt  and  President  Taft,  very  significant 
measures,  particularly  acts  on  transportation 
and  the  tariff  of  1909,  assumed  their  final 
shape  under  this  pressure  upon  Congress.  The 
taking  away  of  the  previous  powers  of  the 
speaker  (see)  of  the  House  of  Representatives, 
in  1910,  has  tende'd  to  enlarge  the  legislative 
authority  of  the  President.  The  public  seems 
to  recognize  that  some  one  person  or  very  small 
group  of  persons  should  have  the  responsibil- 
ity of  preparing  measures  and  pressing  them 
to  a vote ; and  a vigorous  President  is  the  most 
effective  fulcrum  for  such  action. 

Execution  of  the  Laws. — One  reason  for  this 
legislative  weight  of  the  President,  which  was 
neither  stated  in  nor  foreseen  by  the  Constitu- 
tion, is  that  the  American  people  are  coming 
to  recognize  that  the  people  who  carry  out 
the  laws  ought  to  have  some  hand  in  making 
them.  The  Constitution  does,  however,  give 
explicit  power  to  the  President  to  “take  care 
that  the  laws  be  carefully  executed”  (Art.  II, 
Sec.  iii)  and  this  is  one  of  the  largest  fields 
of  executive  power.  In  an  indirect  way  he 
takes  care  to  execute  the  laws  by  appointing 
suitable  persons  to  aid  in  executing  them; 
and  by  calling  upon  Congress  "to  enact  such 
laws  as  are  necessary  for  carrying  out  the 
laws  already  on  the  statute  books.  Directly, 
the  President  takes  care  that  the  laws  are 
faithfully  executed  by  removing  or  causing 


PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  AUTHORITY  AND  INFLUENCE  OF 


the  removal  of  unfaithful  servants  of  the  gov- 
ernment. Under  the  judicial  systems,  both 
federal  and  state,  criminal  prosecutions  are 
generally  instigated  by  an  executive  official, 
the  prosecuting  attorney,  and  prosecutions  are 
pursued  through  or  in  harmony  with  the  attor- 
ney general  of  the  United  States  though  that 
functionary,  or  the  President,  may  set  in  mo- 
tion the  federal  prosecuting  officials.  He  may 
thus  follow  up  officials  who  have  betrayed  their 
trust  and  he  may  also  throw  the  weight  of 
his  influence  into  prosecutions  of  individuals 
or  corporations  whom  he  believes  to  be  vio- 
lators of  law.  The  prosecutions  under  the 
Sherman  Anti-Trust  Act  of  1890  (see)  are 
known  to  have  sprung  from  the  direct  and 
express  will  of  the  Presidents  under  whom  it 
was  carried  out. 

In  a less  obvious  way  the  President  is  see- 
ing to  it  that  the  laws  be  faithfully  executed, 
when  he  keeps  an  eye  on  the  executive  service 
of  the  government;  when  he  tries  to  promote 
efficiency  through  commissions  and  other  agen- 
cies to  find  out  what  is  going  on  in  the  serv- 
ice; when  he  spurs  up  or  supports  collectors 
of  revenue  in  the  enforcement  of  the  tariff 
and  other  tax  laws ; when  he  uses  his  discre-  I 
tion  to  hold  up  land  entries  till  their  real 
character  be  found  out;  when  he  makes  forest 
reservations;  when  he  insists  on  the  treaty 
rights  of  the  United  States. 

The  duty  of  the  faithful  execution  of  the 
laws  is  especially  seen  in  times  of  disturb- 
ance. Many  Presidents  from  Washington  down 
have  called  out  regular  troops  and  sailors  or 
state  militia  to  execute  the  laws  against  com- 
binations otherwise  too  powerful.  Thus,  in 
1894,  President  Cleveland  called  out  troops  to 
prevent  interference  with  the  carriage  of  the 
mails  under  federal  laws  in  Chicago  ( see  In- 
surrections, Suppression  of). 

Relations  with  the  States. — The  President, 
being  always  in  session,  and  standing  as  the 
head  of  the  nation,  is  the  usual  center  of 
official  communication  with  the  states,  particu- 
larly with  reference  to  the  keeping  of  order. 
Under  the  Constitution  he  may  furnish  federal 
forces  on  the  request  of  the  legislature  or  of 
the  governor,  if  the  legislature  cannot  be  con- 
vened, to  suppress  disorder  (Art.  IV,  Sec.  iv). 
Such  a call  was  declined  by  President  Tyler 
in  the  case  of  Rhode  Island  in  1842,  but  is 
usually  heeded.  Recent  Presidents  have  also 
created  a new  body  for  discussion  by  inviting 
the  governors  of  all  the  states  to  meet  and 
discuss  general  public  questions;  but  the  gov- 
ernors have  formed  an  organization  of  their 
own  which  is  not  dependent  upon  the  call  of 
the  President  ( see  House  of  Governors). 

Foreign  Relations. — Ever  since  the  founda- 
tion of  the  federal  republic  the  President  has 
exercised  discretion  over  the  relations  of  the 
United  States  with  other  countries.  This  comes 
about  both  through  written  and  unwritten  au- 
thority. First  of  all  the  President  is  the  offi- 


cial head  of  the  nation  and  to  him  are  accred- 
ited all  the  representatives  of  foreign  powers, 
and  he  has  the  stated  right  to  receive  them 
(Art.  II,  Sec.  iii).  He  also  issues  the  exe- 
quaturs of  the  consuls,  without  which  they 
cannot  perform  their  functions. 

The  President  also  nominates  and  may  re- 
move the  Secretary  of  State,  the  assistant 
Secretary  of  State  and  other  officers  of  the 
department,  through  whom  correspondence 
with  foreign  nations  is  carried  on.  He  nom- 
inates all  the  foreign  ministers ; through  his 
general  authority  over  the  Secretary  of  State 
controls  their  instructions ; and  he  may  remove 
them,  and  in  many  cases  has  removed  them, 
for  such  reasons  as  seem  good  to  him.  In 
practice,  the  negotiation  of  no  treaties  is  be- 
gun except  by  the  direction  or  assent  of  the 
President.  Even  though  the  treaty  has  been 
negotiated  in  accordance  with  his  wish  he  may 
decline  to  submit  it  to  the  Senate  for  ratifica- 
tion, or  may  withdraw  a treaty  which  he  or  a 
predecessor  has  submitted  to  the  Senate.  If  a 
two-thirds  majority  of  the  Senate  approves 
the  treaty,  the  President  must  still  complete 
the  ratification  before  it  becomes  part  of  the 
law  of  the  land  ( see  Negotiation  of  Trea- 
ties ) . 

The  President,  further,  is  the  direct  repre- 
sentative of  the  rights  and  privileges  of  Amer- 
ican citizens  in  foreign  countries  and  may 
make  demands  in  their  behalf  upon  foreign 
governments.  Through  the  combination  of  his 
power  over  foreign  affairs  and  his  power  to 
command  the  Army  and  Navy,  and  to  call 
out  the  militia,  the  President  may  practically 
commit  the  United  States  to  such  a hostile  at- 
titude that  war  will  result.  Upon  the  Presi- 
dent also  falls  the  responsibility  of  stating 
the  great  principles  of  American  foreign  rela- 
tions, such  as  the  Monroe  Doctrine,  and  the 
Open  Door  in  China,  which  in  course  of  time 
become  accepted  principles.  No  field  of  gov- 
ernmental power  within  the  United  States  is 
so  concentrated  as  are  its  foreign  relations 
under  the  President.  By  his  authority  to  re- 
ceive and  appoint  ambassadors,  he  has  the  pow- 
er to  recognize  or  refuse  to  recognize  a new 
state  among  the  family  of  nations  ( see  Recog- 
nition of  New  States). 

General  Influence. — Beyond  any  legally  de- 
fined authority  the  President  of  the  United 
States  has  great  weight  in  government  through 
his  general  influence  on  public  sentiment.  The 
inaugurals  and  annual  messages  of  the  Presi- 
dent are  read  as  official  announcements  of  a 
policy, 'and  many  of  the  special  messages  sent 
to  Congress  are  really  meant  to  affect  that 
body  through  the  comments  of  newspapers  and 
their  constituents  on  the  President’s  proposals. 
Since  1885  all  Presidents  have  sought  to 
arouse  public  sentiment  by  public  addresses 
(see)  sometimes  delivered  on  great  public  oc- 
casions such  as  the  unveiling  of  a public  mon- 
ument, frequently  delivered  at  public  dinners. 


PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  CONSTITUTIONAL  POWERS  OF 


Presidents  McKinley,  Roosevelt  and  Taft,  went 
upon  long  trips  and  made  set  speeches  and  off 
hand  addresses  from  the  rear  platform  of 
trains.  This  meant  personal  contact  with  a 
great  number  of  people  and  an  opportunity 
to  reiterate  and  to  enforce  the  announcement 
of  beliefs  and  purposes. 

Modern  Presidents  are  also  in  constant  rela- 
tion with  newspaper  men,  a staff  of  whom  fre- 
quent the  White  House  and  often  travel  with 
the  President.  A multitude  of  different  people 
get  to  the  President  at  the  White  House,  chief- 
ly from  the  desire  to  meet  the  head  of  the 
nation  personally.  In  these  addresses,  conver- 
sations, and  conferences,  the  President  con- 
stantly appears  as  a directing  force.  Candi- 
dates for  the  presidency  are  discussed  from  the 
point  of  view  of  their  ability  to  meet  and 
impress  thousands  of  their  countrymen.  The 
undeniable  power  of  the  President  and  par- 
ticularly his  power  to  examine  into  and  set 
right  any  trouble  anywhere  in  the  executive 
service  can  be  invoked  by  those  who  have  com- 
plaints. The  President’s  correspondence  is 
enormous ; a high  officer  of  state  has  said 
that  the  President  spends  too  much  time  in 


telling  other  people  where  to  go  in  order  to 
find  out  what  they  want.  A great  part  of 
the  President’s  authority  comes  from  this  im- 
mense personal  prestige. 

See  Civil  Service,  Federal;  Executive 
and  Congress;  Executive  and  Executive  Re- 
form; Executive  and  Judiciary;  Executive 
Departments;  Implied  Powers;  Ordinances, 
Executive  Pardon;  President  of  the  United 
States,  Constitutional  Powers  of;  Veto 
Power. 

References:  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Gov.  and  Pol- 
itics (1910),  ch.  x;  A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Gov- 
ernment (rev.  ed.,  1909),  ch.  xv;  J.  Bryce, 
Am.  Commonwealth  (4th  ed.,  1910)  ; H.  J. 
Ford,  Am.  Politics  (1898),  ch.  xxii;  E.  C. 
Mason,  Veto  Power  (1890);  L.  N.  Salmon, 
Appointing  Power  (1893);  A.  L.  Lowell,  Es- 
says on  Govt.  (1889),  I;  C.  R.  Fish,  Civil 
Service  and  the  Patronage  (1905)  ; H.  C.  Lock- 
wood,  Abolition  of  the  Presidency  (1884)  ; W. 
Whiting,  War  Powers  of  the  President  (1871)  ; 
B.  Harrison,  This  Country  of  Ours  (1898), 
ehs.  iv-xix;  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Constitutional 
Law  (1910),  II,  ch.  lix. 

Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 


PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  CONSTITUTIONAL 

POWERS  OF 


Constitutional  Provisions. — The  first  section 
of  Article  II  of  the  Constitution  provides  that 
the  executive  power  of  the  United  States  shall 
be  vested  in  a President  who  shall  be  elected 
for  a term  of  four  years  by  a college  of  electors 
chosen  in  the  states,  each  state  to  have  a num- 
ber of  electors  equal  to  the  whole  number  of 
Senators  and  Representatives  to  which  that 
state  may  be  entitled  in  Congress.  That  this 
indirect  mode  of  election  almost  at  once  be- 
came but  a form,  direct  election  becoming  the 
substitute,  is  so  well  known  as  to  require  no 
comment.  The  powers  of  the  President  have 
greatly  changed  since  the  present  government 
was  established,  but  this  change  has  been  a 
more  gradual  one.  There  can  be  but  little 
doubt  that  those  who  framed  and  adopted  the 
Constitution  intended  that  the  President 
should  be,  primarily,  a titular  chief  executive 
whose  functions  should  be  political  in  char- 
acter, that  is,  consist  of  the  performance  of 
formal  duties,  and  the  exercise  of  certain 
discretionary  powers  which  should  not  be  sub- 
ject to  judicial  review  or  control.  Among 
these  may  be  mentioned  especially  the  conduct 
of  foreign  affairs,  the  issuing  of  necessary 
proclamations,  the  summoning  of  special  ses- 
sions of  Congress,  the  nominating  and  commis- 
sioning of  officers  of  the  United  States,  the 
recommending  of  measures  for  the  action  of 
Congress,  the  receiving  of  ambassadors  and 
other  public  ministers,  and  the  general  direc- 


tion of  the  army  and  na  ry  as  their  commander- 
in-chief. 

Political  Functions. — In  addition  to  acting 
as  the  chief  executive,  with  respect  to  these 
purely  political  matters,  the  President  has, 
however,  come  to  exercise  two  other  quite  dis- 
tinct functions  in  the  field  of  national  politics 
and  administration.  In  the  first  place  he  is 
now  recognized  as  the  chief  of  his  political 
party — not  indeed  as  its  “boss”  but  as  the  one 
who  represents  and  is  supposed  to  voice  the 
will  of  those  who  have  elected  and  support 
him  ( see  Party,  Place  and  Significance  of). 
Whatever  may  be  the  theory,  the  members  of 
the  Senate  and  of  the  House  of  Representatives 
necessarily  are  influenced  by,  and,  indeed,  con- 
trolled in  a very  large  measure  by,  the  wishes 
and  opinions  of  their  respective  constituen- 
cies. The  President,  alone,  is  able,  and  is 
expected,  to  seek  his  guidance  from  the  intel- 
ligent public  opinion  of  the  whole  community, 
and  especially  that  opinion  as  it  finds  expres- 
sion in  the  councils  of  his  party.  Thus  it  is 
that  no  matter  what  may  be  his  feelings  as  to 
the  impropriety  of  a confusion  of  executive  and 
legislative  functions  it  is  unavoidable  not  only 
that  the  President  should  seek,  by  advice  and 
exhortation,  to  secure  from  Congress  the  legis- 
lation which  the  country  as  a whole  seems  to 
him  to  desire  and  demand,  but  that  he  should, 
to  a certain  extent,  attempt  to  obtain  this 
action  by  the  use  of  such  authority  as  he  may 


PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  CONSTITUTIONAL  POWERS  OF 


have  as  the  head  of  his  party,  as  well  as  by 
the  powers  of  patronage  which  he  possesses. 
That  this  presidential  right  of  dictation  to 
Congress  may  he  carried  to  an  improper  extent 
is  possible,  but  that  it  must  be  exercised  to 
a certain  extent  is  inevitable.  There  is  a 
growing  custom  of  having  important  legisla- 
tive propositions  drafted  by  the  President’s 
immediate  executive  advisors,  and  introduced 
into  Congress  and  their  enactment  there  urged 
as  “administration”  measures. 

Administrative  Chief. — The  second  respect 
in  which  the  President  of  the  United  States 
has  come  to  occupy  a position  different  from, 
and  more  important  than,  that  originally  in- 
tended for  him,  is  as  administrative  chief.  If 
we  may  judge  by  the  early  acts  of  Congress 
establishing  the  great  executive  departments 
(see),  the  idea  was  that  though  the  heads  and 
chief  officials  should  be  nominated  by  the  Pres- 
ident, the  Congress  should  retain  the  general 
control  and  direction  of  their  actions.  The 
act  establishing  the  Department  of  State  (see 
State,  Department  of),  or,  as  it  was  then 
called,  the  Department  of  Foreign  Affairs,  gave 
to  the  President  the  general  directing  power, 
but  this  department  has,  of  course,  to  deal 
principally  with  those  matters  that  are  purely 
political  in  the  sense  which  has  been  men- 
tioned above.  But  the  provisions  and  phrase- 
ology of  the  acts  creating  the  departments  of 
the  Treasury  and  the  Post  Office  clearly 
evinced  the  intention  that  these  branches  of  the 
federal  administrative  service  should  report 
to  Congress  and  act  under  its  direction  and 
control.  The  constitutional  power  of  Congress 
thus  to  retain  and  exercise  this  control  re- 
ceived the  approval  of  the  Supreme  Court  in 
the  case  of  Kendall  vs.  United  States  ( 12 
Peters  524),  decided  in  1838. 

With,  however,  the  increase  of  federal  ad- 
ministrative functions  in  number  and  variety, 
the  exigencies  of  administrative  efficiency  have 
impelled  Congress  to  grant  direct  administra- 
tive control  to  the  President,  and  have  com- 
pelled the  courts  in  many  cases  to  recognize 
the  existence,  even  in  default  of  express  stat- 
utory authorization,  of  the  power  of  the  Presi- 
dent to  issue  orders  to  federal  administrative 
officials,  obedience  to  which  will  be  compelled 
by  the  writ  of  mandamus.  In  fact,  moreover, 
the  President’s  position  as  administrative  chief 
is  rendered  possible  by  the  summary  right  of 
removal  from  office  which  he  possesses — a right 
which  it  is  practically  certain  may  not  be  lim- 
ited by  Congress.  The  dominating  control  pos- 
sible of  exercise  by  the  President  by  this  means 
was  established  once  for  all  by  President  Jack- 
son  at  the  time  that  he  obtained  the  withdraw- 
al of  federal  funds  from  the  state  banks,  by 
removing  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  who 
refused  to  do  this,  and  appointing  a Secretary 
who  would.  But  Congress,  aware  of  its  own 
inability  to  exercise  a continuing  efficient  ad- 
ministrative control,  has  not  been  unwilling 


to  place  the  burden  and  responsibility  upon 
the  President,  and  recent  years  have  witnessed 
a rapidly  increasing  number  of  commissions 
and  other  administrative  agencies  created  by 
Congress  and  placed  under  the  direct  control 
of  the  President. 

Discretionary  Powers.— With  respect  general- 
ly to  all  of  the  laws  of  Congress,  with  the 
exception  of  the  few  that  are  self-executing, 
the  power  of  the  President  is  decisive,  in  that 
it  lies  within  his  discretionary  judgment  to 
take  the  necessary  administrative  action,  or, 
in  cases  where  the  laws  are  violated,  to  direct 
the  institution  of  the  necessary  civil  or  judi- 
cial proceedings  for  their  enforcement.  Also, 
if  such  proceedings  may  be  instituted  without 
his  express  direction,  he  may,  by  orders  issued 
through  his  Attorney  General  (see)  secure 
their  discontinuance.  It  is  established  that 
a mandamus  will  lie  to  compel  the  perform- 
ance by  administrative  officials  and  even  by 
the  heads  of  the  great  executive  departments 
of  acts  purely  ministerial  in  character,  that  is, 
which  involve  the  exercise  of  no  discretionary 
judgment.  But  no  such  writ  will  be  issued 
to  the  President  himself,  and  the  only  relief 
from  malfeasance  or  nonfeasance  of  office  upon 
his  part  is  by  way  of  impeachment  (see),  or, 
of  course,  at  the  polls  at  the  expiration  of  his 
term  of  office. 

The  powers  granted  to  the  President  by  the 
Constitution  are  not  subject  to  withdrawal 
or  curtailment  by  Congress  or  by  the  courts. 
Thus  with  reference  to  all  those  acts  of  a 
political  nature  which  he  is  called  upon  to 
perform,  the  courts  will  assume  no  reviewing 
power;  and  the  same  is  true  where  he  ex- 
ercises a discretionary  administrative  power 
constitutionally  vested  in  him.  Even  when  his 
acts  are  purely  ministerial  in  character,  the 
courts  will  not,  as  has  been  said,  issue  a writ 
of  mandamus  or  of  injunction  directed  to  him. 
In  no  case,  however,  can  an  officer,  or  indeed, 
any  individual  derive  any  legal  support  for 
a right  or  immunity  claimed  by  him  from  an 
order  which  the  President  is  without  the  legal 
authority  to  give.  Congress  may  enact  rules 
and  regulations  for  the  government  of  the  land 
and  naval  forces  of  the  country,  but  it  may  not 
curtail  the  President’s  power  as  commander- 
in-chief  (see).  So,  similarly,  it  may  not  con- 
trol the  appointment  of  those  officers  the  selec- 
tion of  which  lies  within  the  hands  of  the 
President;  nor,  it  seems  practically  certain, 
may  it  curtail  his  power  to  remove  them  from 
office.  Similarly  exempt  from  congressional 
control  are  his  pardoning  powers,  and  his  con- 
trol of  foreign  relations.  Generally  speaking, 
the  President  acts  through  the  chiefs  of  the 
great  executive  departments,  and  their  acts 
are,  in  view  of  law,  his  acts.  So  also  the 
acts  of  subordinate  administrative  officials  are, 
legally  speaking,  the  acts  of  the  official  superi- 
ors at  whose  direction  they  are  performed, 
and  thus,  ultimately,  in  cases  where  the  supo- 

6 


PRESIDENT  PRO  TEMPORE— PRESIDENTIAL  BEE 


rior  speaks  for  tlie  President,  of  the  President 
himself.  There  are,  however,  certain  functions 
the  performance  of  which  the  President  may 
not  delegate  to  others.  These  are  those  regard- 
ing which,  it  may  fairly  be  held  that  the  Con- 
stitution or  law  intends  him  to  exercise  his 
own  individual  judgment.  Thus,  in  the  case 
of  Runkle  vs.  United  States  (122  U.  S.  543), 
the  Supreme  Court  held  that  where  it  was 
provided  by  law  that  the  dismissal  of  an  officer 
of  the  army  should  not  become  operative  until 
approved  by  the  President,  the  actual  personal 
approval  by  him  had  to  be  shown. 

Execution  of  Laws. — The  special  powers  giv- 
en to  the  President  by  the  Constitution  are 
elsewhere  separately  considered  under  the  ap- 
propriate titles  ( see  Appointments  to  Office; 
Army;  Civil  Service;  Ordinances,  Execu- 
tive; Pardon;  Removal  of  Officials;  War 
Power,  Constitutional;  etc.)  and  will  not 
therefore,  receive  treatment  here.  One  general 
power,  or  rather  duty,  remains,  however,  to 
be  here  considered.  This  is  the  obligation  laid 
upon  him  by  the  Constitution  to  “take  care 
that  the  laws  are  faithfully  executed”  (Art.  II, 
Sec.  3).  Strictly,  and  properly  construed, 
this  is  not  a grant  of  power.  It  creates  an 
obligation  upon  the  President  faithfully  to 
perform  the  duties  laid  upon  him  by  the  Con- 
stitution or  by  the  statutes  enacted  or  treaties 
entered  into  in  pursuance  thereof.  As  is  the 
case  with  the  legislative  or  judicial  depart- 
ments of  the  Federal  Government,  the  President 
in  whom  is  vested  the  executive  authority,  has 
only  those  powers  which  have  been  specifically 
granted  to  him.  There  are  no  powers  inherent 
in  him  solely  by  reason  of  the  fact  that  he  is 
the  chief  executive.  Hence  he  has  no  authority 
to  act  in  the  absence  of  existing  law,  nor,  of 
course,  in  violation  of  law.  It  is  true  that, 
within  the  sphere  of  the  powers  granted  to  him 
by  the  Constitution  or  delegated  to  him  by 
treaty  or  statute,  he  often  has  a wide  discre- 
tion as  to  how  he  shall  act,  or  whether  he 
shall  act  at  all,  but  this,  of  course,  is  a wholly 
different  matter  from  acting  in  the  absence  of 
law.  When,  therefore,  in  fine,  the  President  is 
called  upon  to  take  care  that  the  laws  are 
faithfully  executed,  the  obligation  is  that  he 
shall  employ  for  this  purpose  such  constitu- 
tional, statutory,  and  treaty  powers  as  he  may 
possess.  It  is  not  a general  authorization, 
as  has  sometimes  been  argued,  to  take  such 
action  as  he  may  see  fit  so  long  as  he  does 
not  actually  violate  an  existing  law.  Thus,  to 
illustrate  by  an  example  drawn  from  a subject 
of  recent  controversy,  the  President  would  not 
have  the  constitutional  authority,  however  in- 
adequate may  be  the  provisions  of  existing 
law,  or  however  urgent  the  necessity,  to  estab- 
lish rules  for  the  management  and  disposition 
of  the  public  lands  of  the  United  States,  except 
as  authorized  so  to  do  by  acts  of  Congress. 
It  is  to  be  observed  that  in  the  Neagle  case 
(In  re  Neagle,  135  U.  S.  1)  expressions  are 


used  which  seem  to  go  somewhat  beyond  this 
doctrine.  That  case  is,  however,  an  isolated 
one;  moreover  the  dissenting  opinion  of  Justice 
Lamar,  concurred  in  by  Chief  Justice  Fuller 
(see  Fuller,  Melville  W.),  is  a very  strong 
one;  the  case  cannot  therefore  reasonably  be 
held  to  establish  a principle  contrary  to  that 
which  has  been  stated  above. 

See  Executive  and  Congress;  Executive 
and  Executive  Reform;  Executive  and  Ju- 
diciary; Executive  Power,  Theory  of;  Pres- 
ident, Authority  and  Influence  of. 

References:  J.  A.  Fairlie,  National  Admin- 
istration of  the  V.  S.  (1905);  G.  Cleveland, 
Presidential  Problems  (1904)  ; J.  II.  Dougher- 
ty, Electoral  System  of  the  U.  S.  (1906);  F. 
J.  Goodnow,  Administrative  Law  of  the  U.  S. 
(1905);  J.  IJ.  Finley  and  J.  F.  Sanderson, 
Am.  Executive  and  Executive  Methods  (1908)  ; 
P.  S.  Reinscli,  Readings  on  Am.  Government 
and  Politics  (1911),  ch.  x;  W.  W.  Willoughby, 
Constitutional  Law  of  the  V.  S.  (1910),  chs. 
lvii-lx.  W.  W.  Willoughby. 

PRESIDENT  PRO  TEMPORE.  The  name 
president  .pro  tempore  is  applied  to  the  United 
States  Senator  who  is  chosen  by  the  Senate 
to  assist  the  Vice-President  as  presiding  officer 
of  that  body.  No  Senator  by  becoming  presi- 
dent pro  tempore  loses  any  of  his  rights  or 
privileges  as  Senator.  The  president  pro  tem- 
pore was  originally,  as  the  name  shows,  a 
temporary  officer,  selected  for  distinct  occa- 
sions as  a substitute  for  the  Vice-President. 
When  the  Vice-President  died  or  became  Presi- 
dent, the  president  pro  tempore  became  the 
permanent  presiding  officer  of  the  Senate,  al- 
though he  did  not  become  Vice-President.  In 
1890  the  Senate  decided  that  the  president 
pro  tempore  “shall  hold  the  office  during  the 
pleasure  of  the  Senate  until  another  is  elect- 
ed.” In  the  absence  of  both  the  Vice-President 
and  the  president  pro  tempore,  the  latter  se- 
lects the  Senators  who  shall  act  as  presiding 
officer.  Being  usually  a prominent  party  lead- 
er, if  not  the  leader  of  the  dominant  party  in 
the  Senate,  the  president  pro  tempore  frequent- 
ly exercises  greater  power  as  presiding  officer 
than  the  Vice-President.  For  two  periods,  ag- 
gregating ten  years,  the  president  pro  tempore 
was  allowed  to  select  the  Senate  committees. 
Had  President  Johnson  been  removed  from  of- 
fice (1868),  under  the  law  of  succession  then  in 
use,  Senator  Wade,  then  president  pro  tempore, 
would  have  been  acting  President  of  the  United 
States.  See  Presidential  Succession;  Sen- 
ate. Reference:  W.  Wilson,  Constitutional 
Government  in  V.  S.  (1909),  131-133. 

R.  L.  A. 

PRESIDENTIAL  BEE.  A phrase  applied  to 
the  ambitions  of  a would-be  candidate  for  the 
presidential  nomination,  who  is  said  to  have 
“the  presidential  bee  in  his  bonnet.” 

O.  c.  H. 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


Origin. — The  system  of  electing  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States  was  devised  by 
the  Federal  Convention  (see)  of  1787,  to  ac- 
cord with  political  conditions  destined  to 
change  within  a few  years;  and  with  no  no- 
tion of  the  future  importance  of  those  elec- 
tions as  the  barometer  of  political  parties,  and 
as  a means  of  securing  political  action.  The 
Convention  early  made  up  its  mind  to  estab- 
lish a strong  and  single  executive,  and  floun- 
dered  among  various  methods  of  choosing  that 
official.  An  obvious  way,  familiar  under  the 
Confederation,  and  practised  in  several  states, 
was  that  the  legislative  body  should  select 
him;  but  it  was  plain  that  such  a system 
would  be  likely  to  make  the  President  the 
creature  of  Congress.  Direct  popular  vote  of 
the  whole  country  was  hardly  conceived  at  that 
time,  and  would  have  withdrawn  from  the 
small  states  an  influence  for  which  they  never 
ceased  to  contend  throughout  the  Convention. 

Precedent  for  a choice  by  electors  has  been 
sought  in  the  practice  of  the  Holy  Roman 
Empire  and  of  the  College  of  Cardinals  of  the 
Roman  Curia;  hut  the  only  example  with 
which  the  Convention  could  have  been  familiar 
was  that  of  the  election  of  the  Senate  in  Mary- 
land by  a body  of  temporary  electors.  Hence 
the  method  chosen — namely,  election  by  a spe- 
cial board  or  college  of  electors,  chosen  in  each 
state  for  the  sole  purpose  of  indicating  the 
choice  of  that  state,  and  then  dissolving — is  as 
near  a political  invention  as  anything  in  the 
Constitution.  It  was  based  upon  the  state 
political  organizations  and  totally  ignored  the 
probable  growth  of  great  national  parties.  It 
was  a piece  of  elaborate  non-partisan  machin- 
ery, intended  to  secure  a President  who  should 
have  fame  and  popularity  in  a considerable 
number  of  states. 

System. — The  longest  section  of  the  Consti- 
tution is  devoted  to  the  detail  of  the  presi- 
dential election,  including  the  following  im- 
portant factors:  (1)  The  electoral  college 
in  each  state  was  to  be  in  number  equal  to 
the  total  number  of  Senators  and  Representa- 
tives to  which  the  state  was  at  the  time  of 
each  election  entitled  in  the  Congress  then 
existing.  (2)  The  electors  were  to  be  chosen 
in  each  state  “in  such  manner  as  the  legisla- 
ture thereof”  might  direct.  (3)  “No  Senator, 
Representative  or  holder  of  federal  office  of 
trust  or  profit”  could  be  an  elector.  (4)  Each 
elector  was  to  vote  for  two  persons,  one  of 
whom  should  not  be  an  inhabitant  of  the  elec- 
tor’s state.  (5)  The  person  having  the  great- 
est number  of  all  the  electoral  votes  (if  a 
majority)  was  chosen  President;  and  the  per- 
son having  the  next  largest  number  (whether 
a majority  or  not)  was  chosen  Vice-President 


(0)  In  case  of  a tie,  or  if  no  one  had  a ma- 
jority, the  House  of  Representatives  was  to 
choose  the  President,  voting  by  states;  in  such 
an  election  the  person  having  the  largest  num- 
ber of  electoral  votes,  after  the  President  had 
been  chosen,  was  ipso  facto  Vice-President. 
Evidently  the  Convention  believed  that  it  had 
taken  every  reasonable  precaution  to  break  ties 
and  also  to  prevent  choices  of  President  by 
pluralities,  though  the  Vice-President  might  be 
so  chosen. 

Failure  of  the  Original  System. — This  care- 
fully digested  and  elaborately  stated  plan 
broke  down  after  two  trials,  and  would  have 
failed  earlier  but  for  the  great  personal  pop- 
ularity of  the  first  President,  George  Wash- 
ington. In  the  three  elections  of  1788-89, 
1792  and  1796  there  was  a liberal  scattering 
of  votes,  13  persons  receiving  votes  in  1796; 
but  in  1800  there  were  only  five  names  voted 
on.  As  early  as  1792  an  understanding  was 
established  between  the  electors  in  some  of 
the  different  states  that  they  should  combine 
on  the  same  man;  and  from  1796  on  there 
were  always,  with  the  exception  of  the  two 
elections  of  1820  and  1824,  regular  party  can- 
didates. In  practice  most  of  the  members  of 
the  electoral  colleges  belonged  to  a party,  and 
expected  to  support  it;  and  after  1824  it  be- 
came a fixed  principle  that  the  electors  offered 
themselves  for  the  choice  of  the  voters  or  leg- 
islatures upon  a pledge  to  vote  for  a pre- 
designated candidate. 

In  the  tie  election  of  1800  the  careful  fabric 
of  the  constitutional  provision  was  shown  to 
be  so  defective  that  the  Twelfth  Amendment 
(see)  was  at  once  introduced,  and  was  pro- 
claimed to  be  in  force  September  25,  1804,  in 
time  to  control  the  election  of  that  year,  and 
all  subsequent  elections. 

Qualifications. — The  choice  of  a President 
in  practice  depends  to  some  degree  on  the 
qualifications  of  the  candidate  and  the  electors. 
The  only  legal  qualifications  for  the  candidate 
are  that  he  must  be  a native  of  the  United 
States,  thirty-five  years  old,  and  a resident 
for  fourteen  years.  The  age  qualification  has 
never  come  in  question,  and  President  Arthur 
is  the  only  one  whose  place  of  birth  was  ever 
made  a subject  of  particular  inquiry. 

The  qualifications  of  electors  are  not  set 
forth  in  the  Constitution,  but  in  practice  they 
are  always  voters,  frequently  men  of  reputa- 
tion who  have  never  sought  other  office.  The 
question  what  is  an  office  of  trust  or  profit 
under  the  United  States,  has  never  been  com- 
pletely settled.  In  the  election  of  1876,  the 
Democratic  governor  of  Oregon  refused  to  cer- 
tify one  of  the  Republican  electors  on  the 
ground  that  he  was  at  the  time  of  his  election 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


a federal  office-holder,  but  the  other  two  elec- 
tors reappointed  him  to  the  vacancy,  and  the 
Electoral  Commission  affirmed  it.  In  1912  an 
attempt  was  made  to  throw  out  one  of  the 
Republican  electors  of  Maine  on  the  ground 
that  he  held  a small  federal  office. 

Methods  of  Choosing  Electors. — Inasmuch 
as  the  Federal  Constitution  left  it  to  the  state 
legislatures  to  decide  how  the  electors  should 
be  chosen,  throughout  the  early  period  four 
different  methods  were  employed: 

(1)  The  whole  body  of  electors  designated 
by  the  legislature  in  joint  session;  under  this 
system,  in  1820,  the  New  York  legislature 
chose  electors  as  follows:  Adams,  26;  Jack- 
son,  1 ; Crawford,  5 ; Clay,  4. 

(2)  The  whole  body  of  electors  chosen  by 
the  two  houses  of  the  legislature  in  concur- 
rence; this  led  to  such  deals  and  confusion  as 
that  in  Pennsylvania  in  1800  (7  Adams  elec- 
tors, and  8 Jefferson  electors).  In  1824  the 
number  of  states  which  chose  their  electors 
by  legislatures  was  only  6 ; and  the  practice 
speedily  died  out  except  in  South  Carolina 
which  held  to  it  down  to  1860;  and  the  un- 
usual case  of  Colorado  in  1876. 

(3)  Choice  of  electors  in  congressional  or 
other  districts;  the  chief  exponent  of  that  sys- 
tem was  Maryland,  in  which,  therefore,  we  find 
several  split  electoral  votes.  In  1892  the  leg- 
islature of  Michigan  districted  that  state  for 
the  purpose  of  splitting  the  electoral  vote. 
Though  successful,  the  act  was  highly  unpop- 
ular. 

(4)  Choice  of  electors  by  popular  vote  on  a 
general  state  ticket;  this  gives  the  whole  num- 
ber of  state  electors  to  the  party  polling  a 
plurality  of  the  popular  vote.  This  method 
prevailed  in  1796  in  six  out  of  the  sixteen 
states,  and  gained  ground;  but  no  statistics 
of  the  popular  vote  were  collected  before  the 
election  of  1824.  About  1830  began  to  appear 
the  political  almanacs  which  made  a point  of 
tabulating  the  popular  vote  and  thus  made 
possible  comparisons  and  predictions. 

Relative  Popular  Vote. — The  percentages  in 
the  tables  which  are  appended  show  many 
variations  in  the  proportion  of  the  vote  to 
the  population.  In  1912  it  was  about  16  per 
cent;  in  1824  the  recorded  vote  was  not  4 
per  cent;  but  in  1828  (when  all  but  two  of 
the  states  used  the  popular  vote)  the  propor- 
tion at  once  rose  to  over  12  per  cent. 

The  differences  from  state  to  state  are  due 
principally  to  four  causes.  (1)  In  the  early 
elections  and  as  far  down  as  1840,  the  number 
of  voters  was  much  smaller  in  proportion  to 
the  population  than  it  afterwards  became. 
Massachusetts  for  example — a state  always  in- 
terested in  politics — in  1824,  though  the  final- 
ly accepted  candidate  for  President  came  from 
that  state,  cast  a vote  equal  to  but  7 per  cent 
of  its  population;  and  that  of  Ohio  was  but 
8£  per  cent.  The  enlargement  of  the  suffrage 
ahd  other  causes  so  affected  those  states  that 


in  1840  the  Massachusetts  vote  was  17  per 
cent;  and  the  Ohio  vote  was  18  per  cent.  (2) 
In  the  slaveholding  states  up  to  1860  the  negro 
population  varied  from  a sixth  to  a half  of 
the  total  population;  and  though  there  were 
negro  voters  in  North  Carolina  till  1835  their 
number  was  inconsiderable.  Hence  the  total 
potential  voting  population  was  corresponding- 
ly diminished.  (3)  Similar  causes  have  been 
working  in  the  South  since  1876;  the  almost 
complete  exclusion  of  negroes  in  six  of  those 
states  by  constitutional  amendments  (see  Ne- 
gro Suffrage;  Suffrage)  necessarily  dimin- 
ishes the  possible  number  of  votes.  (4)  In 
some  parts  of  the  country,  particularly  those 
southern  states  in  which  there  is  no  probabil- 
ity of  choosing  any  but  Democratic  electors, 
people  are  little  interested  in  going  to  the 
polls.  This  affects  congressional  and  state 
elections  more  than  the  national;  so  that  in 
1884  New  Jersey,  with  a population  of  130,- 
000  less  than  Alabama,  cast  108,000  more 
presidential  votes. 

Federal  Regulation. — The  Twelfth  Amend- 
ment (see)  corrected  a manifest  defect  in  the 
machinery  of  elections,  which  had  been  felt 
for  several  years. 

In  general  the  conduct  of  presidential  elec- 
tions, including  registry,  form  of  ballot,  pro- 
tection of  the  polls  and  count  of  the  popular 
vote  is  in  the  hands  of  the  states.  Although 
Congress,  under  the  Constitution,  possesses 
and  has  exercised  the  power  to  regulate  elec- 
tions to  Congress,  its  principal  relation  to  the 
voters  for  presidential  electors  has  been 
through  the  Fourteenth  and  Fifteenth  Amend- 
ments (see)  which  affect  the  suffrage  in  the 
states,  and  therefore  the  suffrage  for  presiden- 
tial electors. 

By  statutes  of  May  31,  1870  and  Fbb.  28, 
1871  (both  of  which  were  repealed  in  1894),  on 
the  supervision  of  congressional  elections.  Con- 
gress also  practically  supervised  the  choice  of 
presidential  electors,  which  was  made  at  the 
same  time  and  by  the  same  voters.  A statute 
of  February  25,  1865,  prohibited  the  military 
and  naval  forces  from  interfering  “with  any 
general  or  special  election  held  in  any  state.” 

Time. — Under  the  Constitution  “the  Con- 
gress may  determine  the  time  of  choosing  the 
electors”;  and  March  1,  1792,  it  was  enacted 
that  the  choice  should  be  made  within  34  days 
preceding  the  first  Wednesday  of  December. 
By  a statute  of  January  23,  1845,  electors 
were  thenceforward  to  be  chosen  on  the  Tues- 
day following  the  first  Monday  in  November, 
in  each  quadrennial  year.  By  a later  statute, 
taking  effect  in  1876,  the  same  day  was  set 
in  biennial  years,  for  the  choice  of  members  of 
Congress  (with  some  slight  exceptions).  Since 
nearly  all  the  states  hold  their  state  election 
for  the  year  on  the  same  day,  and  in  many 
eases  local  and  municipal  elections  are  append- 
ed, that  fixed  day  has  become  the  great  na- 
tional election  day. 

9 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


Congress  further  has  power  to  determine 
the  day  on  which  the  electors  “shall  give  their 
votes;  which  day  shall  be  the  same  throughout 
the  United  States.”  The  statute  of  March  1, 
1792,  fixed  the  day  for  voting  in  the  electoral 
colleges  as  the  first  Wednesday  in  December. 
By  the  act  of  January  23,  1845,  it  was  further 
provided  that  if  a state  should  hold  an  elec- 
tion on  the  day  fixed  but  should  “fail  to  make 
a choice — then  the  electors  may  be  appointed 
on  a subsequent  day  in  such  manner  as  the 
state  shall  by  law  provide.”  This  was  intended 
to  cover  the  case  of  states  which  required  the 
absolute  majority  of  the  votes  cast  for  a 
choice;  hence  the  statute  ceases  to  be  effective 
now  that  a plurality  elects  in  all  the  states. 

Status  of  Electors. — The  question  of  vacancy 
in  the  electorship  is  covered  by  the  same  stat- 
ute, under  which,  “each  state  may  by  law 
provide  for  the  filling  of  any  vacancy  or  va- 
cancies which  may  occur  in  its  college  of  elec- 
tors when  such  college  meets  to  give  its  elec- 
toral votes.”  This  provision  was  severely  test- 
ed in  1876,  in  Oregon. 

Under  the  now  universal  system  of  a choice 
of  electors  by  pluralities  of  the  popular  vote, 
on  general  ticket,  the  electors  are  nominally 
state  officers,  empowered  to  vote  according  to 
their  best  judgment  for  President;  but  they 
are  actually  markers  to  transmit  officially  the 
information  that  the  state  has  designated  the 
candidates  for  which  its  total  electoral  vote 
is  to  be  cast.  On  a very  close  vote  the  elec- 
tors may  be  split,  the  most  popular  man  or 
men  on  the  minority  creeping  above  the  least 
popular  on  a majority  ticket.  This  happened 
in  'California  in  1880  and  1912,  and  in  Ohio  in 
1892. 

Counting  the  Vote. — Inasmuch  as  the  choice 
of  electors  is  made  by  voters  enfranchised  by 
the  states,  under  general  regulations  made  by 
the  states,  and  as  the  vote  is  canvassed  and 
declared  by  the  states,  the  ascertaining  of  the 
final  result  would  seem  to  be  a mere  matter 
of  arithmetic.  In  practice,  it  has  been  an 
uncertain  and  contested  function,  and  gave 
rise,  in  1877,  to  serious  difficulties.  The  Con- 
stitution on  this  subject  provides  simply  that 
the  votes  shall  be  sent  to  the  president  of  the 
Senate  who,  in  the  presence  of  the  Senate 
and  House  of  Representatives,  shall  “open  all 
the  certificates  and  the  votes  shall  then  be 
counted.”  By  whom  they  are  to  be  counted 
is  not  expressly  stated ; for  many  years  it 
was  expected  that  the  president  of  the  Senate 
would  count  them  himself. 

By  act  of  March  1,  1792,  Congress  made 
elaborate  provision  for  sending  to  the  seat  of 
government  the  results  of  the  electoral  col- 
leges; and  enacted  that  Congress  should  sit 
on  the  second  Wednesday  in  February  for  the 
counting  of  the  vote.  Down  to  1821  the  votes 
were  actually  counted  and  so  certified  by  the 
president  of  the  Senate.  The  first  protest 
against  the  acceptance  of  electoral  votes  was 


made  in  1817  on  the  ground  that  Indiana  did 
not  become  a state  till  after  its  choice  of  elec- 
tors. In  1821  similar  objection  was  made  to 
the  vote  of  Missouri  which  was  “counted  in  the 
alternative”  (see)  ; and  later  similar  objec- 
tions were  made  to  the  first  vote  of  Michigan 
in  1837 ; and  to  the  votes  of  Georgia  which 
were  counted  in  the  alternative  in  1869  and 
again  in  1881. 

The  Civil  War,  with  the  temporary  with- 
drawal of  eleven  states,  complicated  the  pres- 
idential election.  February  6,  1865,  the  Senate 
and  House  adopted  the  so-called  twenty-second 
joint  rule,  to  the  effect  that  if  at  the  time 
of  count  objection  were  made  to  any  electoral 
vote,  it  should  not  be  received  unless  both 
houses  affirmatively  voted  to  receive  it.  By  a 
statute  of  February  8,  1865,  it  was  declared 
that  no  valid  election  had  been  held  in  1864 
in  any  of  the  eleven  states  named  in  the 
act.  In  the  election  of  1873  the  votes  of 
Louisiana  and  Arkansas  were,  under  the  twen- 
ty-second rule,  not  counted,  there  being  double 
returns,  neither  of  which  were  adopted.  In 
1876  the  Senate  withdrew  from  the  twenty- 
second  rule,  thereby  leaving  the  nation  with- 
out any  adequate  machinery  for  the  count  of 
the  close  election  of  that  year.  Twenty-one 
votes  from  South  Carolina,  Florida,  Louisiana 
and  Oregon  were  covered  by  double  returns,  a 
contingency  for  which  no  provision  had  ever 
been  made.  The  crisis  was  surmounted  by 
the  creation,  January  29,  1877,  of  an  extra- 
constitutional  ‘“electoral  commission”  (see) 
empowered  to  decide  which  of  these  rival  re- 
turns should  be  accepted;  it  gave  them  all  to 
the  Republican  candidates,  who  were  thus  elect- 
ed by  a majority  of  one  electoral  vote  ( see 
Table  XXI). 

Ten  years  later,  by  the  act  of  February  3, 
1887,  and  supplementary  act  of  Oct.  19,  1888, 
a new  and  workable  principle  was  adopted,  by 
enacting  that  where  there  is  but  one  return 
from  a state,  it  shall  not  be  rejected;  if  there 
are  double  returns,  Congress  shall  accept  the 
finding  of  a tribunal  previously  set  up  by  the 
state  with  power  to  decide  such  controversies; 
if  there  are  double  returns  and  the  state  has 
not  made  such  provision,  then  the  vote  shall 
not  be  counted  unless  both  houses  agree.  Since 
that  time  no  difficulties  have  occurred  except 
questions  of  the  qualifications  of  some  electors 
who  were  held  to  occupy  federal  offices  which 
made  them  ineligible. 

Election  of  President  by  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives.— The  Federal  Constitution  wisely 
provided  a machinery  for  adjusting  contests 
when  no  person  had  received  the  constitutional 
majority  of  the  electoral  vote.  In  the  election 
of  1800  party  lines  were  for  the  first  time, 
closed  up.  Except  for  one  vote  thrown  off 
from  one  of  the  Federalist  candidates,  Pinck- 
ney, so  that  he  should  not  come  in  ahead 
of  John  Adams,  every  elector  was  either  Fed- 
eralist or  Republican;  and  Jefferson  and  Burr 
10 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


had  each  73  votes.  Under  the  original  Con- 
stitution, the  House  was  to  decide  by  vote  of 
states  in  case  of  a tie  (both  persons  having  a 
majority)  ; and  that  function  was  assumed  by 
a House  of  Representatives  which  was'  about  to 
expire,  and  which  had  a Federalist  majority 
both  numerical  and  voting  by  states.  Since 
under  the  Constitution  they  must  choose*  be- 
tween two  Republicans,  they  took  refuge  in 
trying  to  choose  the  man  who  had  not  been 
intended  for  President  by  their  adversaries. 
Hence,  during  35  ballots,  8 states  voted  for 
Jefferson,  6 for  Burr,  and  2 were  divided.  On 
the  thirty-sixth  ballot,  February  17,  1801, 
members  from  Delaware,  Maryland,  South  Car- 
olina and  Vermont  abstained  from  voting,  thus 
giving  to  Jefferson  10  states,  and  the  election 
(see  Table  IV). 

The  Constitution  further  provided  that  in 
case  no  person  had  a majority  of  the  electoral 
votes  the  House  should  choose  from  the  five 
highest  candidates,  which  wTas  changed  by  the 
Twelfth  Amendment  to  the  three  highest.  In 
1824  none  of  the  four  presidential  candidates 
had  a majority  of  the  electoral  votes,  and  the 
election  therefore  went  to  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives. In  that  House  Clay  was  the 
candidate  who  had  the  most  popularity,  and 
he  probably  would  have  been  elected  but  that 
he  was  fourth  in  the  number  of  electoral  votes. 
February  9,  1825,  the  vote  was  taken,  and 
13  of  the  24  states  voted  for  John  Quincy 
Adams,  though  he  received  only  87  votes  out 
of  212  members  present  and  voting  (see  Table 
VII,  below). 

There  has  been  no  later  case  of  choice  by 
Congress,  though  it  was  suggested  in  1877  that 
one  of  the  Republican  electors  should  throw 
off  his  vote,  thereby  producing  a tie,  and  en- 
abling the  House  to  break  it.  In  that  case 
Samuel  J.  Tilden  would  undoubtedly  have  been 
chosen  President. 

Election  of  Vice-President  by  the  Senate. — 
The  Constitution  likewise  provides  for  the 
breaking  of  a tie  for  the  second  place  on  the 
ticket;  but  no  such  contingency  happened,  pre- 
vious to  the  Twelfth  Amendment.  Burr  was 
not  chosen  Vice-President  by  the  Senate,  in 
1801 : as  the  Constitution  then  stood,  when 
Jefferson  had  been  elected  President,  Burr,  as 
the  holder  of  the  greatest  number  of  votes 
remaining,  was  the  constitutional  choice  of 
the  electors  for  Vice-President. 

Under  the  Twelfth  Amendment  the  candi- 
dates for  the  vice-presidency  are  voted  on  sep- 
arately; in  case  no  one  has  a majority,  the 
Senate  chooses  between  the  two  highest  candi- 
dates. This  contingency  has  happened  but 
once.  In  the  election  of  1836,  Johnson,  who 
was  Van  Buren’s  running-mate,  failed  to  get 
the  23  votes  of  Virginia  and  was  left  one  short 
of  a majority.  The  election  was  therefore 
thrown  into  the  Senate,  which  used  its  discre- 
tion to  choose  Johnson  by  33  to  16  votes  ( see 
Table  IX,  below).  In  such  elections  two-thirds 
99  11 


of  the  Senate  must  be  present;  and  a majority 
of  the  whole  number  must  unite  in  the  choice. 

Minority  Elections. — Under  the  Constitution 
no  person  can  be  elected  President  or  Vice- 
President  without  a majority  of  the  total 
electoral  vote,  or  of  the  House  voting  by  states, 
or  of  the  Senate.  The  constitutional  phrase 
“a  majority  of  the  whole  number  of  electors 
appointed”  has  been  construed  to  mean  a ma- 
jority of  the  electors  chosen  by  the  states  par- 
ticipating. Thus  in  the  election  of  1788-89 
only  69  of  the  91  assigned  electors  were  chosen 
(see  Table  II).  In  1864,  11  of  the  36  states 
were  out  of  status  to  participate,  and  only  233 
of  the  317  electoral  votes  were  cast,  and  in  1868, 
294  out  of  317  were  cast;  but  in  these  cases 
the  electoral  votes  of  the  successful  candidates 
(Lincoln  and  Grant)  were  a majority  of  all 
the  electoral  votes  assigned  to  all  the  states. 
In  several  of  the  early  elections  (particularly 
1820)  a few  electors  either  died  between  their 
choice  and  the  meeting  of  the  electoral  col- 
leges or  neglected  to  cast  their  votes.  It  must 
be  presumed  that  in  such  eases  the  constitu- 
tional majority  would  be  a majority  not  of  the 
actual  votes  in  the  colleges,  but  of  the  electors 
chosen,  whether  they  fulfilled  their  duty  of 
voting  or  otherwise. 

The  majority  of  the  total  popular  vote 
has  no  constitutional  bearing  upon  the  choice 
of  President,  but  in  most  cases  the  successful 
candidate  has  had  more  popular  votes  than 
his  nearest  rival.  The  votes  of  Garfield  and 
Hancock  in  1880,  Cleveland  and  Blaine  in  1884, 
Harrison  and  Cleveland  in  1888,  ran  within  a 
few  thousands  of  each  other,  but  from  the 
figures  printed  in  the  accompanying  tables 
it  will  be  seen  that  the  candidate  successful 
in  the  electoral  vote  also  had  a plurality  of 
the  popular  vote.  Nevertheless,  according  ttf 
the  usually  received  count,  Hayes,  in  1876, 
received  about  200,000  votes  less  than  Tilden; 
and  Harrison  in  1888  was  elected  over  Cleve- 
land, though  he  had  96,000  fewer  votes. 

When  it  comes  to  a comparison  of  the  vote 
of  the  successful  candidate  against  the  total 
polled  by  all  his  opponents  there  are  numer- 
ous minority  Presidents;  beginning  with  Polk 
in  1844;  Taylor  in  1848;  Buchanan  in  1856; 
Lincoln  in  1860  (a  minority  of  over  900,000)  ; 
Hayes  in  1876,  344,000  behind;  Garfield 

(1880);  Cleveland  (1884);  Harrison  (1888); 
and  Cleveland  (1892).  In  1912,  Wilson,  the 
successful  candidate,  was  in  a minority  of  2,- 
500,000. 

Proposed  Changes. — Ever  since  the  beginning 
of  the  Government  efforts  have  been  made  to 
change  the  system  of  presidential  election,  pre- 
sumably by  securing  a uniform  rule  for  choos- 
ing electors  in  one  of  the  following  methods: 
(1)  choice  of  all  electors  by  districts;  (2) 
choice  of  all  electors  by  general  ticket;  (3) 
choice  by  a general  direct  vote,  suggestions  for 
which  can  be  traced  back  to  1826;  (4)  choice 
by  Congress  out  of  candidates  nominated  by 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


the  states;  (5)  choice  by  lot  from  among  the 
retiring  Senators;  (6)  choice  by  a combina- 
tion of  sections,  each  having  the  right  of  suc- 
cession, or  a veto  on  the  others.  On  none  of 
these  propositions  has  the  necessary  two-thirds 
vote  of  both  houses  been  secured. 

Of  late  years  suggestions  have  been  made 
that  the  President  ought  to  be  elected  by  gen- 
eral popular  vote  instead  of  by  the  unusual 
and  formal  method  of  indirect  choice.  The  ex- 
istence of  small  but  tenacious  third  parties 
makes  it  difficult  to  secure  a majority  of  the 
total  popular  vote;  and  hence  such  a system 
must  allow  a choice  by  a plurality.  The 
change  would  get  rid  of  the  present  practice  of 
swinging  a state  block  of  electoral  votes  by 
a small  plurality.  Thus  in  1884,  New  York 
showed  a plurality  for  Cleveland  of  1,143  in 
a total  vote  of  1,108,000,  and  he  was  elected. 
In  1888  Harrison  carried  the  state  by  a plu- 
rality of  14,443  in  a total  vote  of  1,317,000, 
and  was  thereby  elected.  On  the  other  hand 
the  result  of  the  election  under  the  present 
method  is  usually  known  by  midnight  of  elec- 
tion day;  whereas  in  a general  popular  vote 
the  counts  and  recounts  might  last  for  weeks; 
and  there  is  a great  temptation  to  swell  the 
votes  in  sure  states  casting  large  majorities  on 
one  side  or  the  other. 

Actualities  of  Election. — The  final  choice  of 
a President  depends  upon  many  factors  not 
recorded  in  the  Constitution  or  statute  books. 
He  must  first  of  all  be  nominated,  and  that 
depends  in  part  on  his  own  personality  and 
reputation  throughout  the  country,  and  in  part 
upon  the  management  and  machinery  of  his 
party,  from  the  local  primary  election  up  to 
the  national  convention.  Since  1836  no  one 
has  ever  been  elected  President  except  by  a 
strong  national  party  antedating  the  election. 
Third  party  movements  have  sometimes  had 
the  balance  of  power,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Liberty  party  of  1844  and  the  Free  Soilers 
of  1848  and  the  Progressives  of  1912;  but  the 
requirement  of  a majority  of  the  whole  elec- 
toral vote  makes  it  very  hard  to  carry  an 
election  without  long  and  tedious  preparation. 

The  presidential  campaign  is  the  greatest 
political  event  of  its  quadrennial  and  absorbs 
the  political  activities  of  the  country  for  six 
months  before  the  election.  It  was  long  a tra- 
dition that  a candidate  must  not  take  the  field 
in  his  own  behalf — though  it  was  done  by  Scott 
in  1852.  Since  1880  the  opposite  practice  has 
grown  up,  and  in  1912  every  one  of  the  six 
candidates  on  the  ticket  made  numerous  speech- 
es  in  widely  different  parts  of  the  country. 

See  Ballot;  Campaigns,  Political;  Com- 
mittees, Party;  Convention,  Political;  Cor- 
rupt Practices  Acts;  Counting  in  the  Al- 
ternative; Election  Returns-,  Elections, 
Contested;  Elections,  Federal  Control  of; 
Election  System  in  United  States;  Elec- 
toral College;  Electoral  Count  for  Presi- 
dent; Nominating  Systems;  Nomination  of 

12 


President;  Party,  Place  and  Significance 
of;  Platform,  Political;  Qualifications  for 
Office;  Senate  of  United  States;  Suffrage. 

References:  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Commonwealth 
(4tli  ed.,  1910),  chs.  lxxi,  lxxii;  C.  A.  O’Neil, 
Am.  Electoral  System  (1887)  ; D.  A.  Mc- 
Knight,  Electoral  System  of  the  V.  S.  (1878)  ; 
J.  H.  Dougherty,  Electoral  System  of  the  U.  S. 
(1906)  ; E.  Stanwood,  Hist,  of  the  Presidency 
(1898),  Hist,  of  the  Presidency  from  1897  to 
1909  (1912)  ; A.  B.  Hart,  Practical  Essays  in 
Am.  Gov.  (1894),  eh.  iii;  J.  Story,  Commen- 
taries (5th  ed.,  1891),  §§  1453-1460;  R.  L. 
Ashley,  Am.  Fed.  State  (1902),  326-340;  Fin- 
ley and  Sanderson,  Am.  Executive  (1908)  ; W. 
W.  Willoughby,  Am.  Constitutional  System 
(1904),  Pt.  II,  ch.  vii;  “Counting  Electoral 
Votes”  in  House  Misc.  Docs.,  44  Cong.,  2 Sess. 
No.  13  (1877)  ; House  Manual-,  Senate  Manual 
(annual).  Selected  lists  and  tabulations  of 
popular  and  electoral  votes  for  President  ap- 
pear in  many  places,  particularly,  Am.  Almanac 
(1830-1862);  Whig  Almanac  (1838-1855); 
Tribune  Almanac  (1856-1913);  World  Almcv- 
nac  (1888-1913);  Niles’  Weekly  Register  and 
Niles’  National  Register  (1811-1848)  ; Apple- 
ton’s Annual  Cyclopedia  (1861-1875)  ; Am. 
Annual  Cyclopedia  (1876-1902);  Am.  Year 
Book,  1912.  These  tabulations  were  presum- 
ably gathered  by  correspondence  with  state 
officials,  but  there  are  many  minor  differences. 
F.  W.  Hewes  and  if.  Gannett,  Scribner’s  Sta- 
tistical Atlas  of  the  U.  S.  (1885),  contains 
diagrams,  maps  of  the  distribution  of  votes, 
the  popular  vote,  and  the  percentage  of  lead- 
ing votes  in  each  state,  covering  all  elections 
from  1788  to  1880.  In  Edward  Stanwood,  Hist, 
of  the  Presidency  (1898)  and  Hist,  of  the  Pres- 
idency from  1897  to  1909  (1912)  will  be  found 
tables  of  popular  and  electoral  votes  through 
the  election  of  1908.  Maps  of  the  distribution 
of  the  popular  and  electoral  votes  for  1800, 
1824,  1836  and  other  elections  down  to  1900 
will  be  found  scattered  through  A.  B.  Hart, 
Ed.,  Am.  Nation  (1904-1908),  XI-XXV.  A 
semiofficial  statement  of  the  electoral  votes 
through  the  election  of  1900  is  in  R.  B.  Mosher, 
Executive  Register  of  the  TJ.  S.,  1789-1902 
(1903)  ; and  that  statement  has  been  followed 
(with  a few  corrections)  in  the  accompanying 
tables.  For  the  popular  vote  there  are  no 
available  figures  back  of  1824.  From  that  year 
to  1884  the  figures  used  in  the  tables  are  de- 
rived partly  from  political  almanacs  and  part- 
ly from  Hewes  and  Gannett,  Scribner’s  Statis- 
tical Atlas  of  the  U.  S.  (which  is  presumably 
founded  on  the  almanacs),  corrected  by  refer- 
ence to  Stanwood’s  two  books.  On  the  elec- 
tions from  1888  to  1912  there  is  a statement 
of  the  popular  vote,  based  on  the  reports  of 
state  officials  filed  in  the  Department  of  State, 
in  Department  of  Commerce,  Statistical  Ab- 
tract  of  the  U.  S.  No.  35.  1912  (1913),  727- 
733;  and  it  has  been  followed  in  the  tables 
appended.  Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 


TABLE  I.  SUMMARY  OF  PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS,  1788—1912 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


Si 
< ? 
H 


v 2 

vi  y 
H a 
O z 
O 5 

Dn 

02^ 


S° 


65 

2 s 
g§ 

o> 


S S-.^ 
o-u  °£ 


« in  <t  r-oi^»-»tr,«n»n<flo<nhN^N»,0(o«finNe9in«oiflONe9 
to  is  *-  *f  co  n «x>  oo^r-»-(a'l»cN«f»“'-csooiflcoinceu3«tr-io»f«oo) 


a a 
o o 


m t» 

° ° r- 

a a « 
a a § 
O o u 
a> 


a *- 

'd  • irr 


O)  ^ - y 
o oij  ^ : a 2 

h,*  £ S 


boo  to 
- a 

O £*£ 


p-  o -H< 
03  CO  05 
® rH  CO 

<05  doj’ 
oeo'f 
USlfiifl 


< _ 
. O 
C?  *» 


a>>£ 
. 5 « 


OOWiOOM^05Moq05Nir5t^HOOlf5COHr}< 

dfOM'^eod^i^eodododooiocowt^MN 


CM  05 

O OO  X.-  

h lo  in  m 


OO'tt-NMasNlflOOwOHH 
h.  CO  in  in  M in  <n  r/i  lO  r..  rf  h-  C5 


00rt<f-C'JC005C'-l0®OCM 

f-coLninMf-incocoino'J'f- 

_ iflCQHCOCDOt^Otn  O CO  05  o . 

oo  o'  6 <o  in  uf  w 03  t)<’  eg  os'  o’  o*  n co'  Tf 

NCONCOMp.OOMCO-j'rJ'rri-jCOiflcO 

H in  N CO  CO_  CO  °0  ^ co  N ^ OO  in  H CO  o 


to  o 

O CM 
rH  O 


a 


5 >> 

O £) 


03  ® 0) 

a.  e — < 


24 

a o © ^ . 
03  o a © 


: a 52  o 9 o 
3 r ,d  « r r, 1 


a a 03  a 
a 24 


ao3ra^.^rr,«a^aa3 

;a20H2c:o-c2caa.cQC3 


co  cm  T—  eo  o cm  CM69n»-o)ncoenoM'fon^«toN<t(oiflno)wr'»-w«fl»-in 
to  co  r—  r—  ■»—  co  NNoong»i-r-»-r-<*>or*<oinr-a^-’-«ooo»-r-nr-r-o»nNw 

T—  »-  N N f-  NT-r-MT-T-NCNlN^-NNNNCMPJnCO^t 


a a 

© o 

BBS 

G G - 

2 3 % 
1 §< 
& ii  H 


M o 


OOMM05T)|a3qC6«3C3MHOqN03t^'tCDoq 
wo3r^dinc3inNint>coo3  t^cooHcoHH 
m^->7'io^’coinininTj<ri<^Tj<'*i<ioinioWN( 


■ ■ x wi-wujCDCONinLOClCOrHMCOCOOH 
O <N  H ^ H CO  O 00050  O CO  'V  Olfl  OO  0_  CM 

n o h co"  o o in  p-'  co  os  n ,t  ^ in  os’  oo'  03  cn 

MCOOMWHHQCO'fH’tincOHNNcO 

— “ ' — ' " — OJTfWONco'fiN 

rf<~  IO  LT5  P~*  P~-  [-2  t-*  ccT 


•-  - - - WJ  - -*  '-J-  WJ 

^MCOO«KOHHQM*tHTtU3COHCI 
CM_  co  K)  CO  M CO  cqo^lfl  O Tf  05  — ' ■ “ — — 
H H H H H H N CO  M ^ ' ~ 


© © © 


fa  fa 


3 3a 

a a 


u 24 

a ~ 


N*  « © £ .h  *H  M N3 


r a — 

8 8 

d-g-a 

• a __ 

****** 


£ * 
a *■* 


a C- w. 
a 1 
a a a ■ 
© a ’ 


a ^ >> 

•W  a § g -S  S » 

® ~ - a - .£  .s 


I 3 £ J|  e £ ! s = = 2 £ « S3  S I «S 

,>CafaHa-e3N3JC!c;ac3!jinogg6SHe 


2 0 > w 


®Noo22©©mt»t>*NH^ 
CO  eo  CO  to  H t-  H H M co  ^ 

rH  1— ( rH  7—)  rH  CM  CM  C\J  CM 


H Cl 

NH^HCOH'O'finOOCDCOMH'NOSOSHHH't-l 
MCONtOCOOrfOf-QOTCSOCOaiLOtOtOOO’f’f 
NM  CM  cm  cm  CM  CM  CM  CM  CM  CO  CM  CM  CO  CO  CO  ^ ^ 


<n  bl 

13  a 

1 -8 

CO  > 


1-  0 3 3 C 
© - g 0.0 

ft*  5 c © s 

yu6- 


00,0 
U O > 
ft* 


I iff  s 
g 3 > 3 

O o-M 

Dm  O 


ia  CM  tO 
on  o cm* 


CO  05  CO 
CM  05  lO 
05  CO  05 


t-M00inHC005C003Ot’H'^'<rN^^C0'3J 
^cDNcocoint^cooNcddooosdodcocdco 
HHHrlHHHHH  CM  t-H  CM  tH  t-H  CM  rH  rH  t-H  t— I 


C0H00Hf-e0CMHC0inoO03MC0C0C5M<33 
tM.COOOCOu3C50NOC5C500”fHHM!0 
t—  ©05  CM  05  SO  P-  © © ® CO  -rT  ® CM  i©  IOHH 
© O H t}T  N co  -^T  Tf  P-*  N H OO  H CO  M TP  CO  t>  H 
hop*^hi>mcmcm|bht— iinooTfHoinxco 
-rj<.  C'l  OO.  t-^  O,  CO  ® ^ ^ CM  O CO  O OO  C3  N OO  0_ 

CMCMCM'co-^-^‘-«^'io'cd'c<ro50  H N CO*  CO*  CO*  tT  in 

rH  t-H  1— ( rH  t-H  rH  t-H  rH 


05  05 
O © 
tr— 

tO  tS 
05  05 
CM  CM 


I>H'',tCMH(05inH05  05  05HOininNI> 
0000G0c0trWOH<e0e0HC£lH<CM<N't03 
co  co^  h r—  co  in  co  co  eo^  lo  eo  t-h  cm  cmlo  t— i 

o 03*  C3*  [2  h cn  in  in*  h h co  q"  o’  n t^*  03  h 

/Jt't'COK3lOlOH[,I-Q05l'OOOH 
N CO  co  CO  Tf  o H H M co  CO  05  CM  Cfi  O n O 

N N N O*  N IO*  M CO  o’  03*  O*  H N H H 

CM  CM  CM  CO  CM  CO  CO  CO  tH  'M-1  co  eo  to  C~-  C—  05  03 


a a 
a a 
2s 


>> 


z 

o ^ 


o a 
HfH 


OO  r4  ^ d 

OO  CM  tO  O rH  «t«  00CMCOOT^U500CM0©t^O!3100CM®O-^00CMCr>O'^00CM«r>O'^00CM 

no  05  05  o O O OHHf|Mf]cgMCOCOH^H,LOintOO^)^’^COMC003C5000r* 

t—  u-  p—  CO  CO  00  CO  OO  CO  QO  CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  (-*-1  ^ OO  CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  00  CO  CO  CO  CO  05  05  05  05 

rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  t— l HHHrtrlHHHHHHrHHHrlHHrHHHHHHHHHHrHH 


13 


Election  thrown  into  House  of  Representatives;  vote  by  state  delegations. 
Election  thrown  into  Senate;  vote  by  Senators. 

I-Sreekenridge  had  72  electoral  votes,  but  was  third  in  popular  vote  (847,508). 


TABLE  II.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1788—1789 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


O * 
» * 
H O 

5 £ 


t-J  £3  aj 

fe  H — < 
M Q 3 

H tH  ^ 

O Q Ph 

p*  ° 

U2U 


a ' 

c s' 


B.  Lin- 
coln 
(Mass.) 

II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 
II  1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 
II  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 
f I l 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 
II  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
II  1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 
II  1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 
II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 
II  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

- 

u 

-2  ca 
■30 

H 

II  1 1 I I I l 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

II  l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 

II  1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 • 

- 

Arm- 

strong 

(Ga.) 

II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 I 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 l 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

- 

Milton 

(Ga.) 

I 1 1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 l 

II  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

I 1 CM  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

II  1 l | l l | l 1 1 1 

II  1 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 

II  1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 

II  1 1 l 1 1 l 1 1 1 l 

II  1 1 l 1 1 l 1 1 1 l 

1 • l i | i | i l 1 1 1 

CM 

Hunting- 

ton 

(Conn.) 

1 1 ■ l 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 l 

1 1 l 1 l 1 l l 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 l 1 l l 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 l 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 

l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

CM  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

CM 

Han- 

cock 

(Mass.) 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

• 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

i i i i 

■ i i i 

■ i i i 

i i i i 

i i i i 

■ i i i 

■ i i i 

■ i i i 

■ i i i 

• i i i 

■ i i i 

■ i i i 

i 

i 

i 

i 

i 

1 CM 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

! - - 

Rut- 
ledge 
(S.  C.) 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 1 1 <0  1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

■ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

(0 

R.  H. 
Harrison 
(Md.) 

III  1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
III  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
III  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 
III  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
III  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 C0  | 1 | | 1 1 | 1 1 
III  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
III  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
III  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 
III  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
III  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

C0 

a* 

1 1 

! 

1 1 

1 1 

1 CO  | 

■ 1 

1 1 

I 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

i i i 

■ i i 

■ i i 

i i i 

■ i i 

■ > i in 

i i i 

! 1 1 

■ i i 

■ i i 

■ i i 

i i i 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

I 1 

1 1 

1 1 

| 1 

■ 1 

1 1 

| 1 

I 1 

1 1 

O) 

Adams 

(Mass.) 

( Vice- 
Presid’nt) 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 
in  i i 

i i 

■ i 

i i 

i i 

i i 

i i 

10 

5 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 to 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

| 1 

| 1 

1 1 

■ 1 

1 1 

i i m 

i i 

i i 

i i 

i i 

i i 

i i 

34 

Wash- 

ington 

(Va.) 

(Presi- 

dent) 

f-  n uj 

<o  o in  <n 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 C3 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 1—  o 

69 

<D  n 2 3 

m - ri  C3  rr\ 


O Q o 3 


S O H,  JH 

& 
0) 


o U .£ 


& £ 
OJ  4) 

>5  55 


55  c-i  cJ  w > 


<D  H 


Voting 

Oi 

<x> 

'G 

<X> 

a 

fcc 

tH 

(Ji 

M 

< 

ZZS<! 


14 


few  York,  because  of  a deadlock  in  the  legislature,  chose  no  electors, 
forth  Carolina  and  Rhode  Island  had  not  yet  ratified  the  Constitution. 

'wo  electors  from  Maryland  and  two  from  Virginia  not  voting. 

.dams  elected  Vice-President  because  second  in  the  electoral  vote,  a majority  not  being  necessary. 


TABLE  III.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1792  AND  1796 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


bn  M 

£ 3 

U 


►a  w 
d a 
a £ 

OD  ◄ 
W a 
go 

03 

p <J 

mo 


Kj  W 

O S 

o 


J M 

d a 

fe  Eh 
m < 
K Q 

gs 

O g 

p hJ 

®u 


H3  T3  *i 
C C ^ 


c cU 

M O • 

o ~ 2 


Q u erf  ' 


*S  1 > |1 1 

0)  QQ  ^ 


1 1 1 1 1 

111  11 

1 1 .1 

Inde- 

penden 

Fcdcra 

C.  C. 

Pinck 

ney 

(S.  C. 

1 ! ! I ! 

1 1 1 *—  1 1 

111  11 

111  11 

111  11 

111  11 

1 1 < 

1 1 > 

1 1 1 

lit! 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 • 

V Z 

c p 

1 1 I 1 CM 

1 1 1 1 1 L 

i 1 1 

04 

•0  T3 

c a 

£3 

i ! j i 

1 1 1 

0. 

1111 

1 1 1 1 1 i 

1 1 1 

V 

T3 

•s  §3 
£ =~ 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

• III! 

111  11 

111  11 
111  ( ) 
111  11 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

N 

tu 

1 1 i i 1 

111  1 i 

1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

111  11 

l 1 1 

J« 

■So 

1 1 1 1 1 
< ! ! J • 

1 1 1 co  1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

CO 

•O 

~ 2 

£ 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

111  11 

111  11 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 C « 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 
in  1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 

m 

C clg 

~ S.&. 

*""*2 

1111 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 

Demo- 

cratic 

Repub- 

can 

G.  Clin- 
ton 

(N.Y.) 

11  11 

11  11 

I 1 ^ 1 1 

II  11 

11  11 

11  11 

11  11 

11  11 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 CO 

• 1 

- 

i|l 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

CO  1 1 1 1 V? 

1 I 1 1 

— 

*3 

= 13 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 
till 

U* 

' 

1 1 1 1 1 

till 

1? 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 in 

in 

g « 0,  3 

a 

■a  cj 

<s 

C/3  ' — 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

. 3 

-s 

111  1 

111  1 

III  1 

III  1 

1 

1 

CO  l «- 

1 

1 

1 

0 

Anti 

edei 

sH 

«2 

111  1 

111  1 

iii  1 

III  1 

III  1 

CO 

tu 

111  1 

III  1 

1 

A 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

« 

= frcj 

m*eo  1 1 co 

7 

12 

1 

2 

1 

1 ^ 

in 

T3 

c c n 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

Cu 

H ~ 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

1 

•hJi  s § 


3 ^ 

£0  2 


1— <o«or-N»-^<t 


i-j  1 S3  .a  2 g 

^S>o<-S 


eo<o(or« 


I till 

S .S''— 


0)(0«^00<0(0toNMU)<te0  W*- 


H 

H 

<1 

Eh 

02 


. rrj  <X)tH 
rt  Ci  ^ 05  OJ 

5"H  C3  D-  P- 


i t*-  i -m  a d cj 

!C  Sg^-«5.2 

~ ~ >s  3 § £ So  2 “75 

«5-£S-gW|S|Sg£MS)U3- 
Sl^-Es^  3|^5S|.2 

o5oai.»&^  So  a g sy 

^(DOJcicSaxDOj  . £ .a  . a-  £ .3 

oQOWaS^ZZZ&nBSWH^f 


a 

o 


£ g 

S a 


B 0° 

j <M  « 

u U 


r— 

00 

to 

g 

s 

0 

m 

CS 

e 

< 

£ 

© 

15 


1 The  total  electoral  vote  of  1796  is  reported  by  Mosher  and  other  authorities  at  139 : there  were  only  138  electors ; and  the  vote  was  canvassed  at  138,  February 
!,  1797.  One  elector  voted  for  both  Adams  and  Jefferson. 

2 Jefferson  elected  Vice-President  because  second  in  the  electoral  votes,  a majority  not  being  necessary. 


TABLE  IV.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT.  1800—1801  AND  1804 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


B-=  g.  g 
Q « 


CJH 


'>eor-cocK*j*e,>e3*»>®ift<e'«J- 

T-  ■»-  r-  CVJ  *-  «M 


trcJ 

c 00 


o£ 


<V  C • 

*2  ©2 


SQ  00 

g H 
£ H 
g 0 

UT 


<ooeo)(nr*flOW»tMo^Oiflio^ 

r-  evj  »"  ew 


■ iii  111  1 > 1 ■ 1 

> 1 1 1 111  1 * 1 1 1 

O 

T3 

U. 

Burr 
(N.  Y. 
(Vice- 
Presi- 
dent) 

■ 1 1 1 111  1 1 1 1 1 

rH  1 l 1 1 rH  iH  l | 1 IrH'l'l 

■ill  III  1 1 | 1 1 

* 1 1 1 III  1 ■ 1 ' 1 

• 1 1 1 III  1 l 1 1 1 

'III  III  1 till 

Demo- 

cratic 

Repub- 

lican 

Jeffer- 

son 

(Va.) 

(Presi- 

dent) 

1 II  1 

1 II  1 

1 II  1 

J tHiHtH  1 jr-IHH  rH  j HHH 

1 It  1 

1 II  1 

1 II  1 

I II  1 

01  | 

K CG 

w a 

M H 

g O 


g * § s g 

CQ  Z > Cm  -O 


Q 0 c£  - 


te  o ^ u!  c 
« 


X H 

H fH 

52 

O HH 

z a 


►*  >H 

,_1z 


hlM^rH  -rf  CVJ 


to 

‘Z1  ® t/5 


us  1 


|7 
3 S 


CO  to  05  05 

'O 


m to  co  r— 


K M 
0 Q 
~ £ 


& O -O  c 

g-s  g 5 

s? 

11  111 

1 1 111 

1 ' **■  **■  in  1 1 iNeo  co 

1 

1 

1 

CO  0 ! — 

<Z> 

O"^ 

mg 

I ' 111 

ii  111 

II  111 

1 es 

1 

1 

1 

1 

r — 

Demo- 

cratic 

Repub- 

lican 

Jeffer- 

son 

(Va.) 

1 1 111 

1 1 111 

I 1 111 

II  111 

1 *3-  m 1 1 1 cm  co  co 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 111 

t * 111 

1 1 111 

1 

1 

1 

co  (*3  I £- 

1 

1 

1 

h 

«;  H ^ 1/  r; 


h.m  ^ fl  w >s  W S' 


^ £ t£  2 3 C3  ^ ' ' *’'"’  ,fl  M 8 ®. g 

c — 0'S  ^ ^ ^ti.2  2 o p S 

uQC^SS^;^i^ZO£,CHa2^>> 


Cl, 

Cu 

o 


K' 

»co 

a<  ^ 

8 o 


16 


1 The  two  highest  candidates  being  tied,  there  was  no  election  in  1800. 

2 Jefferson  elected  President  by  vote  of  state  delegations  in  the  House. 

3 Burr,  on  the  final  election  of  Jefferson  automatically  became  Vice-President,  as  the  Constitution  then  stood. 
* Delaware  and  South  Carolina  cast  blank  votes. 


TABLE  V.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1808  AND  1812 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


I als 

SB&S 


C9  N « CO  N 


Fusion 

O •— v 

Jr  <« 

9 

4 

5 

20 

7 

8 

29 

4 

CO 

<30 

Demo- 

cratic 

Repub- 

lican 

Madison 

(Va.) 

i i i , i i 

i ;ii' 

i i i i i 

1 i i i i i i 

i | i i ■ i i 

i | oo  cm  co  co  i i , i in  p-  m i <-  eo  eo  n 

' 1 ' 1 l 1 CM  • CM 

1 1 1 | 1 

• 1 1 | | 1 1 

■ 'iii  ; 

i iii 

128 

Fusion 

DeW.  Clinton 
(N.  Y.) 

9 

4 

5 

22 

8 

8 

29 

4 

68 

O > 

S'" 


c jQ  — 

ac 


"2  o'  — 


T3  32 
tx 

c v 

35 


g.H  = § 
| 2 8\S 

Q w os 


.£>< 

d 


c . 
2 
. z 


.£Jh 

o z 

dw 


i'llg 

o 2 57.^ 

Q 


15 

s 


O cm  a>  i 
& ” 


U|cj 

CJ.S  c/5 


►» 

.2  o 

^ ■ 


2 S o o 


H 'd  5 

■H  £1  - 

a cj  p 


'<1>  5 <X>  O d d gj  (D  0)  o ^3  p P 


£ ►“<  o 

“ -rt  Jd 

O g "S  5 

P 


o p 

3 ‘5 


Oi>a}a>oc3C3a)<^a)wFqa)'^C)fl,CD.rH 

OQc52Ugg22iZZOtiHKMH!>> 


Oi 

a 

O 


2 ^ 

C3  D 

CO  £_|  *I-H 

SP  o © 

& s-c  ,p 

© ri 
<u  u 

£ 


a. a 
*i  a 

P 


17 


One  elector  from  Kentucky  not  voting. 
One  elector  from  Ohio  not  voting. 


TABLE  VI.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1816  AND  1820 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


1 1 

1-1  o 


o<  -o 

IS 


£ g-g  i 

•O-O  ft! 


P«  a . • 

e.5^ 

2 

H '-' 


cl&l 

~ rv-  — 


6B  ” 


CMi-  CM  »- 


r *r  t—  oo  in 

V-  CM 


= ? 2 


Ot 

rt  *5 


-- 

=3- 

i 

i 

i i 
i i 

i i i i i i i i i i i i 

i i i i i i i i i i i i 

Inde- 

pende 

Feder 

•g  <« 

Is  > 

i 

«t  i 

i 

i 

i 

i 

i 

■ i 
i i 
i i 
i i 
i i 
i i 
i i 

i i i i i i i i i i i i 
i i i i i i i i i i i i 
i i i i i i i i i i i i 
i i i i i i i i i i i i 
i i i i i i i i i i i i 
i i i i i i i i i i i i 
i i i i i i i i i i i i 

1 c w 

9J  Ci  Jr? 

i 

i 

i 

i 

in  i 

i i 
i i 
i i 
i i 
i i 

i i i i i i i i i i i i 
i i i i i i i i i i i i 
i i i i i i i i i i i i 
i i i i i i i i i i i i 
i i i i i i i i i i i i 

in 

•S  g| 

(§* 

'a  I 

'd  ! ! 

'd 

i rw  rO  i i i i i i i i ■ i i 

© i 

© j | 

i © © i i i i i i i i i i i 

tj 

ti 

+j 

£ tj  1 

a i : 

a 

a 

! a a 

• 

C.  a kj 

'd  ' i 

'O 

'd 

i fo 'd 

■§  g 

« 1 loo 

2 CO  CM  CO  rt0C 

i wooco«meea<t»“»eoa 

CO 

& 5 

52z 

IS  i i 

© 

1 4_,  4_,  CM  *—  CM  *-»  CM 

! © © 

>»  I ! 

>» 

>* 

i 5>i>i 

4-> 

4_i 

4-1 

' +-»  -4-> 

o . . 

o 

° o 

£ : i 

z l l 

z 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

<-4  1 1 1 1 1 ■ 1 1 1 1 1 

§2 

i i 

i i 
i i 

CM 

-a 

i i 

i i 

CM  i 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 

CM 

£ 

i i 
i i 
i i 

i i 
i i 
i i 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 < 1 1 1 1 I 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 

CO  WNM  03 


cooowiocojn^T-ooootf* 


5 ^ 
; 2 


<D 


cS— < S 

9 O c 

j§S 

cS  2-C 


J Oi 

,GOh» 


' k,  5 


H O © 


cs  ; 


—CM  ,2 

cm  a w ft  ^ M Ph 

2 -a  sg  fl  £•£  a 

' 2 #2  — < c*  cS  ^ ® P . k 

^ssgw^  n_ 

SS?S88fr&*t;.sS]hSga> 

m ^ ^ 'S iS  'l1  ^ ^ o*^  ^ ^ ^ ^ ,w 

«SSr--.r'.z^lz;^O^iKiz2F-<>-t> 


FjIr-4) 

r’-'og-gs 

2 g.f 


18 


c 2 
~ a 
P 


0> 


C.  (H  w 

t> 

e°  *Tl  *»-T 

H3  "S 

c fl  .£* 


o 


a 


W » 

t-  K a 

g Jj§ 
I ~ a 

o5g 

<w 

3’S^ 


<D 


0> 


2 

«2 

O K © 

2-2 

c s o 


TABLE  VII.  PRESIDENT,  1824 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


£ 

u 

© 

C 

i 


2 c5  u 


03 

a 

a 

p 

02 


19 


1 No  candidate  having  a majority  of  electoral  votes  for  President,  there  was  no  election.  For  the  election  of  1825  see  Table  VIII. 

2 For  the  vice-presidential  election  of  1824  see  Table  IX. 


TABLE  VIII.  PRESIDENT,  1825  (House  of  Representatives)  and  1828 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


Um-  S 

S°h 

cu 


HCONOOOtfit-O 


0(N'toCOU5lfltO'' 


OOOOOSOlMh-TfLOP-OOOJMMNOMt^t^NH 

T-H -qco  t—  *>^CM  © CO  05  iq  © p~»  cm_  co  05  0-  go  iq  co  go 
oo  co  cm  ai  -rr  co  ■«*  co*  co  go*  ©*  p^  i-4 

tH  t-H  CNJ  CO  t-HCM  CM  CM  rj<  CO  CO  © 


u o§ 

s H 


OO  05  05 

cocmco 

05  OOP- 


rH  GO  05 
lO  -t*  OO 
05  CM  CO 


q^MqcoHNqcoiflOsqoo^coq  oohh 

coeo'^P-osT-lcoooosco’-JoscrjooeoP- 

t-H  t*«  •*3<  ■<*«  LO  iO  OO  |H  CO  10  lO  tP  cm  ^ eo  p-  **  p-eo 


-C005COT-^CMCOOOCOOOcOOO'*t,  Vr©  r 
5P-!OCOC<lClh.tOHHCi  ^LO  OO  C 

:>C'-p-ooi«'3-oC'--'*,05eoooi'-  qcMP-r 


hm  cm  cm  eg 


3-<pcoLoeoco©CM'>-^c 

cm  cm  mh  co  in 


u « 
U-  3 « 
. o o..; 


t-hi-JtHcoCM.  rHCM©cqcMQOT-H©cqcMeq©05co«q 

cDcdi-HeoiOi-io-^ooi-Hiocdodcd'^-^t^corHco 


<ob>ooa5'ta5«)cqot^tOTj<Tj<oooocoioMO‘^ 
h-t-HOMoOlOOOWU5^LOCnOt'l-0'.6P' 
© CM  i-H  P-  COCM  CM  P- P-COOO  COCO  P-  P-  T-H  p-  05  LO  iq 
«l«  CO  T-H  o'  cm'  CO 
■’M’P-lOMtO 


c o 
..2  OO 


NlOCOMlCHt^OSlOOOOr 

CM^'tCM’J'MHCOlO^'OC.-. - 

10  qt- oo  ’toap^  © co  ^ cqooco  05 05 cm  r 

C5*t>^co'cdi>*coP-ir305P^ocooo50oo'p^p^odt>* 

OC5p.HlO'*tjOH05'^,HCC’l'C£5CMHMrtTf05 
CO  CM  10  rH  CO  CO  CM  CO  ^ CO  tH  i— I CM  CO  05  p»  05  CO 


£2  C3  ^ C5  ej  C3 

o owoo®2 

^3t*,5^'9^3S323^22^2H'‘2^9^^3^’ 

2 g-a  S 2 


o c = 

a H o 
2 


° 

' 2 


GO  CM  p-»  L£5  CM 


at!  « .2  » 2^ 

h D ic  sr  : 


H CO  H H O H CM 


◄c 


> W o --  ~ 72 


o.S 
A a.— 


H li  o 

:ui  j 


Z*  >i  7 

■ r-  '—  -J 

C3  C3  C 


— i »£«  *5  «e5  *5  *5  «e5 


:“2 

Sa  ! S * =3  S 

rt 

£ frtis  5 O a § S ^ 


— o 2 

— O-  c 

< o.  5 

O c 


20 


O a 


20 


’Thirteen  states  for  J.  Q.  Adams;  seven  for  Jackson;  four  for  Crawford. 
a For  the  vice-presidential  elections  of  1824  and  1828  see  Table  IX. 


TABLE  IX.  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1824—1836 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


CD  -r> 

2 £ ^ yj 
> <u  - 

t->  V.  HH 

.B 

. ,28i> 

I!"-' 

nS> 


a 

e, 

O 


CO  *, 

M,0  0 
g"- 43 
4)  O 

z 


a.  a 
i-*  a 
P 


1 One  elector  from  Rhode  Island  not  voting. 

2 Two  electors  from  Maryland  not  voting. 

3 No  majority  for  Vice-President,  therefore  no  election. 
* Three  Senators  not  voting. 

6 Michigan  counted  in  the  alternative. 


TABLE  X.  PRESIDENT,  1S32 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


__ 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

• £ 

£ o 

£ 72 

*■*  r ^ 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

i i i i i i i ■ i i i i i ! i i 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

■ 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

i i i i i i i ! i i i i i i r-  i 

» 

£ <3 

02  fk 

H 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

I 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

i i i ■ i i i ■ i i i i i ! i i 
i i i i i i i i i i i i i I i i 
i < i i i i i ! i i i i i i i 

i i i i i i i i i i i i i 1 i i 

Q "3 

2;  a 


k.  ci 

s> 


x 2 

- ? 


O' 

3 


o> 

Ph 


£;  a 

PS 


g >■> 


K-  . 

0)i> 

H 


OOOOCOi 


I^OOOWOOCOlflHlfllfiWrl 


0500^Nb-05H«5U50)NtOCONN«£»M«ri 
OHlO'TfiflTf^Oiin’tHasCOLDOlCO^OON 
Cl  H L-  H incq  o IM  H LO  02  H T CO  Tf  GO  (M  03  H 
H O ' . : J 
t— I NHCOM 


<75  i ^ ^ ^ 

j CO  M4’  CO  03  T lO  lO  ID  CO  CO  -I*  ' 


G G 
a>  ■£ 


G 

rt  <m  o 


Gw 

92 

Q.O 

Ph 


H Eh 

Eh  os 

O < 

>o 


3afl 

o o 2 

Ph  o 


G ^ 

— • 02 

So 

o> 


Ph-' 


in  to 

LO  fc 

t-  N 


'MWNHO 


NOW 

in  ^ ^ 

03  <73  L- 


t>;  in  os  in  in  as  ,3  oo  t-h 
cM’ost^inoooocp"  — -^inin 
CM 

"fcJD 

a> 


O CO  W CO  05  w o 
H0  05WMHH 
OCOOOlOlflt^CO 


L-oiq^t^iDOHinL-eocDiDt-oqajcoaiq 

0)dTpdMHeoiflo6t>'>tM<C'^cceoddio 

i-H  •— I 1 H — J 


^WOW^eOb*inW>OOnN<D(35Mlftlfl(35«5 
(NOOirOC«N-^L-a3H'H'HCia5*Hai(NOO(J5M 
l>  ifl  q w W H'  CO  W O H H^N  CO  W Q 

05  CO  o’  (73  P*  05  W O OO  lO  115  pG  CO  03  t-G  M4^ 
CM  IN  H T t>  CD  CO  -T1  T T N IN  lO  T 

CO  HH 


iftWeoinHf-oifloMHiflcocooo^cocoo 
['--'^cM-^coT-HeoinTfOCMincMCMOoooeoas 
cjo  t-_  m o_  as  t o t w ^ eq  oo  a 05  d in  h 

t-G  CD  CO  l-G  CO  tG  1C  05"  tG  o’  CD  o'  <75*  o’  CO  L-’  C-'  03  t- 
C5b-HuOT«)Ha5TjiHCOTt'CDNHCOCOHi(73 
CM  LO  t — I CO  CD  CM  CO  -M4  CD  H »H  CM  CO  03  l'-  CT3  CO 


G 

O ^2 

G Ti  u> 

a o « 
S a i: 

43  - a 

c3  G — 

PS  o ^ 

<uQ 


G zj  o3 


fco’o 

O .2  r 

0 5 — 

Oh, 


3 72  a* 

j *3  5 

> o G 

1-32 


<D  .. 

72  , 

n g : 
a .a . 
g o ■ 
T rt 

k»  72 
S-i  72 

G G 

S 2 


a j 
£ 5° ' 


•S  o 

72  72 
72  72 


-H.°u 

g K i-s  5h  ^ 

02  O 


■Tt*  t-  tH 
M4  CD  CO 


-rl<  CM  LO 
O LO  O 
<73  CO  M4^ 

■A  © t-H 

COCO  H 

CP  CM  CM 


gj  .2 
G — 
£ 2 
* S 


G 

G 

k H r i w 
hHU  71 
ki  72 


ii  & 

a,  a 

KKi 


OCh 


w - v o a 

•g  5 S a -a 

O 3 p ^ ~ 

G3  © 02  02  Ph 

Ch02E-i3'>' 


_ O D 

— a.  - 

<8% 


12  O «-* 
” o!  «2 
20  = 


o.  c 

Q.  4J 

O fi 


O,  C 
Q,  U 

O S 


22 


1 Two  electors  from  Maryland  not  voting. 

3 For  vice-presidential  election  of  1832,  see  Table  IX. 

3 The  33,108  popular  votes  for  Wirt  added  into  the  Clay  vote. 

4 This  figure  is  the  majority  for  Jackson;  his  total  and  Clay's  total  can  not  now  be  ascertained. 

6 Five  of  the  seven  electors  of  Alabama  were  chosen  by  popular  vote,  but  no  record  of  the  vote  is  available. 


TABLE  XI.  PRESIDENT,  1836 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


3 s.- 

3 it'C 


£ a 
a a 
si  a 


a o 

S3 

a® 


£ s2 


Oh 


OO 
CO  CO 
CO  CM 


c o 

45  U 

r i “ 


O 
W > 

a 


OO  E— 
OOCO 
co  eo 


'fit- 


Hff5p.p*00OlfitDN05NM  OOtT 

. . _ . , . . - >-h  05  cd  -h<  o"  cd  lo’  o -*h  co  »-<  03’  ^ 03  o cd 

lOCDlOTS<TtUOT3HT^LOLO^J<TfCOLOLOt>-^J,irjLO'^<LOlLO  ^ lO 


0,0 

© > 

Oh 


m 

0CDP-Ol0MOP-HO05lflNP-lOO00lflTj<  fcf  o t-  T-l 
?WC500COlOO<OOCDP‘05'M',tHH'^'P-«0  Q,  03  CO  CO 

n h o eo h in co 05 a»  t^eo oo as 05 j hon 

f oq  oo'  c<f  co  co  (oq  oi  co’  p-'  oj  o oo  co*  co  co  co’  rH  cq  hH  co  © 
03  rH  CO  CO  03  03  (TO  H H 03  CO  03  05  © 03  t— l CO 


— V 

as 


a,  e °«*j 

u a,  * 


03  05C010, 


HOl0  03  03C0P-03Oe0t^03lft050qL0  03G0 

^’t— iT-Ho’cocrjocNicd'^'eoaicdioCDT-Heoio 


lOOOoMCDOHOCDOSOJ^ONiMOaiOOCOeOCC'^ 

oeooC5LO°ocooseoeor-i05COcoeoioeoLOCOioooC'- 

p-cop-ooo0t'-coouoouocococooi03eo'»coi«co 


o* OO 
O *-•  vH 

Cl,  W 


p-coLOOOeoiOrHp— crsioooooi—uoooeocot-coeo© 

03G0p-'^03'^,e0rHC0u0-^OC003L003  03o00OC0aj 
“oeoco  t^oo ^o cqcq-»qeqooco  050503  rH 
r>“  '“'■'H  co  O Oi  o OO  ^ oo  t> 

oco^cocMHCOeo^as 

rHrH03C005C~05CO 


C5  0f*COCOP-COP*U5C5P*Or 
OCOOt'HlCrt'COHai'tHC 
CO  CQ  lO  rH  CO  CO  03  CO  ^ CO 


QO 

rH 

-sis 

9 » O « 


r 


'O 

fc3  » o cj.2  w l'  o “ S o S' ® 

C D L»  Vr-H  n — C3  (1)^3  H rW  X 

c3rljjC3^H0.2'x3Clo3,^*iMocoa)^^^ 

jHL,oa)a)2rHi'ocScjc;,’H-^  — ODat 


>»  ^ 


_ a q,.„  § ^ 35 
33  «•= 


03  OO  05 
00  03  03 
OO  CO 


d 

*%3 

*3  § o 

Cj  *— ■ <d 

>•  ^ CD  >— 1 

iSSSsSB,  B 


ej-4  H-  O '-rQ  H 3'^  w u 7;  m ^ b H l i. 

j333323^2^^oiL«a)B>> 

23 


>» 

1 

CO 

05 

OO 

03 

| Plurality  i 

212,155 

*§8 

736,656 

Nearest 

Oppo- 

nent 

549,394 

Van 

Buren 

761,549 

O Zi 

o,  c 

O.  45 

O c 


- 3 
e a> 
ca  ^ 
> 3 


£-s 

p 


1 Michigan  electoral  vote  counted  in  the  alternative. 

2 For  vice-presidential  election  of  1836-1837  see  Table  IX. 


TABLE  XII.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT, 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


Vice-President 

(Electoral  Votes) 

5 l| 

: i i : i i : i i i i i i ! : ! i : ! i i i : i ; i 
!i:  !!::::  i : i 
::::::: i ::::::::  i i :::  : 

i i i i i i i i I i : ! i i ! i 1 : i i 1 i 1 ! i ! 

j 

> 

« 

3 

u 

e- 

c 

P-t 

Majority 

139,256 

Polk 

( Term. ) 

( 

i !!!:!!!  i i i i i i !!!;  i i i ! i ! ! 

1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i1  !!  1 1 1 1 1" 

! ! i ; i | i ; ! i i ; i ! i j I i ! ! 1 ! ; i ! 

- 

Plurality 

146.315 

lANUlbl'. 

Tazewell 

(Va.) 

: i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 1 i i ! i 1 

! 1 ! 1 ! 1 ! 1 1 ! ! ! ! 1 1 ! ! ! 1 ! 1 1=  1 1 ! 

! i i i i ; ! | | ; ; ; : ; i i i i ] i i ; 

- 

All 

Oppo- 

nents 

1,135,761 

JLMiaVI. 

Johnson 

(Ky.) 

i i i i i i i i i i i !!!!!!!  i i 

” ! 1 l”  1 ! ! 1 ! 1 ! 1 ! i 1 1 ! ! ! IS 

; i i | ; ; i ! ; i | ; ; i ! i | i ; i 

3 

Nearest 

Oppo- 

nent 

1,128,702 

U 

8 

3 

11 

------- 

15 

5 

10 

10 

14 

3 

4 

8 

42 

15 

21 

30 

4 

’’’is"” 

7 

5 

•=  e 

m ° 

1 1,275,017 

President 

Liberty 

Birney 

Per 

Cent  of 
Total 

1 ! CO  ! ! vH  ! ! 1 cq  ! INHCD  ICOHIO  ! ' CD  ' 

! ! o ! ! o ! | Jo  ! ho  | ! o o © ! ©o©  ! © | 

!!!!!!!!  ! ! i ! ! ! 

© 

P<  pular 
Vote 

Ns  Ms ! Ms  in ! i^g  in?  j is  i 

| | j ; 1 j j |rf  ! 1 ea  | 1|| 

7,059 

Total 

2,410,778  | 

Democratic 

Van  Buren 

Electoral 

: : ! :!!:!:!!  i i i i i i i i 

r~"  i : i i i : : i ; :'*r-  : \ \ i : is  i :s 

III  | | | | | | | | 

S 

Vice-President 

Oppo- 

nents 

S 

Per  Cent 
of  Total 

• 

1 

Tyler1 

3 

Popular 

Vote 

33,991 

6.049 

25,296 

4,884 

31,933 

47,476 

51,695 

32,616 

7,617 

46.201 

28,752 

51,948 

21,098 

16,995 

29.760 

32.670 

31,034 

212,519 

34,218 

124,782 

143.676 

3,301 

48,289 

18.019 

43,893 

1,128,702 

President 

Oppo- 

nents 

S 

Whig  | 

W.  H.  Harrison 

Electoral 

8 

3 

11 

””i” 

15 

5 

10 

10 

14 

3 

4 

8 

42 

15 

21 

30 

4 

15 

7 

S3 

W.  H. 
Harri- 
son 

3 

Per  Cent 
of  Total 

£i§sil 

p 

1 

Electors 

Neces- 
sary for 
Choice 

3 

Popular 

Vote 

i ^ 1 3'  § is'  1 tf  s'  s § § H gj  i i | ^ J s S 1 

1,275,017 

Voting: 

I 

Vote  Cast 

Per 

Cent  of 
Popula- 
tion 

10.5 

11.4 

18.4 
13.9 

10.4 

19.5 

17.1 

11.6 

5.3 

18.5 

13.2 

17.1 
20.8 

9.7 

13.7 

20.7 

17.2 
18.1 

10.6 
18.0 

16.7 

7.9 

13.1 

17.3 

6.9 

C— 

23 

Popular 

Vote 

2,410,778 

! 

8 

< 

1 

Popula- 

tion 

U840) 

590,756 

97,574 

309,978 

78,085 

691,392 

476,183 

685.866 

779.828 

352,411 

501,793 

470.019 

737,699 

212,267 

375,651 

383,702 

284.574 

373.306 

2,428,921 

753,419 

1.519,467 

1,724.033 

108,830 

829,210 

291,948 

1,239,797 

16,296,709 

States 

bj 

> 

8 

02 

£ 

Alabama  

Arkansas  

Connecticut  

Delaware  

Georgia 

Illinois  

Indiana  - 

Kentucky  

Louisiana  

Maine  

Maryland  

Massachusetts  

Michigan  

Mississippi  

Missouri  

New  Hampshire  

New  Jersey  

New  York  

North  Carolina  

Ohio  

Pennsylvania  

Rhode  Island  

South  Carolina  

Tennessee  

Vermont  

Virginia  

Total  

In 

Union 

8 

SUMMARY 

24 


1 On  April  4,  1841,  by  the  death  of  Harrison,  Tyler  became  President. 


TABLE  XIII.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1844 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


Ph  o 


o V 
o o 
0;J> 

3 


in  10  r-  (o 


co  03 

n o o 


H^NOONHHClMOOtOlflCiONON'fojWt-iflO 

a5M«jo6H'^oidHMt>do>'di>u5oio6t^t^d1^ 


O55H{0t-OH00N0}«fi(fi0J©fl5Olfl00^^wN 
Tjffl,^ait-(N0000MHt'’l'lflN«3(flO5cOCOHMW 
D-  in  OO  05  rH  Oi  tH  CJ3_  P-  p-  CO  00  H M H ^ ifl  N H LO  CO 
t>TaTcrruf^i>for-rcoiLOC<fc<fi>^ir3THt^'t^'t-JCTra^t>r'rjr 
co  eg  ^iop-wh^cownn^ncomm^cd 

eg  —i  —i 


P* 

^3H5 

bo  . 

,3z 


O ° 

0/>- 

3 


« I to  CO 


o5«noooooo«n^o^in^NcoMOM,too'i;^oin  o ® oo 

dsd^ogN  oo^MoNHeoMMood^doiodd  o d 

Tj«coLOio'<J,'^',tin'fN,iniD'^N,'3'foiC'^LnTj<Ti<io  r;  lo  lo  -<*< 


Jo 

o> 

CL, 


^^MOOCeOOtNiiflMoO'fOONOHCfiOONNf.M' 
OOOeOfMOqgcOLOCOp-COTHCOOLriCOrHcOCOlOO1 
o in  co  t-  h in  oo  n o co  oj  rf  eo  eq  w oo  « tj<  ci  o n 
d in  w d n 12  h m in  n rf  05  h 00  co  n m d h 
eg  co  ^'^cocoricofocofgHcoHcoco^inco 


g ttO 
g <U  CO 
o j o 


O D- 
CO 


fl  2 - 

na- 

<j  0.2 

Ph  o 


oo^oojo^-^Tjiwwosot^NoqqNcooqinNN 
d id  d lo  eg  eg"  o d 


^NMrlin^SMIONNMNOO  , 

COO'n^fqOrlNCOC5«OH^COC0HO5OOinNCON 


p 

aoo 


Ph  *. 


«0H'S01flNM(fi(»HM05ONHN'f«firM7)^MO 
lON^<Z)05MCONHC5HC5COinOt-0(NHtOCOfO 
t-  q q o m h co  w ^ t-  o cn  e^  cd  i-  10  co  o q o co 
o"  t-  2 co  h <d  in  05  n h o f-*  n in  co  h*"  m 00  d d h’"  00 
o^OJO^-asb-oop-Loot'-coi— it—  cocot'-cgLOT-Hcgo 
to  eo  tO'fcot^eom'fp-NcocoNcorj.p-ini-H 

eg  h H 


.2  ® 
ra  cs  £ u 

geo  o cs 

Cl  fll  L»- 


, .a  g 


“ t. 

-4  H 


« £ 

gl  s 

O Q O 


Lc  2 § 


■3  8 

i 5 W 


CO  ^ ' 

If 


fee 

3 


o 00 

H H<  05 
eg  os  d- 

C5  H 05 

eg  a co 
00  eg  eg 


S 3 S £ S £ 


£ £ 
<u  o> 

£ z 


Sh  -r-> 

o -1 
£ O 


S3  rt 
c3  »-• 
j>  “ 
co  Cg 

p 'S 


bfi  H 


^ Q O)  05  ‘H 

Ph  « w H > > 


< D,  4j 

o c 


c a " 

zO  c 


o.  2 

Q,  45 

o c 


gj  c 

O c 


25 


The  Liberty  vote  in  New  York,  mostly  withdrawn  from  Clay,  turned  the  vote  of  New  Y'ork  to  Polk. 


TABLE  XIV.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT, 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


26 


Massachusetts  required  a majority  of  the  popular  vote:  there  being  no  such  majority,  the  electors  were  chosen  by  the  legislature. 
The  Free  Soil  vote  in  New  York,  mostly  withdrawn  from  Cass,  turned  the  election  to  Taylor. 

On  July  9,  1850,  by  the  death  of  Taylor,  Fillmore  became  President. 


TABLE  XV.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1S52 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


— p 

Ha'*-' 

>d 


©>• 

s 


fl  d 

©-*e 

^2 


pH  O 


r-H  © 

d 

Ph 


coos««*iio 

CONOCO 

05  05  CO  Cg 


oo  oo  c- 


CO  00  tH  © eg  00 
c<i  O o 05  oa  CO 


lC003  02Nlt5^ 

os  m eg  io  oo  eg 
CO  COCO  CO  LO  CO 


hi 

fi 

2 a 
BS^ 

\T 

'd 

a 

d 

©^7 
© . 
ss 


^©>> 

3 


mcf9(onno-n«t 


Jl^OiOP-lOOWt-^CO 

n^NN 


C d 

© 

Ph  O 


rHcgcooocoocoooo-^^05cocgio^i^i-Hb-coeQTt<oq-^eo 

H'NMojoidt^HNdoOHdMlfldddcOMddt-HH 

COCOLO'^-^COCOlOLOiO'^^OUOlOCOlOCOlOlOcrDlOlO'^lOlO 


^ © 
C.5 


rHC0C0050000Uat-Oc0C£>t>-05O05Cgc0C0t^.u0C0-^O00lO 

cot-CN-rHHOffi'tcoO'^oc'icrj’tP-iooiCcoTrc'icoM 

co  Hcocg  mm  co co  co  o to  oo  oo  co  05  coo  c— eg  io  c— 

co  eg  o' co  co  •» ' 


0W 

'd 

a 

d 


OQfc 


eg  i-h  c-t'-o 


coeg-^oooo 

1— l IO  -Tf  uo  IO 
O lO  O OO  co 


So 


osoqcouot^o^oqcgo^T-Hcot^ocgiooscocooiocgeooq  oo  os  co  eg  t 

lo  c-“  co  lo  05  o eg  r 


y) 

-t'-coioO'-fr-icoaoiocococoo500-*t<tT~c£>cgooco^t‘co  d)oo  lo  co  eg  c 
jiooip-cocooincoLOTrcoooiei'H'oo'tiefOOieicgp-cg  — os  o:  t~-  r^-  - 
r co  eg  co  co  05  oi  ooo  eg  u:  o ©co  io  os  h ie  oo  o io  h co  j ooos  h io  c 
50cocgco-rj«'oioc^c^cg'iocgeot^05cood-^05cgo5t^  oor^'cg'ode 
d co  iHcoccHiOHcocoiflcoHNHeococousp-  io  eg  io  c 
eg  HH 


© ftg 

o o.2 


■^cocgooocgcocguococoo50oquooqcot^coo5oqooot>io 

ioo5cgo6cooduoo6ododi-5cd’^cg’ego"t>^T-Hcocdcdo5t>-oi-H 


03D-COCOCOCOlOP«OMC3CgegOLOOO'H<P-C5H'H<HOOP-lfl 
HL'-C0C0t^05C0©t^cgMO00'tP‘C0Cgc0«0HC'.C0CgcCO 
05  113  r-  CO  H M TP  H (M  rHOS^rH  T-H  eg  C5  ^co  oocg  eg  OO  T^Cg  © 

i-h  os  co  co  eg' lo  co  lo  t-h  io  eg'  io  io  eg'  oo  eg  co  eg'  oo  co  co  t>- 


P* «; 


© X lO  C-  IO  t!>  r 


HOLO©icoo5U5eooeop-u5 


HOSegOHOCOr  _ 

-OC5t-05000U3X05XH'XXC505000r 
- eg  co  05  OO  05  T— I 05  LO  ITS  lO  OS  CO  co  CO  CO  T 


1 O CO  05  CO  r 


p 

w 80.2.2  © 

§ d a -M  ^ 

a 80  u © p - . 

ssoj^io  ’5 : 

i v!  !d  n d o H - 


* 2 
© d 


_ 2 ft 

^ 2 a a— 

S-S  CS 


faiu  ? 

S£-Ss 


co  p™  oo  © eg 

T-  -f  CO  CO  ,— I 
05  IO  CO  P— 


P-LO  H©M 


o eg  co  ^ co 


•2b^ 

a§g 


|l ° la«  I g g-3  b'S'S Soti3S?M 


oj  o 

m <u-r  «3“  o ■o 

- “•  &S-g g g & & 3 Ss  3 M K fj.2 

d d jrH  — « .n  © © © 0^3  ©^  Q 0 0 ©.rH^ 


27 


| a = 


£ 0*2 

z ° 


5 ’S 
p 


100 


States  Electors  President  Vice-President 


TABLE  XVI.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1856 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


«2  a 

c a 

p D 

oH 


fa  w 


nooh-coM'tH^difl' 


facdfacdfacdfaL005  ©’facd< 

rv^  i-m  y-H  y-K  •— i -rt<  ^-h 


OK* 

fa 


“ ' -HCiCMOCMCDC^C'ii.N' 

Hf— 


TT  CO  <M  (0  !N 


1 ~rr  l 

N ^ N IM  CO  N 00 


CO  05  LO  O O 
t-  CO  *f  H t- 

h co  in  co  Hi 


feC 

as 

*C  ^ 


fa 


CO  CO  O CO 


lOTjicofOcocoH^in'tt^oomin^'inooNcoD'N, 


(J50inw,i,ooooooOoN’fOinoco<c^cico«KO'fC)0 

COHCOOOWD'-l*t-f-Tt'«OCrjH^CO’’,WM'g,^*?'t'-H'/J 

t^dCOOOCOlOCO'OH'OHOHNH^rHt^ClCCMMOO^CO 


fiO 

oP> 

Ph 


^cocon 
fa  © fa  fa 
co  com 


05  tH  o <m 


p-  CD  CO  CO  N 


LO  o 00 
22  <m'  fa  o 

^ COIO  ^ 

a 


O cfa 
j-i  fa  t: 

©<H- 

fa  o 


N LO 
05  LO 


C000P*05O00T}<'c)'N0q00l^Lf500C0inMNt>Ln05'f 
fatofa©odcocdfaododfaco0fao5iofa©'o5C50505ed 
NrlHHNN^rl  H H H CO  t-H  03  CSJ  i-H  H H h 


3 . O 
os  o 
(!<->> 


Hp.HlOP-HCOHH’tNM'^COcfiOO 

C5C5(MC'ICOC50COCOOP-I^COLOiniO,fOCHnC5COCOC5C5N 
N CO  N M 't  H OO  05  CO  CO  OO  p.  OO  O W O CO  LO  CO  ^ H ^ CO  00 
LO  fa  ©*©’  fa  fa  fa  OO  LO  05  fa  fa  05  CO  fa  LO  Os’  Co’  fa  fa  Co’  LO~  CO  © <jf 

P*MH00HH05C0f000,t^O00C0Nmo^05  05  00  00  C0H 

*— ( f!VI  ICN1  T—C  v-A  —4  , — I r—i  1(0  (OO  -«TH 


fa 


MP-p.N(NlOLOOCO,,),WN05^,TjCyJ<«0'^cOLO,*''?5'^COlo 

OI  J5  05  C5  M -t  W t-  H H O CO  CO  M H LO  N -f  I-  ,o  (X  CO  Ci  xfa 

cowmt'iOT}<HTfTrMft'HOmcoLOO'C5mcoOMD1n 


— W.  — - - - -vl-r-,,,«-^COHin<NTft,loC5COlMOO^ 

l°.  ^ lo.  ^ t ^ N.  t ^ H,  °,  w.  ^ ^ o 05  m m o co  p-j  - 

y-1  05*  fa  © fa  fa  CO  fa  00  fa  fa  fa  CO  CO  fa  fa  CO  cm'  fa  05  fa  05  © fa  I 

t-—  O 05  t—  05  OO  O LO  CO  05  OO  H OO  OO  05  05  ® OO  H OO  05  CO  CO  H • 

C—  03  CO  0500051— l05L0L0L005C0«©C0C0^fO00  05r^ 


CO 


H fa 


3 B .2 
;2it 


o b 


<< 


3 a 3 

B O O'  - 

ooOc 


'p  p 

.5  §0 


a ft 

0£  75 


© L^ 


o J3 


<*  ^ & 


r 03 

p fa  ► 

o 

Xfl  > 

.22  s 

& 


u rt 

© u 


05  O M LO  1— t 


co  oo  m p*  n 


t—  03  O i— 1 1 1— • 
r-C  05  03  CO  05 

t-  in  h co  co 
fa  C3  fa  1— I LO 
© i— ' I 03  © 
O N fO  ^ CO 


cJ 

rt  *©  £ 

— c — 


t>  ® « & 
O £ 


w*  © ^ 

a « fa 


© ^ 2-  fa  1 
- i ■*-  c CS  p fa  ; 
popart-' 


fl)  ® o!a  S fa  o © © © "- 
£ £ £ o fa  fa  Ul  eh  fa  > > > 


u 

2 * 


e -2 
~ fa 


28 


States  I Electors  President  I Vice-President  I Popular  Vote 


TABLE  XVII.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT, 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


Constitutional  Union 

Bell  and  Everett 

(Tenn.)  (Mass.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CM  1 1 1 1 1 I 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 

i i 
i i 
i i 
i i 
i i 
i i 
i i 
i i 
i i 

1 1 1 1 1 ■ 11  1 

1 1 1 1 1 ■ II  1 

1 1 1 1 1 ■ II  1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 II  1 

i i i i i i cn  i i m i 

i i i i i i ■«—  i i — • i 

i i i i i i ii  i 

i i i i i i ii  i 

i i i i i i ii  i 

CO 

Per  Cent 
of 

Total 

OO  N W H 05  CO  H O ^ H O H N £<|  M N N eO 

o’  id  o -r-i  cm'  tA  d o"  cm'  id  cd  d d d us"  d 

co  co  cmco^  •*#<•<**  coco 

46.8 

2.8 

1.4 

2.7 

47.7 

24.5 

0.5 

44.7 

0.1 

12.5 

Popular 

Vote 

27,825 

20,01)4 

6,817 

3,291 

3,864 

5,437 

42,886 

3,913 

5,306 

1,763 

66,058 

20,204 

2,046 

41,760 

22,331 

405 

62 

25,040 

68,372 

441 

O "'f  CO  CO  l 1 

OSOlOOb-  1 IE—  COHCOC© 
05T-4i-4t—  1 iCM-*CMCDrH 

ds  a | jss  s 

587,830 

U 

5 

O 

o 

S 

H 

Q 

Breckinridge  and  Lane 
(Ky.)  (Ore.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

II  1 1 1 1 1 III  II 

II  till  1 III  II 

II  1 1 1 1 1 III  II 

cr> i i MMo  i i i i <£t  ico  i i ir—  i i 

ii  i i i i i ill  ii 

ii  i i i i i iii  ii 

ii  till  i iii  ii 

i i i i i iii 

■ i i i i iii 

i i i i i iii 

O I 1 1 i 69  l 1 1 l 

1 1 1 1 1 III 

1 1 1 1 1 III 

till  1 III 

cm 

Per  Cent 
of 

Total 

OHO5O5D;li5OOl>lflOOfi3aifi05lfiiqHqe5M 

■■^edGdodddcdd-M<dd-3«ddcddeM’dodcd 
eo  loth 

50.3 

2.6 

24.2 

37.5 

44.5 

75.5 

4.6 

44.4 

0.6 

18.1 

Popular 

Vote 

48,831 

28,732 

34,334 

14,641 

7,347 

8,543 

51,889 

2,404 

12,295 

1,048 

53,143 

22,681 

6,368 

42,482 

5,939 

805 

748 

40,797 

31,317 

2,112 

OSIDCDt— 1 ! 1 CO  GO  OO  CO  CO 

§3585  1 lgSStS3§8 

OOt-HCOOO  ! 

th  t—  i ; cd  t— 

847,514 

Democratic 

Douglas  and  H.  V.  Johnson 
(111.)  (Ga.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

i 

i 

i 

tn  i M 
i 
i 
i 
i 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

CM 

Per  Cent 
of 

Total 

HN^H-^^egjCO^CTllflHMLfleoOffOOOifiNCOWOOMOOiflCO  1 GO  i o t— 

lO^NOco’tM’oNdNViONdoN’^LoQH^oqdHeooo  | 

29.4 

, Popular 

Vote 

13.651 
5,227 

38,516 

15,522 

1,023 

367 

11,590 

160,215 

115,509 

55,111 

25.651 
7,625 

26,693 

5,966 

34,372 

65,057 

11,920 

3.283 

58.801 
25,881 

62.801 
312,510 

2,701 

187,232 

3,951 

16.765 

7,707 

11,350 

6,849 

16,290 

65,021 

1,375,157 

Republican 

Lincoln  and  Hamlin 
(111.)  (Me.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

II  III  II  • 

ll  III  II  1 

II  III  II  1 

i i^rco  i i i<p~co*e  i i»  i to  to 

■ i iii  ii  i 

i i iii  ii  i 

i i iii  ii  i 

1 l 'ill 

1 1 III 

1 1 III 

i m u*»  imm^"9  ' i i m m 

1 « IN  N ! 1 1 1 

■ S j ! ! ! 

O 

cx> 

Per  Cent 
of 

Total 

39.0 
56.6 

23.8 

50.8 

58.9 

54.8 

0.9 

64.1 

2.4 

63.8 

59.2 
63.4 

i i i 

i th eo _ ! i as  T--i co 

d d od co  I'dddn  ^ ! ! dr-id 

T— 4tf3-'fLD  , LD  LQ  C©  £ J , t—  LfS 

! -g  : ! 

39.9 

Popular 

Vote 

1 iMMlfl  1 i HcoC75't  iHtCCOoO) 

1 It—  33H  1 KeeoOCD  IHOMOOIO 

I l r-H  CD  CO  1 iHO'H'M  igocmlo-^o 

i iss?”*  ! 

II  1 1 I"H  T— 1 1 tH 

J j II  1 

17,028 

37,519 

58.324 

5 isaas'l  i isas 

CD  l CD  NON  &>  i ioOOStH 

cm  ! HidcdcqM  ! j ed  v4  d 

i cm  c©  t~i  J i co  oo 

i ! i 

i i i 

1,866,352 

Vote  Cast 

Per  Cent 
of  Popu- 
lation 

1 

M05«et-CNINOt-HOCeHiO'H<U-C£)Cqt^OCqOMt£)05<fiM'H<  lO^LO-^CD 

1 

1 > 

15.3 

Popular 

Vote 

90,307 

54,053 

118,840 

77,146 

16,049 

14,347 

106,365 

338,693 

272,143 

128,331 

146,216 

50,510 

97,918 

92,502 

169,175 

154,747 

34,799 

69,120 

165,518 

65,953 

121,125 

675,156 

96,030 

442.441 
12,410 

476.442 
19,951 

145,333 

62,986 

42,844 

167,223 

152,180 

4,676,853 

Popula- 
tion 
| (I860) 

964,201 

435,450 

379,994 

460,147 

112,216 

140,424 

1,057,286 

1,711,951 

1,350,428 

674,913 

1,155,684 

708,002 

628,279 

687,049 

1,231,066 

749,113 

172,023 

791.305 

1,182,012 

326,073 

672,035 

3,880,735 

992,622 

2,339,511 

52,465 

2,906,215 

174,620 

1,109,801 

604,215 

315,098 

1,596,318 

775,881 

30,337,132 

States 

Alabama  

Arkansas  

California  

Connecticut  

Delaware  

Florida  

Georgia  

Illinois  

Indiana  

Iowa  

Kentucky  

Louisiana  

Maiife  

Maryland  

Massachusetts  

Michigan  

Minnesota  (1858)  

Missouri  

New  Hampshire  

New  .Terse v 

New  York  

North  Carolina  

Ohio  

Oregon  (1859)  

Pennsylvania  

Rhode  Island  - 

South  Carolina  

Tennessee  

Texas  

Vermont  

Virginia  

Wisconsin  

Total  

Eh 

Q 


Minor- 

ity 

944,149 

b 

g 

a 

3* 

a 

_ o S 
— ■ cs.  a 

§ 

s 

CM 

5 o.  e 

t— 

LO 

Z.S- 

a 

r-H 

CM 

k£ 

S3 

3 8 

i 

tH 

Total 

CD 

£ 

if 

12- 

i e 

K~ 

eo 

Neces- 
sary for 
Choice 

152 

e 

0 

o 

> 

g 

•g 

a 

o 

8 

CO 

< 

h« 

© 

S3 

> 

d 

£•1 

S3 

£ 

Pm 

◄ 


a 


p 


CQ 


29 


TABLE  XVIII.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1864 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


ai 

9 

ft 

M O 

kOh 

O w 
!>.£  — 
s« 

& 

g O 
gfl  ' 

© 

'd 

-5 


* D 

-I 

& 


•JO 

OZ 


rS  © 

Jo 

ft> 

Ph 


© 


g.5 

o< 


© o 

§2 

'd 

d 

d 

d — . 

© • 

C5 

O 

8 


rt 

f-i 

O 4) 

_L_,  4-> 

o o 
H 


OcjH 

co 


C '2 
=3 
© d 
i-s  © 

H 


Per  Cent 
of  Total 

Hj<t-;oqCDlDOqHPOOoq©OOOS©'^©MlDOqCDt'-T-<CMCOa5rHTH 

HCtOHlOCOldoOcjHlflt^H-HOdc^Cq’cicOcdoOCiOCOHrr 

^J<'^,lD'T|-M1COCMCD-^'^,CMTj<Tj'CO-^''rftD-vP-^'^Tj<COeOCOTr 

44.9 

Popular 

Vote 

Hlflt>OeOCDHHHC5tfl^iflCOT}*HH<©CiOt-CD©HOO^< 
rf  OOcDCOC005C50HeOH,Oh-f”C5P"CMCClCDlOH^  CM  CO  CO 
OO  CM  l—  t—  CM  LO  CD  CO  CM  t—  p—  CD  CO  C£^io  OOOC5lflH,CO'H<MH,cO 
CO  CM*  OO  Oo'  ® Os'  CO*  Hp  tP  CM*  OO  •***'  P^  rH  cp  cm'  OO  rH  ID  Oo'  CD*  CO  CO  ® LD 
lOCOTf  CD  -M*  CO  >tf  P-  rH  CO  CO  CD  t©  O P-  rH  rH  CD 
HH  CO  CM  CM 

1,808,725 

Electoral 

Vote 

1 l 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

• 1 ^ 1 

IO  CO  1 CD  CO  03  CO  1 r- f— M oo  »"  (M  W IM«-M(0^lfll0  00 

1 *—  l r-  — " 1 CO  CH  CM 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 ■ 1 

1 1 1 

HZ 

Per  Cent 
of  Total 

CD  CO  CM  ^ LD  CM  <D  CM  CM  ® CM  O O OO  LD  CM  rP  CO  ©S  p—  rH  OS  OS 
OOrHod-^CO-^rHOCO^CMlDasOSasCM'p^OCDCOrHrHCDOOtD 
iDtDrflDUOCDOOCOlO^t-lDlO^lDlD-^flOLDLDlD^t-^UO 

55.0 

— . 

cocjin^'MP-'Toooto 
r- I CD  HH  rf<  -vf  O HP  C—  GO  rH 


4COMMN’- 


• oStDOMlfi^OOHNoiNOO 
CM  CD  iP  CM  O1  CM  CO  LCD  CO  05  05  r—*  LO  LO 
W O ^CO ’t  l>  H OO  CO  CO  Tf  H ^ 
OO  05  6 Ol  CO  P-  H O to  H c^'  Q oo  lO  05  <£5  M (Nl*  P3  eo" 

00LD00rHCMCD',T'CMO5CMt'"  CO  CD  CD  OlH^NOO 


COCM  CM 


a ft  2 

o ©.2 


£h  o 


OOOSOCOt^lflNOJOOWNH^M 
i^^ico'ddo6t'(£)©T}'NT4;© 
NHhNIMNH  hHHNn 


cm^oot-hosp^cdcdhpo 
Hajood’taiiNfJooaj 
cq  ft(  t-(  C<1  CO  rH  1-1  i-(  rH 


d < 
ft  ^ ^ 

Ph  r 


NMnw2?OHNHNU5MMQON 
_ . ,asoo<Mco£2c<it'-’rt>cvic^^-ocoi?cri-^ 

05  05  CD  CD  rH  O o °2  ■’*1  rH.H*  "2  tJ*  CM  t-  P^  P-  CO  rH  ID  CO 
lotooooo'oo  o'  N {D  eg  Ifl  <£>'  m'  yj  05  oo  © o'  oo  N N M 05 

OOOHH<COCO(M050t^t'-«£;Tf2H©(MMt>HP”(M!5;COTr 
rH  rH  *-(  t>*  HP  ID  rH 


lfl©N«£iinHiNlN 
t—  t-  cm  oq  m p-  co  oo 
05  OS  05  CM  CD  CD  — ' 


CO  CM  rH 


cl,  «; 


asrHcMOSHfCSCMCD 
05  O C 
I^CD  r 
CON<r 


HlOl-OlO 


CnjOCDeOcO^t-COLcO^rHLDLOO^COrH 
M O O H o 0_^  O O ^ N W q N CO 

OO  P-  rH  05  CM*  CM  CD  cq  ® os'  cm'  cd’  h-oO  in 

CM  OO  CO  Hp  ^ GO  Nt-OOcOlOOt^2©t- 
CD  CD  M t'  rH  rH  CO  CD  OO  CO  05  t— ( ^ P- 

rH  tH  CO  CM  CM 


|S  C3  ^ 


° 2 ^ 
£2  5 d 

,ft  G~-< 
G O <£ 

UUQ 


o cr  c 

.29  : 


d G 4)-^  2 ^ 


2-.S- 


-r  K [>, 

- SA  O 

: «SHW 


- - 


d— < 

© d 


: .2  ” 


© ^ ^ 
>£££.2^§o 

0;  © © ©43  ;-<  — 


fc£d 

4->  S-.  — 

cr  “ 
;-<d2>s 


30 


— c.  e 
< & £ 
O c 


b c.  e 
2 c,  O 
zO  c 


t-3  « 


O c 


c® 
•C  c 
© o 
►o  co 


O,  a 

o> 

O G 


e — 

9 8 


By  statute  of  Feb.  8,  1865,  tbe  eleven  states  then  in  secession  were  declared  not  to  lie  in  a status  to  participate. 

The  soldier  vote  changed  the  result  in  no  state. 

On  April  15,  1865,  by  death  of  Lincoln,  Johnson  became  President. 

Three  of  the  five  votes  of  West  Virginia  would  have  been  deducted  from  those  of  Virginia,  making  the  total  electoral  vote  314. 


TABLE  XIX.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1868,  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT, 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


Julian 

( Ind.) 

Elec- 

toral 

Vote 

!!!!n!HH!!!!!!!HH!!!!!!!!!!!!n 

Banks 

(Mass.) 

Elec- 

toral 

Vote 

ill!!!  :::  t t i : 

ii!  1 i r Mi  im  i M i Mi  i m M m i i 1 M i ! 

- 

H 

Elec- 

toral 

Vote 

I!!!!!i!!ir!!|!!!!!!!!iil! 

!!!!i!!!!l 

- 

Groes- 

beck 

(Ohio) 

Elec- 

toral 

Vote 

!!  !!!!!!!!  !!!!!!!!  ! !!!!  !!!!!!!!  I !!!  ! 

j M ! M M ! M ! M M M r i M i M ! M M i M M i 

- 

Bram- 

lette 

(Ky.) 

Elec- 

toral 

Vote 

i:  i ; i i ::::::: i : i :::  : 

! !!!!!!!!!  1”  !!!!  1 !!!!!!!  1 ,'  ! 

:!!!!:!!!!!  ! ! ! ! i i ! ! ! ! i ! ! ! i 

: ii:::;::  ; 

: : : : i : : i : : 

i i : ! i i i : i i 

CO 

M 

Elec- 

toral 

Vote 

! ! !!!!!!!  i !!!!!!!  ! Ill:::: 

! ! !!!!!!!  i !!!!!!  j !n  ! ! !!!'  ! 

! 1 !!  !!!!!!!!  1!!!!  ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 

min  in 

CO 

Col- 

quitt 

(Ga.) 

Elec- 

toral 

Vote 

1 ! 1 ! ! 1 !!!  i ! I !!!!!  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  i ! 

!!!!!  I”  ! i ! !!'!!!!!  1 !!!!!!  1 !!!!!!!!!!  ! 

! i i ! i i !!!!!!!!! i !!! i ! i !!!!!!!!!!  i ! i ! 

Brown 

(Ind.) 

Elec- 

toral 

Vote 

! i i i ! !«  : i ! :«  ! i»  i i i i»  ! ! ! : : ! ! 

ill!  III! 
i i i isj"  1 : : : 
'III  ! ! ! ! 

•4- 

« ^ y 

P-i 


ill  in 


:%  : i 


lOTfOOinO  <?>  t>-  O OO  Irt  O CO  OO  <X>  7— I <X>  LO  HOO 

ISSSSSSSg&SgSiS  SSSSSSSSSSISSiS  d S3 


(See  next  page  for  Su: 


TABLE  XIX.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  186S,  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1872— Continued 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


£. 

_o 

"rt 

s 

| 305.435 

Plurality 

1ft 

CO 

LO 

o 

CO 

CO 

_ o 2 

co 

< <=*•  43 

o 

O C 

P— 

c-i 

CO 

s a s 

CO 

S s S 
20  c 

05 

o 

p- 

<M 

oo 

CO 

G 

03 

LO 

<5 

© 

CO 

r4 

h 

oq 

LO 

£•1 

3 


PH 


co  ^ 

W 73 
73  G 
C3  73 

v\  a 

<33  G 


■a* 

•—  oo 

73  w 
73 

*73  2 

73  a 

73 

.g§ 

£ ■ 

C CL  ? 

& 

t 

■agin 

Svg® 

^ G g M 

.S  SP  -M  <*f 

o Ot” 

+-  Goo 

'CC  "H 

& > 73  - 

g 03  a 
G 03  o 0> 

o h 


■*-  G M 

C3  k.  03  g 

o£  = =- 
<U  P o o 


3 G 
D.  O 

P > 


£ 6: 

2 43 

~ a 1 


ow 


g| 

Q « 


i -o  e g 

■ <3  Q <3 


c - 

43  .— 


£ o 


* 6 
2^ 


■§* 


6 g « 
W G > 


COMWMCOlfl^OWt-COMMHHt-ifl 

o’  t ^ m m «e  ^ n ci  »r  ei  o o’  id 

■^rfTfi^Ti'Ti'y^N'foeoiDTi'foineoM 


Tj'h.OOO^t^tflOONWOinOlNNOlfl 
^NHCOON^MMcS^CfJNWl/XOlfl 
^0)^OONT}ipj03WHO)OiOO<ONM 
03  t>  o id  o id  trj  co  h n o p-'  oj  o»  oo 


03  =3 

i*  — • 

o— 


o o 

S3  h 


NWTfMqiq^MON^^^COMMtO 
CC  N cd  <N  H M to  C>3  -<f  «fi  to  id  C3  05  N 
lOlfllfllrtWlO^.IOlOCD'fi'^WW'fOW 


NMOcOiOMO'fOtOWWMNONiO 
P-f'WMHaifl'^TfOTfOCONCOI'lfl 
N.  M,  °.  W H W m H U3  o t-  CO  ^ C",  ^ ■'3' 
O rH  'T  o’  H t-’  M H o’  H p.’  CO  H H O M CO 
03Tl0lDHH<D^C3DC0oC30l'CDOC0W 
Cl  H tH  tH  t— < 


15  oil 


OMrlqTfWOffiODHW^^^MNO 

p-dp-cct^t-dddt^t^'J'C-rfP'COcc 


5-P 
P > 

&4 


WOWOQCOOIDOWMii'lONci^lMW 
'r-tOOc^OC5O'^aJ00T-<C^,^1Ot>,C^'T 
CO  “3  « oo  H 03  !?}  pH  03  d H 50  in  M a 

oT  CTi  LO  CO  H M IN  03*  H Tf  o H"  K"  O W IN  C 
OD03cr)NfO'tNlOOoC3NC3MCiC'] 
T-H  H Tf  CO  N H T- 1 rH  H rH  03 


O, 00 
O ~ »-l 

tU  w 


C<Ir-4t'”Tfl000  05T-<t'-©CT;>t-HLniftTfvHo^ 

C3  ^ <M_  Tf  o D H CO  cn  o CO  o_  o c;  <30  eo  O 
tD  Tf  O (nT  in  p-r  Tj<  03  © Tf*  H «fi  to  O*  N 
O3WWto<NCClWMC33O;0NW<N",“-- 
<cr>  ■*+4  i ft  >/*\  —i  rH  rH  lO  t£>  — j <"»•»  t>»  <-<-% 


M t>  t-  T)«  . 


_ g 

73  •-. 

a a 

73  U 

G O 


G 

O 0) 

£ J-< 

o G c3 

03  £ ^ 

rl  L,  •>“« 


•S  .2  S 
*33 


■s  1 

3 ■S 


G3  rt 
§ fcl) 
g 2 

si 


32 


(Continued  ou  next  page) 


TABLE  XX.  PRESIDENT,  1872— Continued 


If 

h 


|1| 


ll 

Q ^ 


6 w 

6-3 


;Iia 

: = jj  2 

1 &a  « 


ai 

o > 

&4 


o.| 
o > 

a. 


§1 


15  « 
e O 


1« 

s> 

a 


e - 

£’c  - 


2U 
O W 

a 


£ o* 


O ~ 
2£ 


l^- 

uS. 


"3  „ 

11 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 

. _ 9 ! ! 

§ 


i§§3 


SE2  | 


C5  M M 
05  05  ' 


S3 

£3 


e _• 

23 

o 


Per  Cent 
of 

Total 

35.4 

36.5 

55.5 

29.9 

42.6 

45.6 

45.3 

46.7 

42.5 
46.2 

38.4 

37.6 
28.1 

23.9 

52.4 

57.1 

20.6 

49.5 

47.2 
45.0 

43.8 

rt  D 

a o 

gl 

O 

§•> 

§ 

exf 

i i i 

i i i 

II 

5 

8 

3 

3 

5 

9 

35 

IQ 

22 

3 
29 

4 
7 

5 
11 

5 

10 

<r> 

eo 

S 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

a 

OWtOHrJOMHlONNHOOlCDHMlflCOtD 

(£> 

uo5 

S H 

H fi  W 6 t-  Tf  'f  M D M M N ri  Ifl  h H OO  d H ^ 

18 

eu 

S 3 55  w H 56  ^ ^ a m o 


§s§s 

^ '3">f  M ! 


S8S28  3SSSSSS8SS8SSSSSg 

H Cl  H CO  H ifl  IT3  rHi-H  tH 


peAp§5^pc^Sco<§c3£gS'3p;cML-“Lo£o^Hp 

05  CM  05  O t'*  M CM  05  eo  LO  tO  ^ 1-1  O S 

gSSSSSgSSggSSSgaSBSs 

^ OO  H 03  05  M q («  W (Nl  t-  N oo  M N Tf  g 
rH  rH  C<T  CO  rH  _T 


a a 

-*-'  o, 
o P 

CO  M 


v.  ^ 


“ u «* 

S So 


^3  fl 
fl  S 


fl 

fl  « 

fl  cq 


! ! 


! |gsi«hiHa 

SasSg&gg«5 


§ I* 

in  a 'S 

fl 


g 


•E 


.3  1 

fl 

s *s>  ■ 


4)  xfi 

fl  fl 

3--«55«»ojkSao«»»'"®S 
2gaKZZggZoOa!(tifflHH>!t>?? 


C -S 

s 


◄ 

§ 

s 

p 

XJ1 


S 

© 

h 

s 

£ 

rH 

§ 

2 

of 

3 

CD 

0H 

CO 

_ A 2 

S 

< o.  V 

O c 

s 

CM 

05 

S3  A „ 

o 

^ D.  C 

£°  s 

§3 

CM 

+» 

s 

o 

ft 

2 

of 

o 

CO 

1 

tH 

h 

s 

<xT 

A 2 

„ 

D.  «J 

s 

O G 

G 

J 

CO 

GO 

I 

CS 

sl| 


33 


1 Fourteen  votes  not  counted  from  Arkansas  (6)  and  Louisiana  (8). 

1 For  vice-presidential  vote  of  1872,  see  Table  XIX. 

a Three  votes  for  Horace  Greeley  (deceased)  from  Georgia  not  counted. 


TABLE  XXI.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1S76 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


Or' 

H 


IS  !g 


I II  I 

il  i i*  i 


IS 


i— . 

o . 


|S  !E  1 1 pis  rrn  ill  r-S  il 


lO  T— I 


'd 

a 

cj 


3 


•D'm 


0> 


4,  O 

s5 


ii  i i ii 

xf  i i ift  i css  r—  to  t—  lo  i in«w 


r i 


!S"S' 


I I 


I 1 
I"  I 
I I 
I I 


a a 
Ao 
'■'H 


O GTS  OO  MWOff)<N«(CarC!ONO[»inOOailNt-^C«OH’tPIOJ(D««WCIOtD'll 


u 

rt  a. 

j j j jg  1 Is  Nss  1 1— F |S| 

ft  is  ir  nil 

isi 

9,522 

H 

III!  Hi  i ii  i 

I m In 

l 

05  000  CDOiK^COHOOOOMHh-eoOH'^NNt>OOOlfl’^N’>i< 


Per  Cent 
of  Popu- 
lation 

IS  1 

15  1 

l^SSSias 

il  1 

c 

§3 

. 

ill  iSSgSlIIslIlIIgsglllsilllllgsBsiiss 

1 

Pop 

Un- 

vote 

j 

<07 

o 6 

i a ~x 

ISS  ilgslSSIlsssIlllllIslIlIliglllSSSsI 

s 

».2g 

O+joo 

LCD 

Hi 

ss 


m 


i 


i 


Sf-1 

*Ss 

oo 

i 

Oi 

> 

I 

CT. 

CC 

ec 

2 

2 

£h 

o 

■B 

<3 

► 

o 

s 

O 
. C3 

5 S 

15 
« „ 
0)0 
MO 
es w 

f ►» 

Is 

ft 

II 

if 

1 1 

51 


g? 


c.a 


TABLE  XXII.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1880 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


TABLE  XXIII.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1SS4 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


36 


Vice-Presidential  candidates  receiving  no  electoral  votes:  West  (Miss.),  Greenback;  Daniel  (Md.),  Prohibition. 
10,360  popular  votes  "scattering”  are  included  in  the  state  totals  and  also  in  the  national  total. 


TABLE  XXIV.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1888 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


American 

Curtis1 

(Conn.) 

Popular 

Vote 

!!!!!!!  I!::!!!!!  ! 1 ! ! 1 ! ! 111!  Ill  1 ! ! 1 

1 1 1 1 j ; ; i j ] I j i 1 ; j j i i j ; 1 ; j I | j j : ; j j j 

j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j i j j j j j j j 

iii! 

III! 

|| 

United  Lab.  1 

o 

V 

Popular 

Vote 

1 ! ! ! 1 1 1 1 ! 1 ! 1 1 1 1 ! ! ! ! 1 ! ! ! 1 1 ! ! ! 1 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! : 
!!!!  1 I!!!'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  1 !!!!  1 !!!!  1 ! 

1 ! 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 !!  1 1 !!  1 !!!!!!  1 !!!!!!!  1 ! 

! i i : : i i i : i ; i i : i i i i !!!!!!>!!!!  : i i i i : i i i 

2,808 2 

Prohibition  j 

Jr 

m 

Popular 

Vote 

isjgfgifs 

LO  CQ  t-4  rH  05  CO  CO  lO  CQ  GO  O IO  03  Hl>0  CQ  r-i  O rH  [ id  tH  r-i  rH  rr 

1 

250,125 

Labor 

<v  -7 

Popular 

Vote 

Is  III  1 isslss  |8|  1 Isl  !§£  |9  ll-llte  1 ! li  1 ill 

is  i-  : i i - i is-  i i ” » i i \n  i i-« 

i i ! ! : i i : i : i : : i i 

| 146.897 

Democratic 

Cleveland  and  Thurman 
(N.  Y.)  (Ohio) 

Elector! 

Vote 

| ! j | | | j | i i i i | i j | 

or-  ! Iton^N  ! j j I <*>  00  loo  j j j o>  to  ! j lo>  ! *—  j j ! Iwnm  ! ch  to  j 

ill  "Hi  MITT  1 

1 

Per  Cent 
of  Total 

^oo'^o3t^o^McocoiOT-j-^^T^eoiH03t>e<>co(>ooooo3eooqe<i03t>ot^eot^irt0^t> 

s 

Popular 

V ote 

117,320 

86,717 

117,729 

37,567 

74,922 

16.414 

39,656 

100.472 

348.371 

261,013 

179,877 

102.745 

1S3.800 

85,032 

50,437 

106,168 

151,905 

213.469 

104,385 

85,467 

261,943 

80,542 

5.149 

43,456 

151.508 

635.965 

14S.336 

396.455 

26.522 

447.004 

17.530 

65.825 

15S.779 

234,883 

16,788 

151.979 

78.677 

155,243 

5.540,050 

Republican 

fl  — 

S* 

Is 

'd 

a 

c3 

d 

0 

® 

'2 

u 

« • 

SI 

pS^ 

Electoral 

Vote 

i i i i i i i i I i i i i i : i i I 

! 1 1 ! ! : : ! ! ! 1 ! ! 1 ! 1 ! 1 

i ! i ! :ssseD  i i"  !2”r-  i i””*  ;s  i:n 

: i : i : i : : : : i : : i : i i i 

i i iii:  iii  i i : : i : i i i 

s 

Per  Cent 
of  Total 

CO 

Popular 

Vote 

56,197 

60,245 

124,816 

50,774 

74,586 

12,973 

26,654 

40,453 

370,475 

263,361 

211,598 

182,904 

155.134 

30,701 

73,656 

99.986 

183,892 

236,387 

142,492 

31.120 

236,252 

108.425 

7,088 

45.728 

144.360 

650,338 

134.7S4 

416.054 

33.291 

526.269 

21,969 

13,740 

138.9S8 

88,280 

1™ 

5,444,337 

Vote  Cast 

Per  Cent 
of  Popu- 
lation 

RSOnf  Nt-COOt-lfl^HHOMCOMOOt-OO^OOSHOOCDlflTfCDt-asNosHcOCOO 

t": 

00 

Popu- 

lar 

Vote 

SSI8SII8l8l88ilSSS-SSSSiSSBSSSll-llBIS3S 

8 

Popu- 

lation 

(1890) 

1,513,401 

1,128.211 

1,213.398 

413,249 

746.258 

168,493 

391.422 
1,837,353 
3,826,352 
2,192,404 
1,912,297 
1,428,108 
1,858,635 
1,118,588 

661,086 
1,042,390 
2,238,947 
2,093,890 
1.310.283 
1.289.600 
2,679,185 
1,062.656 
47,355 
. 376,530 
1,444,933 
6,003,174 
1.617,949 

3.672.329 
317,704 

5,258,113 

345,506 

1.151.149 

1.767.518 

2,235,527 

332.422 
1,655.980 

762.794 

1.693.330 

05  i 

LO 

1 

§ “ 


_ o £ 
— D.  C 
< C.  O 

O e 


c-  e 

C. 

O « 


e •- 

»-i  c 


fl 

0,  g 

§ 'S 

» I 

.5  ^ 

> C^J 

I ;s 

,5  ^ 

I |! 

i ■s® 

s I-a 

1,  -So 

ill5  8 

■S  s 5.2  o 

‘r<«  H a 

rg?^| 

Eh  <m 

w O 


37 


TABLE  XXV.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT, 


PRESIDENTIAL  elections 


i 

i 

ss 

Popular 

Vote 

!!!  i !!!!!!  1 

M M M ! M M 
MM!!!!!!! 

i i i i i i i i i : i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i : ! : 

M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M ! 

1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II!  1 

! i !!!! i i i !!!!!!  i !!  i !!!  i i i i i ! i ! i ! ! 

21,164  1 

Prohib. 

13 

S'" 

Popular 

Vote 

ssliijllilpjl  i!gSgSSSSI®SaIi!SSSS  ! 

LTD  CO  <X>'  Tp  C£>  !cOU3t>0^j‘  -*t*  ^ iHOOOOCvf  CO  CSJ  id  rH  \ 

4.799 

2.165 

1.424 

2.79S 

2,553 

2.145 

13.132 

530 

271.058  | 

Populist 

Weaver  and  Field 
(Iowa)  (Va.) 

Eleetor'l 
Vote  1 

ill  !ii:  i i 

iiniiNi 

U i i i i i 1 ! N U M L Li  i N i i i i 1 i i i 

1-  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

i : !!!!!!!  i ! ! \ i I i : i i ! i i i i i i i i : 

S 

Per  Cent 
of  Total  | 

! | p ! p | 

I i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i ! i i i i i i i i i i i i 

PilllllllllPlIIPPinillliilll 

2 

Popular 

Vote 

85,181 

11,831 

25,311 

63,584 

809 

"4,843" 

42.937 

10,520 

22.207 

22.208 
20.595 

163.111 

23,500 

' — 27645" 

3'34S” 

19.931 

29.313 

10,102 

41,213 

7,334 

83,134 

7,264 

293 

969 

16.436 

44,732 

17.700 

14,852 

26,965 

8.714 

22S 

2,410 

26.544 

23.730 

99.41S 

44 

12,275 

19.105 

4.166 

9.909 

7,722 

1,027.329  | 

Democratic 

Cleveland  and  Stevenson 
(N.  Y.)  (111.) 

Eleetor'l 

Vote 

1 1 

iU4Mi!i— - Hi- 

i i i:i  i i i 1 i i i 

ill! 

i Min  'cm  ' «}  CM  I 

ill 

5 

Per  Cent 
of  Total 

i i 

gg£  issss  isss 
: i 

i : i 

C<J 

5S 

Popular 

Vote 

IdU.OU  1 

175~461_ 

87.662 

48,024 

113,866 

176.858 

202.296 

100,920 

40,288 

268,188 

17,581 

24.943 

714 

42.081 

171.066 

654.900 

133.098 

~”404~H5~ 

14,243 

452.264 

24.336 

54.698 

9.081 

136,594 

239.148 

16.325 

163.977 

29,844 

84.467 

177,335 

5.554,414  1 

Republican 

Harrison  and  Reid 
(Ind.)  (N.  Y.) 

| Eleetor’l 

Vote 

1 ! !!!!!!!!  ! ! i 1 II  1 1 i ! 1 11  ! ! ! 

I 1 — 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 In  1 1 In  Inna.  ! U 1 1 l-nnn-*  l»  1 1*  1 In 

II  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I"  1 I 1 l~  II  1 III””  1 II  1 II 

! i i !!!!!! i ! i ! i i i i ! ! 1 i i i i i i 

s 

Per  Cent 
of  Total 

i 

OONHoiTl-  I'^CTit^CVJcO'vPt^-rHC^UftaiOOcri^OlOiCOOOrHTPC^OOlOC-COlOtr-OlOC-eOT-IC-LOOOCO 

Popular 

Vote 

9,197 

46,974 

117,962 

38,620 

77.032 

18,077 

48,305 

8,799 

399,288 

255,615 

91 Q 7QK 

157,241 

135,441 

27,903 

62,878 

92,736 

202,927 

222,708 

122,823 

1,342 

226.918 

18.851 
87.227 

2,811 

45.658 

156,101 

609,459 

100,565 

17.506 

405,187 

35.002 

516.011 

26.975 

13,384 

34.SS8 

99.851 
81.444 
37.992 

113.256 

36,460 

80.293 

170,846 

8.454 

1 

1 

id 

Vote  Cast 

Per  Cent 
of  Popu- 
lation 

s 

Popu- 

lar 

Vote 

232,757 

146,769 

269.543 

93,891 

164.262 

37.222 

35,556 

221.616 

19.609 

873,646 

553,613 

415  1SQ 

324,905 
340,844 
115.565 
116.009 
213.275 
390,672 
465,792 
267.238 
52.727 
540.650 
44,315 
200,206 
10.878 
89.329 
336.269 
1,318, 9S8 
281.025 
36,105 
850,166 

78.491 
1,002.112 

53.193 

70.492 
70.513 

264,974 

422,175 

55.785 

292.306 

87.962 

171.071 

371.222 

16.706 

1 

1 

s' 

Popu- 

lation 

(1890) 

1,513,401 

1.128,211 

1,213.398 

413.249 

746,258 

168,493 

391,422 

1,837.353 

88,548 

3.S26.352 

2,192.404 

1 912  9Q7 

1,428,108 

1,858,635 

1,118,588 

661.086 

1.042,390 

2.238,947 

2,093,890 

1.310.2S3 

1,289,600 

2.679.185 

142.924 

1,062,656 

47.355 

376.530 

1.444.933 

6.003.174 

1,617.949 

190.983 

3.672.329 
317.704 

5,258,113 

345.506 

1.151.149 

348.600 

1.767.518 

2,235,527 

332,422 

1.655.980 

357,232 

762.794 

1.693.330 
62,555 

$ 

1 

s 

States 

Alabama  

Arkansas  

California  

Colorado  

Connecticut  

Delaware  _ 

Florida  

Georgia  

Idaho  (1890)  

Illinois  

Indiana  

Iowa  

Kansas  

Kentucky  

Louisiana  

Maine  

Maryland  

Massachusetts  

Michigan  

Minnesota  

Mississippi  

Missouri  

Montana  (1889)  

Nebraska  

Nevada  

New  Hampshire 

New  Jersey  

New  York  

North  Carolina  

North  Dakota  (1889)- 

Ohio  

Oregon  

Pennsylvania  

Rhode  Island  

South  Carolina  

South  Dakota  (1889) _ 

Tennessee  

Texas  

Vermont  

Virginia  

Washington  (1889)  -- 

West  Virginia  

Wisconsin  

Wyoming  (1890)  

Total  

38 


(See  next  page  for  Summary). 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


39 


(Continued  on  next  page) 


TABLE  XXVI.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1896— Continued 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


Vice-President 

| Populist 

Watson 

(Ga.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 « 1 1 1 • II  || 

till  1 1 1 1 1 1 II  II  || 

j ; j ;i  j«  i j 

i i i i i i i i i i ii  ii  ii 

i j j j j j [ j j | j i j j ii 

r— 

CM 

H 

§ 

a 

3 

G 

G 

O 

P-, 

Majority 

244,065 

Demo- 

cratic 

Sewall 

(Me.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

iii  i i i i i i ii 

! 1 ! ! ! ! 1 ! ! 1 ! 

CO  1 J j <r>  J 1 j J j CM  CM  in  CM  INN  i IN 

iii  i i i i i T i : 

CT> 

Plurality 

567,692 

Repub- 

lican. 

Hobart 
(N.j  ) 

Electoral 

Vote 

i | i-ss  j-’s-s-  | i i i i i“n  i 

CM 

All 

Oppo- 

nents 8 

6.791,573 

1 

H 

G 

Nat’nal 1 

|? 

Popular 

Vote 

is  i§  i b is  ig1"  i i i i i i b is  i 

i C—  i i IN  it-  100  1 1 l 1 1 I 1 1 — i CO  l 

1 1 II  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

! 1 : ! 1N  ! '!!!!!!  ! 1 

1 | II  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 | 1 

CO 

CO 

OS 

CO 

Nearest 

Oppo- 

nent 

6,467,946 

Socialist 

Labor1 

Popular 

Vote 

icd  iooeDrH  i i m icoco  i i i i i 1 10  i i i-h  i 

ICO  1 (M  CO  CO  1 ICO  ICOLO  l 1 1 1 1 IH  1 It-1  1 

1th  : \Zs  .'S10  1 ! ! ! 1 l1-1  1 1”  1 

1 | | 1 1— 1 | T— 1 llllll  I 1 V— 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 llllll  II  1 

1 1 II  1 llllll  II  1 

36,454 

Prohibi- 
tion 1 

Levering: 

(Md.) 

Popular 

Vote 

1S6 

2,040 

'“'825' 

5,617 

16.086 

681 

358 

7,7S4 

919 

20,147 

1.161 

6S3 

3.140 

1,722 

733 

2.344 

1,116 

1.223 

7.799 

159 

141,676 

Eft 

s 

7.035, 63S 

National 
Demo- 
cratic 1 

Palmer 

(111.) 

Popular 

Vote 

is  igSKS  igSBSJS  iBSSSKSgSS?  i 

ico  iTj-coosio  lOoaqHoo  • hod  eq t-i co co lo  1 
| oa  j edcdao  [ vA  t-h  tH  hn'h  \ 

131,529 

1 

h 

13.95S.495 

Democratic 

Brvan  and  Sewall 
(Neb.)  (Me.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

i ■ ii 

! 1 1 1 ! 1 1 ! ! ! 1 

CO  OO  CO  1 j J 1 1 1 1 j CT>  ^ CM  lO  C*>  J CM  j I CO 

i | r | | i | i *'*"  r i i 

CO 

Vice-President 

I Oppo- 

nents 

176 

Per  Cent 
of 

Total 

as  i-5 1-4  lo  cd  od  <m*  co  oo  co  co  to  os  cd’  co  <m‘  co  cm  in  «d  tG  o 
c-inioocNjeoeoiQ'0<-rT^eocqco^tocoooT-Hio[o^t,coio 

46.8 

Hobart 

Popular 

Vote 

42,537 
115.999 
8,376 
21,650 
133,695 
551,513 
174,488 
20,686 
477,497 
46,739 
433,228 
14,459 
58.801 
41,225 
168. S47 
361.224 
64,607 
10.640 
154.9S5 
51.646 
94,488 
165.349 
10.375 

6,467,946 

President 

If 

176 

Republican 

McKinley  and  Hobart 
(Ohio)  (N.  J.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

| 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

III  ! ! ! : ! ! 1 1 ! 

i i \nsmrti't  i i i i !'*  i i"5!  i 

iii  ; i i : i i : i 

iii  i i i i i i i i i 

CM 

McKin- 

ley 

5 

Per  Cent 
of 

Total 

t-Ooot>*t^cqo5cqo5T-ioeouqLftcqeQcqT-4cqoq(rqoo5 
os’  cd  oo  oo  os  t-5  o 1-4  oo  co  os  cd  o’  o cq  o oo 

H'JiHCOiOlOiJ'LniOiOCOCOH'^'^COHOOciJ'J'LOCDO’ 

50.9 

Electors 

Neces- 
sary for 
Choice 

224 

Popular 

Vote 

10,494 

103.084 

1,938 

57,444 

221,371 

819,838 

155,243 

26.335 

525,991 

48.779 

728,300 

37,437 

9,313 

41,042 

149,703 

158,894 

13,491 

51.127 

135,388 

39.153 

105.379 

26S.051 

10,072 

7,035.638 

I 

> 

447 

Vote  Cast 

Per  Cent 

of 

Popula- 

tion 

oqOt>.i-icqt>;^GqcqeoC>-ooo5t>.equqcqt^oqT-j'^^o5 

c^i-HrHc4idedo’'^D-o<M’Lduocdo6cdcqqit^cdcdcdcvi 

CO  CNJ  cq  M CO  (?q  (M  Od  CO  C8l  rH  CM  i— I Od  Od  i-H  CM  CM  CM  CO 

22.2 

Popular 

Vote 



53.217 

224,174 

10.314 

83,567 

371.047 

1,424,140 

330,990 

47,379 

1,014,295 

97.414 

1,194.358 

54,781 

68,938 

82,950 

323.796 

526,693 

78.119 

63.S31 

294.959 

93.583 

201,768 

447.063 

20,606 

13.S13.243 

Assigned 

447 

Popula- 

tion 

(1890) 

142,924 

1,062,656 

47,355 

376,530 

1,444.933 

6,003,174 

1.617,949 

190,983 

3.672.329 
317.704 

5,258.113 

345,506 

1,151.149 

348.600 

1,767,518 

2,235,527 

210,779 

332.422 

1,655.980 

357,232 

762.794 

1.693.330 
62.555 

62.210,140 

States 

! 

> 

3 

States 

Montana  

Nebraska  

Nevada  

New  Hampshire 

New  Jersey  

New  York  

North  Carolina 

North  Dakota 

Ohio  

Oregon  --  

Pennsylvania  

Rhode  Island  

South  Carolina  

South  Dakota 

Tennessee  

Texas  

Utah  (1896)  

Vermont  

Virginia  

Washington  

West  Virginia - 

Wisconsin  

Wyoming  

Total  

■ 

In 

Union 

£ 

SUMMARY 

40 


1 Vice-presidential  candidates  receiving  no  electoral  votes:  Buckner  (Ky.),  National  Democratic;  Johnson  (111.),  Prohibition;  McGuire  (N.  J.),  Socialist  Labor; 
Southgate  (N.  C.)  National. 

2 The  votes  for  the  National  candidate  are  not  included  in  the  state  totals  or  the  national  total;  they  are  not  so  included  in  the  Statistical  Abstract. 

3 Including  votes  for  National  Party. 


TABLE  XXVII.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT, 


Prohibi- 
tion 1 

Wooley 

(111.) 

Popular 

Vote 

llllll  Ills  lalllliili  liillgSIll  1 

C<f  ID  CO  r-T  r-'  CO  OS  CO  Csf  ! <M~  rt«'  CD  r4 00  ! to  CO  ! iH  C-'  c4  rH  © CVJ  P-'  t-T  | r4  CO  OQ  CQ  NHO  ! 

1 " 1 j - - - | | 

209,166 

Socialist 1 

Debs 

(lnd.) 

Popular 

Vote 

27 

7,572 

714 

1,029 

57 

601 

lisisg  isigig  liis  liai  Iisii 

|OiC^C<JrH  | ©C^CO|©  | 

1 1 1 ! " ! 

169 

413 

1,846 

720 

~145~ 

2,006 

219 

7,051 

94,768 

a — x 

Zd 

gr*. 

Electoral 

Vote 

! i i ill!  i i i i : i ill  ! i i i 

-CO  ;«  j ;■*««  ; ; ; ;««  mm  | , <o  | | 

i i i ill!  i i i i : !!!:'!!!! 

----- 

15 

12 

s 

Democratic 

'd 

§ 

3-3 

M — 

Per  Cent 
of  Total 

CO^fOCOHCi-f  CO©*f  CO-tONOCOeOOlOJP-lrtujeOiNKNI^HCOaJWOO'XMMOOHOHMOiMt-CflOiN 

“1 

£ 

Popular 

Vote 

96,368 

81,091 

124,985 

122,733 

74,014 

18,863 

2S.007 

81.700 

29,414 

503,061 

309,584 

209,265 

162,601 

234.899 

53,671 

36,823 

122,237 

157,016 

211.6S5 

112,901 

51,706 

351,922 

37,145 

114,013 

6.347 

35,489 

164,879 

678.425 

157,752 

20,531 

474,882 

33.3S5 

424,232 

19.812 

47.283 

39.544 

145,356 

267.432 

45,006 

12.849 

146.0S0 

44.833 

98,807 

159,279 

10,164 

6.358.071 

41 


(See  next  page  for  Summary) 


TABLE  XXVII.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1900 —Continued 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


>a 

=3 

g 

a 

U 

% 

3 


Eh 

V, 

H 

Q 

t» 

K 

PH 

H 

O 

> 

Q 

% 

Eh 

W 

a 

xn 

W 

Pi 

Ph 


5 

V 

H 

J 

53 


l 

i 

hi 

Popular 

Vote 

: 

i i i i ia§  i l|  : I I sss  Is 

n un  in n r 

Social.  1 

11 

Popular 

Vote 

££lil3£5!gg£!il§slSig§ 

ej 

a 

§ 

CL 

Swallow  j 

(Pa.) 

Popular 

Vote 

eiiiii^isgiiii  Iiiiii Is 

t—  CO  rH  M N S ^ ^ i H CO  CO  (O  it- 

\ 

A 

Oh 

O 

Ph 

Watson 

(Ga.) 

Popular 

Vote 

is  Isi-isggiisi  ig  !§§§§- 

uivi  1 i-fgj  ®Mci»eq  j j r-T  i4  ea  r-T  ■» 

! j j 

Democratic 

Parker  and  Davis 
(N.  Y.)  (W.  Va.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

11 

9 

5 

13 

13 

9 

7 

10 

Per  Cent 
of 

Total 

'I'COOHHHCOt-WlflNt-NCiOlflOOCONoOCO’tC 

Popular 

Vote 

79,857 

64.434 

89,404 

100,105 

72,909 

19,359 

27,046 

83,472 

1S.4S0 

327.606 

274,345 

149,141 

86,174 

217,170 

47,708 

27.64S 

109,446 

165,772 

135,392 

55,187 

53.374 

296,312 

Republican 

Roosevelt  and  Fairbanks 
(N.Y.)  (Ind.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

II  ||  ||  | 

Per  Cent 
of 

Total 

“"““HOSIMaJIXiqH.tOHNWCOOloOUl® 

Popular 

Vote 

SI 

as 

1U,OUt/ 

205.226 

134,687 

111,089 

23,712 

8,314 

24,003 

47,783 

632,645 

36S.2S9 

307,907 

212,955 

205,277 

5,205 

64.438 

109,497 

257.S22 

364,957 

216,651 

3,187 

321,449 

Vote  Cast 

Per  Cent 
of 

Popula- 

tion 

0500MHOt-^OOOMOC-MNOCOCOO)«)C-t.l> 

Popular 

Vote 

§2 

rH  r 

331,545 

243,687 

191,117 

43,875 

39,307 

130,992 

72.578 

1,075.669 

681,934 

485,902 

328,557 

435,765 

53,908 

96,037 

224,224 

445.146 

525,099 

292,959 

58,377 

643,861 

Popula- 

tion 

(1900) 

II 

ii 

rHr 

1,485,053 
539,700 
90S.420 
184,735 
528,542 
2,216,331 
161,772 
4,821,550 
2,516,462 
2,231,853 
1,470.495 
2,147,174 
1.381,625 
694,466 
1,188,044 
2,805.346 
2.420, 9S2 
1,751,394 
1,551,270 
3,106,665 

States 

Alabama  

AIAUUSUS  

California  — 

Colorado  - 

Connecticut  

Delaware  — 

Florida  

Georgia  

Illinois  - 

Indiana - 

Kansas  - - 

Kentucky  

Louisiana  — 

Maine — - 

Maryland  

Massachusetts  — 

Michigan  - - 

Minnesota  

Mississippi  

Missouri  

42 


(Continued  on  next  page) 


XXVIII.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1904— Continued 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


<1 

A 

o 

o 

X/l 

Corri- 

gan 

(N.Y.) 

Popular 

Vote 

iii  ii  i iii 

iii  ii  i iii 

OO  1 1 1 Olh-  1 ICO  I H OO  I 1 I H 

O 1 1 1 OO  03  1 ICO  1 H CIO  l 1 ICQ 

CQ  1 I l CO  i—l  I ICO  1 N 1 i i -rf 

I ! ! d d ! ! d ! d ! ; ! 

Ill  II  1 III 

III  II  1 III 

III  II  1 III 

III  II  1 III 

218 

1,592 

223 

33,724 

0 

H 

O 

> 

< 

0 

O 

0 

O 

Ph 

Majority 

1,734,149 

hi 

o 

o 

U1 

Debs 

(ind.) 

Popular 

Vote 

CDCqiOOt-CO'tt^OOlMCDMOOH'Ht-CtDMH'ON 
I^H(NC30000(NHtr)HCDlOIMCOlOCCDWU3(NNC'lk- 
05  0_in  CO  H H N OO  o HCO_P;t^CO  OWNO 

Ifl  rH  05  CD  d CO  d rH  COt-TcIiO  O H OO  H 

CO  CO  CQ  T— 1 CQ 

402,460 

Plurality 

2,544,343 

m 

3 

o 

Ph 

to 

Swallow 

(Pa.I 

Popular 

Vote 

1 l 

LO  CO  l C Ifl  f-  H o C l>  OO  1 in  CD  IM 

COCSJ  I Tf  ^ OO  CD  Tf  CO  O H CO  1 CO  O 05 

COCO  1 t-  OO  M H CO  CO  l>  1 05  05  IN 

CO  ! COO  r-T  05  CO  CO  | d rH  d 

1 C"Q  tH  CO  i 

1 I 

1 1 

1 1 

NC0  05  ^0t- 
05  OO  <M  O t—  H 

C—  CO  CO  CO  C^.<M 
t-h  co  d d 

259,257 

All 

Oppo- 

nents 

5,894,685 

H 

W 

PH 

o 

Ph 

Watson 

(Ga.) 

Popular 

Vote 

1 l 

o oo  eo  in  05  05  w h co  i ihocon 

CIH'fOOOlCt-COOlO  1 l rf  o CO 

LC  LO  CO  t-  ^ OO  tH  C-  1 1 N in  o 

t— 1 O CO  i— 1 IS  1H  <M  OO 

CO  1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 05  05  05  O 1 

1 to  co  co  co  1 

4 CO  CO  CO  LO  1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

114,753 

Nearest 

Oppo- 

nent 

5,084,491 

Democratic 

Parker  and  Davis 
(N.  Y.)  (W.  Va.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

IIIIIICM|III'0>ICQO9 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 CH  1 I 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

140 

I Roose- 

velt 

7,628,834 

Per  Cent 
of 

Total 

OO  '#C5t-qMC0C0MH;MNMt^N^05  00  00  CO  O ® rH 
eOeOC'Qdo6c'Q05®dCT5t'-dLOrH-r}4THc4o6rHCT5C'qC<005 
COCQeOCOCO’tlONCOHNeOOSNlflt-COHCOH-^NCQ 

37.6 

Total 

13,523,519 

Popular 

Vote 

C0HNint-HHt0OH00  05  C00)f0OC0l>M00Ht-O 
t-(M00  05C000Nt-TfN05C0C0COinOHt-'1'05  00Oe0 

05  c®  05  LO  CT5  T-^CQ  05  LO^  05^  OO  LTD  05  CO  CQ  ^ 0^00  H 05 

H 04  P3  CO*  ^ CO  'l’’  Tf  Tf  D-"  P-*  Tf  d H ri  M 05  6 OO  O ,f’  OO 

N in  COCOOONHHiHeONlONCOCOCO  CO  CQ  O CM 

HCOH  CO  CO  HH  H H 

5,084,491 

Vice-President 

Fair-  Oppo- 

banks  nents 

O 

Xt< 

CO 

CO 

CO 

Republican 

Roosevelt  and  Fairbanks 
(N.  lr.)  (Ind.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 till 

oflO««»No>  nf  n i i i co  i in  r—  co  co 

*-  (*5  1 CS  CO  1 II  1 V— 

1 till 

1 fill 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 till 

336 

Per  Cent 
of 

Total 

N.  ^^THt^Ht^Oqt^HOCOCOH^OS^qt^OSCONt^ 
r-i  CD  O CD  eo  03  Ti<  05  t-  OO  O ^ H CO  H H CO  CD  05  in  CO  CD 

Locoiocoioiocotr— iocococo  t-^Ncoc-cocoinco«o 

56.4 

President 

Roose-  Oppo- 

velt  nents 

336  140 

Popular 

Vote 

Cvl  CO  ^ o CO  LO  LO  LO  lO  05  lO  ■rH  CO  05  CQ  CD  05  O O CO  Tf  05 

eOlOCDCOCDMDJ05  05lO'^OIOOOCDH,^lOOOTl<(Ncoa) 
05_ Ifl  (»  H H in  CD  in  O ^05  ® LO  O M N Tf  00  W (O  H 

co  co  uj  05’ d d o o o’  h d d w h d o b*  h d o o 

COCO  lO  lO  OO  lO  O CD  TJI  Tf  t-  O lO  CO  t}<  T}<  o CO  CO  N 

rH  <M  OO  CO  OO  tH  H H (M 

7,628,834 

Vote  Cast 

Per  Cent 
of 

Popula- 

tion 

tjjH(Dooo5NC5qHoocoqHNqcD^qoqqTi'H 
crir-ioOi— <C'QC'QOC'Q'3<THoicO'^LQC'Qt'-eOlOr'^C©lOr-icO 
(N(NI(N|NN(N1HNNNHH  CQ  H COiH  CM  (M  Cd  CO 

18.7 

Electors 

Neces- 
sary for 
Choice 

05 

CO 

<M 

Popular 

Vote 

H'NlOt-OOOOOOOH'CiOCOOlOCOOOCDt-H'HCOTi'CO 
H'C0H05Tj<k.HC5CDl0Ml0rf05  00ONC0H,l0lMHH 

'f  n h o in  h w co  h t-  co  h « q co  oo  in  w o o 
t|T  io  d o d t-'  oo'  o h1’'  o'  co'  oo*  in  h d h h 6 in  o co  o 

Cfl(MH05COHOt-005fOCOIOO^COOlOCO'l'f^CO 

CNI  CD  04  o CQ  HNNH  H H N rf 

rH  rH  tH 

13,523,519 

tu 

0 

> 

476 

Popula- 

tion 

(1900) 

OSOlOMos^OCOlOCOlflCDCOOCOOOSHTfeOONH 

NOCOMcOOJH^'fCOHlOHt-HH'tH'OOOOrJ'eO 

CO  CO  CO  LO  CO  COOOrHlOLOrHLOCOLOCOC'-C'^COrHTHOO®  LO 

CO  co'  N H M oo'  M 05'  t-‘  co  d 00'  0'  H 0 00  co'  M 00'  00'  Cl  d 

vP0’tHCOCOO5HlOHOiN-tOIM^P-'flOHlOcr)O5 
<M  0 00  N OO^CO  H 't  eo  Tf  CO^’S'  0.0  IN  CO  OO^lfl  05  O 

tH  hVh  d d rH  dco  rH  d 

74,607,225 

Assigned 

476 

States 

Montana  

Nebraska  — 

Nevada  

New  Hampshire 

New  Jersey  

New  York 

North  Carolina  

North  Dakota  

Ohio  

Oregon  

Pennsylvania  — 

Rhode  Island  

South  Carolina  

South  Dakota  - - 

Tennessee  

Texas  

TT+nlv 

Vermont  

Virginia  

Washington  

West  Virginia  

Wisconsin  

Wyoming  — 

Total  - - 

States 

SUMMARY  u^on  Voting 

45  45 

101  43 


Vice-presidential  candidates  receiving  no  electoral  votes:  Tibbies  (Neb.),  Populist;  Cainell  (Tex.),  Prohibition;  Hanford  (N.  Y.),  Socialist;  Cox  (111.),  Socialist 


TABLE  XXIX.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT, 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


Social. 

Debs 

(Ind.) 

Popular 

Vote 

1.399 

5,842 

2S.659 

7,974 

5,113 

239 

3,747 

5S4 

6.400 

34,691 

13,476 

S.2S7 

12,420 

4.060 

2,53S 

1,758 

2,323 

10.7S1 

11,586 

14,527 

978 

15.431 

5.S55 

3,524 

2.103 

1.299 

10,253 

38,451 

378 

2,421 

33.795 

21.734 

7.339 

33,913 

1,365 

100 

2.S46 

1,870 

7.S70 

4.S95 

255" 

14,177 

3,679 

28,170 

1,715 

420, S20 

u 

a 

Hisgen 

(Mass.) 

Popular 

Vote 

495 

289 

4,278 

728" 

30 

1,356 

77 

119 

7,709 

514 

404 

68 

200 

82 

701 

4S5 

19,239 

742 

426 

402" 

481 

436" 

584 

2.922 

35.S17 

43’ 

475 

245 

2S9 

1,057 

1,105 

43 

SS 

332 

§f" 

S04 

51 

249 

46 

’”’64’ 

83.562 

i 

$ 

Gillhaus 

(N.Y.) 

f s 

0 > 

!!!H!!!g*IH!!5!!H!!iss!HF!!!!!r|p! 

i i i i i iii:!!  i i i i I:!:!:::: 

8 

CO 

"2 

0 

Ji 

Popular 

Vote 

1 1 1 i 1 1 1 Is  SI  S \Bmm  laSS  Ills  ill  !i.Ii  ill!  Il3l !SS* 

t— 1 t-H  LD  THiHgToOCaiDlD  | iH  CO  tH  J ^ ID  | | t-T  t-~T  | CQ  CO  rH  | rH  [ 

252.6S3 

POP’L’ST1 

1 Watson 
(Ga.) 

Popular 

Vote 

m \ i i !||  jsw  is  i 1 jj  I igs  I i i i i i j jss  1 1 1 ! jt  j j is  | i | i 

i i i ! : !!!!!!!  i ! ! i ! i ! L ! i ! ! ! i ! i ! ! i i 

g 

5 

Republican  . Democratic 

Bryan  and  Kern 
(Neb.)  (Ind.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

i i i : i i i i ! iii  i i iii  i i i i i j i i i i i i 

- : i : - i j i i-  : i i i-  : i i : : 1 : i 

iii  i i i i i i i i i i i i i i ; i i i i i i i i i i i 

s 

Per  Cent 
of 

Total 

cr"MOO05  05Ol0NO(?3«'e5t>C0M«£iO^OH,;*‘'£|’-|b.®Ht-e0  00  00  05MTj-0q00Ht-M(N)00U5a5(Mt-t- 

Popular 

Vote 

74,374 

87.015 

127,492 

126,644 

68,255 

22,071 

31,104 

72,413 

36,162 

450,795 

338,262 

200.771 
161,209 
244,092 

63,568 

35,403 

115,908 

155,543 

175.771 
109,401 
60,287 
346,574 

29,326 

131.099 

11,212 

33,655 

182,567 

667,468 

136,995 

32.885 

502,721 

122,363 

38,049 

448,778 

24,706 

62,290 

40,266 

135,608 

217,302 

42,601 

11,496 

82,946 

5S.691 

111,418 

166,632 

14,918 

6,409.106  | 

Taft  and  Sherman 
(Ohio)  (N.Y.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

__________ 

7 

3 

_____ 

27 

15 

13 

10 

_____ 

2 

16 

14 

11 

__________ 

3 

----- 

12 

39 

_____ 

23 

_____ 

34 

4 

----- 

4 

7 

13 

3 

s 

I Per  Cent 

of 

Total 

T)<Mlfl07'^OC£i^Ht£i'tce^O05O00NaiHl0lOO«'05M00HC£)OOM^00  00  O0005lfli(NIHTrt>^lfl'<t 

CD 

5 

Popula 

Vote 

25,308 

56,760 

214,398 

123,700 

112,915 

25,014 

10,654 

41,692 

52,621 

629.929 

348,993 

275,210 

197,216 

235,711 

8,958 

66,987 

116,513 

265,966 

335,580 

195,843 

4,363 

347.203 

32,333 

126.997 

10,775 

53,149 

265,326 

870,070 

114,937 

57,680 

572,312 

110,474 

62,530 

745,779 

43.942 

3,965 

67.536 

118,324 

65.666 

61.028 

39,552 

52.573 

106.062 

137,869 

247,747 

20,846 

7,679.006 

Vote  Cast 

Per  Cent 
of 

Popula- 

tion 

3 

|s 

0> 

103,809 

152.126 
386,597 
263,877 
189,999 

48,024 

49.360 

132,794 

97,288 

1,154,751 

721.126 
494,770 
375,946 
490,687 

75,146 

106,336 

238,531 

456,926 

541,749 

331,304 

66.904 

715,874 

68,822 

266,799 

24,526 

89.592 

467,198 

1,638,350 

252,310 

94,582 

1,121,588 

255,228 

110,889 

1,267.443 

72,317 

66,398 

114.775 

257.515 

292,472 

108.611 

52,654 

137,066 

183.879 

258,151 

454,435 

37,609 

1 14.887.133 

Popula- 

If 

2,138,093 

1,574,449 

2,377,549 

799,024 

1.114,756 

202,322 

752,619 

2.609.121 
325,594 

5,638.591 

2,700,876 

2,224,771 

1,690,949 

2,289,905 

1,656,388 

742,371 

1,295,346 

3,366,416 

2,810,173 

2,075,708 

1,797.114 

3,293,335 

376,053 

1,192,214 

81,875 

430,572 

2,537,167 

9,113,614 

2,206,287 

577,056 

4.767.121 
1,657,155 

672.765 

7,665,111 

542,610 

1,515,400 

583,888 

2,184,789 

3,896,542 

373,351 

355,956 

2,061,612 

1.141,990 

1,221,119 

2,333.860 

145,965 

% 

| 

ci 

States 

o.,a'oama  

Arkansas  

California  

Colorado  

Connecticut  

Delaware  

Florida  

Georgia  

Idaho  

Illinois  

Indiana  

Iowa  

Kansas  

Kentucky  

Louisiana  

Maine  

Maryland  

Massachusetts  

Michigan  

Minnesota  

Mississippi  

Missouri  

Montana  

Nebraska  

Nevada  

New  Hampshire  

New  Jersey  

New  York  

North  Carolina  

Nortli  Dakota  

Ohio  

Oklahoma  (1907)  

Oregon  

Pennsylvania  

Rhode  Island  

South  Carolina  

South  Dakota  

Tennessee  

Texas  

Utah  

Vermont  - 

Virginia  

Washington  

West  Virginia 

Wisconsin  

Wyoming  r 

Total  

44 


(See  next  page  for  Summary) 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


_ o 2 
~ Oi  fl 

< o.  w 

O e 


« afi 
£ O ® 


| CD' 


o.  c 

G,  U 

O e 


w ^ 2 

_r  l-  -a 

£ 2<-> 


CD  Z-l 

- a 


txi  o 
G O 
r«2 


u . 

C;  72 

B 2 


<M<MC<1C<J 


C3MMH00CD'0tD$5OC0Ht-<J)t-C5HCD<0rlWH<C 
NCOlOOHlO<nOci<DOMCDt'1,’f^OHHOCDCD 
OHHN^oWCOo05NC3C5t'CD<MWOCONlflO'^ 
M M OO  D CD  ©'  ^ H H ri  D D D ri  Ifl  N CO  N M N OO 

C—  t— < t— I H OO  CO  rl  N H rH  <M  <M  <M 


G . 

ca.2 

C3  u 


W.  OODcOOOM^t>»^ODO 
CDC.CDoSc'^lO^MH-fTf 
IM  CO  CO  D O °0  H 1C  N ^ 

CO  LTD  C<f  iH  rH  ID  Oi  CO 


HCOrj<rJOfl5N^H 

cj05t^Nt^^OOOOoo'tCO'»J<N<MC<i 
H N H 'f  (M  H H H N CO  N CO  CO  N 


CO  <M  <M  CO  CO 


O^COOwffjtDlOoOCOhOOCDCOlOOCOM'CDlOH 
w^t'T^0(MSMCOCOt-OHH<fl01GWO]WlO't't' 
<£)  D <D  CO  CO  H W W Q 1C  Tl<  O OO  N h-  CO  <M_  W CO  D CO 

ci  ® H CO  N OO  H lO  CO  N H 6 N D OO  I>  N tJ<'  ifi'  CO  t!<“ 
<M  <M  C/D  c~  CO  <M<MCOCDCD<MO  Tf  W Tt>  h C]  <M 


S'Zi 

«»  a 

S-J2 
d w 


sZ 


M n O)  N (O 


C)'OlOH(X)Hlf:<M_h.qcOHCD_COT}<GOT)HlOincO(X)CDCO 

cijSicNcjQCDpoNiOcO^cjoOCOcjodinc^H  ooc^ 

<£J,C,lO,;CT)'cO'^^t>'COCO'^COCO'3<t-COTl<C*5NMCOrJ< 


I’fHCOTt'COHCD^CD 


00  M °2  5S  N H H t-  0 H OO  o in  %V  V r.  .V  -*•  ~ ^ 

CO^COCOfOOCOH^(MTfciNDCOt-rHt-OLONOJT)< 
t . “ ^ N W ^ t OO  M » W 05  H CO  *’  ‘ 

N"  2 fS  ^ S 52  M CO  W H Ifl  M D O H N CO  6 CD 

COHCCWHt-<MCOc)COOCiOCOTt<HDl<0-1^ 

<M  t-H  <M  rH  H <M 


o in  co 


G^ 

c3  . 

g£ 


Ho 


c 0) 
o o 


B rt 

<D  4-» 

OS 


(MWt-CDOOC-oNNO 


H’t^inooin^ooN'^c- 


Ph 


NHC-'-tCD^NOJHoCONinWlMTl'inCDCiO'O'TjilflH 
CO  <M  CD  H CO  <M  q t-  QHOCDO^HCOTt-lOi-'t-MGlM 

l>  ^ D CO  CO  05  N H OO  ID  Cq  OO  OO  ID  OO  LD  05  05  <M_  CO  ID  OO 

d co  ^ co  oo'  co  io  't  in  eq  co  h 


LDCDOOCOCOOoGOCD'^eO<Mr“jCDOOt'-Ti<aj'<^CDrHCD<M 

IflH^odM^rjJcOTjicid't  NHci^^^rrojcdcOH 

H N CO  H oq  CO  <M  <M  <M  oq  H rH  i-H  rH  rH  rH  <M 


c-r:  4J 

o 

Ph  > 


OO  C-»  O ID  OO  CO  c o CO  f. 


CD  CO  CD  O O CD  CM  ID  LO 


h n -rt<  in  co 


&.2S 

O -1-0 


CO  T)<  05 
OHD  'C 
o_  CO  ^ 
co 

CO  O ' 


<M 


ID  O 
t~-*  as 

o*  cs 

cq  id  co  t— 


I OS  H Tf  H CD  H On  lD  CO  i— I CD  CD  CO  CO  tJ*  id 

t— (cqascnt^t^-^ooot^-rT— ic—Ot- <co 

I CD  H ID  in  CO  I>  C5  D CO  CO  M Tf  H l>  H CO 

I n o’  in  oo  o $ <J>  cn  ci  in  d o iD~  co 

I in  O C l M o oq  o (/j  LO  Q o H I-  05  O) 

I t-  CD ; CO  CD  t-  <M  «D.  <M  CD  <M  CO  CO  O <M 

H CO  N N H 05 


cq 


ID  C\f  ©q 


i cq 


-Q  cq 


B O 
d «m 
M S 

t-t  c3 


o 2 £ 

^ ~tj  ra  a 
2 2 £ 2 M 


ci 

rr>  ■“* 


"d  d 

3 A 

ri  o 


B 42 
c3  O 
fcfl  M 


O 


.2  B h 


45 


^ h ^ a <d  a c3  d d -h  .h 


a 

a .m 
*w  % 
•2  § 
73  W 
73  W 


saajs 


a a 


(Continued  on  next  page) 


TABLE  XXX.  PRESIDENT  AND  VICE-PRESIDENT,  1912 —Continued 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTIONS 


Socialist 

Labor1 

Reimer 

(Mass.! 

Popular 

Vue 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1,322 

4,251 

2,630 

1 «*t<  CD 

1 0 CO 

1 t-  <M 

1 

1 

1 

1 

430 

509 

50 

1,872 

522 

0 

t- 

0 

05 

<M 

Socialist1 

Delis 

(Ind.) 

Popular 

Vote 

10,885 

10,174 

3,313 

1,980 

15,900 

2,859 

63.3S1 

117 

6,966 

90,144 

41,674 

13,343 

80,915 

2,049 

164 

4,662 

3,492 

24,896 

9,023 

92S 

820 

40,134 

15,336 

33.4S1 

2,760 

O 

P-* 

05 

CO 

Prohibi- 

tion1 

Chafin 

(Ariz.) 

Popular 

Vote 

32 

3,383 

535 

2,875 

19,427 

1,025 

1,243 

11,511 

2,185 

4,360 

19,533 

616 

3,910 

825 

1,69S 

1,095 

709 

9,810 

4,534 

8,5S6 

434 

j 20S.923 

Progressive 

Roosevelt  and  Johnson 
(N.  Y.)  (Cal.) 

Electoral 

Vote 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 t 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

■ 1 1 1 

■III 
till 

1 1 1 1 

■ III 

■ 1 1 1 

33 

1 1 ■ 1 1 ill 

1 1 ■ 1 1 III 

1 1 1 1 1 III 

u»  1 1 1 1 1 r—  1 1 1 

1 1 ■ 1 1 iii 

1 1 1 1 1 111 

1 1 ■ 1 1 111 

1 1 ■ 1 1 111 

88 

Per  Cent 
of  Total 

28.1 

29.1 

27.9 

20.2 

33.6 

16.9 

24.6 
28.4 

29.7 
22.1 

27.4 

36.7 

21.6 

2.5 

50.5 

21.7 

. 9.4 

21.5 

35.2 

15.9 

35.2 

29.0 

15.6 

21.8 

VIZ 

Popular 

Vote 

22,456 

72,614 

5,620 

17,794 

145,409 

8,347 

390,021 

69,667 

25,726 

229,807 

37,600 

447,426 

16,878 

1,293 

58,811 

53,725 

28,530 

24,174 

22,132 

21,777 

113,698 

78,977 

62,460 

9,232 

4,126,020 

p£ 

g 

a 

a 

X'  . 


n«t»tniftNio«oio 


£2 

(jo 

£ © 


q^cDiqNOMcoHfl)fflMTf_oqHtri^io^oia)qoH 

lOfOcjoiHMH<3)^d'O^NOidNNNdTj3u5tDNH(D 


cu 


H00©TfN05lOr-lfi^«fi’J'05Nt'NlflC5O)^NO(fiCX)O 
r)<Oa)NCOM^OWMlI5(OHHin-*"'K-'*  — — — 

05  O fl>  N H ifl  ifl  OO  H O (O  ^ M 

D-'  OJ  t>  o"  ffi  Ifl  ^ C5  C>  N Ifl"  o 00'  CO  6 05  o U5  O W M ^ 

CM  O COP-Nin'^NNH^oiMTjt'JMHMHOSCOHCD 
tH  t-H  CO  H rH  CO  H N H H 


g*5 


hO 


[ Elector’l 

Vote 

■ 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 

• 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

■ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

■ 1 1 1 1 l 1 ■ 1 1 1 1 1 ■ 1 

■ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 

■ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 

< 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 

II  1 • l 1 1 
II  1 l l 1 1 
II  l 1 1 1 1 
II  1 1 1 1 l 

I 1 ^ 1 • 1 1 ■ 

II  1 1 1 l l 
II  1 1 1 1 1 
11  1 1 1 l ■ 
11  1 1 l 1 1 
II  1 ■ 1 1 1 

CO 

Per  Cent 
of  Total 

23.3 

21.6 

15.8 

37.4 

20.5 

34.9 

28.7 

11.9 

26.7 

26.7 

35.7 

25.3 

22.4 

35.6 

1.0 

OCOlflHOCOHCO't; 

Cd  CO  CO  H N N eo  M 

Popular 

Vote 

18,512 

54,029 

3,196 

32,927 

88,834 

17,900 

455,428 

29,139 

23,090 

278,168 

90,786 

34,673 

273,305 

27,703 

536 

59.444 
26,745 
42,100 
23,332 
23,288 

70.445 
56,667 

130,695 

14,560 

(M 

<M 

05 

CO 

CO 

CO 

Id 
r4  0 

NO)u5^t-(O^OOt-MMCOMM©MC-H©©NOH© 

D 

Hd^dciflNrlwHiooifl^MgH^Of-COON^OO 
NNNNHrlHHHNrlNrHH  rl  H COrt  N N H N 

CD 

Pm  > 


ooomONineoino^Ho^^oWHcoLnHoaigNco 

NOH'CW'tMlOOOOlo^OOinNNCOCO^^gCO^Ol 

CO  N H o CD  N OJ  ’t  113  O 00  o °°  M M.  “I  ^ M.  °°«  °l  ^ °i  N. 

05  oT  o H ce  b-‘  M*  t-'  t-'  o to  N H N N 2 N 00  05  N 

rneor?  UJ  H N CO  H HMwM 


N ^ N OO  N W 


a.: 
© + 
PMi 


COCJMHCONOcOOlftl 
...COOO^WWHCDHCOO 
co  n<  co  t-  ifl  — - 


05  O 03  H CO  05 


M ^ LO  N t- 

tO  r—t  C'*  CD  . . . , — tLV- 

ID  N CO  IO  H W CC  N O H h D1  H ^ 

CC  N h O h>'  N M CD  t-T  h"”  sT  N"  R3  N ifl  M CO  M Ifl 

I'OJooMMlMHOb-COiflNlcO^HCOCOgi^ifl-,-. 

M H Tf  w CO  1-1  03.  10  C^.  CD  S <x>  10  1C  IO  H OO  CO  M OrHo3COi 

th  03  cfoi"  •*  ^ t-T  oi~  eo  ei  h h n 


« cc  rt 
o3  c«  ^ 
*{  ^ cj 

3 ■£  5 
g 55  55 


k_  w 

a)  .51 
£ m 


2 .3 


& & & 
a>  a>  05 
£ £ £ 


o o I 

|H 

d , 

£ ft 
<D  o 
£ £ 


o d d ft  a>  ^ © o © a>4->  Q--  — < ►>  ►>  b* 

2;oOO^Ci!awHHU>>>k^^ 

46 


Cj 

'd  .2  ^ 

§ ’o  I 

d ft  ^*3 

k m rt  d 

-HOP 
a >>n, 

o co  43  .a 

‘ a 2 d d 


05  CO 

a <s  d 

a M c3 


c .5  a ^ 

§23^ 

d fcc  W CO 
p-  u d <D 


; .2  tfi 

. *co  a 


© ►» 
c.tS 

i 


_ o E 

- Q C 
<0.0 
O « 


O o < 
£ o.  1 

So : 


ft  e 
o.  « 
O © 


a * 
S <B 


Cl, 


in 


j-  CO 
c3 
d w 

2? 
PH  S 

.2  w 
d 0 

So 
— > 

£g 
2 o 
2 ° 

|l 

c- 

kd 
_,  p 
c3  Q* 

ft  © 

o« 

Is 

"3  M 
00 
aa 
tX-3 


SI 

05 

S’0 

I* 


K rt 

£g 

“■S 

fl;  ft 

o © 

•dd 

>GG 


PRESIDENTIAL  FEVER — PRESIDENTS  OE  VILLAGES 


PRESIDENTIAL  FEVER.  A phrase  used 
to  denote  the  eager  desire  for,  and  ambition 
to  gain,  the  presidency  of  the  United  States, 
prevalent  among  prominent  political  leaders 
and  “favorite  sons”  in  the  several  states. 

0.  C.  H. 

PRESIDENTIAL  PREFERENCE  PRIMARY. 

See  Primary,  Presidential  Preference. 

PRESIDENTIAL  SUCCESSION.  The  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  provides  (Art. 
II,  Sec.  i,  U 6 ) : 

In  case  of  the  removal  of  the  President  from 
office,  or  of  his  death,  resignation,  or  inability  to 
discharge  the  powers  and  duties  of  the  said  office, 
the  same  shall  devolve  on  the  Vice-President ; and 
the  Congress  may  by  law  provide  for  the  case  of 
removal,  death,  resignation,  or  inability,  both  of 
the  President  and  Vice-President,  declaring  what 
officer  shall  then  act  as  President ; and  such  officer 
shall  act  accordingly,  until  the  disability  be  re- 
moved or  a President  shall  be  elected. 

In  1792  Congress  passed  an  act  providing 
that  in  case  of  the  removal,  death,  resignation, 
or  disability  of  both  President  and  Vice-Presi- 
dent, the  president  pro  tempore  of  the  Senate 
would  succeed,  and  in  case  there  were  no  presi- 
dent of  the  Senate,  then  the  speaker  of  the 
House.  This  continued  to  be  the  law  until 
1886  when  the  law  now  in  force  (1913)  was 
enacted.  This  law  provides  for  the  succession 
of  Cabinet  officers,  constitutionally  eligible,  in 
the  following  order : Secretary  of  State,  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasury,  Secretary  of  War,  At- 
torney General,  Postmaster  General,  Secretary 
of  the  Navy,  Secretary  of  the  Interior.  There 
is  no  provision  concerning  an  election  before 
the  ordinary  time;  and  there  is  no  law  or 
precedent  enabling  us  to  determine  with  assur- 
ance whether  Congress  could  provide  for  such 
an  election.  There  is,  however,  some  reason 
for  thinking  that  Congress  in  passing  this  act 
of  1886  meant  to  leave  with  each  Congress  the 
right  of  deciding  whether  there  should  be  such 
an  election.  In  five  instances  the  Vice-Presi- 
dent has  succeeded  to  the  full  power  and  dig- 
nity of  the  office.  No  special  election  has 
been  held.  Moreover  the  law  does  not  seek  to 
define  “inability,”  although  it  is  quite  plain 
that  a serious  question  might  arise,  as  in  fact 
it  did  during  the  long  illness  of  President  Gar- 
field. Who  is  to  decide  whether  the  inability 
is  such  that  the  next  officer  in  the  line  of 
succession  should  assume  the  presidential  du- 
ties? 

See  President;  Third  Term;  Vice-Presi- 
dent. 

References:  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Constitution- 
al Law  of  the  United  States  (1910),  II,  eh. 
lviii;  C.  S.  Hamlin,  “The  Presidential  Succes- 
sion Act  of  1886”  in  Harvard  Law  Review, 
XVIII,  182.  A.  C.  McLaughlin. 

PRESIDENTS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

Following  is  a list  of  the  first  28  Presidents 
of  the  United  States: 


1789  (April  30)-1797  (March  3),  George  Washington 
(reelected,  1792),  earlier  Commander  of  Continental 
Army,  planter. 

1797  (March  4 ) —1801  (March  3),  John  Adams  (de- 
feated for  second  term,  1800),  previoqsly  Vice-Presi- 
dent. 

1801  (March  4)-1809  (March  3),  Thomas  Jefferson 
(reelected,  1804),  previously  Vice-President. 

1809  (March  4)— 1817  (March  3),  James  Madison 
(reelected,  1812),  previously  Secretary  of  State. 

1817  (March  4 ) -1825  (March  3),  James  Monroe  (re- 
elected, 1820),  previously  Secretary  of  State. 

1825  (March  4) -1829  (March  3),  John  Quincy 
Adams  (defeated  for  second  term,  1828),  previously 
Secretary  of  State. 

1829  (March  4 ) —1837  (March  3),  Andrew  Jackson 
(reelected,  1832),  earlier  general  and  Senator. 

1837  (March  4)— 1841  (March  3),  Martin  Van  Buren 
(defeated  for  second  term,  1840),  previously  Vice- 
President. 

1841  (March  4)-1841  (April  4)  William  Henry 
Harrison  (died  in  office),  earlier  general  and  for- 
eign minister. 

1841  (April  4 ) —1845  (March  3),  John  Tyler,  ele- 
vated from  Vice-Presidency  by  Harrison’s  death. 
1845  (March  4 ) —1849  (March  3),  James  K.  Polk, 
earlier  Speaker  of  the  House. 

1849  (March  4 ) —1850  (July  9),  Zachary  Taylor 
(died  in  office),  previously  general. 

1850  (July  10)-1853  (March  3),  Millard  Fillmore, 
elevated  from  Vice- Presidency  by  Taylor’s  death. 

1853  (March  4) -1857  (March  3),  Franklin  Pierce, 
earlier  congressman  and  military  officer. 

1857  (March  4 ) — 1861  (March  3),  James  Buchanan, 
previously  Minister  to  Great  Britain. 

1861  (March  4 ) —1865  (April  15),  Abraham  Lincoln 
(reelected,  1864;  died  in  office),  previously  lawyer. 

1865  (April  15)-1869  (March  3),  Andrew  Johnson, 
elevated  from  Vice-Presidency  by  Lincoln’s  death. 

1869  (March  5)-1887  (March  3),  Ulysses  S.  Grant 
(reelected,  1872),  previously  general. 

1877  (March  4)-1881  (March  3),  Rutherford  B. 
Hayes,  previously  general  and  governor  of  Ohio. 
1881  (March  4)— 1881  (Sept.  19),  James  A.  Gar- 
field (died  in  office),  previously  general  and  Repre- 
sentative. 

1881  (Sept.  201-1885  (March  3),  Chester  A.  Arthur, 
elevated  from  Vice-Presidency  by  Garfield's  death. 

1885  (March  3 ) —1889  (March  3),  Grover  Cleveland 
(defeated  for  reelection,  1888),  previously  governor 
of  New  York. 

1889  (March  4)-1893  (March  3),  Benjamin  Harri- 
son, previously  Senator. 

1893  (March  4 ) —1897  (March  3),  Grover  Cleveland 
(second  term). 

1897  (March  4)-1901  (Sept.  14),  William  McKinley 
(reelected,  1900,  died  in  office),  previously  Repre- 
sentative. 

1901  (Sept.  14 ) —1909  (March  3),  Theodore  Roose- 
velt. elevated  from  Vice-Presidency  by  McKinley’s 
death  (elected  1904,  defeated  for  third  term,  1912). 

1909  (March  4 ) -1913  (March  3),  William  Howard 
Taft  (defeated  for  second  term,  1912),  previously 
Secretary  of  War. 

1913  (March  4)-Woodrow  Wilson,  previously  gov- 
ernor of  New  Jersey. 


See  Executive  and  Congress;  under  Presi- 
dent; Presidential  Elections;  and  Presi- 
dents 'by  name.  A.  B.  H. 


PRESIDENTS  OF  VILLAGES.  The  official 

title  of  the  chief  officer  of  a village  in  New 
York,  Vermont,  Michigan,  Illinois,  Wisconsin, 
and  Minnesota.  More  often  the  title  mayor  is 
used,  and  in  some  cases  other  titles,  such  as 
intendant,  warden,  or  chairman  of  the  board  of 
trustees.  They  are  usually  elected  by  popular 
vote,  for  a term  of  one  or  two  years.  They 
preside  over  the  meetings  of  village  councils, 
have  some  supervision  over  other  village  of- 
ficers and  a more  definite  responsibility  for 
the  enforcement  of  local  police  ordinances.  In 
some  states  there  is  a tendency  to  vest  them 
with  the  special  powers  of  mayors  such  as 
the  power  to  veto  acts  of  the  councils  and  to 


PRESS — PRICES  AND  CHARGES,  REGULATION  OF 


appoint  policemen  and  minor  officials.  See 
Villages,  Incorporated.  Reference:  J.  A. 
Fairlie,  Local  Government  in  Counties,  Towns, 
and  Villages  (1906),  209-10.  J.  A.  F. 

PRESS.  See  Freedom  of  Speech  and  of 
the  Press. 

PRESS,  ASSOCIATED.  See  Associated 
Press. 

PREVIOUS  QUESTION.  The  previous  ques- 
tion was  originally  a device  for  suspending 
debate  on  a subject  of  a delicate  nature.  In 
Congress,  since  1811,  the  purpose  of  the  motion 
has  been  to  close  debate  on  the  measure  under 
consideration  by  the  House  (Rule  XVII). 

It  is  not  used  in  committee  of  the  whole 
nor  in  the  Senate.  It  may  be  demanded 
by  any  member  and  if  ordered  by  a majority 
the  main  question  as  ordered,  whether  a single 
motion,  or  all  the  motions  required  to  put  the 
measure  through  all  its  stages  to  final  passage, 
is  put  to  a vote.  Forty  minutes  of  debate  are 
allowed  whenever  the  previous  question  is  or- 
dered on  a question  on  which  there  has  been 
no  debate,  but  if  there  has  been  debate,  even 
though  brief,  before  the  ordering  of  the  pre- 
vious question,  the  ordering  of  the  previous 
question  must  be  followed  by  an  immediate 
vote.  The  forty  minutes  is  equally  divided 
between  those  favoring  the  question  and  those 
opposing  it.  In  practice  the  member  in  charge 
of  a measure  brought  before  the  House  (see 
Leader  of  the  House)  and  having  the  floor 
usually  demands  the  previous  question  at  the 
end  of  his  hour  (see  Hour  Rule),  unless  the 
measure  is  being  debated  under  a special  or- 
der. See  Parliamentary  Law;  Rules  of 
Congress;  State  Legislature.  Reference: 

A.  C.  Hinds,  Digest  and  Manual  of  Rules 
(1908),  607-616.  A.  N.  H. 

PRICE,  ECONOMIC  THEORY  OF.  Price  is 
value  expressed  in  terms  of  money.  A thing  has 
value  when,  and  only  when,  more  of  it  is  de- 
sired than  there  is  to  be  had.  When  a great 
deal  more  is  desired  than  there  is  to  be  had, 
each  unit  of  it  will  have  a high  value,  and 
when  there  is  almost  as  much  as  is  desired, 
each  unit  will  have  a low  value.  When  there 
is  quite  as  much  as  is  desired,  each  unit  will 
have  no  value;  and  if  there  should  be  a great 
deal  more  than  is  desired,  it  may  even  have  a 
negative  value  and  men  will  pay  money  to 
get  rid  of  it.  This  rule  applies  to  money  as 
well  as  to  everything  else. 

A thing  may  be  scarce  either  because  nature 
has  supplied  very  little  of  it,  or  because  it 
costs  so  much  to  produce  it  as  to  discourage 
production.  It  may  be  desired  either  because 
it  is  directly  useful,  as  in  the  case  of  consum- 
ers’ goods,  or  because  it  is  indirectly  useful, 
as  in  the  case  of  instruments  of  production. 
In  the  case  of  an  article  of  consumption,  the 

48 


desire  for  each  unit  tends  to  grow  less  intense 
the  more  we  have  of  it,  for  the  physiological 
reason  that  our  capacity  for  consuming  any 
single  article  is  limited,  and  the  more  nearly 
we  reach  that  limit,  the  less  intense  our  desire 
for  it  becomes.  In  the  case  of  an  agent  of 
production,  say  a tool,  the  desire  for  each 
unit  tends  to  grow  less  intense  the  more  we 
have  of  it,  for  the  physical  reason  that,  with 
a given  supply  of  other  instruments  of  produc- 
tion, our  ability  to  use  profitably  that  particu- 
lar kind  is  limited,  and  the  more  nearly  we 
approach  that  limit  the  less  profitable  each 
additional  unit  becomes. 

See  Cost;  Value. 

References:  T.  N.  Carver,  Distribution  of 
Wealth  (1904),  cli.  i;  A.  Marshall,  Principles 
of  Economics  (6tli  ed.,  1910),  Bk.  IV;  F.  von 
Wieser,  'Natural  Value  (1893);  C.  W.  Mac- 
farlane,  Value  and  Distribution  (1899)  ; J.  R. 
Commons,  The  Distribution  of  Wealth  (1893), 
eh.  i.  T.  N.  C. 

PRICES  AND  CHARGES,  REGULATION 

OF.  The  guaranties  of  liberty  and  property 
found  in  the  state  constitutions  and  in  the 
Fourteenth  Amendment  to  the  Federal  Consti- 
tution stand  in  the  way  of  general  legislative 
regulation  of  prices  at  which  goods  shall  be 
sold  or  the  rates  at  which  services  shall  be 
rendered  (see  Contract,  Freedom  of;  Labor, 
Freedom  of  ) . But  those  who  pursue  public 
callings  or  devote  their  property  to  a public 
use  ( see  Public  Use),  thereby  availing  them- 
selves of  advantages  specially  conferred  upon 
them  by  organized  society,  subject  themselves 
in  return  to  governmental  regulation  of  their 
rates,  charges,  and  methods  of  doing  business 
which  could  not  be  exercised  with  reference 
to  private  contracts  and  private  property  (see 
Police  Power).  For  reasons  which  are  not  the 
same  in  each  case,  the  businesses  of  common 
carriers  in  general,  and  in  particular  railroad 
companies,  telegraph  and  telephone  companies, 
hackinen,  draymen,  bakers,  millers,  wharfin- 
gers, public  warehousemen,  public  ferrymen, 
and  innkeepers  have  been  said  to  be  in  such 
sense  public  as  that  they  are  burdened  with  du- 
ties not  resting  upon  those  callings  which  are 
strictly  private;  and  therefore  they  are  subject 
to  public  regulation  which  may  include  regula- 
tion of  prices  and  rates  (see  Granger  Cases; 
Munn  vs.  Illinois  ) . 

Any  business  which  can  be  carried  on  only 
under  the  grant  of  a public  franchise  is  neces- 
sarily subject  to  regulation  as  to  prices  and 
charges  which  may  be  fixed  in  the  granting 
of  the  franchise  or,  if  it  involves  a monopoly, 
may  be  regulated  under  the  general  police  pow- 
er (see  Franchises,  Corporation,  Legal  As- 
pects of).  Thus  corporations  authorized  to 
supply  the  inhabitants  of  a city  with  water, 
gas,  electric  light  and  power,  street  car  serv- 
ice, etc.,  are  subject  to  regulation  as  to  their 
rates  and  charges. 


PRIMARY 


As  between  one  who  holds  himself  out  as 
pursuing  a public  calling  and  one  of  the  public 
entitled  to  be  served  in  pursuance  of  that  call- 
ing, it  may  be  a judicial  question  whether  the 
rate  or  charge  in  a particular  case  is  reason- 
able. But  the  general  regulation  of  rates  and 
charges  in  such  callings  is  a legislative  func- 
tion, which  may  be  delegated  to  a commission 
(see  Interstate  Commerce  Commission; 
Commerce,  Governmental  Control  of). 

The  natural  and  necessary  limitation  upon 
the  exercise  of  the  legislative  power  to  regulate 
prices  and  rates  in  cases  in  which  such  right 
of  regulation  exists  is  that  those  engaged  in 
a public  calling  or  who  have  devoted  their 
property  to  a public  use  shall  not  be  deprived 
of  the  right  to  pursue  such  calling  or  make  a 
profit  out  of  the  business  to  which  their  prop- 
erty has  been  devoted ; for  to  deny  a reason- 
able compensation  for  services  rendered  or  for 
the  use  of  property  is  to  infringe  the  liberty 
of  contract  or  the  essential  right  to  the  en- 
joyment of  property.  In  the  case  of  Smyth  vs. 
Ames  (169  D.  S.  466)  the  court  said: 


While  rates  for  the  transportation  of  persons 
and  property  within  the  limits  of  a state  are 
primarily  for  its  determination,  the  question 
whether  they  are  so  unreasonably  low  as  to  deprive 
the  carrier  of  its  property  without  such  compen- 
sation as  the  Constitution  secures,  and  therefore 
without  due  process  of  law,  cannot  be  so  conclu- 
sively determined  by  the  legislature  of  the  State 
or  by  regulations  adopted  under  its  authority  that 
the  matter  may  not  become  the  subject  of  judicial 
inquiry. 

The  reasonableness  of  the  compensation  per- 
mitted is  therefore  a judicial  question  to  be 
determined  by  reference  to  the  usual  profits  on 
property  employed  in  other  forms  of  business, 
the  usual  rate  of  interest  realized  on  property 
thus  invested  affording  a substantial  guide  to 
determine  reasonable  profits. 

See  Contract,  Freedom  of;  Commerce, 
Governmental  Control  of  ; Due  Process  of 
Law;  Interstate  Commerce  Legislation; 
Public  Service  Corporations;  Quasi-Public 
Corporations;  Transportation,  Regulation 
of. 

References:  Brass  vs.  Stoeser,  153  U.  8.  391; 
Budd  vs.  N.  Y.,  143  U.  8.  517;  Railroad  Com. 
Cases,  116  TJ.  8.  307.  Emlin  McClain. 


PRIMARY 


Definition. — The  term  “primary”  is  applied 
to  a party  election  for  the  purpose  of  choosing 
candidates  or  delegates  to  choose  candidates 
to  contest  in  the  following  regular  election. 
“Caucus”  (see)  and  “primary”  are  sometimes 
used  interchangeably  but  generally  caucus  is 
used  to  describe  a mass  meeting  of  party  voters 
assembled  at  a particular  time  and  place  to 
choose  candidates  or  delegates,  and  a primary 
is  a party  election  held  at  a particular  place 
between  certain  fixed  hours  during  which  party 
voters  may  appear  and  cast  their  ballots  for 
candidates  or  delegates.  The  term  caucus  is 
often  loosely  used  and  broadly  applied  to  a 
wide  variety  of  political  conferences;  primary 
has  an  increasingly  definite  use  in  connection 
with  primary  or  preliminary  elections. 

Historical  Growth. — Various  methods  of 
placing  candidates  for  office  in  nomination  have 
been  employed  in  the  United  States.  Origin- 
ally candidates  for  local  office  were  presented 
to  the  electorate  upon  their  own  announcement, 
upon  the  endorsement  of  mass  meetings,  or  up- 
on nomination  by  informal  caucus.  Candi- 
dates for  state  office  were  generally  named  by 
a legislative  caucus  composed  of  members  of 
the  party  in  the  legislative  body  or  later  by 
a “mongrel  caucus”  in  which  legislators  and 
other  representatives  of  the  party  united  in 
the  selection  of  nominees.  In  the  national  field 
candidates  for  President  were  named  by  the 
congressional  caucus.  After  a long  struggle 
the  legislative  caucus  and  the  congressional 
caucus  were  overthrown,  and  the  system  of 
choosing  candidates  in  conventions  composed 
of  delegates  specially  chosen  for  that  purpose 


came  into  vogue.  By  1840  the  convention  sys- 
tem had  generally  been  adopted  for  national 
and  local  offices.  By  1866  abuses  in  the  selec- 
tion of  delegates  had  begun  to  appear  and 
this  led  to  legal  regulation  of  nominations  in 
the  interest  of  the  purity  of  elections.  This 
process  continued  slowly  until  about  1890,  and 
then  very  rapidly  until  the  close  of  the  nine- 
teenth century.  By  that  time  party  elections 
were  generally  placed  under  practically  the 
same  legal  restrictions  and  guaranties  as  regu- 
lar elections.  Dissatisfaction  with  the  work- 
ings of  the  delegate  system  gave  rise  to  an- 
other movement,  and  about  1900  the  direct 
nomination  system  began  to  be  generally  used, 
although  it  had  been  employed  as  early  as  the 
sixties  on  a small  scale,  and  in  the  nineties 
on  an  increasing  scale. 

Convention  System. — At  the  present  time 
there  are  four  principal  methods  of  nominating 
candidates.  These  are:  (1)  the  delegate  con- 
vention system;  (2)  the  direct  primary;  (3) 
the  non-partisan  primary;  (4)  nomination  by 
petition  only.  Under  the  first  of  these  sys- 
tems, the  delegate  convention  plan,  candidates 
for  public  offices  are  selected  by  conventions 
which  are  made  up  of  delegates  who  have  been 
selected  either  by  other  conventions  in  smaller 
districts,  or  directly  by  the  voters  in  small 
districts.  Candidates  for  President  of  the 
United  States  are  named  by  national  conven- 
tions which  are  composed  of  delegates  chosen 
in  part  by  state  conventions  which  are  com- 
posed of  delegates  chosen  by  county  conven- 
tions, which  are  composed  of  delegates  chosen 
by  towns  or  wards  either  in  caucuses  or  pri- 
49 


PRIMARY 


maries.  This  system  of  indirect  choice  has 
been  accompanied  by  many  abuses  and  is  fast 
disappearing.  For  choice  of  state  and  local  of- 
fices it  is  found  in  most  of  the  northeastern 
and  some  of  the  central  states,  but  during  the 
last  ten  years  has  rapidly  been  supplanted  by 
the  direct  primary.  The  convention  plan  was 
so  indirect  and  complicated  as  to  make  effective 
popular  action  difficult.  Fraud  and  corruption 
also  crept  into  its  operations  and  rendered 
the  system  generally  unpopular.  It  came  to  be 
regarded  as  one  of  tbe  instruments  of  control 
in  the  hands  of  the  machine  (see)  and  the 
boss  (see),  and  as  one  of  the  elements  in  the 
maintenance  of  the  spoils  system  (see). 

Direct  Primaries. — Under  the  system  of  di- 
rect nomination  candidates  are  selected  by 
direct  vote  of  the  party.  In  a number  of 
states  provision  is  made  for  direct  vote  in 
each  party  on  choice  for  presidential  nominee 
(see  Primary,  Direct;  Primary,  Presiden- 
tial Preference).  It  is  generally  recog- 
nized that  the  direct  primary  makes  it  possible 
for  the  voter  to  exercise  more  complete  control 
over  party  nomination  and  makes  domination 
by  the  party  machine  and  the  boss  more  diffi- 
cult than  under  the  delegate  system. 

Non-Partisan  Primary. — The  non-partisan 
primary  has  been  developed  in  connection  with 
the  commission  form  of  government  as  worked 
out  in  Des  Moines,  Iowa,  and  other  cities. 
Under  this  system  a preliminary  election  is 
held  in  which  all  voters  may  participate.  The 
highest  two  candidates  for  mayor  and  the  high- 
est eight  candidates  for  the  four  positions  of 
commissioner,  are  eligible  for  the  second  and 
final  election.  No  party  emblem,  circle  (see 
Party  Circle)  or  designation  is  permitted  in 
connection  with  the  name  of  any  candidate 
either  in  the  primary  or  first  election  or  in 
the  second  election.  In  some  cases  as  in  Berke- 
ley, California,  this  plan  has  been  so  modified 
as  to  provide  that  if  any  candidate  receives  a 
majority  of  all  the  votes  cast  in  the  first  elec- 
tion, the  second  election  shall  then  be  unnec- 
essary as  far  as  that  office  is  concerned.  In 
other  cases  the  system  of  preferential  voting 
has  been  applied.  The  purpose  of  this  system 
is  to  eliminate  the  national  political  parties 
from  local  elections.  Thus  far  the  results  have 
been  satisfactory  and  city  elections  under  this 
system  have  been  conducted  on  a non-partisan 
basis  (see  Vote,  Preferential). 

Nomination  by  Petition  Only. — The  system 
of  nomination  by  petition  only  is  also  applied 
solely  to  local  elections.  This  plan  provides 
that  nominations  for  office  shall  be  made  by 
petition  only  and  that  no  party  designation  of 
any  sort  shall  be  attached  to  the  name  of  the 
candidates.  This  system  has  been  adopted  in 
Newport,  R.  I.,  in  Boston,  and  in  other  cities. 
It  is  also  employed  in  the  selection  of  judges 
and  of  school  officials  in  certain  states  in  ac- 
cordance with  recent  laws.  Tbe  purpose  of 
this  plan  is  to  prevent  party  nominations  and 


party  elections  in  local,  school  or  judicial  af- 
fairs (see  Petition,  Nomination  by). 

A modification  of  these  last  two  systems  is 
found  in  Wisconsin.  The  law  of  this  state 
(1907,  ch.  670)  permits  of  a system  under 
which  nomination  may  be  made  by  petition 
only,  but  after  the  nominations  are  filed  upon 
petition  of  five  per  cent  of  the  electors,  a pre- 
liminary election  may  be  called  at  which  the 
two  candidates  for  each  office  will  be  selected 
and  made  the  candidates  at  the  final  election. 

Test  of  Party  Affiliation. — As  the  party  pri- 
mary becomes  more  and  more  like  an  election 
the  question  of  a satisfactory  legal  test  of 
membership  in  a particular  party  becomes  more 
important.  Originally,  and  still  to  some  extent, 
in  the  South,  this  was  a subject  over  which 
the  party  authorities  had  complete  control. 
In  recent  years,  however,  the  tendency  has  been 
to  prescribe  tests  of  party  membership  in  the 
primary  law.  The  most  frequent  test  required 
is  an  expression  of  intention  to  support  the 
party  candidates  in  the  ensuing  election. 
Sometimes  this  is  coupled  with  a declaration 
of  past  support  of  or  affiliation  with  the  party. 
In  some  cases  the  voter  must,  if  challenged, 
merely  answer  affirmatively  the  question  “Are 
you  a Republican?”  (or  a Democrat,  etc.,  as 
the  case  may  be ) . In  other  instances,  as  in 
Illinois,  it  is  further  provided  that  no  one 
may  take  part  in  a primary  if  he  has  partici- 
pated in  the  primary  of  another  party  within 
a period  of  two  years. 

A number  of  states  have  provided  for  a sys- 
tem of  party  registration  corresponding  some- 
what to  the  registration  in  connection  with  the 
general  election.  At  the  time  of  such  regis- 
tration the  voter  is  given  an  opportunity  of 
declaring  his  party  affiliation,  if  any,  and  a 
list  of  party  voters  is  then  made  up  from  these 
indications  of  preference.  This  list  then  serves 
as  the  registration  list  for  the  ensuing  primary 
election.  This  system  has  been  longest  in 
operation  and  most  completely  worked  out  in 
New  York  state. 

In  a few  instances  the  party  test  has  been 
abolished  altogether.  In  California  the  law 
of  1899  contained  a provision  which  enabled 
the  voter  to  cast  a ballot  for  either  party 
without  divulging  his  party  preference.  This 
clause  was  subsequently  declared  unconstitu- 
tional as  was  a similar  provision  in  the  Oregon 
law  of  1901.  In  the  Wisconsin  Law  of  1903 
absolute  secrecy  of  the  ballot  is  secured  and 
the  voter  may  vote  for  candidates  for  which- 
ever party  he  may  choose.  He  cannot  vote 
with  both  parties  at  the  same  time  however. 
This  is  called  the  “open  primary,”  as  distin- 
guished from  the  “closed  primary”  where  the 
party  test  is  applied. 

In  the  so-called  “non-partisan  primaries” 
which  are  found  in  connection  with  the  com- 
mission form  of  government  (see  Commission 
System)  and  which  are  really  not  primaries 
at  all,  there  is  no  test  of  party  allegiance  or 


PRIMARY,  DIRECT 


affiliation.  An  elector  may  vote  for  any  can- 
didate for  the  nomination  regardless  of  party 
ties.  It  is  clear  in  this  case,  however,  that  the 
design  of  the  law  is  to  eliminate  parties  al- 
together. 

Judicial  Interpretation  of  Primary  Laws. — 

On  the  whole,  the  courts  have  sustained  the 
constitutionality  of  primary  legislation  of  the 
last  forty  years,  with  few  exceptions.  In  Cal- 
ifornia and  in  Illinois  considerable  difficulty 
has  been  experienced  in  securing  the  passage 
of  a law  that  would  meet  the  approval  of  the 
courts,  but  elsewhere  the  judicial  veto  has 
been  very  sparingly  exercised.  In  no  field  of 
legislation  has  the  judiciary  shown  itself  more 
friendly  to  experiment  than  in  the  regulation 
of  political  organization.  There  has  been  un- 
usually little  of  the  “law’s  delay”  to  hinder 
the  advance  of  primary  legislation.  The  objec- 
tion of  special  legislation,  of  unfair  discrim- 
ination between  political  parties,  of  interfer- 
ence with  the  freedom  and  equality  of  elec- 
tions, and  of  unwarranted  invasion  of  the 
rights  of  political  parties  as  voluntary  asso- 
ciations, have  all  been  met  and  overruled.  The 
theory  of  the  party  as  a voluntary  association 
has  been  completely  overthrown  by  the  con- 
trary doctrine  that  the  party  is  in  reality 
a governmental  agency,  subject  to  legal  regu- 
lation and  control.  The  element  of  public  con- 
cern in  the  making  of  nominations  has  been 
strongly  emphasized,  and  the  right  of  the  legis- 
lature to  make  reasonable  regulations  to  pro- 
tect and  preserve  the  purity  and  honesty  of 
elections  has  been  vigorously  asserted.  The 
police  power  has  been  invoked  against  the  un- 
regulated party.  The  absence  of  any  constitu- 


tional prohibition  or  regulation  has  been  ad- 
vanced in  behalf  of  the  law-making  body  of 
the  state,  and  made  a part  of  the  general 
argument  in  behalf  of  the  laws  attacked.  And 
finally  the  privileged  position  of  the  party  up- 
on the  ballot,  under  the  official  ballot  system, 
has  been  used  as  a means  of  justifying  all  man- 
ner of  restraint  and  regulations  in  return.  As 
Justice  Holmes  said,  “The  legislature  has  a 
right  to  attach  reasonable  conditions  to  that 
advantage,  if  it  has  a right  to  grant  the  ad- 
vantage.” 

See  Ballot;  Ballot,  Australian;  Caucus, 
Legislative,  for  Nomination;  Convention, 
Political;  Nominating  Systems  in  the  Unit- 
ed States;  Party,  Place  and  Significance 
of;  Primary,  Direct. 

References:  C.  E.  Merriam,  Primary  Elec- 
tions (1908)  ; Library  of  Congress,  List  of  Ref- 
erences on  Primary  Elections  (1905);  F.  W. 
Dallinger,  Nominations  for  Elective  Office  in 
the  U.  S.  (1897)  ; E.  C.  Meyer,  Nominating  Sys- 
tems (1902)  ; P.  S.  Reinseh,  Readings  on  Am. 
State  Governments  (1911),  383-421;  N.  A. 
Schaffner,  “Primary  Elections”  in  Wisconsin 
Library  Commission,  Comparative  Legislation 
Bulletin,  No.  13  (1908)  ; New  York  State  Li- 
brary Commission,  Legislative  Bulletin,  Direct 
Nominations  (1906)  ; Conference  on  Practical 
Reform  of  Primaries  (1898)  ; Connecticut  Com- 
mission on  Laws  Relating  to  Direct  Primaries 
and  Corrupt  Practices,  Report,  1907 ; Michi- 
gan Pol.  Sci.  Assn.,  Publication,  VI,  No.  1 
(1905)  ; New  York  State  Commission  on  Elec- 
tion, Report,  1909 ; R.  H.  Fuller,  Government 
by  the  People  (1908). 

Charles  Edward  Merriam. 


PRIMARY,  DIRECT 


Definition. — A direct  primary  is  a party 
election  at  which  candidates  for  nomination 
are  chosen  directly  by  the  party  voters.  It  is 
generally  contrasted  with  the  delegate  or  con- 
vention system  under  which  the  party  voters 
choose  delegates,  who,  in  turn,  select  the  party 
candidates.  By  the  one  plan  the  voter  selects 
his  choice  for  nomination  directly,  by  the  other 
plan  indirectly. 

Extent  of  Use. — The  direct  method  of  select- 
ing candidates  was  used  as  early  as  the  sixties 
in  Pennsylvania  and  was  known  as  the  Craw- 
ford county  system.  It  was  employed  for  many 
years  in  various  counties  and  cities  under 
rules  adopted  by  one  party  or  the  other  in  the 
central,  southern  and  western  states,  but  did 
not  come  into  general  use  until  the  nineties. 
The  direct  primary  was  adopted  by  a legisla- 
tive act  instead  of  by  party  rule  in  Minnesota 
in  1899,  but  applied  only  to  one  county  (Hen- 
nepin). The  first  state  to  adopt  the  system 
by  legal  enactment  for  all  nominations  was 
Wisconsin  in  1903.  The  system  spread  over 


the  United  States  with  very  great  rapidity. 
Jan.  1,  1914,  complete  state-wide  systems  of 
direct  nominations  had  been  established  in 
32  states,  while  in  five  others  the  direct  pri- 
mary was  established  by  party  rule.  In  addi- 
tion, two  states,  North  Carolina  and  Mary- 
land, had  incomplete  systems,  leaving  only 
nine  states  without  any  system  of  state-wide 
direct  primary. 

Reasons  for  Adoption.— The  direct  primary 
was  the  outgrowth  of  widespread  and  deep- 
seated  dissatisfaction  with  the  convention  (see 
Convention,  Political)  system.  It  was  a re- 
sult of  a desire  to  substitute  for  this  dis- 
credited method  some  more  effective  way  of 
nominating  candidates.  Under  the  worst  con- 
ditions the  delegate  system  was  accompanied 
by  bribery,  trickery  and  political  trading  on  a 
large  scale.  Under  the  most  favorable  circum- 
stances the  delegate  system  was  so  indirect  in 
its  methods  that  the  results  obtained  were 
frequently  wholly  unrepresentative  of  the  will 
of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  party.  It  was 


PRIMARY,  DIRECT 


generally  felt  that  political  bosses  and  ma- 
chines were  fostered  under  a system  which  of- 
fered such  large  opportunities  for  their  char- 
acteristic methods  of  intrigue  and  corruption, 
and  that  the  introduction  of  more  simple  nomi- 
nation machinery  would  increase  the  chances 
for  a genuinely  representative  selection  by  the 
people  of  the  party.  Widespread  disclosures 
of  corruption  within  the  ranks  of  the  ruling 
political  oligarchies  intensified  popular  dis- 
trust of  them  and  aroused  the  desire  to  secure 
a really  representative  form  of  party  govern- 
ment. It  was  argued  that  the  direct  primary 
would  prevent  bribery,  trickery  and  corrupt 
deals  in  connection  with  the  delegates  and  con- 
vention, and  would  afford  the  party  electorate 
an  opportunity  to  express  its  will  more  di- 
rectly and  effectively.  It  was  asserted  that 
greater  interest  in  party  nominations  would 
be  shown  by  the  electorate  and  that  the  chance 
of  selecting  honest  and  capable  nominees  would 
be  materially  increased.  The  burden  of  the 
argument  was  that  the  control  of  the  rank 
and  file  of  the  parties  over  the  affairs  of  the 
party  would  be  restored,  or  at  least  an  oppor- 
tunity opened  for  party  democracy.  The  dis- 
repute into  which  party  management  and  ma- 
chines had  generally  fallen  added  force  to 
these  contentions  and  hastened  the  transforma- 
tion of  the  party  nomination  system  within 
tne  limits  of  a decade. 

Practical  Operation. — In  the  main  the  results 
obtained  under  the  direct  primaries  have  been 
satisfactory  to  the  advocates  of  the  change. 
The  vote  cast  at  the  primaries  has  been  larger 
than  under  the  delegate  system  as  a rule,  and 
the  greater  interest  shown  within  the  party 
has  tended  to  make  party  rulers  more  amen- 
able to  the  will  of  the  party.  Notable  illustra- 
tions of  the  effectiveness  with  which  the  direct 
primaries  may  be  employed  are  found  in  the 
nomination  of  Governor  Bass  in  New  Hamp- 
shire, and  of  Governor  Johnson  in  California 
in  1910,  and  in  numerous  other  points  since 
the  adoption  of  the  system.  The  apprehensions 
expressed  by  the  opponents  of  the  plan  when 
the  subject  was  under  discussion  have  not  been 
realized,  as  for  example,  the  avalanche  of 
candidates,  the  danger  of  party  disruption  or 
destruction,  geographical  discrimination  espe- 
cially on  the  part  of  urban  districts,  the  un- 
due influence  of  the  press,  prohibitive  cost  to 
tbe  candidates. 

Pre-Pfimary  States. — Some  tendencies,  un- 
foreseen either  by  the  friends  or  foes  of  the 
direct  primary  have  developed  in  the  practical 
operation  of  the  system.  The  tendency  to  hold 
preliminary  or  pre-primary  caucuses  is  strong. 
A powerful  combination  of  “bosses”  may  make 
up  a nomination  “slate”  or  list  of  candidates, 
which  is  not  easily  assailed  by  the  unorganized 
mass  of  the  party.  In  theory,  any  one  is  free 
to  oppose  it,  but  in  practice  an  attack  is  futile 
unless  an  overpowering  public  sentiment  is 
aroused.  It  is  contended,  however,  that  slates 


so  made  are  more  easily  broken  under  the 
direct  primaries  than  where  delegates  are  se- 
lected. It  is  said  that  the  voters  become  more 
independent  and  are  often  disposed  to  “smash, 
the  slate  in  whole  or  in  part.”  The  primary 
amounts  to  a referendum  on  the  caucus  nomi- 
nees, and  the  elimination  of  the  unfit  is  made 
easier  than  under  the  convention  method,  where 
in  many  instances  the  candidates  for  the  mi- 
nor, and  sometimes  for  the  major,  offices  are 
not  even  mentioned  in  advance  of  their  selec- 
tion by  the  convention.  In  any  event  the  party 
leaders  are  made  directly  responsible  to  the 
party  voters  for  the  principles  and  the  per- 
sonal qualities  of  tbe  candidates  presented.  If 
these  nominees  are  unworthy,  the  voters  have 
an  opportunity  to  reject  them  and  thus  to  dis- 
credit the  slate  makers.  The  caucus  always 
runs  the  risk  of  repudiation  by  the  party 
electorate. 

Party  Harmony. — The  prediction  that  the 
direct  primary  would  “destroy  the  party”  was 
obviously  untrue,  since  party  organizations 
continue  to  exist  in  flourishing  condition  under 
the  new  system.  The  “party  suicide,”  which 
some  political  leaders  anticipated  would  fol- 
low the  passage  of  direct  primary  laws,  is  yet 
to  occur.  Some  complaint  has  been  made  that 
party  dissensions  are  more  frequent  than  be- 
fore and  that  factional  jealousy  and  bitterness 
within  the  ranks  are  more  common  than  in  the 
days  when  the  masters  of  the  convention  “har- 
monized” the  ticket.  It  is  doubtful,  however, 
whether  there  really  are  more  factional  dis- 
turbances of  a personal  nature  under  the  new 
system  than  under  the  old.  Many  a party  feud 
dated  from  some  ugly  fight  regarding  the  seat- 
ing of  delegates  or  the  general  conduct  of  the 
convention.  The  delegate  that  was  thrown  out 
of  the  convention  or  the  candidate  that  was 
beaten  by  unfair  tactics  very  often  developed 
political  hatred  of  a most  bitter  and  enduring 
type. 

Influence  of  Press. — It  is  often  charged  that 
the  press  becomes  a more  important  factor 
under  the  direct  primary  system  than  under 
the  delegate  plan.  Since  the  candidate  can  not 
meet  personally  all  of  his  constituents  the 
attitude  taken  by  the  great  organs  of  publicity 
seriously  affects  the  prospects.  It  may  happen 
that  the  press  is  dominated  by  a factional  or 
other  special  interest,  and  hence  that  a par- 
ticular candidate  or  group  of  candidates  may 
not  receive  proper  publicity.  The  general  dic- 
tation of  nominations  by  a prejudiced  or  venal 
press,  would  of  course  be  a political  calamity 
of  serious  proportions.  But  the  danger  to  the 
cause  of  good  government  from  this  source  is 
not,  after  all,  as  great  as  it  is  frequently  pre- 
sumed. A newspaper  cannot  continuously  in- 
fluence large  masses  of  voters  unless  the  com- 
munity has  come  to  believe  that  this  journal 
is,  on  the  whole,  honest  in  its  intentions,  clear 
in  its  vision,  and  temperate  in  its  judgment 
of  men  and  measures.  Insincere  appeals  to' 


PRIMARY,  DIRECT 


popular  passion  and  cunningly  concealed  pleas 
for  special  interest  may  bring  temporary  suc- 
cess, but  in  the  long  run  newspapers  of  either 
type  will  not  possess  the  confidence  of  the 
electorate  and  will  not  enjoy  a wide  circle  of 
influence. 

Publicity  Pamphlets. — A novel  publicity 
feature  in  connection  with  primary  elections 
was  established  in  Oregon  and  has  since  been 
adopted  by  a number  of  other  states.  Accord- 
ing to  the  Oregon  plan  each  candidate  may 
have  printed  a cut  of  himself  and  a statement 
of  the  platform  or  principles  upon  which  he 
stands,  together  with  similar  statements  from 
other  candidates,  in  a publicity  pamphlet  for 
a nominal  sum.  This  pamphlet  is  printed  and 
distributed  by  the  state  to  each  voter  prior 
to  the  primary.  In  this  way  the  candidates 
are  given  widespread  publicity  at  a nominal 
expense  and  at  the  same  time  all  voters  are 
given  the  information  regarding  the  several 
candidates  in  compact  form. 

Character  of  Nominees. — That  the  demagogue 
will  on  the  whole,  fare  better  before  the  party 
voters  than  before  the  representatives  of  the 
voters,  is  an  assertion  that  can  not  be  estab- 
lished. The  “sober  second  thought”  of  the 
convention  can  scarcely  be  assumed  to  have 
unerringly  fixed  upon  the  ideal  candidate.  Al- 
so it  may  be  conceded  that  occasionally  a con- 
vention nomination  was  given  to  a man  who 
would  not  have  been  willing  to  run  the  gaunt- 
let both  at  the  primary  and  at  the  election. 
On  the  whole,  the  process  of  “deliberation” 
in  a convention  tended  to  produce  candidates 
who  were  not  sufficiently  in  agreement  with 
the  conscience,  sentiment  and  judgment  of  the 
masses  of  the  party.  One  of  the  purposes  of 
the  direct  primary  was  to  establish  closer  re- 
lations between  the  people  and  their  repre- 
sentatives. 

Platform  Making. — Many  interesting  prob- 
lems arise  in  the  practical  application  and 
development  of  the  primary  system.  For 
example:  How  shall  the  party  platform  be 
framed?  What  majority  shall  be  required 
for  nomination?  How  far  shall  direct  pri- 
mary be  extended  to  the  choice  of  national 
officials  on  the  one  hand,  or  of  city  offi- 
cials on  the  other  hand?  In  local  districts 
where  direct  primaries  were  first  tried  the 
question  of  the  platform  did  not  occasion 
serious  trouble.  In  larger  districts,  however, 
the  question  became  more  important,  for  there 
are  occasionally  serious  divisions  of  opinion  in 
state  elections,  and  for  such  emergencies  pro- 
vision must  be  made  in  the  law. 

In  Wisconsin  the  state  platform  is  made 
by  a candidate’s  convention.  This  body  is 
composed  of  all  the  party  candidates  for 
state  offices  and  for  the  legislature  and 
also  the  party’s  hold-over  members  of  the 
state  senate.  In  this  way  members  both  of 
the  legislative  and  executive  departments  may 
be  committed  to  a definite  policy  and  their 

53 


platform  formally  presented  to  the  voter.  In 
Missouri  the  law  provides  for  the  formulation 
of  the  platform  by  the  state  central  committee 
acting  with  the  party  nominees  for  state  office, 
for  Congress  and  for  the  legislature.  In  Ore- 
gon provision  is  made  for  declaration  at  the 
time  of  filing  the  petition  of  the  principles 
upon  which  the  candidate  stands  in  not  exceed- 
ing 100  words,  and  12  words  are  permitted 
to  appear  upon  the  ballot.  But  where  no  legal 
provision  is  made  for  such  a declaration  upon 
the  ballot,  the  candidate  may,  of  course,  make 
a statement  which  will  serve  as  the  basis  of 
his  campaign.  In  Texas  it  is  provided  that 
no  convention  shall  place  in  the  platform  or 
resolutions  of  the  party  it  represents  any  de- 
mand for  specific  legislation  unless  the  demand 
for  such  specific  legislation  shall  have  been 
submitted  to  a direct  vote  of  the  people,  and 
shall  have  been  endorsed  by  a majority  vote 
of  all  the  votes  cast  at  tne  primary  election 
of  the  party. 

The  shaping  of  the  platform  by  the  candidate 
himself  seems,  all  things  considered,  most  like- 
ly to  survive.  Where  there  is  a serious  differ- 
ence of  opinion,  the  platform  is  likely,  under 
any  system,  to  be  shaped  by  the  strongest 
faction  and  will  be  practically  the  program 
outlined  by  this  faction  in  its  primary  fight. 
Generally  issues  are  as  clearly  and  as  sin- 
cerely defined  during  the  primaries  in  this  way 
as  they  would  be  in  a convention  framed  plat- 
form. For  it  should  not  be  forgotten  that 
the  average  convention  platform  was  verbose 
and  perfunctory  and  often  served  no  real  pur- 
pose, since  the  elections  are  usually  conducted 
on  the  basis  of  national  issues.  Where  there  is 
no  living  issue  of  a local  character  the  lack 
of  a platform  is  not  serious. 

Majority  Necessary  for  Nomination. — Under 
a system  which  provides  for  the  selection  of 
candidates  by  direct  vote  the  percentage  of  a 
total  vote  necessary  for  a choice  is  subject 
to  considerable  importance.  The  common  plan 
is  to  require  merely  a plurality.  In  the  south- 
ern states,  however,  a clear  majority  is  often 
required,  and  if  no  candidate  receives  a neces- 
sary vote,  a second  primary  is  held  in  which 
the  two  leading  candidates  alone  participate. 
A modification  of  the  plurality  system  is  the 
minimum  percentage  plan  now  used  in  Mich- 
igan where  40  per  cent  of  the  total  vote  is 
required  for  governor  and  lieutenant-governor; 
in  Iowa  where  35  per  cent  is  necessary  for  a 
choice;  and  in  a few  other  states.  In  these 
cases  nomination  by  convention  is  the  alterna- 
tive. This  plan  is  open  to  the  objection  that 
the  leading  candidates  at  the  polls  may  be 
beaten  in  a convention  and  that  dummy  can- 
didates may  be  put  up  for  the  purpose  of  so 
dividing  the  vote  that  choice  must  be  made 
by  the  delegates.  The  lower  the  percentage, 
however,  the  less  is  the  likelihood  that  choice 
will  not  be  made  in  the  primaries  and  the  less 
the  opportunity  for  such  manoeuvres. 


PRIMARY,  DIRECT 


In  some  quarters  a system  of  preferential 
voting  has  been  advocated.  Under  this  plan 
the  voter  indicates  his  first  and  second  choice 
for  the  given  office,  and  in  case  no  candidate 
receives  a majority  of  first  choice  the  lowest 
candidate  is  dropped  and  his  second  choices 
are  then  distributed.  This  system  has  been 
adopted  in  Wisconsin,  Idaho,  North  Dakota, 
and  for  local  elections  in  other  states.  This 
preferential  system  is  designed  to  obviate  the 
necessity  for  a second  ballot  and  at  the  same 
time  to  prevent  the  choice  of  a candidate  by 
plurality  only.  It  is  also  intended  to  meet 
cases  where  a majority  as  to  policy  is  divided 
as  to  a candidate  and  is  likely  to  be  over- 
ridden by  a minority  united  both  on  a policy 
and  on  a candidate.  Thus  an  anti-machine 
group  may  muster  50,000  votes  as  against 
30,000  machine  votes,  but  if  the  reform  voters 
are  divided  between  two  candidates  the  solid 
vote  of  the  “organization”  will  present  the 
candidate  of  that  faction  in  nomination  (see 
Vote,  Preferential). 

In  the  South  the  second  primary  does  not 
occasion  any  particular  difficulty.  As  there 
is  really  but  one  party  and  as  the  regular 
election  is  generally  perfunctory  the  second 
primary  is  usually  well  attended.  In  fact 
this  second  primary  when  held  is  in  reality 
the  election.  In  other  sections  of  the  country 
where  the  biparty  system  is  in  vogue,  it  is 
not  likely  that  second  primaries  would  prove 
practicable.  The  number  of  elections  is  al- 
ready so  great  that  an  additional  primary 
would  probably  be  poorly  attended  and  the  re- 
sults unsatisfactory.  In  many  instances  the 
second  primary  would  involve  the  holding  of 
two  primaries  and  an  election  in  the  spring 
followed  by  two  primaries  and  an  election  in 
the  fall. 

Direct  Primaries  and  Federal  Officers. — The 

relation  of  the  direct  primary  to  national 
elections  has  recently  become  an  important 
question.  The  choice  of  members  of  the  House 
of  Representatives,  of  the  United  States  Sen- 
ate, of  presidential  electors,  and  of  delegates 
to  national  conventions  is  affected  by  the  pri- 
mary movement.  Selection  of  members  of  the 
lower  house  has  ordinarily  been  provided  for 
in  direct  primary  laws  without  much  discus- 
sion. In  a number  of  states  the  primary  law 
also  requires  the  nomination  of  Senators  in 
the  party  primary  and  provides  for  pledging 
the  candidates  for  the  state  legislature  to 
abide  by  the  result  of  the  vote.  In  other  states, 
notably  in  Oregon,  the  names  of  candidates  so 
chosen  are  placed  upon  the  ballot  and  the 
candidate  receiving  the  highest  popular  vote 
is  elected  by  the  legislature.  This  situation 
presents  some  difficulties  involved  in  binding 
the  legislator  to  vote  for  the  candidate  of  his 
party  who  receives  a plurality  in  the  general 
election.  These  difficulties  have  been  overcome, 
however,  by  pledging  the  candidates  for  the 
legislature  in  advance  to  support  that  candi- 


date for  senator  who  receives  the  highest  vote 
in  the  election.  In  Oregon,  in  1910,  Mr.  George 
E.  Chamberlain,  a Democrat,  received  the 
largest  vote  in  the  election  and  was  selected 
'as  United  States  Senator  by  a Republican  leg- 
islature. 

The  laws  of  a number  of  states  provide  for 
the  choice  of  delegates  to  national  nominating 
conventions  by  direct  vote.  In  this  movement 
Wisconsin  was  the  pioneer  and  it  seems  prob- 
able that  this  method  will  be  generally  adopt- 
ed. The  next  step  is  a provision  for  a vote  in 
each  party  on  the  question  of  the  party  nominee 
for  the  office  of  President,  with  the  understand- 
ing that  the  state  delegates  to  the  national 
convention  shall  be  bound  by  this  expression 
of  party  preference.  In  November,  1910,  Ore- 
gon adopted  a primary  law  extended  to  presi- 
dential nominations. 

By  Jan.  1,  1913,  the  presidential  preferen- 
tial primary  was  in  operation  in  11  states 
(see  Primary,  Presidential  Preference). 
Whether  the  direct  vote  system  will  be  carried 
so  far  as  to  provide  for  the  choice  of  a Presi- 
dent by  popular  vote  of  the  entire  party  is 
problematical.  It  seems  likely,  however,  that  in 
the  near  future  all  states  will  choose  their 
delegates  to  the  national  convention  by  direct 
primary  and  that  these  delegates  will  be  in- 
structed by  the  popular  vote  of  the  state  or 
district  upon  the  question  of  presidential  nom- 
ination. Under  such  circumstances  the  nomi- 
nation of  a minority  candidate,  even  though  he 
might  possess  a majority  of  the  delegates, 
would  be  exceedingly  unpopular  and  politically 
inexpedient.  Hence  the  tendency  would  in- 
evitably be  toward  accepting  the  popular  vote 
on  the  question  of  a party  nomination  for  Pres- 
ident as  decisive.  This  may  be  checked  by 
consideration  of  the  federal  character  of  the 
government  and  the  fact  that  electors  are 
chosen  by  states  rather  than  by  popular  vote 
of  the  country  at  large.  Although  little  dis- 
cussed at  the  present  time  it  is  clear  that  this 
question  must  very  soon  become  a subject  of 
great  importance  and  that  significant  develop- 
ments may  be  expected  in  this  field. 

In  the  case  of  municipal  elections  the  direct 
primary  has,  in  some  cases,  been  abandoned 
and  a system  either  of  non-partisan  primaries 
or  of  nomination  by  petition  only,  has  been 
adopted  (see  Primary).  This  movement  is 
due  to  a desire  to  eliminate  national  party 
politics  including  partisan  primaries,  from  lo- 
cal elections. 

Direct  Primary  and  Short  Ballot. — A study 
of  primary  election  legislation  and  practice 
shows  that  the  best  results  can  not  be  obtained 
until  other  and  important  political  changes 
have  been  made.  In  the  first  place  it  is  not 
likely  that  the  direct  nomination  system  will 
achieve  its  full  results  until  the  number  of 
elective  offices  is  materially  reduced.  If  thirty 
or  forty  positions  are  to  be  filled  at  one 
primary,  it  is  not  probable  that  an  intelligent 
54 


PRIMARY,  PRESIDENTIAL  PREFERENCE 


choice  will  be  made  from  the  great  number 
of  candidates  presented.  The  variety  of  quali- 
fications to  be  considered  in  connection  with 
the  several  offices,  the  number  of  candidates, 
the  framing  of  deals  and  slates,  make  careful 
selection  difficult.  A great  array  of  elective 
public  offices  means  control  by  the  few  rather 
than  by  the  many.  Amenability  to  popular 
control  will  be  better  secured  by  reducing  the 
number  of  offices  so  that  the  requirements  of 
the  candidates  for  each  such  position  and  the 
policies  to  which  they  are  committed  may  be 
carefully  scrutinized  and  compared. 

The  simplification  of  the  machinery  of  gov- 
ernment ( see  Ballot;  Ballot,  Shokt)  may 
most  easily  be  made  by  eliminating  adminis- 
trative offices  from  the  elective  list.  The  true 
principle  is  that  the  people  should  choose  all 
officers  connected  of  concerned  with  the  for- 
mulation of  public  policies.  They  need  not 
choose  men  engaged  in  the  carrying  out  of 
policies.  Policy  framing  or  legislation  is  a 
matter  upon  which  there  may  and  will  be 
differences  of  opinion;  and  men  entrusted  with 
the  work  of  drawing  up  such  plans  must  be 
elected  by  and  made  responsible  to  the  people. 
Laws  should  not  be  administered  in  a parti- 
san way  however,  but  with  efficiency  and  jus- 
tice. Administration  requires  technical  skill 
and  partisanship  is  destructive  of  its  best  de- 
velopment. If  any  administrative  officers  are 
to  be  selected  by  popular  vote  the  number 
should  be  confined  to  the  chief  executive  of- 
ficers, such  as  the  mayor  and  the  governor. 

Direct  Primary  and  the  Merit  System. — An- 
other requisite  to  the  complete  success  of  the 
direct  nominating  plan  is  the  further  exten- 
sion and  more  vigorous  enforcement  of  the 
merit  system  (see).  As  long  as  an  army  of 
officials  can  be  thrown  into  the  field  in  support 
of  a particular  slate,  it  will  be  difficult  for  a 
candidate  outside  the  organization  to  succeed. 
The  honest  and  intelligent  application  of  the 
merit  principle  to  administrative  appointments 
reduces  the  number  of  workers  under  the  con- 
trol of  a faction  or  organization  and  makes 
the  support  of  a slate  far  less  formidable. 
Hence  the  mobilization  of  an  army  for  effective 
use  in  a primary  campaign  becomes  far  more 
difficult  and  the  opportunities  for  success  on 
the  part  of  the  opposition  correspondingly 
greater.  If  the  group  in  power  centers  around 
some  principle  or  policy  it  will  continue  to  be 
powerful  and  effective  in  the  primaries  under 
the  merit  system.  But  if  the  chief  element 
of  cohesion  in  this  group  was  patronage  it  will 
be  far  less  vigorous  than  before. 

Direct  Primary  and  Party  Circle. — Another 
essential  change  is  the  return  to  the  original 
form  of  the  Australian  ballot.  The  party  em- 
blem, the  party  circle  (see)  and  the  party 
column  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  Australian 
ballot  (see  Ballot,  Australian)  and  were 
engrafted  on  the  system  by  American  legisla- 
tors in  the  haste  which  attended  the  original 


adoption  of  these  laws.  The  secrecy  of  the 
ballot  was  secured,  but  the  party  managers 
obtained  the  concession  of  arranging  party  can- 
didates in  columns  and  permitting  the  voters 
to  select  a list  of  candidates  by  marking  in 
the  party  circle.  This  mechanical  arrange- 
ment places  a premium  upon  undiseriminating 
voting  and  often  results  in  the  election  of  un- 
worthy and  unfit  candidates  by  sheer  advantage 
of  position  upon  the  ballot.  If  the  head  of 
the  ticket  is  elected  the  others  are  likely  to 
be  carried  along  with  the  leader  regardless  of 
their  own  merits.  The  knowledge  that  candi- 
dates, when  nominated,  will  be  placed  under 
the  protection  of  the  emblem  or  the  circle, 
makes  the  party,  especially  in  districts  where 
it  is  strongly  in  a majority,  less  careful  in  its 
choice  of  candidates  than  would  otherwise  be 
the  case.  Ballot  reform  is  therefore  a neces- 
sary accompaniment  of  primary  reform.  The 
ballot  in  the  regular  election  should  be  made 
up  in  the  same  form  as  the  ballot  in  the  pri- 
mary election  with  the  party  designation  after 
the  name  of  the  candidate. 

See  Ballot;  Ballot,  Australian;  Ballot, 
Short;  Candidate;  Caucus;  Convention,  Po- 
litical; Nominating  Systems;  Nomination 
of  President;  Primary. 

References:  E.  C.  Meyer,  'Nominating  Sys- 
tems (1902);  C.  E.  Merriam,  Primary  Elec- 
tions (1908)  ; Library  of  Congress,  List  of 
References  on  Primary  Elections  ( 1905 ) ; H. 
J.  Ford,  “Direct  Primary”  in  North  Am.  Rev., 
CXC  (1909),  1-14;  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Gov.  and 
Politics  (1909),  685;  M.  A.  Schaffner,  “Pri- 
mary Elections,  1908”  in  Wisconsin,  Compara- 
tive Legislative  Bulletin,  No.  13  (1908)  ; C.  L. 
Jones,  Readings  on  Parties  and  Elections 
(1912),  57-79;  R.  Metcalf,  Direct  Primary  Leg- 
islation (1907)  ; A.  H.  Tuttle,  “Limitations  on 
Power  of  Legislature  to  Control  Political  Par- 
ties and  their  Primaries”  in  Mich.  Laio  Rev., 
I (1906),  466-95;  J.  D.  Verplank,  “A  Problem 
of  Primaries”  in  Am.  Acad,  of  Pol.  and  Soc. 
Sci.,  Armais,  XXVIII  (1906),  No.  3,  84-94; 
E.  Freund,  The  Police  Power  (1904),  § 483; 
L.  E.  Aylesworth,  “Primary  Elections”  in  Am. 
Pol.  Sci.  Rev.,  II  (1908),  578-585;  F.  R.  Me- 
chem,  “Constitutional  Limitations  on  Primary 
Election  Legislation”  in  Mich.  Pol.  Sci.  Asso., 
Publications,  VI  (1905),  No.  1,  125-149. 

Charles  Edward  Merriam. 

PRIMARY,  PRESIDENTIAL  PREFER- 
ENCE. Owing  to  a widespread  belief  that  the 
system  of  choosing  delegates  to  national  polit- 
ical conventions  by  local  or  state  conventions 
does  not  ordinarily  reflect  the  real  preference 
of  the  majority  of  the  voters,  several  states 
have  passed  laws  under  which  the  delegates 
are  chosen  directly  by  the  party  voters  in 
official  primaries.  The  difficulties  of  the  sys- 
tem are  those  of  all  primary  nominations  and 
particularly  of  state-wide  nominations : ( 1 ) 

it  is  hard  effectively  to  prevent  members  of 


PRIMARY  SCHOOL — PRIME  MINISTER 


one  party  from  voting  on  some  terms  or  pre- 
tense in  the  primaries  of  the  other  and  thus 
swamping  the  legitimate  majority;  (2)  the 
ordinary  precaution  is  that  all  the  caucuses 
shall  take  place  at  the  same  time,  and  that  the 
voter  shall  declare  when  he  asks  for  a ballot 
with  what  party  he  means  to  vote;  (3)  this 
involves  in  some  statutes  legal  definitions  of 
what  constitutes  membership  in  a party,  such 
as  having  voted  with  it  at  the  last  election, 
or  having  voted  for  a majority  of  its  candi- 
dates, as  in  Pennsylvania.  Some  states  re- 
quire a pledge  that  the  voter  will  support  the 
man  who  gets  the  primary  nomination. 

Until  1912,  in  the  few  states  that  had  a 
primary  for  delegates  to  the  national  conven- 
tions, the  district  delegates  were  chosen  by 
districts,  the  delegates  at  large  by  a state 
convention.  In  that  year,  however,  various  at- 
tempts were  made  to  choose  the  delegates  at 
large  by  a general  popular  vote,  just  as  presi- 
dential electors  are  chosen.  In  California  a 
new  statute  was  passed  in  1912,  with  the  sup- 
port of  all  parties,  for  the  choice  of  the 
whole  delegation  to  the  national  conventions 
by  general  state  vote  of  the  members  of  each 
party.  Two  of  the  delegates  thus  chosen  to 
the  Republican  national  convention  were 
thrown  out,  on  the  ground  that  in  the  district 
in  which  they  lived,  there  were  more  votes 
for  another  candidate  than  for  the  men  living 
in  that  district  who  got  the  majority  of  the 
state  vote.  In  Massachusetts  there  was  provi- 
sion for  not  only  choosing  the  eight  delegates 
at  large  by  a general  state  vote;  but  also  for 
the  expression  of  a preference  for  the  candi- 
dates expected  to  come  before  the  national 
convention  for  nomination.  Through  a con- 
fused and  clumsy  primary  law  the  result  was 
the  choice  of  eight  Roosevelt  delegates,  and 
an  expression  of  preference  of  the  majority 
of  voters  for  the  nomination  of  Taft. 

The  California  votes  were  thrown  out  in 
the  Chicago  Republican  convention  because  the 
California  law  was  considered  void  as  against 
a conflicting  rule  of  the  Republican  national 
committee.  If  this  principle  is  correct  it  ap- 
plies to  all  attempts  by  the  states  to  throw 
legal  safeguards  around  their  choice  of  dele- 
gates to  national  conventions.  In  July,  1912, 
a case  was  brought  from  Kansas  before  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  which 
raised  the  point  of  the  authority  of  state  legis- 
latures to  regulate  the  choice  of  delegates 
whose  function  was  confined  to  national  af- 
fairs. The  case  was  giveii  a special  hearing 
by  Justices  Pitney  and  Vandevanter  who  main- 
tained that  the  state  legislatures  have  no  au- 
thority to  intervene. 

Growth. — In  November,  1910,  Oregon  adopted 
the  presidential  preference  plan;  in  1911,  four 
states  followed — North  Dakota,  Nebraska,  Wis- 
consin and  New  Jersey.  In  the  spring  of 
1912  it  was  established  in  half  a dozen  of 
the  other  states — California,  Illinois,  Mary- 

' 56 


land,  Massachusetts,  Michigan,  and  South  Da- 
kota— and  subsequently  at  the  November  elec- 
tion it  was  submitted  under  the  initiative  to 
the  voters  of  Montana.  In  Michigan,  on  ac- 
count of  the  constitutional  provision  enabling 
new  legislation  to  go  into  effect  only  after  90 
days,  the  preferential  primary  law  could  not 
control  the  selection  of  delegates  to  the  na- 
tional conventions  of  1912.  In  1913  the  presi- 
dential preference  primary  was  adopted  by 
Iowa,  Minnesota,  New  Hampshire,  Ohio,  and 
Pennsylvania.  In  the  New  York  State  Repub- 
lican Convention  of  1913  a resolution  was 
passed  favoring  choice  of  delegates  in  each 
state  in  the  manner  preferred  by  the  Repub- 
lican voters  of  that  state. 

See  Convention,  Political;  Credentials 
of  Delegates;  Nominating  Systems  in  the 
United  States;  Nomination  of  President; 
Primary;  Primary,  Direct. 

References:  A.  B.  Hart,  “The  Direct  Pri- 
mary vs.  the  Convention”  in  Acad,  of  Polit. 
Sci.,  N.  Y.,  Proceedings,  III  (Jan.,  1913),  210- 
219;  Republican  Campaign  Committee,  State- 
ment (1912).  A.  B.  H. 

PRIMARY  SCHOOL.  See  School,  Pri- 
mary. 

PRIME  MINISTER.  The  office  of  prime 
minister  is  a development  of  the  cabinet  sys- 
tem that  was  slow  in  obtaining  official  recog- 
nition. Statutory  recognition  it  has  not  yet 
received.  When  the  term  was  first  applied  to 
the  head  of  the  Cabinet  has  not  been  deter- 
mined. Constitutional  objection  was  taken  to 
Walpole’s  use  of  the  term,  and  North,  to  the 
end  of  his  career,  deprecated  its  use.  Glad- 
stone once  explained  as  follows : 

Departmental^,  the  Prime  Minister  is  no 
more  than  the  first  named  of  five  persons,  by 
whom  jointly  the  powers  of  the  local  treasurership 
are  taken  to  be  exercised.  He  is  not  their  master, 
or  otherwise  than  by  mere  priority  their  head, 
and  he  has  no  special  function  or  prerogative 
under  the  formal  constitution  of  the  office.  He 
has  no  official  rank  except  that  of  privy  councillor. 
Eight  members  of  the  Cabinet,  including  five  sec- 
rataries  of  state  and  several  other  members  of 
the  Government,  take  official  precedence  of  him. 
His  rights  and  claims  as  head  of  the  Administra- 
tion are  nowhere  recorded.  He  is  almost  if  not 
altogether  unknown  to  the  statute  law. 

The  first  traceable  use  of  the  term  prime 
minister  in  a state  document  was  in  the  pre- 
amble to  the  Treaty  of  Berlin  of  1878.  There- 
in Beaconsfield  was  described  as  “First  Lord 
of  Her  Majesty’s  Treasury,  and  Prime  Minis- 
ter.” The  next  official  use  of  it  was  in  the 
Court  Circular  for  March  3,  1894,  which  an- 
nounced that  the  Queen  had  offered  to  Rose- 
bery the  “post  of  Prime  Minister,”  vacated  by 
Gladstone.  Gully,  speaker  from  1895  to  1905, 
is  said  to  have  been  the  first  to  use  it  from 
the  chair;  and  it  was  not  until  May,  1904,  that 
it  appeared  on  the  “order  paper.”  It  was 
then  used  in  a motion  that  in  the  opinion  of 
the  House  it  was  unnecessary  to  discuss  a 


PRIMOGENITURE— PRINTING  AND  BINDING,  PUBLIC 


declaration  that  the  prime  minister — Balfour 
— had  made  with  regard  to  the  fiscal  question 
at  Sheffield.  As  Gladstone  stated  in  his  de- 
scription of  the  office,  its  holder  had  no  official 
rank,  and  the  precedence  of  the  premier  was 
not  determined  until  1905.  The  prime  minis- 
ter now  has  precedence  over  all  members  of 
his  administration  except  the  lord  chancellor. 

The  appointment  of  the  prime  minister  is 
determined  by  constitutional  usage.  The  king 
appoints  him,  but  the  prime  minister  is  prac- 
tically chosen  by  the  political  party  which  a 
general  election  has  placed  in  a majority  in 
the  House  of  Commons.  Since  the  Reform 
Act  of  1832  the  only  premiers  who  were  not 
of  the  House  of  Commons  were  Grey,  Derby, 
Russell,  Beaconsfield,  Salisbury  and  Rosebery. 
Melbourne  and  Palmerston  were  of  the  Irish 
peerage  and  sat  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
Lord  John  Russell  was  not  of  the  peerage 
until  he  was  created  an  earl  in  1861.  Premiers, 
when  of  the  Commons,  are  leaders  of  the  House 
— an  office  of  so  much  importance  as  to  make 
it  an  obvious  disadvantage,  especially  for  a 
Liberal  government,  when  the  prime  minister 
is  of  the  Lords.  The  prime  minister  usually 
holds  the  office  of  first  lord  of  the  treasury — 
an  office  whose  duties  are  only  nominal.  On 
the  advice  of  the  prime  minister  to  the  king 
the  members  of  the  Cabinet  and  ministry  are 
appointed.  He  has  a general  oversight  of  all 
the  state  departments  and  controls  the  ar- 
rangement of  business  in  Parliament.  He  is 
in  constant  communication  with  the  sovereign, 
and  when  Parliament  is  in  session  he  writes 
a letter  to  the  king  which  is  despatched  at  the 
close  of  each  sitting,  reporting  the  progress  of 
business.  In  all  the  oversea  dominions  the 
office  of  premier  has  developed  on  the  same 
lines  as  at  Westminster. 

See  Cabinet  Government;  Executive  Sys- 
tem of  Great  Britain;  House  of  Commons; 
Party  Government  in  Great  Britain. 

References:  W.  R.  Anson,  Law  and  Custom 
of  the  Constitution  (3d  ed.,  1907),  II;  S.  J.  M. 
Low,  The  Governance  of  England  (1904),  153- 
162,  263;  J.  Morley,  Life  of  Gladstone  (1903), 
I,  297-300,  II,  416-424. 

Edward  Porritt. 

PRIMOGENITURE.  The  right  which  the 
first-born  or  eldest  son,  had  under  the  Nor- 
man and  English  law,  to  succeed  to  the  land 
of  his  father  in  preference  to  all  the  other 
children.  It  is  now  greatly  modified  in  Eng- 
land and  abolished  in  the  United  States.  Ref- 
erence: Sir  H.  Maine,  Early  Law  and  Cus- 
toms (1886),  260.  H.  M.  B. 

PRINCE  EDWARD  ISLAND.  Prince  Ed- 
ward Island  is  the  smallest  among  the  nine 
provinces  of  Canada.  It  is  situated  in  the 
Gulf  of  the  St.  Lawrence,  off  the  northeastern 
coast  of  Nova  -Scotia.  It  is  about  one  hundred 
and  forty  miles  long  and  at  its  narrowest 


point  about  thirty-four  miles  in  breadth,  hav- 
ing a total  area  of  slightly  more  than  two 
thousand  square  miles.  Its  population  in 
1911  was  93,722.  The  island  was  discovered 
by  the  Cabots  and  named  St.  John,  but  not 
being  taken  possession  of  by  England,  fell 
within  the  territories  claimed  by  France  a 
short  time  later.  After  the  Treaty  of  Utrecht 
the  island  received  a considerable  influx  of 
French  from  the  ceded  territory  of  Acadia, 
but  was  itself  taken  by  the  English  in  1745 
only  to  be  restored  to  France  by  treaty  in 
1748.  In  1763  the  Treaty  of  Paris  finally 
awarded  the  island  to  England,  and,  together 
with  Cape  Breton,  it  was  placed  under  the 
government  of  Nova  Scotia.  Seven  years  la- 
ter it  was  given  a separate  administration. 
The  history  of  Prince  Edward  Island  during 
the  next  three  quarters  of  a century  was 
marked  by  serious  troubles  over  questions  of 
land  tenure  and  by  political  bickerings  over 
questions  of  executive  responsibility  similar 
to  those  which  convulsed  the  other  Canadian 
provinces.  These  troubles  were  not  eliminated 
until  1851,  when  a complete  system  of  respon- 
sible government  was  finally  established. 

Prince  Edward  Island  was  represented  at 
the  confederation  conferences  of  1863-64,  but 
public  feeling  among  the  islanders  was  so 
strongly  opposed  to  the  scheme  of  union  final- 
ly adopted  that  the  provincial  authorities  de- 
clined to  enter  the  federation  of  1867.  Six 
years  later,  however,  its  admission  as  a prov- 
ince of  the  Dominion  was  brought  about  by 
special  act.  The  province  is  represented  in  the 
Dominion  Parliament  by  four  senators  and 
four  members  of  the  house  of  commons.  Its 
provincial  government  consists  of  a lieutenant- 
governor  appointed  for  a four-year  term  by 
the  governor-general  of  the  Dominion,  a re- 
sponsible ministry  headed  by  a provincial 
prime  minister,  and  an  elective  legislature  of 
thirty  members.  These  members  of  the  legis- 
lature are  chosen  ten  from  each  of  the  three 
counties  of  the  island.  A general  election 
must  take  place  at  least  once  in  four  years, 
but  the  legislative  assembly  may  be  dissolved 
at  any  earlier  time  by  the  lieutenant-governor 
on  the  advice  of  his  ministers.  The  provincial 
capital  is  Charlottetown.  See  Canada  ; Ca- 
nadian Provinces.  References:  D.  Campbell, 
Hist,  of  Prince  Edward  Island  (1875);  W. 
Kingsford,  Hist,  of  Canada  (1887-1898),  pas- 
sim; Canadian  Annual  Review  of  Public  Af- 
fairs. W.  B.  M. 

PRINTING  AND  BINDING,  PUBLIC.  Pub- 
lic printing  and  binding  is  usually  let  by  con- 
tract, with  a maximum  price  fixed  by  the  legis- 
lative body.  The  contracts  must  be  approved 
usually  by  the  Governor  or  the  treasurer.  In 
some  states,  there  is  a state  printer,  appointed 
by  the  governor,  or,  as  in  the  case  of  Louisi- 
ana, appointed  by  joint  vote  of  both  houses. 
In  Ohio,  the  public  printing  and  binding  is 


PRINTING  AND  STATIONERY,  DIVISION  OP— PRISON  DISCIPLINE 


to  be  done,  if  possible,  by  the  state,  by  the 
use  of  prison  labor.  The  Congressional  Print- 
ing Office  is  the  largest  and  most  extravagant 
publishing  establishment  in  the  world.  See 
Expenditures,  Federal;  Expenditures,  State 
and  Local;  Purchase  of  Public  Supplies. 
References:  Constitutions  of  the  states. 

T.  N.  H. 

PRINTING  AND  STATIONERY,  DIVISION 

OF.  The  Division  of  Printing  and  Stationery 
is  one  of  the  divisions  of  the  United  States 
Treasury  Department  (see).  This  division 
keeps  the  records  of  incoming  and  outgoing 
mail,  and  preserves  the  files.  A.  N.  H. 

PRINTING  OFFICE,  GOVERNMENT.  See 

Government  Printing  Office. 

PRISON  DISCIPLINE.  Purposes.— Prison 

discipline  has  two  objects:  (1)  the  mainte- 
nance of  the  institution,  which  involves  the 
safe  keeping  of  prisoners,  including  the  pre- 
vention of  escapes,  mutiny,  disorder,  immoral- 
ity, etc.,  the  maintenance  of  good  behavior, 
self-control,  self-respect,  faithful  performance 
of  tasks,  etc.,  the  protection  of  the  officers  of 
the  prison,  the  preservation  of  the  health  of 
the  prisoners  and  officers,  including  proper 
ventilation,  heating,  plumbing,  cleanliness  and 
sanitation;  (2)  the  reformation  of  the  pris- 
oner. It  is  quite  possible  to  have  good  order, 
good  sanitation,  and  outward  compliance  to 
rules,  without  any  material  effect  upon  the 
character  of  the  inmates.  It  is  well  under- 
stood that  the  worst  prisoner  sometimes  makes 
the  best  convict;  one  who  has  been  in  prison 
repeatedly  knows  the  ways  of  the  prison  and 
has  learned  by  experience  that  it  is  foolish 
to  resist  the  fixed  order  of  things.  Such  a 
prisoner  will  keep  all  of  the  rules,  conduct 
himself  with  propriety,  save  his  good  time, 
and  return  to  criminal  courses  immediately 
upon  his  discharge. 

Punishment. — Till  a few  decades  ago  sever- 
ity was  considered  an  essential  part  of  prison 
discipline.  Prisoners  were  sentenced  to  “con- 
finement at  hard  labor,”  with  an  implication 
that  this  involved  hardship  and  suffering. 
The  prison  was  a place  of  punishment  and 
rigor  which  was  enforced  by  coarse  fare, 
striped  clothing,  shaven  heads,  rigorous  si- 
lence, harsh  commands  and  sometimes  torture. 
Prisoners  who  violated  the  rules  were  promptly 
subjected  to  such  punishments  as  a bread  and 
water  diet,  cat  o’  nine  tails,  paddle,  cold  shower 
bath,  fire  hose,  dark  unventilated  dungeon, 
stringing  up  by  the  thumbs.  Punishments 
unknown  to  the  law  or  forbidden  by  law  were 
in  frequent  use.  Thus  in  Sing  Sing  prison, 
New  York,  as  late  as  1885,  an  instrument  of 
torture  called  a “slide”  was  in  regular  use. 
The  officers  used  it  because  no  man  could  en- 
dure the  strain  of  it  for  more  than  five  min- 
utes without  fainting,  and  therefore  defended 


it  as  a plan  which,  while  it  inflicted  no  physi- 
cal injury  upon  the  prisoner,  invariably  forced 
submission.  In  some  prisons  whipping  and 
other  tortures  are  still  in  regular  use.  In 
1912  a prisoner  in  the  Michigan  penitentiary 
at  Jackson  died  under  a torturing  punishment. 

In  most  of  the  prisons  of  the  United  States 
these  severe  punishments  have  been  discarded. 
In  some  prisons,  convicts  who  are  reported 
for  misconduct  are  brought  before  the  deputy 
warden  who  gives  them  a patient  hearing.  If 
the  prisoner  has  acted  hastily  and  shows  peni- 
tence he  may  be  forgiven ; otherwise  he  may 
be  confined  in  a well  lighted  cell  where  he  is 
compelled  to  stand  at  ease  during  working 
hours,  where  he  sleeps  at  night  upon  a wooden 
plank  and  where  he  remains  until  he  shows  a 
cheerful  disposition  to  render  reasonable  com- 
pliance with  the  rules.  The  prisoner  may 
lose  good  conduct  time  or  he  may  lose  marks 
which  will  retard  his  advancement  to  a higher 
grade,  or  he  may  be  deprived  of  the  privilege 
of  writing  letters  or  receiving  visits. 

Garb. — In  many  prisons  stripes  are  no  longer 
worn  but  the  prisoners  are  divided  into  three 
grades.  On  commitment  the  prisoner  is  placed 
in  the  second  grade  and  may  rise  or  fall  ac- 
cording to  his  record.  Misconduct  may  place 
him  in  the  third  grade  where  he  will  wear 
prison  stripes  and  will  be  conspicuous  as  a 
delinquent.  Good  conduct  will  advance  him 
to  the  first  grade  where  he  wears  a neat  gray 
uniform  and  is  treated  with  an  increasing 
degree  of  confidence  and  good  will.  Continu- 
ance for  a suitable  time  in  the  first  grade  is 
prerequisite  to  the  privilege  of  parole  which 
now  exists  in  many  prisons. 

Recreation. — The  effort  is  made  to  enlist  the 
good  will  of  the  prisoner  and  secure  his  co- 
operation in  his  own  improvement.  Provision 
is  made  for  the  wholesome  employment  of 
prisoners  out  of  working  hours  by  books,  stud- 
ies, literary  societies,  etc.  The  best  penolo- 
gists now  recognize  that  a man  cannot  be  re- 
formed by  degrading  him  or  according  him 
such  treatment  that  he  will  set  himself  against 
every  reformatory  influence.  It  has  been  found 
that  wholesome  recreation,  entertainments,  ath- 
letic contests,  baseball  games,  gymnastic  exer- 
cises and  social  intercourse  with  his  kind  may 
be  made  to  serve  the  proper  ends  of  imprison- 
ment. 

There  has  long  been  a deep  seated  feeling 
in  the  community  that  the  prisoner  should  be 
made  to  suffer  in  some  degree,  first  as  a prop- 
er retribution  for  his  ill  desert,  and  second, 
as  a deterrent  from  future  misdoing,  but  it 
is  now  generally  recognized  that  the  effort  to 
assign  to  the  prisoner  a penalty  proportionate 
to  his  guilt  is  futile.  It  is  impossible  for  the 
state  to  establish  such  standards  as  will  enable 
one  human  being  justly  to  measure  the  desert 
of  another.  It  may  be  admitted  that  punish- 
ment has  a certain  deterrent  effect ; and  hence 
many  people  have  felt  that  the  introduction  of 
58 


PRISON  INDUSTRIES— PRISON  INSPECTORS 


amusements,  recreation,  schools,  literary  soci- 
eties, etc.,  tends  unduly  to  mitigate  the  experi- 
ence of  the  prisoners  and  to  do  away  with  the 
wholesome  deterrent  effect.  Many  who  are 
familiar  with  prison  life  and  prison  conditions 
do  not  share  this  anxiety. 

Prison  Officers. — The  chief  burden  of  the 
prison  falls  upon  the  deputy  warden  or  the 
disciplinary  officer  who  has  immediate  charge 
of  the  prisoners.  That  officer  must  be  a man 
of  extraordinary  justice,  wisdom,  patience  and 
discrimination.  If  he  is  a man  of  harsh  or 
unjust  disposition  he  will  exercise  a destruc- 
tive influence  upon  the  characters  of  his  men. 
The  guards  must  be  men  chosen  with  special 
reference  to  their  intelligence,  conscience,  and 
fair  mindedness.  There  is  a growing  demand 
for  training  schools  for  prison  officers  and  it 
is  probable  that  such  schools  will  be  organized 
and  conducted  by  officers  who  have  shown  spe- 
cial skill  in  dealing  with  prisoners. 

See  County  Jails;  Penitentiaries. 

References:  F.  H.  Wines,  Punishment  and 
Reformation  (1010);  G.  W.  Cable,  “Convict 
Lease  System  of  the  Southern  States”  in  Nat. 
Conf.  of  Charities  and  Correction,  Proceedings, 
1S83,  265 ; C.  R.  Henderson,  Penal  and  Re- 
formatory Institutions  (1010);  H.  M.  Boies, 
Science  of  Penology  ( 1001 ) ; Am.  Prison  Assoc, 
(formerly  Nat.  Prison  Assoc.),  Reports  (1870 
to  date)  ; Z.  R.  Brockway,  Fifty  Years  of 
Prison  Service  (1012). 

Hastings  H.  Hart. 

PRISON  INDUSTRIES.  For  misdemeanant 
prisons,  workhouses,  houses  of  correction,  etc., 
it  has  been  necessary  to  introduce  .industries 
of  a simple  character  which  require  little  train- 
ing, for  the  reason  that  the  prisoners  are  usu- 
ally low  grade  men  of  intemperate  habit  and 
their  stay  very  brief,  their  sentences  ranging 
from  five  days  to  six  months,  with'  a small 
number  of  prisoners  who  serve  a year  or  more. 
Such  industries  as  brush-making,  broom-mak- 
ing and  rug-making  have  been  practiced.  Re- 
cently there  has  been  a movement  in  favor  of 
placing  misdemeanant  prisoners  on  farms,  and 
employing  prisoners  largely  upon  reclamation 
of  waste  land,  farming,  truck  gardening,  horti- 
culture, etc.  It  is  recognized  that  such  indus- 
tries as  brush-making  have  no  reformatory  in- 
fluence and  do  not  teach  practical  or  useful 
labor. 

In  state  prisons  and  penitentiaries,  a wider 
range  of  industries  has  been  practicable  because 
the  prisoners  are  of  higher  grade  and  serve  for 
longer  terms.  The  leading  industries  in  state 
penitentiaries  have  been  such  work  as  stone 
quarrying,  stone  cutting,  mining,  shoe  making, 
shirt  making,  foundries,  including  stove  mak- 
ing, hollow  ware,  enameled  ware,  etc.,  manu- 
facture of  agricultural  implements  and  furni- 
ture, rug  making,  broom  making,  weaving, 
manufacture  'of  binder  twine  and  seamless 
sacks,  agriculture  and  horticulture. 

102  59 


With  the  introduction  of  the  “state  use  sys- 
tem,” there  is  being  introduced  the  manufac- 
ture of  office  furniture,  school  furniture,  print- 
ing, book  binding,  tin  ware,  clothing,  wagons, 
hand  carts,  etc. 

In  some  states,  the  law  requires  that  no 
power  machinery  shall  be  employed.  In  other 
states  the  number  of  men  that  can  be  em- 
ployed upon  a given  line  of  industry  is  limited. 
There  is  a general  movement  toward  increas- 
ing the  employment  of  prisoners  upon  farms 
and  farm  work,  which  has  been  prosecuted 
profitably  in  several  southern  states.  In  a 
number  of  states  prisoners  are  employed  prin- 
cipally on  the  making  of  public  roads.  Coun- 
ty prisoners  are  so  used  quite  extensively  in 
the  South.  Objection  has  been  raised  to  the 
employment  of  prisoners  on  the  public  roads 
in  that  it  exposes  them  to  the  public  view,  fa- 
cilitates escapes,  and  makes  it  difficult  to  pro- 
vide housing  facilities  and  to  provide  schools 
and  other  reformatory  agencies. 

A great  effort  has  been  made  to  find  prison 
industries  which  would  not  compete  with  free 
labor.  This  search  is  futile,  for  the  reason 
that  if  the  prisoner  performs  any  productive 
labor,  he  must  compete  with  free  labor.  If 
he  sweeps  his  own  cell,  if  he  cooks  his  own 
meals  or  sets  his  own  table,  he  does  work  for 
which  free  laborers  might  have  been  employed. 
All  agree  that  convicts  should  work  at  some 
productive  labor.  That  being  the  case,  it  is 
necessary  to  accept  the  fact  of  competition, 
but  to  endeavor  so  to  distribute  convict  labor 
as  to  avoid  unfair  competition  and  distribute 
the  burden  as  widely  and  equitably  as  possible 
between  the  different  industries. 

County  jail  prisoners  are  almost  invariably 
kept  in  idleness,  partly  because  their  number 
is  too  small  to  permit  profitable  employment; 
partly  because  the  involuntary  employment  of 
unconvicted  prisoners  is  unconstitutional ; but 
it  has  been  found  by  experience  in  Pennsyl- 
vania and  New  Hampshire  that  most  prisoners 
prefer  to  work  if  suitable  employment  is  pro- 
vided. 

See  Convict  Labor;  County  Jails;  Crim- 
inal, Reformation  of;  Penitentiaries;  Pris- 
on Discipline;  Prison  Labor. 

References:  Am.  Prison  Assoc,  (formerly 
Nat.  Prison  Assoc.),  Reports  (1870  to  date); 
Z.  R.  Brockway,  Fifty  Years  of  Prison  Service 
(1912);  F.  H.  Wines,  Punishment  and  Ref- 
ormation (1910)  ; New  York  State  Legisla- 
ture, An  Act  in  Relation  to  a Farm  and  In- 
dustrial Colony  for  Tramps  and  Vagrants 
(1911),  ch.  812;  C.  R.  Henderson,  Penal  and 
Reformatory  Institutions  (1910);  Massachu- 
setts State  Farm,  Annual  Reports  (1889  to 
date).  Hastings  H.  Hart. 

PRISON  INSPECTORS.  The  term  prison 
inspector  is  used  both  with  reference  to  the 
hoards  of  trustees  of  certain  prisons,  and  also 
with  reference  to  officers  who  visit  and  super- 


PRISON  LABOR 


vise  prisons  without  administrative  authority. 
The  latter  is  the  correct  use  of  the  term. 

In  Rhode  Island,  Ohio,  Illinois  and  other 
states  having  state  hoards  of  control  for  char- 
itable and  public  institutions,  both  the  duties 
of  management  and  inspection  fall  to  one 
board.  In  Massachusetts  and  New  York  the 
public  prisons  are  under  the  management  of 
the  state  prison  commission  and  are  also  sub- 
ject to  inspection  by  outside  officers.  In  the 
states  of  Indiana,  Colorado,  California,  etc., 
the  prisons  are  managed  by  special  boards  of 
trustees  but  are  subject  to  inspection  by  the 
state  board  of  charities. 

It  is  generally  agreed  that  all  city,  county 
and  state  prisons  should  be  subject  to  the 
inspection  and  supervision  of  public  officers, 
entirely  separate  from  the  officials  who  admin- 
ister the  prisons.  This  is  necessary  because 
prisons  are  closed  institutions;  and  prisoners 
are  of  necessity  subjected  to  a degree  of  control 
which  gives  opportunity  for  abuses,  and  calls 
for  outside  visitation  both  for  the  protection 
of  the  inmates  against  possible  abuse  and  for 
the  improvement  of  the  administration.  The 
difficulty  of  adequate  supervision  is  increased 
by  the  tendency  of  officers  to  become  harsh  in 
the  effort  to  maintain  discipline,  and  the  ten- 
dency of  prisoners  to  complain  of  things  which 
are  unavoidable  incidents  to  administration. 

See  County  Jails;  Criminal,  Reformation 
of;  Penitentiaries;  Prison  Discipline. 

References:  F.  H.  Wines,  Punishment  and 
Reformation  (1910)  ; C.  R.  Henderson,  Penal 
and  Reformatory  Institutions  (1910). 

H.  H.  H. 

PRISON  LABOR.  The  prison  labor  question 
has  been  complicated  and  obscured  by  the 
enactment  of  legislation  which  deals  with  this 
question  on  irrational  principles.  Every  one 
agrees  that  the  prisoner  ought  to  work.  There 
is  practically  universal  agreement  that  his 
labor  should  be  productive  and  that  he  should, 
as  far  as  practicable,  earn  his  own  keep.  Most 
students  of  penology  agree  further  that  prison 
labor  should  be  so  organized  as  to  promote 
the  reformation  of  the  prisoner,  and  to  fit  him 
for  self-support  after  his  discharge.  But  most 
of  these  rational  principles  have  been  disre- 
garded in  ill-considered  or  inconsiderate  legis- 
lation. 

Lease  System.— In  the  past,  prisoners  were 
worked  upon  the  lease  system,  under  which 
their  labor  was  sold  to  men  who  held  them 
practically  in  slavery;  or  have  been  employed 
under  the  contract  system  whereby  the  em- 
ployer obtained  the  labor  for  a nominal  sum, 
usually  forty  cents  to  seventy-five  cents  per 
day;  or  they  were  employed  under  the  piece 
price  system,  under  which  the  contractor  paid 
by  the  piece  for  the  work  actually  performed. 
It  is  generally  believed  among  workingmen 
that  under  the  contract  system  and  the  piece 
price  system  the  contractor  enjoys  unjust  ad- 


vantages, and  free  laborers  are  exposed  to 
unfair  and  injurious  competition.  As  a result 
of  this  belief,  irrational  convict  labor  laws 
have  been  enacted.  In  some  states  the  number 
of  convicts  to  be  employed  on  productive  labor 
is  limited;  in  others  all  use  of  power  ma- 
chinery is  prohibited;  and  in  many  such  re- 
strictions have  been  established  as  to  make  it 
impossible  to  employ  convicts  remuneratively. 
As  a result  few  prisoners,  though  provided  with 
a free  plant,  earn  as  much  as  fifty  per  cent  of 
the  cost  of  maintenance;  and  the  public  is 
charged  not  only  with  the  burden  of  support- 
ing idle  prisoners  but  also,  in  many  cases, 
with  the  burden  of  supporting  their  dependent 
families  at  home. 

Public  Account  System. — The  lease  system, 
the  contract  system,  and  the  piece  price  sys- 
tem have  generally  been  superseded  by  the 
“public  account”  system  and  the  “state  use” 
system  ( see  Prison  Labor,  Public  Account 
System  of.) 

Public  Use  System. — Under  the  public  use 
system  the  products  of  the  prison  labor  are 
disposed  of  to  the  state,  the  counties,  and  the 
municipalities  of  the  community.  They  in- 
clude the  manufacture  of  clothing,  furniture, 
wagons,  farming  utensils,  school  desks,  etc., 
for  use  in  public  institutions.  Usually  it  is 
made  mandatory  upon  the  administrators  of 
such  institutions  to  purchase  from  the  prison 
such  articles  as  the  prison  can  supply.  The 
state  use  system  is  followed  extensively  in  New 
York.  It  is  being  introduced  in  other  states 
and  is  generally  accepted  as  a reasonable  so- 
lution of  the  prison  labor  problem.  It  is  prob- 
ably the  coming  system  of  prison  labor  in  the 
United  States,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  it 
involves  a palpable  fallacy.  Theoretically,  it 
does  away  with  the  competition  of  prison  la- 
bor with  free  labor;  but  it  undoubtedly  takes 
away  desirable  customers  of  the  manufacturer 
and  the  wholesaler,  customers  who  buy  in 
large  quantities,  the  year  round,  are  not  un- 
reasonably exacting  as  to  quality,  and  always 
sure  pay. 

Competition. — The  fact  is  that  it  is  impos- 
sible to  organize  any  system  of  productive 
labor  in  prisons  which  shall  be  entirely  free 
from  competition.  The  convict  is  a prisoner 
because  he  has  not  competed  with  free  labor. 
To  do  him  any  good,  he  must  be  qualified  to 
compete  with  free  labor,  and  put  back  into 
the  community  as  a competitor.  If  the  con- 
vict performs  any  productive  labor  he  neces- 
sarily competes  with  free  labor.  The  remedy 
for  the  evils  of  convict  labor  are : ( 1 ) con- 

victs shall  be  employed  as  nearly  as  possible 
like  free  laborers;  (2)  their  product  shall  be 
sold  on  the  market  at  its  actual  value;  (3) 
the  labor  shall  be  distributed  as  equitably  as 
possible  among  different  trades,  and  shall  not 
be  concentrated  upon  some  one  form  of  labor 
like  shoe-making  or  barrel-making  or  stove- 
making. The  workingman  must  choose 


PRISON  LABOR,  PUBLIC  ACCOUNT  SYSTEM  OF— PRISON  LABORATORIES 


whether  his  labor  shall  support  the  convicts 
in  idleness,  or  whether  the  convicts  shall  sup- 
port themselves  by  their  own  labor  under  as 
fair  an  adjustment  as  possible,  and  the  free 
laborers  shall  endure  a reasonable  amount  of 
fair  competition. 

See  Convict  Labor  ; Criminal,  Reformation 
of;  Penitentiaries;  Prison  Discipline; 
Prison  Industries;  Prisons  for  Women. 

References:  New  York  State  Commission  of 
Prisons,  Annual  Reports  (1896  to  date)  ; New 
York  State  Legislature,  Act  in  Relation  to  a 
Farm  and  Industrial  Colony  for  Tramps  and 
Vagrants  (1911),  ch.  812;  C.  R.  Henderson, 
Penal  and  Reformatory  Institutions  (1910), 
Outdoor  Labor  for  Convicts  (1907);  F.  H. 
Wines,  Punishment  and  Reformation  (1910)  ; 
Massachusetts  State  Farm,  Annual  Reports, 
No.  1 (1854),  (1889  to  date);  Am.  Prison 
Assoc,  (formerly  Nat.  Prison  Assoc.),  Reports 
(1870  to  date)  ; E.  Stagg  Whitin,  Penal  Servi- 
tude (1912)  ; Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  465,  1911, 
374,  and  year  by  year. 

Hastings  H.  Hart. 

PRISON  LABOR,  PUBLIC  ACCOUNT  SYS- 
TEM OF.  Under  the  public  account  system  of 
prison  labor  the  state  goes  into  business  on 
its  own  account,  providing  the  necessary  cap- 
ital, shops,  machinery,  material  and  instruc- 
tors. The  goods  are  sold  in  the  public  markets 
and  the  profits,  if  any,  go  into  the  state 
treasury.  In  order  to  carry  on  the  state  ac- 
count system  successfully  it  is  necessary  either 
to  provide  a large  capital  amounting  to  from 
$1500  to  $3000  per  man,  or  else  to  engage  in 
some  very  simple  manufacture  which  requires 
little  machinery  and  a moderate  capital,  such 
as  the  manufacture  of  brooms,  brushes,  door 
mats,  etc.  On  whatever  scale  the  state  ac- 
count system  may  be  operated  it  is  necessary 
to  have  a prison  warden  who  is  a competent 
and  thorough  going  business  man.  This  is 
especially  true  when  the  manufacture  is  un- 
dertaken on  a large  scale,  requiring  expensive 
machinery,  large  stocks  of  raw  material  and 
an  elaborate  system  of  marketing.  Examples 
of  success  in  the  state  account  system  are 
found  in  the  Minnesota  state  prison  which 
manufactures  binder  twine  to  be  sold  to  the 
farmers  of  the  state  at  prices  below  those 
which  are  obtained  by  the  trust,  and  the  De- 
troit house  of  correction  which  has  for  many 
years  successfully  maintained  a large  furni- 
ture manufactury.  Any  manufacturing  busi- 
ness, carried  on  by  the  state  on  a large  scale, 
involves  a considerable  hazard  and  the  dis- 
appointments which  have  been  experienced  in 
this  method  in  the  past  have  discouraged  the 
establishment  of  new  public  account  ventures. 
See  Convict  Labor  ; Prison  Labor.  Refer- 
ences: C.  R.  Henderson,  Penal  and  Reforma- 
tory Institutions  (1910)  ; Prison  Assoc,  (for- 
merly Nat.  Prison  Assoc.),  Reports  (1870  to 
date).  H.  H.  H. 

61 


PRISON  LABORATORIES.  Prisons  afford 
an  extraordinary  opportunity  for  study  rela- 
tive to  the  causes  and  prevention  of  crime. 
American  physicians  and  penologists  are  not 
generally  inclined  to  accept  the  French  doc- 
trine of  a criminal  type;  but  it  has  long  been 
recognized  that  every  prison  contains  many 
individuals  who  are  defective  in  one  way  or 
another,  and  are  not  to  be  considered  morally 
accountable. 

In  recent  years  the  scientific  study  of  pris- 
oners has  been  undertaken  in  such  prisons  as 
the  New  York  reformatory  at  Elmira,  the 
New  Jersey  reformatory  at  Rahway  and  the 
New  York  reformatory  for  women  at  Bedford. 
These  inquiries  indicate  that  the  proportion 
of  irresponsible  prisoners  is  larger  than  was 
formerly  supposed. 

It  is  nearly  self-evident  that  intelligent  re- 
formatory treatment  of  prisoners  ought  to  be 
based  upon  the  most  complete  and  careful  di- 
agnosis. The  following  course  of  procedure 
is  suggested: 

( 1 ) The  prisoner  should  undergo  an  elab- 
orate and  exhaustive  medical  examination 
more  thorough  than  would  be  required  for  life 
insurance,  in  order  to  ascertain  his  heredity; 
his  physical  development  as  compared  with 
normal  standards ; the  condition  of  all  his 
organs — brain,  heart,  lungs,  digestive  apparat- 
us, skin,  teeth,  eyes,  ears  and  nose;  and  the 
presence  or  absence  of  chronic,  contagious  or 
infectious  diseases  and  tendencies. 

(2)  A thorough  psychological  examination 
should  be  made  to  discover  the  prisoner’s  men- 
tal ability,  education,  capacity  and  bent;  es- 
pecially to  discover  whether  the  patient  is  in 
any  degree  feeble-minded,  insane,  epileptic  or 
otherwise  defective. 

(3)  The  examination  should  be  directed  also 
to  the  spiritual  capability  of  the  individual, 
his  perception  of  right  and  wrong;  the  devel- 
opment of  his  conscience;  his  regard  or  dis- 
regard for  the  truth  and  the  moral  law;  his 
good  and  bad  habits  of  mind  and  body;  his 
religious  affiliations,  and  his  susceptibility  to 
moral  and  religious  impressions. 

All  of  this  information  should  be  so  record- 
ed as  to  make  it  accessible  for  the  medical, 
educational,  religious  and  disciplinary  officers 
of  the  prison.  It  is  reasonable  to  anticipate 
that  within  a very  few  years  careful  and  com- 
plete studies  like  those  here  outlined  will  be 
the  rule  in  all  well  organized  prisons  with  a 
corresponding  gain  in  the  opportunity  for  in- 
telligent treatment  of  prisoners. 

The  psychological  study  of  the  prisoner  is 
no  less  important  in  jails  and  detention  pris- 
ons than  in  penal  institutions.  Such  studies 
have  been  commenced  in  the  Tombs  prison  of 
New  York  and  the  need  of  such  studies  for  the 
guidance  of  judges  and  court  officers  is  already 
manifest. 

See  Criminal,  Reformation  of;  Crimi- 
nology. 


PRISON  MATRONS— PRISONERS,  PROBATION  OF 


References:  Z.  R.  Brockway,  Fifty  Years  of 
Prison  Ser  vice  (1912)  ; C.  R.  Henderson,  Prison 
Laboratories  (1900),  232-40. 

. Hastings  H.  Hart. 

PRISON  MATRONS.  Prison  matrons  have 
long  been  employed  in  state  prisons  where 
women  convicts  are  confined;  but  it  is  only 
within  a few  years  that  the  custom  of  providing 
matrons  in  prisons  of  detention,  even  in  the 
larger  cities,  has  become  general.  Every  suen 
prison  is  liable  to  receive  women  who  are  in- 
toxicated, sick,  insane  or  feeble  minded.  The 
difficulty  arises  from  the  fact  that  in  most 
county  jails,  police  stations  and  lockups,  the 
number  of  female  prisoners  is  very  small  and 
the  public  authorities  have  objected  to  pro- 
viding matrons  for  so  few  prisoners.  This 
difficulty  has  been  met  in  the  state  of  Min- 
nesota by  a law  requiring  that  a matron  shall 
be  appointed  for  every  jail  and  police  station 
in  the  state  and  that  in  those  prisons  where 
few  women  prisoners  are  confined  the  matron 
may  be  paid  for  actual  service  rendered  on  the 
per  diem  basis;  but  that  she  must  be  on  duty 
whenever  female  prisoners  are  confined.  In 
practice,  prison  matrons  have  been  found  ex- 
ceedingly useful  in  caring  for  children,  young 
girls  and  young  women  who  are  not  hardened 
in  crime. 

In  California  and  some  other  states,  a few 
women  are  regularly  appointed  on  the  police 
force  and  presumably  are  detailed  to  service 
in  which  their  sex  will  be  of  special  advantage. 
Such  officials  might  be  used  in  many  cases  as 
police  matrons. 

See  County  Jails;  Police  in  American 
Cities;  Prisons  for  Women. 

Hastings  IP.  Hart. 

PRISONERS,  GOOD  BEHAVIOR  OF.  See 

Good  Behavior  of  Prisoners. 

PRISONERS  OF  WAR.  “A  prisoner  of  war 
is  a public  enemy  armed  or  attached  to  the 
hostile  army  for  active  aid,  who  has  fallen  into 
the  hands  of  the  captor,  either  fighting  or 
wounded,  on  the  field  or  in  the  hospital,  by 
individual  surrender  or  by  capitulation.”  As 
this  definition  has  largely  influenced  modern 
codifications  of  the  laws  of  war,  it  may  be 
regarded  as  comprehensive  for  war  upon  the 
land.  On  the  sea,  similarly,  persons  taken  by 
the  enemy  would  be  prisoners  of  war. 

In  early  days  prisoners  were  killed  or  en- 
slaved. At  the  present  time  the  rules  of  war 
prescribe  that  they  may  be  “interned  in  a 
town,  fortress,  camp  or  any  other  locality  and 
are  bound  not  to  go  beyond  fixed  limits;  but 
they  can  be  confined  only  as  an  indispensable 
measure  of  safety,  and  only  while  the  circum- 
stances necessitating  the  measure  continue  to 
exist.”  They  must  be  maintained  by  the  state 
into  whose  hands  they  have  fallen  in  a manner 
consistent  with  their  rank.  They  may  labor 


for  pay  on  non-military  works.  They  may  be 
paroled  but  are  not  obliged  to  accept  parole. 
Newspaper  correspondents  and  reporters,  sut- 
lers and  contractors  accompanying  the  army 
may  be  treated  as  prisoners  of  war.  All  are 
allowed  the  largest  freedom  consistent  with 
the  military  situation. 

See  Cartel;  Courts  Martial;  Declara- 
tion of  War;  Non-Combatant;  Military 
Prisons;  War,  International  Relations  in. 

References:  Hague  Convention,  Laics  and 
Customs  of  War  on  Land  (1907),  eh.  ii;  U.  S. 
War  Department,  General  Orders,  No.  100 
(1803),  § 49,  Lieber’s  Code.  G.  G.  Wilson. 

PRISONERS,  PROBATION  OF.  Principle.— 

Suspension  of  sentence  is  at  common  law  an 
inherent  power  of  a court  of  record  and  was 
exercised  long  before  probation  as  a form  of 
correctional  procedure. 

Growth  of  Legislation. — The  first  adult  pro- 
bation law,  that  of  Massachusetts  in  1878, 
provided  for  the  appointment  in  any  criminal 
court  within  the  county  of  Suffolk,  at  the  dis- 
cretion of  the  court,  of  a probation  officer 
whose  duties  were  to  make  investigations  and 
recommendations  for  the  release  of  offenders 
on  probation,  and  to  visit  and  assist  them. 
Rhode  Island  adopted  adult  probation  in  1899 
in  a limited  form.  New  Jersey  and  Vermont 
followed  in  1900.  New  York,  in  1901,  au- 
thorized all  courts  having  original  criminal 
jurisdiction  to  use  probation  practically  with- 
out restriction.  California,  Connecticut,  and 
Michigan  adopted  adult  probation  in  1903. 
California  applied  it  in  all  courts  without 
restriction.  Michigan  limited  its  use  to  per- 
sons never  before  convicted  of  crime.  Maine 
in  1905  instituted  adult  probation  in  Cumber- 
land County,  and  in  1909  extended  it  to  the 
remainder  of  the  State. 

Indiana  established  adult  probation  in  1907 
excluding  specified  crimes.  It  was  the  first 
state  to  require  the  supervision  of  probation- 
ers by  the  authorities  and  agents  of  correc- 
tional institutions.  Ohio  in  1908  framed  an 
adult  probation  law  along  lines  similar  to  the 
Indiana  statute. 

Colorado,  by  a unique  statute  of  1909,  ex- 
tended the  chancery  procedure  to  misdemean- 
ors of  adults,  and  created  a probation  court 
to  which  the  state  as  parens  patriae  could 
summons  adults  within  the  civil  jurisdiction 
of  the  court,  and  if  guilty  of  a misdemeanor 
place  them  on  probation  by  an  order  of  the 
court;  violation  of  the  order  was  declared  to 
be  contempt  of  court  and  punished  accord- 
ingly. 

Kansas,  Minnesota,  North  Dakota,  Oregon, 
Pennsylvania  and  Wisconsin  also  instituted 
adult  probation  in  1909.  Kansas  restricted 
its  use  to  persons  convicted  of  the  violation 
of  ordinances  in  cities  of  the  first  and  second 
class.  Minnesota  applied  it  generally  to  all 
offenses  and  crimes  where  the  maximum  pen- 
62 


PRISONERS,  PROBATION  OF 


alty  did  not  exceed  five  years  imprisonment. 
North  Dakota  excluded  all  persons  who  were 
not  first  offenders,  excepted  specified  crimes, 
and  placed  the  supervision  of  persons  on  pro- 
bation under  the  Board  of  Trustees  of  the  peni- 
tentiary. Oregon  limited  adult  probation  to 
persons  never  before  convicted  of  felony  and 
allowed  their  release  under  the  oversight  of 
the  court  or  a Prisoners’  Aid  Society.  Pennsyl- 
vania permitted  adult  probation  for  persons 
never  previously  imprisoned  for  crime  and 
excepted  specified  crimes.  Wisconsin  excluded 
second  offenders  and  persons  convicted  of 
crimes  in  which  the  maximum  penalty  was 
ten  years  imprisonment. 

The  District  of  Columbia  and  Virginia 
adopted  the  principle  with  limitations  in  1910. 
Delaware  in  1911  excluded  persons  pre- 
viously convicted  of  crime,  but  permitted  its 
use  in  all  crimes  not  capital.  An  adult  pro- 
bation law  in  Illinois,  in  1911,  restricted  pro- 
bation to  persons  never  previously  convicted 
of  crime  who  upon  conviction  could  request 
the  court  that  they  be  released  on  probation ; 
and  the  court  was  empowered  to  exercise  pro- 
bation provided  their  offenses  did  not  involve 
the  appropriation  of  $200  in  money,  or  other 
property  values  to  the  same  amount.  The 
courts,  however,  were  given  freedom  in  the 
use  of  probation  upon  conviction  of  violation 
of  ordinances.  The  tendency  since  1907  has 
been  to  impose  restrictions  and  limitations  on 
the  court. 

Comparison  with  Juvenile  Probation. — Al- 
though adult  probation  has  made  great  prog- 
ress, it  has  not  kept  pace  with  juvenile  pro- 
bation in  the  number  of  states  adopting  it,  or 
its  general  use  in  many  states  in  which  both 
systems  have  been  established.  The  difference 
in  growth  can  in  part  be  explained  by  the 
more  fundamental  and  preventive  nature  of 
juvenile  probation.  The  jurisdiction  of  the 
children’s  courts  in  many  of  the  states  where 
adult  probation  has  lagged  behind  has  been 
transferred  to  chancery  courts  and  the  more 
attractive  features  of  child  reform  work  in 
civil  courts  may  have  detracted  the  interest 
of  social  workers  from  the  criminal  courts 
and  their  problems.  Public  impatience  witli 
adult  crime,  the  traditional  fear  of  making 
punishment  easy,  the  greater  social  values 
heretofore  attached  to  property  rights  over 
personal  rights,  and  the  negro  problem  in  the 
southern  states,  have  been  other  contributing 
causes. 

Ideal  of  Reformation. — The  ideals  of  progres- 
sive penology  are  reclamation  of  the  offender 
and  individual  treatment  of  each  human  prob- 
lem instead  of  mass  treatment.  The  same  prin- 
ciples should  be  applied  to  probation.  The 
provisions  in  some  of  the  recent  probation 
statutes,  notably  those  of  Indiana,  Ohio,  North 
Dakota,  and  Wisconsin,  which  specifically  im- 
pute that  certain  classes  of  probationers  are 
on  the  same  moral  and  social  level  as  paroled 

63 


prisoners,  and  place  their  supervision  under 
the  control  of  the  authorities  of  prisoners  and 
other  correctional  institutions,  are  out  of 
harmony  with  the  redemptive  and  constructive 
spirit  of  probation. 

Administration. — The  judges  and  the  proba- 
tion officers  are  the  keystones  of  the  system. 
The  closer  the  probationer  can  be  kept  in 
touch  with  them  tiie  better  results  follow.  Pro- 
bation officers  whose  duties  are  to  reform  and 
discipline  and  who  are  expected  to  exercise 
great  personal  influence  over  their  wards  ought 
to  be  qualified  persons  carefully  selected. 
Civil  service  examinations  for  probation  of- 
ficers are  advisable.  Every  such  examination 
should  allow  about  50  per  cent  on  written 
technical  work,  and  about  50  per  cent  to  be 
rated  in  an  oral  examination  for  personality 
and  experience.  Practically  all  the  public 
salaried  probation  officers  in  New  York  State 
have  been  appointed  in  this  way  and  many  of 
the  best  officers  could  never  have  been  found, 
except  for  the  open  competition.  Massa- 
chusetts, New  York  and  Vermont,  three  of 
the  first  states  to  institute  probation,  have  es- 
tablished state  probation  commissions,  and 
bills  for  such  departments  have  been  intro- 
duced in  other  states. 

Felonies. — In  states  which  permit  the  un- 
restricted use  of  probation  for  felonies,  the 
statistics  of  such  cases  have  shown  improve- 
ment almost  proportionate  to  those  in  the 
minor  offenses.  The  young  felon  from  1(5  to 
25  years  of  age  has  offered  an  exceptional 
opportunity  for  probation.  In  Erie  County, 
New  York  state,  which  includes  the  City  of 
Buffalo,  45  per  cent  of  all  adult  felons  dis- 
posed of  by  the  courts  have  been  placed  on 
probation  during  the  past  two  years,  and,  at 
least  75  per  cent  of  these  cases  have  shown 
improvement  and  have  never  come  back  to  the 
criminal  courts. 

Non-Support. — Attention  should  be  called  to 
the  remarkable  development  in  non-support 
cases  under  probation.  Formerly  the  non-sup- 
port evil  was  neglected  everywhere,  and 
the  public  paid  the  price  in  poverty,  crime, 
and  the  heavy  toll  exacted  from  unfortunate 
women  and  children.  The  probation  system 
has  shown  itself  to  be  adapted  to  the  following 
up  of  these  cases,  to  securing  employment  for 
the  culprits,  to  collecting  their  wages  and 
cementing  home  differences. 

Need  of  Federal  Laws. — The  enactment  of  a 
federal  probation  law  is  a much  needed  reform 
in  the  criminal  procedure  of  the  United  States 
courts.  A large  proportion  of  persons  con- 
victed in  the  United  States  district  court  are 
first  offenders  and  many  of  the  offenses  are 
for  technical  violation  of  the  law.  Probation 
can  be  used  to  good  advantage  in  such  cases 
and  should  be  established.  Probation  bills 
have  been  introduced  during  several  sessions 
of  Congress,  but  have  never  been  reported  out 
of  committee. 


PRISONS,  CITY  AND  COUNTY— PRIVATE  BILLS 


See  Criminal,  Reformation  of;  Good  Be- 
havior of  Prisoners  ; Indeterminate  Sen- 
tence; Legal  Procedure,  Proposed  Reform 
of;  Parole  System. 

References:  National  Probation  Assoc.,  Annu- 
al Report,  1910,  passim;  New  York  Probation 
Assoc.,  Annual  Report,  1908,  passim;  Am. 
Prison  Assoc.,  Annual  Report,  1870,  passim; 
Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  1911,  1912. 

Hastings  H.  Hart. 

PRISONS,  CITY  AND  COUNTY.  See 

County  Jails. 

PRISONS  FOR  WOMEN.  The  United  States 
has  been  slow  to  establish  a special  prison 
system  for  women,  partly  because  of  the  very 
small  number  of  women  convicted  of  crime, 
and  partly  because  of  general  traditions  which 
have  stood  in  the  way  of  establishing  a prison 
system.  The  first  prison  exclusively  for  wom- 
en in  the  United  States  was  the  Massachusetts 
State  Reformatory  for  Women  at  Sherborn; 
the  second  was  the  Indiana  Prison  for  Women 
at  Indianapolis;  the  third  was  the  New  York 
Prison  for  Women  at  Hudson,  subsequently 
transferred  to  Bedford;  the  fourth  was  the  New 
Jersey  Reformatory  for  Women  near  Clinton. 
These  four  remain  the  only  separate  prisons 
for  women  in  the  United  States  (1913). 

Departments  for  the  confinement  of  women 
prisoners  exist  in  connection  with  nearly  all 
of  the  state  prisons  and  the  houses  of  correc- 
tion or  work  houses  in  the  United  States, 
though  prison  officers  almost  universally  con- 
demn the  plan  of  keeping  men  and  women  in 
the  same  institution,  for  the  reason  that  the 
women  are  a disturbing  influence  in  the  dis- 
cipline of  the  prison;  constant  vigilance  is  re- 
quired to  prevent  communication  between  the 
two  sexes,  and  it  is  impossible  to  give  the 
women  that  degree  of  liberty  and  outdoor  life 
which  is  essential  for  reformatory  treatment. 
Furthermore  the  same  degree  of  rigor  is  un- 
necessary for  their  safe  keeping. 

The  Bedford  prison  for  women  illustrates 
the  plan  which  is  adapted  to  the  needs  of 
women  prisoners.  There  is  no  prison  wall  and 
the  gates  to  the  prison  enclosure  stand  open. 
The  women  occupy  cottages  holding  30  to  50 
women  each.  The  cottage  windows  are  pro- 
tected by  a lattice  of  steel  wire  but  there  are 
no  steel  doors  and  no  prison  appliances.  The 
women  go  back  and  forth  through  the  grounds, 
work  in  the  stables,  grounds  and  fields,  build 
sidewalks,  do  painting,  whitewashing,  etc. 
The  life  appears  to  be  remarkably  free,  na- 
tural and  wholesome.  The  contrast  between 
the  aspect  of  these  women  and  those  who  are 
confined  in  ordinary  prisons  where  male  pris- 
oners are  confined  is  palpable  even  to  the 
casual  observer,  and  it  has  been  demonstrated 
that  an  esprit  de  corps  can  be  established 
whereby  restrictive  discipline  is  reduced  to  its 
lowest  terms. 


Public  sentiment  in  favor  of  separate  pris- 
ons for  women  is  rapidly  growing,  and  such 
prisons  are  contemplated  in  Ohio,  New  Jersey 
and  other  states  of  the  Union. 

See  Penitentiaries;  Reformatories,  Ju- 
venile. 

References:  New  York  State  Legislature, 
An  Act  to  Establish  a State  Farm  for  Women 
(1908),  ch.  467;  United  States  Bureau  of  the 
Census,  Prisoners  and  Juvenile  Delinquents 
in  Institutions  (1904);  C.  R.  Henderson, 
Penal  and  Reformatory  Institutions  (1910). 

Hastings  H.  Hart. 

PRIVACY,  RIGHT  TO.  The  right  of  invio- 
late personality — the  right  to  prevent  the  un- 
authorized use  of  one’s  name,  reputation,  por- 
trait or  other  likeness,  or  the  unauthorized 
and  false  attributing  to  one  of  alleged  state- 
ments. The  existence  of  such  a right  at  com- 
mon law,  independent  of  property  rights,  con- 
tract and  the  law  of  trusts  and  of  slander  and 
libel,  seems  not  to  have  been  asserted  in  any 
court  of  last  resort  until  after  1890.  It  has 
been  most  frequently  claimed  to  recover  dam- 
ages for  the  unauthorized  use  of  one’s  likeness 
or  alleged  statement  of  opinion  in  the  de- 
fendant’s advertising  matter.  Those  courts 
which  have  passed  upon  the  question,  are 
about  evenly  divided  as  to  whether  the  right 
exists  in  the  absence  of  a statute  giving  it.  On 
the  one  hand  it  is  asserted  that  the  non- 
recognition by  the  courts  of  such  right,  except 
in  connection  with  property  or  contract  rights, 
or  trust  relations  is  practically  conclusive 
against  its  existence,  and  that  to  admit  it 
would  infringe  upon  the  freedom  of  the  press 
and  of  speech.  On  the  other  hand  it  is  argued 
that  the  right  which  one  has  in  his  name  or 
likeness  is  fairly  included  within  the  legal 
concept  of  property;  but  that  even  if  it  were 
not,  the  common  law  has  in  spirit  and  in  fact 
recognized  such  a right,  in  affording  remedies 
for  private  nuisances,  against  eavesdroppers, 
in  the  right  to  be  secure  in  one’s  home,  to  pre- 
vent the  unauthorized  publication  of  even  one’s 
commercially  valueless  papers,  letters,  and 
works  of  art.  In  New  York  where  the  right 
at  common  law  was  denied  by  the  Court  of 
Appeals,  a statute  creating  such  a right  and 
providing  penalties  for  its  violations,  has  since 
been  passed.  References:  W.  D.  Warren  and 
L.  D.  Brandeis,  “Right  to  Privacy”  in  Harvard 
Law  Rev.,  IV  (1890),  193;  Editorial  in  Hich. 
Law  Rev.,  Ill  (1905),  559-563;  ibid,  VIII 
(1910),  221;  Laws  of  New  York  (1903),  chs. 
132,  308.  H.  M.  B. 

PRIVATE  BILLS.  A private  bill  as  dis- 
tinguished from  a public  bill  is  one  which,  in- 
stead of  applying  generally  to  all  persons  in 
the  state  or  to  all  persons  in  a class,  defined 
according  to  some  essential  characteristic,  af- 
fects only  a particular  person  or  place.  Such 
are  bills  for  the  incorporation  of  railway, 


PRIVATE  BILLS  DAY— PRIVATE  PROPERTY  AT  SEA 


gas,  water  and  other  companies;  bills  for  in- 
corporating towns  and  cities  or  for  extending 
their  powers;  bills  for  the  naturalization  of 
particular  individuals;  bills  to  change  the 
names  of  persons  or  places;  divorce  bills;  bills 
granting  pensions  to  certain  individuals;  bills 
for  the  settlement  of  private  claims ; exemp- 
tion bills  and  the  like.  A characteristic  fea- 
ture of  such  bills  is  that  they  are  usually 
designed  to  confer  a benefit  or  privilege  upon 
some  particular  person,  company  or  place  and 
the  proceedings  with  reference  to  them  are  to 
a certain  extent,  judicial  as  well  as  legislative 
in  character.  In  England  private  bills  are 
brought  before  Parliament  by  “petition”  and 
may  be  introduced  only  after  public  notice  has 
been  given  by  advertisement  three  months  be- 
fore the  opening  of  Parliament.  Fees  are  also 
required  to  be  paid  by  the  parties  promoting 
or  opposing  such  bills.  They  must  be  de- 
posited before  December  31  in  the  “private  bill 
office”  where  they  are  open  for  public  inspec- 
tion and  the  question  of  the  notices  and 
other  preliminary  proceedings  required  is 
inquired  into  and  reported  upon  by  two  ex- 
aminers of  petitions  appointed  by  the  speaker. 
They  are  then  considered  by  a committee  on 
private  bills  which  takes  evidence  regarding 
their  merits,  hears  arguments  from  promoters 
and  opponents  and  reports  to  the  house. 

In  the  United  States,  with  a few  exceptions, 
the  procedure  in  respect  to  private  bills  differs 
in  no  essential  particular  from  that  with  ref- 
erence to  public  bills.  In  Congress  there  is  a 
private  bill  calender  to  which  is  referred  the 
large  mass  of  private  pension  bills,  relief 
measures,  and  the  like,  but  except  for  the  prac- 
tice by  which  such  bills  are  usually  passed  by 
unanimous  consent  there  is  no  essential  dif- 
ference in  the  procedure. 

In  a few  of  the  states,  however,  the  English 
distinction  between  public  and  private  bills  is 
observed  and  a different  method  of  procedure 
for  passing  them  is  followed.  For  example  in 
Massachusetts  a private  or  local  bill  must  be 
proposed  by  petition  and  is  considered  only 
after  notice  has  been  given  by  advertisement 
or  otherwise  to  all  the  parties  interested.  In 
Pennsylvania  and  a few  other  states  notice  of 
intention  to  apply  for  a special  act  must  be 
published  in  the  locality  where  the  matter  or 
thing  to  be  affected  is  situated,  at  least  thirty 
days  prior  to  the  introduction  of  such  a bill 
in  the  legislature. 

See  Bills,  Course  of;  Legislation,  Brit- 
ish System  of;  Legislative  Output,  State 
and  National;  Legislative  System  in 
Europe;  Statutes,  State. 

References:  J.  Bryce,  The  Am.  Common- 
wealth (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  688-690;  W.  K. 
Clifford,  History  of  Private  Bill  Legislation 
(1885);  L.  S.  Cushing,  Law  and  Practice  of 
Legislative  Assemblies  (1907),  933-975;  P.  S. 
Reinseh,  Am.  Legislatures  and  Legislative 
Methods  (1903).  James  W.  Garner. 


PRIVATE  BILLS  DAY.  Private-bills  day 
in  the  federal  House  of  Representatives  is  the 
day  regularly  set  apart  for  the  consideration 
of  private  business — especially  of  claims 
against  the  government,  and  pension  bills. 
This  day  is  Friday  in  every  week,  but  may  be 
devoted  to  other  business  by  a majority  vote 
of  the  House  (Rule  XXIV).  See  Private 
Bills,  Rules  of  Congress.  References:  A.  C. 
Hinds,  Precedents  of  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives (1907-1908),  IV,  §§  3081-3085,  3201, 
3202,  3266-3282,  3310,  V,  § 6945.  A.  N.  H. 

PRIVATE  INTERNATIONAL  LAW.  See 

International  Law,  Private. 

PRIVATE  PROPERTY  AT  SEA.  Private 

property  at  sea  in  time  of  war  may,  in  general, 
be  in  form  of  vessels  or  goods,  and  may  belong 
to  a belligerent  or  to  a neutral. 

The  private  vessels  of  a belligerent  are  liable 
to  capture  unless  specially  exempt  by  nature 
of  their  service,  as  hospital  or  scientific  ships; 
by  nature  of  their  occupation,  as  coast  fishing 
vessels  or  small  vessels  employed  in  local 
trade;  or  vessels  exempt  by  declaration  at  the 
outbreak  of  war. 

The  private  goods  of  a belligerent  are  in 
general  liable  to  capture  unless  under  a neutral 
flag,  and  even  then  if  they  are  of  the  nature 
of  contraband. 

The  private  vessels  of  a neutral  innocently 
employed,  are  exempt  from  capture.  Such 
vessels  may  be  captured  for  violation  of  block- 
ade (see),  carriage  of  contraband  (see),  un- 
neutral service,  resistance  of  visit  and  search, 
sailing  under  enemy  convoy,  or  irregularity  or 
absence  of  proper  papers. 

The  private  goods  of  a neutral  are,  in  gen- 
eral, exempt  from  capture  except  contraband 
of  war,  even  when  on  board  the  vessel  of  an 
enemy. 

The  United  States  has  from  the  very  early 
days  of  the  republic  been  in  favor  of  the 
exemption  from  capture  in  time  of  war  of 
private  property  at  sea,  except  contraband. 
Franklin,  in  1781  and  1783,  wrote  in  favor  of 
this  policy.  Various  representatives  of  the 
United  States  in  a formal  and  informal  man- 
ner have  endeavored  to  bring  about  this  ex- 
emption. Secretary  Marcy  strove  to  secure 
exemption  in  connection  with  the  negotiations 
in  regard  to  the  adoption  of  the  Treaty  of 
Paris  (see)  in  1856.  Congress  passed  a reso- 
lution in  favor  of  exemption  on  April  28,  1904, 
and  the  American  delegation  at  the  Second 
Hague  Peace  Conference  in  1907  labored  earn- 
estly to  secure  an  international  agreement  ex- 
empting all  private  property  at  sea,  not  con- 
traband of  war,  from  capture  or  destruction 
by  belligerents. 

See  Commerce,  International  ; Continu- 
ous Voyages;  Contraband;  Free  Ships 
Make  Free  Goods;  Maritime  War;  Neutral 
Trade;  Piracy. 


PRIVATE  SUBSIDIES  TO  INSTITUTIONS— PRIVILEGE,  PARLIAMENTARY 


References:  L.  A.  Atherlcy-Jones,  Commerce 
in  War  (1007);  N.  Bentvvich,  War  and  Pri- 
vate Property  (1007),  70  ct  scq.;  J.  B.  Moore, 
Digest  of  Int.  Law  (1006),  VII,  398. 

George  G.  Wilson. 

PRIVATE  SUBSIDIES  TO  INSTITUTIONS. 

See  Subsidies,  Peivate,  to  Institutions. 

PRIVATEERS.  In  tlie  early  days  of  mari- 
time warfare  it  was  customary  for  a belliger- 
ent to  grant  to  private  vessels  letters  of  mar- 
que (see),  commissioning  them  to  prey  upon 
the  enemy’s  commerce.  These  private  vessels 
were  not  held  in  high  repute  in  the  fifteenth 
century,  but  as  the  practice  became  more  com- 
mon many  resorted  to  it  as  a means  of  obtain- 
ing large  returns  even  when  patriotism  was 
not  a moving  influence.  Some  states  forbade 
the  practice  in  treaty  agreements.  One  be- 
tween Sweden  and  the  United  Provinces  was 
negotiated  as  early  as  1675. 

Franklin  as  minister  of  the  United  States 
endeavored  to  negotiate  treaties  prohibiting 
the  resort  to  privateering  and  secured  the 
insertion  of  a clause  in  the  treaty  with  Prussia 
in  1785  to  the  effect  that  in  case  of  war 
“neither  of  the  contracting  powers  shall  grant 
or  issue  any  commission  to  any  private  armed 
vessels,  empowering  them  to  take  or  destroy 
such  trading  vessels  or  interrupt  such  com- 
merce”; but  the  clause  was  not  retained  in  the 
treaty  of  1799  between  the  United  States  and 
Prussia.  The  United  States  resorted  to  pri- 
vateering in  the  War  of  1812. 

Woolsey,  in  his  International  Law,  the  first 
edition  of  which  appeared  in  1860  said;  “The 
right  to  employ  this  kind  of  extraordinary 
naval  force  is  unquestioned,  nor  is  it  at  all 
against  the  usage  of  nations  in  times  past  to 
grant  commissions  even  to  privateers  owned 
by  aliens.”  This  opinion  was  in  accord  with 
the  American  sentiment  of  the  middle  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  as  shown  in  a letter  of 
Secretary  Marcy  in  1856  which  says,  “It  is, 
in  the  opinion  of  this  Government,  to  be  seri- 
ously apprehended  that  if  the  use  of  privateers 
be  abandoned,  the  dominion  over  the  seas  will 
be  surrendered  to  those  powers  which  adopt 
the  policy,  and  have  the  means  of  keeping  up 
large  navies.  The  one  which  has  a decided 
naval  superiority  would  be  potentially  the  mis- 
tress of  the  ocean,  and  by  the  abolition  of 
privateering  that  domination  would  be  more 
firmly  secured.”  The  states  which  signed  the 
Declaration  of  Paris  of  April  16,  1856,  affirmed 
that  “privateering  is  and  remains  abolished.” 
The  United  States  maintained  that  her  posi- 
tion was  such  that  unless  all  private  property 
at  sea,  except  contraband,  was  made  exempt 
from  capture,  she  could  not  sign  this  Declara- 
tion. All  the  leading  states  of  the  world 
adhered  to  the  Declaration  except  Spain, 
China,  Mexico  and  the  United  States,  which 
latter  power  at  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War 

66 


in  vain  proposed  to  be  received  among  the 
signatories.  During  the  Spanish-American 
War  of  1898  the  United  States  declared  that 
the  government  would  not  resort  to  privateer- 
ing and  Spain  did  not  use  privateers.  Spain 
in  1908  formally  adhered  to  the  Declaration, 
Mexico  did  the  same  in  1909.  The  introduc- 
tion of  the  system  of  a volunteer  or  auxiliary 
navy  under  which  private  vessels  may  in  time 
of  war  be  taken  over  and  placed  under  re- 
sponsible government  control,  and  the  growing 
sentiment  against  such  practices  as  were  in- 
volved in  privateering  make  its  further  con- 
tinuance improbable. 

See  Maritime  War;  Piracy;  Private  Prop- 
erty at  Sea;  Prize  Law  and  Courts. 

References:  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law 
(1906),  VII,  535-583;  L.  A.  Atherley- Jones, 
Commerce  in  War  (1907),  315-321,  541-545; 
E.  S.  McClain,  Ilist.  of  American  Privateers 
(1899)  ;Geo.  Coggshall,  Hist,  of  the  American 
Privateers  (1856)  ; F.  R.  Stark,  The  Abolition 
of  Privateering  (1897).  George  G.  Wilson. 

PRIVILEGE,  PARLIAMENTARY.  The  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  (Art.  I,  Sec. 
vi,  '[  1)  says  that  Senators  and  Representatives 
“shall  in  all  cases,  except  treason,  felony,  and 
breach  of  the  peace,  be  privileged  from  arrest 
during  their  attendance  at  the  session  of  their 
respective  houses,  and  in  going  to  and  return- 
ing from  the  same ; and  for  any  speech  or  de- 
bate in  either  House,  they  shall  not  be  ques- 
tioned in  any  other  place.”  Provisions  similar 
to  this  appear  in  most  of  the  state  constitu- 
tions. The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  has  decided  that  the  terms  “treason,  fel- 
ony and  breach  of  the  peace,”  as  used  in  the 
Constitution,  are  intended  to  include  all  crimi- 
nal offenses  (Williamson  vs.  U.  S.,  207  U. 
S.  425)  ; the  provision  therefore  amounts  to 
a declaration  that  members  may  not  be  arrest- 
ed save  on  a criminal  charge.  Some  of  the 
states,  for  example,  Michigan,  Indiana  and 
Kansas,  extend  the  privilege  to  exemption 
from  service  of-  civil  process. 

The  privilege  of  free  speech  in  legislative 
assemblies  is  based  on  a long  struggle  of  the 
English  Parliament  to  secure  and  maintain 
the  right.  The  right  was  authoritatively  an- 
nounced in  the  English  Bill  of  Rights  which 
declared  that  “the  freedom  of  speech  and  de- 
bates, or  proceedings  in  Parliament,  ought  not 
to  be  impeached  or  questioned  in  any  Court  or 
place  out  of  Parliament.”  While  the  terms 
used  in  different  American  constitutions  vary, 
they  are  all  probably  of  like  effect,  and  would 
be  construed  to  cover  reports  and  other  of- 
ficial acts  as  well  as  words  used  in  debate. 
The  legislative  body  must,  however,  be  in  ses- 
sion, or  at  least  the  member  must  be  acting 
in  his  official  capacity,  if  he  is  to  have  the 
privilege  and  immunity. 

The  privilege  of  publication  is  not  so  clearly 
settled;  where  the  publication  of  debates  is 


PRIVILEGED  COMMUNICATIONS' — PRIVILEGED  STATUS  OF  PERSONS 


official,  the  publications  could  not,  it  would 
seem,  be  the  basis  for  action  against  the  repre- 
sentative whose  words  are  complained  of ; and 
there  seems  to  be  like  good  reason  for  holding 
that  in  this  country  a bona  fide  address  to 
one’s  constituents  is  privileged. 

The  word,  privilege,  is  also  used  with  refer- 
ence to  the  rights  and  prerogatives  of  a legis- 
lative body.  For  example,  an  alleged  infringe- 
ment by  the  treaty-making  power  on  the  right 
of  the  House  of  Representatives  presents  a 
question  of  privilege ; and  a protest  by  the 
President  against  certain  proceedings  of  the 
House  has  been  declared  a breach  of  privilge. 
Questions  of  privilege  (not  privileged  motions 
or  privileged  questions)  relate  to  the  safety 
or  efficiency  of  the  House. 

There  are  certain  motions  in  parliamentary 
practice  that  are  called  privileged  motions. 

See  Abrest;  Congress  ; Freedom  of 
Speech;  Parliamentary  Law;  Rules  of  Leg- 
islative Bodies. 

References:  T.  M.  Cooley,  Constitutional 
Limitations  (7th  ed.,  1903);  Jefferson’s  Man- 
ual, § iii;  Kilbourn  vs.  Thompson,  103  U.  R. 
168  (1880)  ; Coffin  vs.  Coffin,  4 Mass.  27;  V.  V. 
Veeder,  “Absolute  Immunity  in  Defamation” 
in  Columbia  Law  Review,  X (1910),  131-146; 

A.  C.  Hinds,  Digest  of  Rules  of  the  House  of 
Representatives  fl908),  630;  House  Manual 
(1909).  A.  C.  McL. 

PRIVILEGED  COMMUNICATIONS.  Under 
the  law  of  libel  and  slander  some  communica- 
tions, the  making  of  which  orally  or  in  writing 
is  injurious  to  another  and  which  are  in  their 
nature  or  by  reason  of  the  circumstances  de- 
famatory, may  nevertheless  be  absolutely  or 
unqualifiedly  privileged  in  such  sense  as  not 
to  furnish  the  basis  of  a civil  or  criminal  ac- 
tion. Under  the  rules  of  evidence  some  com- 
munications between  persons  standing  in  a 
confidential  relation,  as  between  husband  and 
wife,  doctor  and  patient,  lawyer  and  client, 
are  privileged  in  such  sense  that  one  of  the 
parties  to  such  communication  will  not  be 
allowed  against  the  objection  of  the  other  to 
testify  with  reference  thereto  in  a court  of 
justice.  See  Freedom  of  Speech.  E.  McC. 

PRIVILEGED  STATUS  OF  PERSONS.  In 

earlier  times,  inequalities  in  the  legal  and  civil 
status  of  different  classes  of  persons  were  quite 
common.  Thus  in  ancient  Athens,  the  Eupat- 
ridae  enjoyed  special  privileges  in  regard  to 
office  holding.  So  in  Rome,  the  patrician  class 
was  especially  privileged  in  various  ways. 
Throughout  the  middle  ages,  the  existence  of 
privileged  orders  or  estates  each  with  its  own 
laws  and  courts  of  justice  was  one  of  the 
basic  facts  of  social  and  political  organization. 
The  chief  cause  of  the  French  Revolution  was 
the  enjoyment  by  the  two  upper  estates,  the 
nobility  and  the  clergy,  of  exclusive  privileges 
denied  to  the  third  estate.  The  nobility  en- 

67 


joyed  the  right  to  collect  various  tolls  and 
other  impositions  from  the  peasant  class;  the 
aristocratic  privilege  of  the  hunt ; and  of 
course  most  of  the  offices  of  state  as  well  as 
military  commissions  were  reserved  for  them. 
Their  military  obligations  were  exactly  fixed 
and  defined,  which  was  not  the  case  with  the 
members  of  the  third  estate.  The  king  could 
not  impose  taxes,  make  laws  or  issue  ordi- 
nances without  their  consent;  they  exercised 
an  inferior  jurisdiction  over  their  vassals  and 
to  a certain  extent  possessed  a limited  terri- 
torial sovereignty;  they  had  the  privilege  of 
free  access  to  the  king  and  to  the  parliament 
of  Paris  before  which  alone  they  could  be  tried; 
besides  various  other  privileges  not  enjoyed  by 
the  third  estate.  The  clergy  also  constituted 
a privileged  class  during  the  middle  ages  and 
in  some  countries,  of  which  France  was  an 
example,  they  continued  to  be  treated  as  such 
until  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century.  In 
England,  they  were  early  exempted  from  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  ordinary  law  courts  in  all 
ecclesiastical  matters  and  in  time  they  asserted 
a claim  to  immunity  from  trial  in  the  civil 
courts  even  for  criminal  acts,  and  for  a time 
the  privilege  was  conceded.  This  extraordi- 
nary assertion  of  privilege  was,  however,  later 
resisted  by  the  Crown  and  by  the  constitutions 
of  Clarendon,  in  1164,  it  was  withdrawn  and 
their  right  of  trial  before  the  ecclesiastical 
courts  was  restricted  to  ecclesiastical  offenses 
only. 

On  the  continent,  the  exclusive  privileges  of 
the  clergy  were  even  more  extensive.  They  not 
only  claimed  and  secured  exemption  from  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  civil  courts,  but  asserted 
the  independence  of  the  church  as  over  against 
the  state;  maintained  that  the  laws  of  the 
state  were  not  binding  upon  them;  insisted 
that  they  were  the  judges  of  how  far  their 
voluntary  obedience  to  civil  authority  should 
extend  and  even  demanded  that  the  secular 
authority  should  obey  the  laws  of  the  church 
and  lend  its  assistance  in  carrying  out  its 
will.  Moreover,  the  clergy  claimed  an  exemp- 
tion from  military  service,  the  payment  of 
taxes  and  the  performance  of  other  public 
obligations.  The  clergy,  like  the  nobility,  con- 
stituted a separate  estate,  the  highest  of  the 
three,  and  had  their  own  representation  in  the 
legislative  assemblies.  In  the  canon  law  they 
had  their  own  system  of  jurisprudence  and  in 
some  states  exercised  a more  or  less  extensive 
civil  jurisdiction  in  their  domains.  Gradually, 
the  special  immunities  and  privileges  of  the 
clergy  as  a class  as  well  as  those  of  the  no- 
bility, though  less  completely,  were  done  away 
with  and  they  were  assimilated  with  the  other 
classes  of  society  in  respect  to  their  legal  and 
civil  status.  In  France  this  was  one  of  the 
great  results  of  the  Revolution.  In  a few 
countries  where  a hereditary  nobility  still  sur- 
vives, certain  exclusive  privileges  are  still  re- 
tained by  those  who  belong  to  this  class  but 


PRIVILEGES  AND  IMMUNITIES  OF  CITIZENS— PRIVILEGES  OF  STATE  CITIZENSHIP 


they  are  not  important  or  extensive.  Thus  in 
England,  peers  enjoy  the  right  of  access  to  the 
sovereign  for  the  purpose  of  discussing  public 
affairs  and  the  right  to  be  tried  by  their  own 
class  for  acts  of  treason  or  felony. 

In  the  United  States  where  a hereditary 
nobility  has  never  existed  (see  Nobility, 
Titles  of)  and  where  the  clergy  never  con- 
stituted a separate  class,  equality  as  regards 
the  legal  and  civil  status  of  all  persons  has 
been  a fundamental  part  of  the  political  system 
though  as  regards  political  rights,  this  is  less 
true  ( see  Suffrage).  For  reasons  of  public 
policy,  however,  special  exemptions  or  privi- 
leges are  sometimes  allowed  to  particular  per- 
sons or  classes.  Thus  some  are  exempted  from 
military  service,  jury  duty,  work  on  public 
roads  and  occasionally  certain  persons  or  com- 
panies are  exempted  from  taxation  permanently 
or  for  a limited  period.  Military  veterans  are 
sometimes  allowed  special  privileges  or  prefer- 
ences in  regard  to  appointments  under  the 
civil  service  laws  and  in  a few  states,  particu- 
larly in  the  South,  they  are  exempt  from  the 
payment  of  poll  taxes.  In  a few  southern 
states  they  as  well  as  their  descendants  are 
also  exempt  from  educational  tests  for  voting. 
Lawyers,  spiritual  advisers,  members  of  legis- 
lative bodies  and  witnesses  enjoy  the  right  of 
“privileged  communication”  (see). 

A common  provision  found  in  many  state 
constitutions  is  one  which  forbids  the  legisla- 
ture from  granting  to  any  citizen  or  class  of 
citizens  any  privilege  or  immunities  not  grant- 
ed equally  to  other  citizens.  Others  declare 
that  no  special  privileges  or  immunities  shall 
ever  be  granted  which  may  not  be  altered,  re- 
voked, or  repealed  by  the  legislature.  A few 
allow  exclusive  privileges  to  be  granted  only 
in  consideration  of  public  services  rendered. 

See  Equality;  Liberty. 

James  W.  Garner. 

PRIVILEGES  AND  IMMUNITIES  OF  CIT- 
IZENS. The  Fourteenth  Amendment  (see)  of 
the  Federal  Constitution,  after  declaring  all 
persons  born  or  naturalized  in  the  United 
States  and  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  thereof 
are  citizens  of  the  United  States,  goes  on  to 
provide  that  no  state  shall  make  or  enforce 
any  law  which  shall  abridge  the  privileges  and 
immunities  of  such  citizens.  In  the  famous 
Slaughter  House  Cases  (see)  (16  Wall.  36)  the 
doctrine  was  declared,  which  has  not  since  been 
disturbed,  that  these  privileges  and  immunities 
thus  secured  against  state  abridgement  are 
only  those  which  are  peculiar  to  and  arise  out 
of  federal  citizenship,  which  citizenship  it  is 
pointed  out  is  still  distinct  from  that  of  the 
states.  It  is  thus  important  to  determine  just 
what  are  these  peculiar  federal  privileges  and 
immunities.  In  the  Slaughter  House  Cases 
the  court  does  not  attempt  an  exhaustive  enum- 
eration of  them,  but  does  mention  the  follow- 
ing as  indubitably  falling  within  this  class: 


The  right  of  the  citizen  “to  come  to  the  seat 
of  government  to  transact  any  business  he  may 
have  with  it,  to  seek  its  protection,  to  share  its 
offices,  to  engage  in  administering  its  functions, 
lie  has  the  right  of  free  access  to  its  seaports, 
through  which  all  operations  of  foreign  commerce 
are  conducted,  to  the  subtreasuries,  land  offices, 
and  courts  of  justice  in  the  several  states"  (Cran- 
dall vs.  Nevada,  6 Wallace,  35). 

The  court  also  quotes  the  words  of  Chief 
Justice  Taney: 

Another  privilege  of  a citizen  of  the  United 
States  is  to  demand  the  care  and  protection  of 
the  Federal  Government  over  his  life,  liberty  and 
property  when  on  the  high  seas  or  within  the  juris- 
diction of  a foreign  office.  . . . The  right  to 
peaceably  assemble  and  petition  for  redress  of 
grievances,  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus,  . . . the  right  to  use  the  navigable  wa- 
ters of  the  United  States,  however  they  may  pene- 
trate the  territory  of  the  several  states,  all  rights 
secured  to  our  citizens  by  treaties  with  foreign 
nations  are  dependent  upon  citizenship  of  the 
United  States,  and  not  citizenship  of  a state, 
...  A citizen  of  the  United  States  can,  of  his 
own  volition,  become  a citizen  of  any  state  of  the 
Union  by  a bona  fide  residence  therein,  with  the 
same  rights  as  the  other  citizens  of  that  state. 
To  these  may  be  added  the  rights  secured  by  the 
Thirteenth  and  Fifteenth  Articles  of  Amendment, 
and  by  the  . . . Fourteenth. 

It  may  be  said  generally  that  federal  rights, 
including  within  this  term  both  privileges  and 
immunities,  embrace  all  those  rights  which  are 
recognized  and  supported  by  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution and  the  treaties  entered  into  and 
statutes  enacted  in  pursuance  thereof;  and  by 
this  is  meant  not  only  those  rights  which  are 
specifically  enumerated  but  all  those  which 
impliedly  exist  by  reason  of  the  nature  of  the 
American  constitutional  system  and  the  su- 
premacy of  national  authority.  It  is,  how- 
ever, to  be  remarked  that  the  limitations  which 
are  laid  upon  the  Federal  Government,  as,  for 
example,  by  the  first  eight  amendments  to  the 
Constitution  (see  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  Amendments  to),  do  not  operate  to 
create  corresponding  federal  rights  of  the  citi- 
zen which  the  states  may  not  abridge.  This 
was  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  Maxwell 
vs.  Dow  (176  U.  8.  581)  in  which  case  the 
court  says  “in  none  are  the  privileges  and 
immunities  granted  and  belonging  to  the  indi- 
vidual as  a citizen  of  the  United  States,  but 
they  are  secured  to  all  persons  as  against  the 
Federal  Government,  entirely  irrespective  of 
such  citizenship.”  In  Minor  vs.  Happerset.t 
(21  Wall.  162)  it  is  specifically  denied  that 
the  suffrage  is  a right  springing  from  federal 
citizenship. 

See  Citizenship  in  the  United  States  : 
United  States  as  a Federal  State. 

References:  D.  K.  Watson,  Constitution  of 
the  U.  S.  (1910)  ; W.  W.  Willoughby,  Consti- 
tutional Law  of  the  U.  8.  (1910)  J.  I.  C.  Hare, 
Am.  Const.  Law  (1889),  518-521. 

W.  W.  Willoughby. 

PRIVILEGES  AND  IMMUNITIES  OF 
STATE  CITIZENSHIP.  The  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  provides  that  the  citizens  of 
each  state  shall  be  entitled  to  all  the  privileges 
68 


PRIVY  COUNCIL — PRIVY  COUNCIL  IN  COLONIAL  AFFAIRS 


and  immunities  of  citizens  in  the  several  states 
(Art.  IV.  Sec.  ii,  If  1).  In  a federal  state,  in 
which  each  member  of  the  Union  regulates  its 
internal  affairs  and  has  its  own  citizenship,  the 
relations  between  the  commonwealths  is  of 
supreme  importance.  In  the  United  States  the 
principles  of  private  international  law  apply 
in  such  relations  in  many  particulars  just  as 
if  the  states  were  foreign  to  each  other;  but 
in  a number  of  clauses  of  the  Constitution  the 
states  are  put  under  obligations  to  regard  prin- 
ciples of  comity,  which  otherwise  might  have 
been  disregarded. 

The  clause  we  are  here  considering  made  it 
a constitutional  duty  for  each  state  to  grant 
to  citizens  of  other  states  of  the  Union  the 
same  privileges  and  immunities  it  grants  to 
its  own  citizens.  These  privileges  are  only 
those  which  pertain  to  citizenship.  It  is  not 
a privilege  of  citizenship  to  have  a share  in 
the  property  of  another  state;  the  people  of 
the  state  own  the  property;  for  example  a 
state  does  not  violate  this  constitutional  pro- 
vision by  granting  to  its  own  citizens  the  ex- 
clusive right  of  using  its  waters  for  maintain- 
ing oyster  beds  and  by  prohibiting  such  use 
by  citizens  of  other  states  (McCready  vs.  Vir- 
ginia, 94  U.  8.  391 ) . Suffrage  is  not  a privi- 
lege or  immunity  of  citizenship.  The  privi- 
leges and  immunities  contemplated  are  the 
fundamental  ones — protection  by  government, 
the  right  to  acquire  property,  to  pass  through 
or  reside  in  a state,  to  claim  the  benefit  of 
habeas  corpus,  to  institute  and  maintain  ac- 
tions in  the  courts,  etc.  The  term  citizens  in 
this  clause  of  the  Constitution  does  not  include 
corporations  but  natural  persons  only.  It  is 
therefore  constitutional  for  a state  to  exclude 
a corporation  established  by  another  state  or 
to  prescribe  certain  conditions  under  which 
such  corporations  may  do  business  within  the 
state,  subject,  of  course,  to  the  general  prin- 
ciples concerning  freedom  of  interstate  com- 
merce. 

See  Comitt,  International  and  Inter- 
state; Extradition,  Interstate;  Faith  and 
Credit;  Interstate  Law  and  Relations. 

References:  Corfield  vs.  Coryell,  4 Wash. 
C.  G.  371;  Paul  vs.  Virginia,  8 Wallace  168. 

A.  C.  McL. 

PRIVY  COUNCIL.  The  descendant  of  the 
curia  regis  or  permanent  council.  Itself  an 
inner  circle  developed  in  a body  which  had 
become  unwieldy,  it  has  transmitted  its  active 
functions  of  advice  and  administration  to  a 
circle  within  itself,  the  Cabinet  (see  Cabinet 
Government  in  England).  The  ordinance 
power  of  the  Crown  is  still,  however,  exercised 
by  orders  in  council,  practically  by  represen- 
tatives of  the  departments  concerned;  and  ad- 
ministrative powers  have  been  assigned  to  the 
Privy  Council  by  numerous  statutes,  notably 
those  concerning  public  health,  and  the  Foreign 
Enlistment  Act  of  1870.  The  board  of  trade, 

69 


local  government  board,  board  of  education  and 
board  of  agriculture  were  all  created  as  com- 
mittees of  the  Privy  Council.  There  are  also 
permanent  committees  on  universities,  Scottish 
universities,  municipal  charters,  and  the  affairs 
of  Jersey  and  Guernsey.  The  judicial  powers 
of  the  Privy  Council  are  exercised  by  the  judi- 
cial committee,  which  is  a court  of  appeals 
for  the  empire,  hearing  cases  from  the  colonial 
and  Indian  courts  and  the  ecclesiastical  courts, 
consular  and  prize  courts  and  vice-admiralty 
courts.  It  consists  (1911)  of  the  Lord  Chan- 
cellor and  the  lords  of  appeal  in  ordinary  (who 
also  constitute  the  House  of  Lords  in  its  judi- 
cial capacity)  ; the  lord  president  of  the  coun- 
cil, ex-lords  president,  other  members  of  the 
Privy  Council  who  have  held  “high  judicial 
office,”  two  former  Indian  judges,  five  colonial 
chief  justices,  and  either  one  or  two  other  mem- 
bers of  the  Council  by  special  appointment. 

Membership  in  the  Privy  Council  is  by  nomi- 
nation by  the  Crown.  There  were,  in  1911, 
about  295  members,  including  the  princes  of 
the  royal  family,  the  archbishops  and  the  Bis- 
hop of  London,  members  of  the  Cabinet  and 
ex-members,  several  other  principal  officers  of 
state  and  of  the  household,  principal  ambassa- 
dors, colonial  premiers  and  many  statesmen, 
politicians  and  men  of  distinction  in  arts,  let- 
ters and  science.  Appointment  is  for  the  life 
of  the  sovereign  and  six  months  following; 
but  in  practice  the  new  sovereign  renews  the 
appointment.  The  Privy  Council  meets  as  a 
whole  on  the  succession  of  a new  monarch,  and 
may  be  summoned  on  other  occasions  of  cere- 
mony. At  other  times  only  those  concerned  in 
the  specific  business  are  invited. 

See  Executive  System  in  Great  Britain. 

References:  L.  Courtney,  The  Working  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  Kingdom  (1901); 
W.  R.  Anson,  Law  and  Custom  of  the  Consti- 
stitution  (3d  ed.,  1908),  II,  Pt.  II;  A.  L. 
Lowell,  The  Government  of  England  (1908)  ; 
J.  Macy,  The  English  Constitution  (1897)  ; 
kcatesman’s  Year  Book  (annual). 

F.  D.  Bramhall. 

PRIVY  COUNCIL  IN  COLONIAL  AFFAIRS. 

After  1600  the  council  took  an  active  part  in 
colonial  administration  either  through  the 
lords  of  trade  (see)  or  by  its  committees.  It 
approved  all  charters,  commissions  and  in- 
structions, and,  by  orders  in  council  gave  ulti- 
mate sanction  to  the  administrative,  commer- 
cial, and  military  recommendations  of  the 
board  of  trade  (see)  and  other  governmental 
departments.  On  the  advice  of  the  board  of 
trade  or  the  law  officers  of  the  Crown  it  allowed 
or  disallowed  the  acts  of  the  colonial  legis- 
latures, and  through  its  committee  on  appeals 
was  the  final  court  for  the  decision  of  all 
colonial  cases.  See  Board  of  Trade;  Coloni- 
zation by  Great  Britain  in  America.  Ref- 
erences: C.  M.  Andrews  and  F.  G.  Davenport, 
Guide  to  Manuscript  Materials  in  the  British 


PRIZE  CASES — PROBATION  OFFICERS 


Museum,  etc.  (1908),  170-174;  C.  M.  Andrews,  I 

British  Committees and  Councils 

of  Trade  (1908),  60-114;  Acts  of  the  Privy 
Council,  Colonial,  Series  (1908),  I,  clis.  xi-xvi, 
II,  clis.  xi-xxv.  E.  K. 

PRIZE  CASES.  In  May,  1861,  certain  ves- 
sels and  their  cargoes  were  seized  in  Hampton 
Roads  for  an  alleged  violation  of  the  blockade 
of  the  ports  of  the  state  of  Virginia  proclaimed 
by  the  President  before  any  formal  declar- 
ation of  war  with  the  Confederate  States  had 
been  made  by  Congress ; and  the  question  dis- 
cussed on  an  appeal  to  the  Supreme  Court  from 
the  decisions  of  the  prize  court  in  which  the 
vessels  had  been  adjudged  to  be  lawful  prizes 
of  war  was  whether  a state  of  war  justifying 
a proclamation  of  belligerency  and  blockade 
could  constitutionally  be  made  by  the  Presi- 
dent prior  to  any  declaration  of  war  by  Con- 
gress ((1862]  2 Black  635).  The  conclusion 
reached  by  the  majority  of  the  court  was  that 
a state  of  war  might  exist  authorizing  a proc- 
lamation of  blockade  prior  to  a declaration 
of  war  by  Congress  and  that  the  fact  of  the 
existence  of  a state  of  war  was  a political 
question  as  to  which  the  action  of  the  executive 
was  conclusive  on  the  courts.  The  theory  of 
the  dissenting  judges  was  that  while  the  action 
of  Congress  would  be  conclusive  on  the  courts, 
the  president  had  no  authority  under  the  Con- 
stitution to  proclaim  a blockade  until  Congress 
had  acted.  See  Blockade;  Declaration  of 
War.  Reference:  J.  R.  Tucker,  Constitution 
of  U.  S.  (1899),  II,  588-9.  E.  McC. 

PRIZE  LAW  AND  COURTS.  The  title  to 

property  captured  in  time  of  war  does  not 
legally  pass  to  the  captor  until  adjudication  by 
a prize  court.  “The  right  of  capture  is  a 
limited  right,  is  derived  from  the  law,  and  is 
subject  to  all  the  restrictions  the  law  imposes, 
and  is  to  be  exercised  in  the  manner  which  its 
wisdom  imposes”  (The  Thomas  Gibbons,  3 
C ranch  421). 

In  the  United  States  the  district  courts  are 
invested  with  the  power  of  prize  courts  with 
appeal  to  the  Supreme  Court.  The  prize  law 
of  different  states  varies;  some  states  follow 
the  principle  of  the  domicil  of  the  owner  as 
determining  enemy  character  of  property; 
other  states  follow  the  principle  of  the  nation- 
ality of  the  owner.  The  methods  of  procedure 
in  the  prize  courts  of  different  states  is  usually 
similar.  The  trials  therein  are  to  be  “accord- 
ing to  the  usage  of  nations  and  not  by  jury.” 

This  American  position  that  the  prize  court 
should  administer  international  law  is  in  ac- 
cord with  British  precedent  (The  Maria  [1799] 

1 C.  Robinson,  Admiralty  Reports  340).  When 
administrative  officers  sit  in  the  court, 
as  in  Russia  in  1904,  decisions  are  sometimes 
less  acceptable  to  neutrals.  The  prize  court 
does  not  usually  give  the  same  attention  to 
minute  technicalities  as  do  other  courts. 


In  1907  propositions  were  made  at  the  In- 
ternational Peace  Conference  at  The  Hague  to 
establish  an  International  Prize  Court  to  de- 
cide questions  on  appeal  from  the  decision  of 
national  prize  courts.  As  cases  of  prize  are 
essentially  international  questions  there  is 
ample  reason  for  the  establishment  of  such  a 
court.  A convention  providing  for  such  a 
court  was  signed,  and  duly  ratified  by  the  Sen- 
ate, February  15,  1911,  though  with  the  proviso 
that  a case  referred  to  this  court  might  be  con- 
sidered as  coming  before  it  de  novo. 

See  Maritime  War;  Piracy;  Private  Prop- 
erty at  Sea;  Privateers;  Prize  Money. 

References:  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law 
(1906),  VII,  584,  655;  U.  8.  Rev.  statutes 
(1878),  §§  563,  1624,  4615-21. 

George  G.  Wilson. 

PRIZE  MONEY.  Till  1899  it  was  custom- 
ary in  the  United  States,  and  in  many  states 
it  still  is  customary,  for  the  prize  court  to 
distribute  among  the  captors,  even  though  they 
be  of  the  public  forces,  the  proceeds  of  the 
capture.  It  was  formerly  accepted  that  such 
a proceeding  stimulated  the  loyal  zeal  of  those 
engaged  in  war  on  the  sea;  though  such  ideas 
had  long  since  been  put  aside  in  warfare  on 
land.  The  United  States  by  act  of  March  3, 
1899  provides  that: 

All  provisions  of  law  authorizing  the  distribu- 
tion among  captors  of  the  whole,  or  any  portion, 
of  the  proceeds  of  vessels,  or  any  property  here- 
after captured,  condemned  as  prize,  or  providing 
for  the  payment  of  bounty  for  the  sinking  or 
destruction  of  vessels  or  the  enemy  hereafter  oc- 
curring in  time  of  war,  are  hereby  repealed. 

See  Maritime  War;  Prize  Law  and  Courts. 

References:  U.  8.  Statutes  at  Large,  XXX 
(1897).  G.  G.  W. 

TROBATE  COURT.  See  Court  of  Pro- 
bate. 

PROBATION  OFFICERS.  Systems  of  pub- 
lic education  do  not  work  automatically,  and 
wherever  they  are  carried  out  there  must  be 
some  system  of  supervision.  In  many  places 
the  police  receive  lists  of  children  not  account- 
ed for  and  go  to  the  houses  and  make  in- 
quiries. In  Massachusetts  and  other  states 
there  is  a much  more  effective  system  of  truant 
officers  or  probation  officers,  who  follow  up 
lists  given  them  by  the  school  authorities; 
they  not  only  try  to  restore  the  children  to 
school,  but  are  placed  in  charge  of  habitual 
truants.  Probation  officers  are  also  appointed 
by  juvenile  courts  and  sometimes  by  other 
courts  to  look  after  delinquent  young  persons. 
Sometimes  they  are  also  put  in  charge  of  pris- 
oners out  on  probation.  The  system  is  a 
valuable  adjunct  to  the  whole  method  of 
preventive  discipline.  See  Children,  Depend- 
ent, Public  Care  of;  Education,  Compul- 
sory; Public  Morals,  Care  for;  Social  Re- 
form Problems.  A.  B.  II. 


PROBATION  OF  PRISONERS— PRODUCTION 


PROBATION  OF  PRISONERS.  See 

Prisoners,  Probation  of. 

PROCLAMATIONS,  EXECUTIVE.  These 
are  issued  by  the  executive  in  pursuance  of 
constitutional  or  statutory  powers  and  duties 
or  with  regard  to  matters  which  it  is  desirable 
to  direct  the  public  attention  to.  There  is  no 
general  statute  of  Congress  regulating  their 
issuance.  For  many  of  them,  such  as  the 
Thanksgiving  proclamation,  there  is  no  pro- 
vision at  all.  The  few  subjects  on  which  the 
President  may  act  with  a specific  authority 
conferred  by  Congress  include:  the  sale  of 
public  land3,  the  establishment  of  forest  re- 
serves, the  extension  of  copyright  privileges 
to  foreign  citizens  and  subjects,  the  applica- 
tion of  the  minimum  tariff  of  the  Payne-Ald- 
rich  act  to  the  imports  coming  from  particu- 
lar countries,  the  conduct  to  be  observed 
toward  alien  enemies,  the  jurisdiction  of  for- 
eign consuls  over  disputes  among  seamen,  the 
suspension  of  discriminating  tonnage  duties  on 
foreign  vessels,  closing  a port  of  entry  in  case 
of  insurrection,  and  exempting  hospital  ships 
from  taxes  and  pilotage  duties  in  time  of  war. 
The  great  range  which  the  use  of  the  procla- 
mation may  cover  was  well  illustrated  in  the 
administration  of  President  Lincoln.  His 
powers  were,  of  course,  vastly  increased  by 
the  existence  of  war.  He  issued  proclama- 
tions admitting  West  Virginia  and  Nevada  as 


states,  suspending  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  at 
various  times  and  in  various  places,  calling 
for  militia  and  volunteers,  establishing  and 
raising  blockades,  forbidding  intercourse  with 
Confederate  states  declaring  the  forfeiture  of 
property,  regulating  the  collection  of  taxes  in 
the  South,  offering  pardon  to  deserters,  ex- 
tending amnesty  to  rebels  and  providing  for 
the  recognition  of  state  governments  in  the 
South,  emancipating  the  slaves,  calling  the  Sen- 
ate and  Congress  into  special  session,  appoint- 
ing a day  of  prayer,  a national  fast  day, 
a day  of  thanksgiving  for  victories,  subject- 
ing to  military  service  aliens  who  had  declared 
their  intention  of  becoming  citizens  and  sub- 
jecting to  court-martial  those  guilty  of  fur- 
nishing arms  to  the  Indians.  In  some  of  these 
cases  Lincoln  acted  with  clear  legal  warrant; 
in  others  with  doubtful  authority,  as  was  seen 
when  the  Supreme  Court  condemned  his  sus- 
pension of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  outside 
the  theatre  of  war.  It  is  customary  for  the 
executive  department  concerned  to  draft  the 
proclamation.  Thus  in  two  cases  President 
Harrison  used,  with  some  alterations,  drafts 
of  the  Thanksgiving  proclamation  prepared  by 
the  Department  of  State  and  in  the  two  other 
cases  wrote  the  proclamation  himself.  See 
Governor;  Messages;  Executive;  President. 
Reference:  J.  A.  Fairlie,  The  National  Ad- 
ministration of  the  United  States  (1905),  41- 
42.  Charles  A.  Beard. 


PRODUCTION 


Definitions. — Fundamental  to  all  production 
are  the  wants  of  human  beings.  Effective- 
ness for  the  satisfaction  of  want  is  termed 
utility.  Not  all  useful  things  need  to  be 
produced;  some  of  them,  e.  g.,  air,  are  to  be 
had  in  sufficient  supply  without  any  need  of 
effort  or  attention.  These  are  called  free 
goods.  Only  goods  that  are  both  useful  and, 
relatively  to  the  need  for  them,  in  some  meas- 
ure scarce  can  require  to  be  produced  and 
can  as  product  indemnify  the  producer  of  them 
for  his  costs  of  production.  Such  useful  and 
scarce  goods  have  value;  having  value,  that  is 
the  power  of  purchasing  other  things,  they 
become  profitable  of  production  if  their  costs 
are  not  out  of  proportion  to  their  value. 
Whether  then,  after  all,  the  process  of  pro- 
ducing these  goods  is  remunerative  to  the  pro- 
ducer depends  in  part  upon  what  they  will  sell 
for  and  in  part  upon  what  it  costs  to  produce 
them  ( see  Cost,  Economic). 

Valuable  Goods. — Economic  products  are  di- 
vided into  two  classes  called:  (1)  wealth; 
(2)  services;  wealth  including  all  relatively 
permanent  items  of  value,  like  cloth,  wheat, 
lumber;  services  connoting  such  evanescent 
yet  useful  facts  as  the  effects  from  singing, 
preaching,  teaching,  or  acting.  The  maker  of  a 

71 


violin  produces  wealth;  the  player  of  it  pro- 
duces services.  Either  is  economically  pro- 
ductive, as  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  either 
commands  payment.  The  servant  or  the  advis- 
ing physician  furnishes  something  that  we  de- 
sire and  something  so  far  scarce  that  we  must 
pay  for  it  in  order  to  have  it.  Good  advice 
may  afford  more  benefit  than  an  equally  costly 
drug;  pills  are  wealth;  advice  is  service. 

The  amount  of  valuable  goods  that  can  be 
consumed  depends  upon  the  volume  which  is 
produced.  It  follows  that  the  average  or  per 
capita  production  of  valuable  goods — inclusive 
both  of  wealth  and  services — in  any  society, 
and  thereby  the  average  or  per  capita  command 
of  economic  welfare  in  that  society  is  con- 
ditioned: (1)  upon  the  quality  of  the  human 
laborer  as  producer;  (2)  upon  the  social  and 
institutional  conditions  within  which  the  la- 
borer works;  (3)  upon  the  environmental  situ- 
ation. This  same  fact  may  be  restated  to  assert 
that  the  standard  of  living  in  any  society  re- 
flects the  average  or  per  capita  production  and 
is  derivative  from  it.  Thus,  the  great  economic 
prosperity  of  America  is  due  in  large  part  to 
its  abundance  of  fertile  land  and  to  the  other 
great  natural  resources  and  opportunities  which 
the  continent  presents — great  stores  of  gold, 


PROFESSIONAL  SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC— PROFESSIONS,  PUBLIC  REGULATION  OF 


silver,  iron,  copper,  lead,  and  coal;  wide  ex- 
panses of  forests;  great  natural  advantages 
for  transportation;  an  especially  favorable  cli- 
mate. With  about  one-eighteenth  of  the  popu- 
lation of  the  world,  this  continent  produces 
three-fourths  of  the  maize,  more  wheat  than 
any  other  one  country,  one-third  of  the  oats, 
two-thirds  of  the  cotton,  one-half  of  the  iron, 
one-fourth  of  the  gold,  three-sevenths  of  the 
lead,  two-fifths  of  the  coal  (and,  exclusive  of 
the  United  Kingdom,  more  than  all  the  rest  of 
the  world  combined),  three-fifths  of  the  copper, 
one-third  of  the  zinc. 

Not  only  does  the  per  capita  output  of 
America  advantage  greatly  by  the  generous  en- 
vironment, but  perhaps  even  more  by  the 
average  productive  efficiency  of  the  American 
as  economic  producer.  The  American  laborer 
is  vigorous  of  body,  rapid  of  movement,  in- 
dustrious, intelligent,  and  inventive,  and  en- 
joys in  especial  degree  the  aid  of  the  world’s 
best  attainments  in  the  science  and  technique 
of  industry,  both  in  the  methods  of  industry 
and  in  the  equipment  of  instrumental  goods — 
tools,  machines,  and  appliances;  that  is  to  say, 
in  the  stored  up  products  of  earlier  labor  set 
aside  for  further  production. 

Something  further  deserves  to  be  said  as  to 
the  scientific  and  institutional  situation,  and 
particularly  as  to  the  prevailing  organization 
of  the  processes  of  production.  Most  import- 
ant among  the  characteristics  of  man  as  pro- 
ducer are  his  intellectual  powers  and  acquire- 
ments. If  we  compare  modern  industrial  proc- 
esses with  the  methods  of  ancient  times,  we  get 
some  notion  of  the  importance  of  science  and 
art  in  production.  Especially  in  the  world  of 
economics  is  it  true  that  knowledge  is  power. 
The  savage  made  an  enormous  step  forward 
when  he  acquired  the  knowledge  of  the  bow 
and  the  rod.  Tools  increase  by  many  fold  the 
effectiveness  of  human  energies.  But  when,  by 
the  use  of  machinery,  man  lias  harnessed  to  his 
aid  the  forces  of  nature,  the  field  of  progress 
is  indefinitely  widened.  And  behind  the  art 
and  the  skill  in  all  these  processes  and  methods, 
there  is  a world  of  pure  science.  No  one  has 
grown  more  grain  than  the  chemist.  The  in- 
vestigators and  the  inventors  have  revolution- 
ized the  opinions  and  the  organization  of  the 
modern  world.  The  ruling  forces  of  civilized 
life  are  the  intellectual  forces.  The  moral  code 
of  eighteen  hundred  years  ago  left,  indeed,  not 
much  to  be  added.  Laws,  governments,  insti- 
tutions, science,  art,  invention,  and  discovery, 
these  are  the  facts  which  measure  the  distance 
between  civilization  and  savagery.  In  these 
directions  the  progress  of  mankind  is  seeming- 
ly without  limit  (see  Division  of  Labor). 

Productive  Wealth. — Production  in  a com- 
petitive society  taking  place  commonly  and 
typically  for  purposes  of  sale  in  the  market, 
each  producer  must  aim  at  results  in  terms  of 
price.  It  is  in  terms  of  the  price  which  he 
receives,  and  as  limited  by  it,  that  he  comes 


into  command  of  the  other  things  that  satisfy 
his  needs.  Productive,  therefore,  are  those 
instruments  and  agents  which  bring  about  or 
aid  in  bringing  about  a result  to  which  there 
attaches  a price.  It  matters  not  for  this  pur- 
pose— but  only  for  purposes  of  ethical  esti- 
mate and  social  appraisal — that  the  result  may 
or  may  not  be  a pernicious  thing,  or  even  that, 
from  the  point  of  view  of  social  welfare,  the 
gain  rendering  process  be  essentially  predatory. 
Whiskey,  peruna,  hop  bitters,  corsets,  ribbons, 
caviare  and  mince  pie  are  products  market- 
able at  a price;  therefore  the  labor  and  equip- 
ment employed  in  their  production  must  be 
accounted  productive.  So  burglars’  jimmies 
are  productive  by  the  mere  fact  that  they 
render  a price  gain  to  the  owner,  either  through 
renting  them  or  through  direct  use. 

Nor  is  the  materiality  or  the  tangibility  of 
the  product  relevant  for  the  purpose:  actors, 
teachers,  preachers,  lawyers,  all  do  things  that 
men  are  content  to  pay  for.  Wages  are  earned 
by  winning  bad  law  suits,  by  writing  advertis- 
ing lies,  by  libeling  a rival  candidate,  or  by 
setting  fire  to  a competitor’s  refinery. 

Factors  of  Production. — The  factors  of  pro- 
duction, so-called,  are  commonly  distributed 
into  three  classes — land,  labor,  and  capital. 
All  production,  and  therefore  all  income, 
whether  socially  or  individually  viewed,  must 
be  due  either  to:  (1)  human  activity,  (2) 
human  possessions.  The  productive,  or  gainful, 
or  acquisitive,  activity  of  human  beings  is 
called  labor.  Human  labor,  is  either:  (1)  em- 
ployed labor  remunerated  in  wages  ( inclusive 
of  salaries,  fees,  etc.)  ; (2)  the  labor  of  the 
employer  remunerated  in  profits  (see).  Wages 
connote  the  intermediation  of  an  employer; 
profits  are  remuneration  received  without  the 
intervention  of  an  employer. 

All  incomes  from  possessions,  property  or 
capital,  trace  back  either  to  natural  sources  of 
income,  commonly  called  land,  or  to  arti- 
ficial sources,  commonly  called  capital  (see). 
But  land  as  well  as  any  other  item  of  pro- 
ductive property  ranks  in  the  business  man’s 
computation  as  capital,  by  the  sole  and  ulti- 
mate test  of  rendering  an  income. 

See  Cost,  Economic  ; Economic  Theory, 
History  of;  Labor;  Price,  Economic  Theory 
of;  Profit. 

References:  H.  E.  Gregory,  A.  G.  Keller,  and 
A.  L.  Bishop,  Physical  and  Commercial  Geo- 
graphy (ed.,  1910),  ch.  7;  J.  S.  Mill,  Princi- 
ples of  Pol.  Economy  (ed.,  1909),  I,  chs.  i, 
ii,  vii,  viii,  ix;  A.  Marshall,  Principles  of 
Economics  (4tli  ed.,  1898),  Bk.  II,  chs.  i-iii, 
v,  vi,  viii,  ix,  xi-xiii.  H.  J.  Davenport. 

PROFESSIONAL  SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC.  See 

Schools,  Public,  Professional. 

PROFESSIONS  AND  CALLINGS,  PUBLIC 
REGULATION  OF.  Under  its  police  power  the 
state  may  impose  conditions  upon  admission 


PROFIT  SHARING 


to  any  professions  or  callings  whose  regula- 
tion is  justified  in  the  interest  of  society,  ill 
order  to  protect  the  public  health,  safety  or 
morals,  or  to  guard  the  public  from  fraud, 
crime  or  disorder.  A calling  or  profession 
legitimate  in  itself  may  not  be  altogether  for- 
bidden, unless  the  dangers  arising  from  it 
clearly  outweigh  the  possible  advantages;  and 
every  public  regulation  of  legitimate  callings 
or  professions  must  bear  some  direct  and  ap- 
preciable relation  to  possible  dangers  or  abuses 
arising  in  connection  with  such  calling  or  pro- 
fession. The  state  may  impose  reasonable  re- 
strictions upon  the  practice  of  any  calling 
which  requires  special  knowledge,  experience 
or  skill.  The  state  control  of  professions  and 
callings  is  exercised  primarily  for  the  purposes 
of  preventing  crime  or  its  concealment,  of 
preventing  fraud,  of  protecting  morals  and 
order,  and  of  protecting  the  health  and  safety 
of  the  community. 

Licenses  and  Certificates. — The  method  ordi- 
narily employed  in  the  United  States  for  the 
regulation  of  professions  and  callings  is  that 
of  licensing,  licenses  ordinarily  being  granted 
as  a result  of  examinations  or  other  tests  of 
competency ; and  persons  without  licenses  being 
forbidden  to  engage  in  such  professions  or  call- 
ings. 

Another  method  of  control,  but  less  often  em- 
ployed in  the  United  States,  is  that  of  issuing 
certificates  to  those  who  comply  with  certain 
tests,  but  without  forbidding  the  exercise  of 
the  profession  or  calling  to  those  without  such 
certificates.  This  second  plan  is  not  a safe 
one  with  respect  to  trades  and  professions 
closely  affecting  the  public  health  or  safety, 
but  has  been  employed  with  respect  to  account- 
ants and  nurses.  What  the  government  does 
in  such  a case  is  merely  to  certify  to  the 
competence  of  the  person  having  a certificate, 
thus  giving  him  an  advantage  with  the  public, 
as  against  his  competitors  who  have  not  com- 
plied with  the  test  necessary  to  obtain  such 
a certificate. 

Law  and  Medicine. — Of  the  professions  sub- 
ject to  public  regulation,  the  most  important 
are  those  of  medicine,  pharmacy,  dentistry, 
veterinary  surgery,  architecture,  public  ac- 
countancy, and  the  practice  of  law.  The  pro- 
fessions concerned  with  the  treatment  of  dis- 
ease and  the  sale  of  medicine  are  usually  sub- 
ject to  strict  regulation;  and  properly  so,  in- 
asmuch as  they  deal  most  closely  with  matters 
of  public  health.  The  practice  of  law  is  sub- 
ject in  most  states  to  a similar  strict  control, 
and  the  requirements  for  admission  to  the  bar 
have  been  materially  raised  in  a number  of 
the  states  during  the  past  twenty-five  years. 
It  is  almost  universally  recognized  that  grave 
abuses  are  likely  to  arise  from  the  admission 
of  incompetent  persons  to  practice  a profes- 
sion which  bears  such  a close  relation  to  the 
administration  of  justice.  The  Indiana  con- 
stitution (1851),  however,  provides  that  “every 


person  of  good  moral  character,  being  a voter, 
shall  be  entitled  to  admission  to  practice  law 
in  all  courts  of  justice.”  In  general  the  legis- 
latures have  power  to  prescribe  regulations  for 
admission  to  the  bar,  but  the  supreme  courts 
of  Pennsylvania  and  Illinois  have  held  that 
the  practice  of  law  is  so  closely  related  to  judi- 
cial functions  that  the  legislature  may  not 
prescribe  conclusively  the  conditions  for  ad- 
mission to  the  bar.  The  power  to  disbar  an 
attorney  for  improper  practices  is  one  exer- 
cised by  the  courts. 

Architects  and  Accountants. — The  right  to 
practice  as  an  architect  is  one  not  so  general- 
ly subjected  to  public  regulation,  but  there  is 
a tendency  to  make  the  practice  of  this  pro- 
fession subject  to  the  condition  that  a license 
shall  first  be  obtained.  As  to  the  profession 
of  accountancy  'it  has  already  been  suggested 
that  in  the  states  where  it  is  regulated,  the 
tendency  is  not  to  set  up  conditions  without 
compliance  with  which  no  one  shall  practice, 
but  rather  to  grant  certificates  of  competency 
to  those  meeting  certain  requirements,  and 
also  to  permit  practice  by  those  not  having 
such  certificates. 

Various  Callings. — Of  callings  subject  to  reg- 
ulation, those  of  plumbers,  barbers,  and  nurses 
are  regulated  in  the  interest  of  public  health; 
builders,  locomotive  and  stationary  engineers, 
and  mining  engineers,  are  regulated  in  the 
interest  of  the  public  safety;  auctioneers  and 
employment  agents,  largely  to  protect  from 
fraud ; and  to  this  list  may  be  added  a great 
number  of  other  occupations  which  in  recent 
years  have  been  subjected  to  public  regulation. 
Laws  have  been  enacted,  for  example,  regula- 
ting the  business  of  horse-shoeing.  Recent  Il- 
linois legislation  which  goes  very  far  in  regu- 
lating a hazardous  occupation,  but  which  has 
been  upheld  by  the  state  supreme  court,  di- 
rectly requires  coal  miners  to  pass  examina- 
tions and  obtain  certificates,  the  law  providing 
that  no  one  be  employed  in  a mine  unless  he 
has  a certificate  or  unless  he  is  working  with 
a miner  who  has  such  a certificate. 

See  Bills  of  Rights;  Business,  Govern- 
ment Restriction  of;  Examination  for  Em- 
ployment and  Professions  ; Health,  Public, 
Regulation  of;  Labor,  Freedom  of;  Labor, 
Women’s,  Legislative  Control  of;  Licenses 
for  Callings;  Police  Power;  Privileges  and 
Immunities.  W.  F.  Dodd. 

PROFIT  SHARING.  Profit  sharing  is 
an  arangement  between  employers  and  em- 
ployees usually  initiated  by  the  former  from 
a desire  to  share  prosperity  resulting  from 
joint  enterprises,  and  to  stimulate  greater 
efficiency  on  the  part  of  employees.  It  takes 
the  form  of : ( 1 ) stock  ownership,  stock  often 
being  obtained  on  terms  more  favorable  than 
the  public  acquires  it,  and  bought  on  install- 
ments; (2)  cash  bonus,  proportionate  to 
wages;  (3)  deferred  participation  in  profits 


PROFITS— PROGRESSIVE  PARTY 


where  a percentage  of  profits  is  credited  to 
special  funds  to  meet  future  needs  of  em- 
ployees. The  cash  bonus  is  the  most  popular 
form.  It  is  generally  in  use  in  department 
stores,  and  in  large,  highly  organized  indus- 
tries not  without  attendant  evils  in  exploita- 
tion of  lower  grades  of  labor.  See  Cooper- 
ation; Welfare  Systems.  References:  N.  P. 
Gilman,  Profit  Sharing  and  Cooperation  in  the 
United  States  (1900),  Methods  of  Industrial 
Peace  (1904);  H.  R.  Burch,  and  Scott  Near- 
ing, Elements  of  Economics  (1912). 

S.  McC.  L. 

PROFITS.  The  quest  of  the  business  man 
is  commonly  asserted  to  be  the  maximum  net 
profit  to  himself.  Obviously,  however,  he  is 
concerned  to  derive  from  his  capital  its  maxi- 
mum possible  return  interest,  from  his  lands 
the  maximum  rent,  from  his  machinery  its 
maximum  product  or  hire.  Used  to  connote 
all  of  these  returns  or  gains,  the  term  profit 
is  inaccurately  employed  and  comes  to  be 
practically  interchangeable  with  income.  Profit 
in  the  restricted  and  technical  sense  is  some- 
thing more  specific  and  distinctive;  it  is 
the  share  accruing  to  the  independent  business 
operator — as  distinguished  from  the  employee 
— for  his  own  personal  gain-acquiring  function 
( see  Wages). 

When  funds  are  lent  to  a borrower,  some 
charge,  or  premium,  representing  risk,  is  com- 
monly present  in  the  rate  paid  and  is  commonly 
designated  broadly  as  interest.  This  risk  share 
is,  accurately  speaking,  risk  interest.  So  if 
one  employs  his  own  capital  in  hazardous 
ways,  his  return,  if  return  there  be,  must  in- 
clude some  indemnity  for  the  danger  incurred 
of  losing  his  capital.  This  risk  charge,  also, 
is  properly  ranked  as  risk  interest  rather  than 
as  risk  profit.  Only  when  the  reward  received 
is  an  indemnity  for  the  possible  loss  of  one’s 
time  and  effort  is  the  return  accurately  to 
be  regarded  as  risk  profit.  But  there  is  wide- 
spread confusion  in  this  regard.  The  usage 
is  not  in  full  accord  with  the  logic. 

The  relation  of  profits  to  cost  of  production 
has  been  the  occasion  of  much  perplexity  and 
of  much  inaccuracy  of  statement.  It  is  not 
true  that  profit  is  a surplus  above  cost.  Neces- 
sary profit — that  portion  of  profit  which  must 
be  received  to  hold  the  producer  in  business 
as  against  his  best  alternative  opening  or  in- 
vestment— falls  within  cost.  Only  unnecessary, 
or  surplus,  profit  is  a surplus  above  cost  (see). 

Distributively  viewed,  profits  are  that  share 
out  of  the  joint  value — product  of  several  co- 
operating factors  which  accrues  to  the  entre- 
preneur as  a remainder  after  all  the  other 
shares  have  been  computed  and  allotted — rent, 
interest,  wages,  etc. 

See  Labor;  Production. 

References:  T.  N.  Carver,  Distribution  of 
Wealth  (1904).  ch.  vii;  A.  Marshall,  Princi- 
ple of  Economics  (4th  ed.,  1898),  VI,  chs.  vii, 


viii;  F.  A.  Fetter,  Principles  of  Economics 
(1904),  ch.  xxxi;  J.  S.  Mill,  Principles  of  Pol. 
Economy  (ed.,  1909),  II,  ch.  xv;  H.  J.  Daven- 
port, Value  and  Distribution  (1907),  ch.  viii. 

H.  J.  Davenport. 

PROGRESSIVE  LABOR  PARTY.  The  name 

adopted  by  the  socialistic  element  that  seceded 
from  the  United  Labor  Party  at  Syracuse, 
N.  Y.,  Aug.  19,  1880.  See  Labor  Parties; 
Socialist  Labor  Party.  O.  C.  H. 

PROGRESSIVE  PARTY.  Name  officially 

adopted  by  the  Progressive  convention  at  Chi- 
cago, Aug.  7,  1912.  The  party  arose  out  of 
two  converging  forces: 

( 1 ) A general  movement  for  a broader  range 
of  government,  particularly  in  national  affairs 
began  in  1909  (see  Progressives)  ; it  aimed  to 
compel  the  Republican  party  (see)  to  take  up 
new  principles;  and  the  leaders  expected  to 
bring  over  to  their  point  of  view  sufficient  Re- 
publicans to  give  them  permanent  control  of 
the  party. 

(2)  At  the  Republican  national  convention 
at  Chicago,  in  June,  1912,  Theodore  Roosevelt 
(see)  was  supported  by  most  of  the  former 
Progressives  and  also  by  complete  or  partial 
delegations  from  Republican  states,  such  as 
Pennsylvania  and  Illinois,  mostly  gained 
through  primaries  for  members  of  the  conven- 
tion. 

When  their  candidate  lost  the  Republican 
nomination,  as  his  supporters  believed  because 
of  unfair  tactics,  at  a mass  meeting  in  Orches- 
tra Hall  on  the  evening  of  June  22,  1912, 
Roosevelt  was  informally  nominated  as  the 
candidate  of  a new  political  organization. 

For  some  time  it  was  uncertain  whether  the 
Roosevelt  men  would  call  themselves  Pro- 
gressive Republicans  and  act  within  the  Re- 
publican party,  with  a view  to  capturing  its 
organization ; or  would  form  a third  party.  At 
a convention  which  met  in  Chicago  Aug.  5, 
made  up  wholly  of  Roosevelt  men  from  47  of 
the  48  states,  chosen  in  informal  ways,  the 
name  Progressive  was  formally  adopted. 
Theodore  Roosevelt  was  nominated  for  Presi- 
dent and  Hiram  Johnson,  Governor  of  Cali- 
fornia, for  Vice-President;  and  an  elaborate 
platform  was  adopted. 

In  California,  Pennsylvania,  and  some  other 
states,  the  adherents  of  the  new  party  for  the 
time  considered  themselves  still  within  the  Re- 
publican party. 

In  the  presidential  election  of  November, 
1912,  the  Progressive  Party  carried  one  state 
on  the  state  ticket,  cast  4,123,200  popular 
votes,  and  elected  88  presidential  electors. 
Many  of  the  former  Progressives  did  not  come 
into  the  Progressive  party;  and  it  drew  some 
voters  out  of  both  Republican  and  Democratic 
ranks,  who  had  not  been  Progressives  before 
1912.  In  1913  the  latter  began  noticeably  to 
drift  back  to  the  old  parties. 


PROGRESSIVE  TAXATION — PEOGEESSIVES 


See  Convention,  Political;  Democratic 
Party;  Platform,  Political;  Primary,  Presi- 
dential Preference;  Republican  Party; 
Socialist  Party;  Third  Parties. 

References:  Theodore  Boosevelt,  Speech,  Aug. 
6,  1912,  in  Chicago  Tribune,  Aug.  7,  1912  and 
New  York  Times,  Aug.  7,  1912;  Progressive 
National  Convention,  Official  Proceedings, 
1912;  A.  B.  Hart,  “A  New  Party,  the  People 
Want  It”  in  Review  of  Reviews,  XLII  (Aug. 
1912),  197-200;  Am.  Year  Book,  1912,  1-14, 
20-27,  34-44,  and  year  by  year. 

A.  B.  H. 

PROGRESSIVE  TAXATION.  See  Tax- 
ation, Progressive. 

PROGRESSIVES.  Conflicts  within  the  Re- 
publican Party. — Since  the  Civil  War  four  se- 
rious splits  have  threatened  the  Republican 
Party:  the  Liberal  Republican  (see)  move- 
ment of  1872;  the  Mugwump  (see)  move- 
ment of  1884;  the  silver  controversy  (see) 
of  1890;  and  the  progressive  movement  which 
came  into  prominence  under  that  name  in 
1910.  Of  these  the  most  serious,  because  ap- 
pearing in  the  largest  number  of  states  and 
involving  the  most  determined  internal  strug- 
gle, is  the  progressive  movement.  In  origin 
this  movement  springs  from  the  belief  of  a 
considerable  number  of  Republicans,  reflected 
through  their  representatives  in  Congress  and 
then  through  state  legislatures,  that  the  party 
was  too  much  under  the  influence  of  “the  in- 
terests.” The  Silver  Republicans  from  1890  to 
1894  laid  hold  of  this  principle  in  their  pas- 
sionate protest  against  “gold  bugs”;  and  their 
movement  had  its  origin  in  the  belief  that 
the  accepted  commercial  and  financial  system 
of  the  United  States  gave  to  the  eastern  com- 
munities an  undue  share  of  the  profits  and 
advantages  of  the  common  national  prosper- 
ity. The  movement  for  regulation  of  the  rail- 
roads culminating  in  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Act  (see)  of  1887,  was  based  upon  the  same 
conviction — that  corporations  had  things  too 
much  their  own  way  out  of  doors,  and  had 
too  much  influence  on  Congress  and  the  state 
legislatures.  The  trust  problem,  which,  to  the 
public  mind,  was  a problem  of  commercial 
and  financial  corporations  rather  than  of  rail- 
roads, intensified  this  sense  of  protest.  The 
earliest  evidence,  however,  of  the  spirit  in  the 
party  was  the  protest  of  certain  western 
members,  particularly  from  Minnesota,  against 
the  three  successive  Republican  tariffs,  the 
McKinley  tariff  of  1890,  the  Dingley  tariff  of 
1897,  and  the  Payne-Aldrich  tariff  of  1909.  The 
Populist  and  silver  movements  broke  up  the 
tradition  that  states  like  Kansas  and  Min- 
nesota were  solidly  and  permanently  Republi- 
can in  politics.  A few  Populists  and  eventu- 
ally a few  Democrats  were  returned  to  Con- 
gress from  those  communities.  Their  protests, 
however,  had  very  little  effect. 

103 


The  friction  within  the  party  was  much 
increased  by  the  opinion  of  a vigorous  minor- 
ity of  the  party  that  the  organization  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  gave  too  much  power 
to  the  Speaker,  and  that  his  appointments  and 
favors  usually  went  to  those  who  supported 
what  by  1910  was  familiarly  called  the  “stand- 
pat  policy” — that  is,  the  policy  of  adherence 
to  existing  legislation  on  the  tariff,  railroads, 
trusts,  taxation,  and  conservation. 

Insurgency  on  the  Payne-Aldrich  Tariff. — In 
1909  about  a score  of  the  Republican  Repre- 
sentatives refused  to  support  the  pending  tariff 
bill,  and  in  the  next  session,  as  a result  of 
the  congressional  election  of  1908,  this  body 
of  so-called  insurgents  (see)  mustered  40  votes 
in  the  House  and  eight  in  the  Senate.  They 
combined  with  the  Democrats  to  overthrow  the 
power  of  the  Speaker,  and  seriously  to  amend 
railroad  and  other  legislation. 

Progressive  Republicans. — In  the  congres- 
sional compaign  of  1910,  the  insurgents  showed 
such  strength  that  it  was  no  longer  possible 
to  treat  them  simply  as  an  insubordinate  and 
troublesome  faction  of  the  party.  They  took 
upon  themselves  the  title  of  Progressive  Re- 
publicans. The  most  aggressive  and  influential 
of  them  were  Senator  La  Follette,  of  Wiscon- 
sin, Senator  Cummins,  of  Iowa,  Senator  Dol- 
liver,  of  Iowa,  and  Senator  Beveridge,  of  Indi- 
ana, who,  however,  lost  his  seat,  and  retired  in 
March,  1911.  The  political  influence  of  the 
progressives  was  felt  by  both  parties.  Some 
of  them  deadlocked  with  the  standpatters 
in  their  districts,  and  through  the  dissen- 
tions  in  the  ranks  of  the  Republicans  the  Dem- 
ocrats were  able  to  make  a net  gain  of  51 
seats  in  the  House,  and  to  capture  nine  state 
legislatures  from  the  Republicans.  In  the 
Senate  of  the  Sixty-second  Congress  however, 
a combination  of  Democratic  and  progressive 
votes  was  necessary  to  carry  a measure  against 
the  regular  Republicans.  In  the  senatorial 
elections  of  the  early  part  of  1911,  the  term 
“progressive”  was  given  a wider  signification 
through  the  action  of  a small  body  of  “Progres- 
sive Democrats”  in  the  Democratic  legislature 
of  New  York,  who  stood  out  against  a senato- 
rial nomination  which  they  thought  unfit.  Of 
the  old-line  leaders  of  the  regular  Republicans, 
two,  Senator  Aldrich  of  Rhode  Island,  and  Sen- 
ator Hale  of  Maine,  declined  to  stand  for  re- 
election.  Others,  like  Senators  Lodge  and  Crane 
of  Massachusetts  and  Senator  Penrose  of  Penn- 
sylvania, stood  out  against  a more  moderate 
policy.  By  the  beginning  of  the  presidential 
campaign  of  1912,  the  progressive  movement 
had  acquired  such  strength  that  the  Progres- 
sive Republicans  attempted  to  take  possession 
of  the  party  and  to  dictate  its  platform. 

Principles  of  the  Progressive  Republicans. — 
Until  the  formation  of  the  Progressive  party 
(see)  the  general  principles  of  the  Progressive 
Republicans  were  not  authoritatively  defined 
but  the  early  canons  of  the  progressives  may 


75 


PROHIBITION 


be  deduced  from  state  platforms  and  from  the 
speeches  of  the  acknowledged  leaders.  In  the 
first  place  they  were  bent  on  changing  the  po- 
litical machinery  of  the  Republican  party. 
Senator  La  Follette  began  the  campaign  in 
Wisconsin,  where,  after  service  as  representa- 
tive in  Congress,  he  became  governor,  and  sub- 
sequently United  States  Senator  in  the  face 
of  the  opposition  of  the  party  machine.  To 
break  the  power  of  the  organization  he  advo- 
cated, finally  secured  in  his  own  state,  and 
thereby  set  an  example  for  other  states,  direct 
primary  (see)  nominations  of  state  officials 
and  of  Representatives  in  Congress.  In  other 
states,  particularly  Oregon,  this  principle  was 
extended  to  the  expression  of  a ruling  prefer- 
ence for  United  States  Senators  in  the  pri- 
maries. This  device  enabled  the  progressives 
to  elect  a large  number  of  members  of  Con- 
gress who  owed  no  allegiance  to  the  old-line 
party  managers.  The  initiative  and  referen- 
dum in  state  government  followed  close  after 
the  primary  system  in  several  states,  and  was 
favored  by  most  of  the  progressives. 

The  second  main  principle  of  the  progres- 
sives was  hostility  to  all  kinds  of  powerful 
corporations,  especially  railroads  and  great 
industrial  combinations  exercising  an  approach 
to  monopolistic  control  over  certain  industries. 
Hence,  the  progressives  favored  more  and  more 
stringent  legislation;  they  helped  to  carry 
against  the  standpatters  the  statute  of  1910 
extending  the  powers  of  the  Interstate  Com- 
merce Commission  (see),  and  they  supported 
prosecutions  of  corporations  under  the  Sher- 
man Act  (see)  of  1890. 

In  the  third  place,  the  progressives  advo- 
cated a reduction  of  the  tariff,  the  question 
upon  which  their  strength  was  first  revealed. 
They  fought  for  a lower  rate  of  duties  in  the 
act  of  1909,  and  accused  the  stand-pat  leaders 
of  trickery  and  evasion  of  platform  obligations. 
Their  point  of  view  was,  however,  much  affect- 
ed by  the  reciprocity  legislation  of  1911,  which 
was  carried  by  a combination  of  some  of  the 
regulars  with  the  Democrats.  It  proved  that 
the  constituents  of  many  of  the  progressives, 
especially  in  the  northwestern  states,  objected 
to  the  free  entry  of  Canadian  farm  products. 
The  rejection  of  reciprocity  by  Canada  (see), 
therefore,  released  the  progressives  from  a 
painful  dilemma. 

Formation  of  the  Progressive  Party. — Among 
the  leading,  though  unofficial,  heads  of  the  pro- 
gressive movement,  was  Theodore  Roosevelt, 
ex-President  of  the  United  States.  On  August 
31,  1910,  Roosevelt  laid  down  a platform  in 
seventeen  planks  which  he  called  the  “New 
Nationalism.”  This  platform  included  most 
of  the  points  made  by  the  Progressive  Repub- 
licans, and  many  which  in  the  campaigns  of 
1892,  189fi  and  1900  had  been  put  forward  by 
the  Democratic  leader,  Mr.  Bryan.  Tt  advo- 
cated thorough  supervision  of  trusts  and  cor- 
porations by  a federal  agency  on  conservation, 

76 


the  direct  primary,  and  the  recall  of  elective 
officials. 

Early  in  1912  the  Progressive  Republicans 
declared  themselves  opposed  to  the  renomina- 
tion of  President  Taft  by  the  Republican  Par- 
ty and  prevailed  upon  Roosevelt  to  offer  him- 
self as  a candidate  for  the  Republican  nomina- 
tion. The  defeat  of  their  candidate  in  the 
Convention,  the  progressives  attributed  to 
fraudulent  decisions  of  the  Republican  Nation- 
al Committee  in  a large  number  of  contests  be- 
tween delegates  representing  the  opposing  fac- 
tions. A convention  of  progressives  was  ac- 
cordingly held  in  Chicago,  August  5-7,  1912, 
which  resulted  in  the  formation,  under  the 
leadership  of  Theodore  Roosevelt  of  the  Pro- 
gressive Party  (see),  in  which  the  progressive 
elements  of  both  parties  were  thenceforth 
merged. 

See  Independent  Movements  in  Politics  ; 
Insurgents  in  Congress;  Nomination  of  the 
President;  Parties,  State  and  Local;  Par- 
ty, Place  and  Significance  of;  Progressive 
Party;  Public  Opinion  and  Popular  Con- 
trol; Reform  Movements,  Political;  Repub- 
lican Party;  Third  Parties;  Voting,  Inde- 
pendent. 

Reference:  American  Year  Booh,  1910,  31- 
54,  1911,  68-71,  1912.  1-44,  and  year  by  year. 

Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

PROHIBITION.  The  first  state-wide  prohi- 
bition law  was  enacted  in  Maine  in  1846.  It 
was  a crude  measure  and  could  only  be  made 
partially  effective  because  it  contained  no  ade- 
quate provision  for  the  punishment  of  viola- 
tions or  for  the  seizure  of  liquors  held  for  sale. 
A new  measure  was  therefore  enacted  on  April 
29,  1851.  It  was  the  first  full-fledged  prohibi- 
tion law  and  became  famous  tbe  world  over  as 
the  Maine  Law.  In  1856  public  sentiment 
changed  and  swept  away  all  this  legislation 
with  its  numerous  amendments  and  substi- 
tuted a license  law.  In  1858  the  question  of 
license  or  prohibition  was  again  submitted  to 
the  voters  and  a new  prohibition  law  was 
adopted.  An  amendment  to  the  constitution 
of  the  state  of  Maine  prohibiting  the  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  liquors  was  adopted  in 
1S84.  Since  1850,  24  states  and  territories 
have  at  some  time  adopted  prohibition,  but 
in  1912  only  8 of  them  remained  under  prohibi- 
tion, although  the  adoption  of  the  prohibition 
amendment  in  West  Virginia,  to  become  effec- 
tive July  1,  1914,  will  bring  tbe  total  up  to  9. 
The  tabular  statement  below  shows  the 
dates  on  which  prohibition  was  adopted  and 
repealed  in  the  different  states. 

In  a number  of  other  states  the  question  of 
adopting  prohibition  has  been  submitted  to  tbe 
electorate  and  rejected  Thus  in  1910.  the 
states  of  Missouri,  Florida,  Utah  and  Oregon 
rejected  state  prohibition,  as  did,  in  1911.  the 
state  of  Texas,  and,  in  1912,  tbe  state  of  Colo- 
rado. 


PROHIBITION  PARTY 


PROHIBITION  BY  STATUTE  OR  CONSTITU- 
TIONAL PROVISION 


State 

Adopted 

Repealed 

Illinois  - - — - — 

1S51 

1853 

Massachusetts  

1852 

1868 

1869 

1875 

Rhode  Island  

1852 

1863 

1871 

1875 

1886 

1889 

Vermont  

1852 

1503 

Connecticut 

1854 

1872 

Delaware  

1855 

1857 

Indiana  

1855 

1 18o8 

Iowa  --  — - 

1855 

2 1894 

Michigan - - 

1855 

18.5 

Nebraska  

1855 

1858 

New  Hampshire  

1855 

1903 

New  York 

1 1855 

— 

Wisconsin 

3 1855 



Maine  

1858 



Kansas 

4 1867 

5 1879 

1880 



South  Dakota  - 

1885 

1896 

Alaska  (territory)  

1887 

1899 

North  Dakota  

isyo 

— 

Georgia  — - - _____  __ 

1907 

— 

Oklahoma  ..  — --  

1907 

— 

1908 

1911 

Mississippi --  -- 

1908 

— 

Tennessee  

1909 

— 

North  Carolina 

1909 



West  Virginia 

1912 

— 

1 Declared  unconstitutional. 

2 Partial  law  only  in  IS55 ; reenacted  more  com- 
pletely in  1885. 

3 Vetoed  by  governor. 

4 Partial  law  only. 

6 Superseded  by  constitutional  prohibitory 
amendment. 

In  the  nine  states  at  the  present  time  under 
prohibition,  namely,  Maine',  Kansas,  North  Da- 
kota, Georgia,  Oklahoma,  Mississippi,  Tennes- 
see, North  Carolina,  West  Virginia,  the  manu- 
facture as  well  as  the  sale  of  alcoholic  bever- 
ages is  prohibited.  The  manufacture  of  cider 
and  wine  for  home  use  is  generally  permitted. 

See  Drunkenness,  Regulation  of;  Liquor 
Legislation  ; Liquor  Licenses. 

References:  Committee  of  Fifty,  Liquor 
Problem  in  its  Legislative  Aspects  (1818  ed.), 
1-140;  Joseph  Rowntree  and  Arthur  Sherwell, 
Temperance  Problem  and  Social  Reform  (1900 
ed.),  ch.  iii;  H.  Joyce,  Law  Relating  to 
Intoxicating  Liquors  (1910);  E.  L.  Fan- 
shaw,  Liquor  Legislation  (1893);  J.  Koren, 
Economic  Aspects  of  the  Liquor  Problem 
(1899)  ; R.  Calkins,  Substitutes  for  the  Saloon 
(1901);  Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  407,  410,  414, 
and  year  by  year;  bibliography  in  A.  B.  Hart, 
Manual  (1908),  § 228.  John  Koren. 

PROHIBITION  PARTY.  The  Prohibition 
party  has  been  the  longest-lived  of  all  third 
parties  in  this  country.  Its  fundamental  prin- 
ciple is  the  opposition  to  the  manufacture  and 
sale  of  intoxicating  liquors,  for  purposes  other 
than  their  use  in  art,  science  or  medicine.  The 
prohibition  movement  was  active  long  before 
it  was  taken  into  politics.  Only  when  the 
principles  of  prohibition  were  not  taken  up 
by  an  existing  party,  was  a distinct  party 
formed.  In  1869,  a meeting  was  held  at 
Oswego,  N.  Y.,  and  a committee  was  appointed 


to  prepare  a party  organization.  In  some 
states,  the  Prohibitionists  had  candidates  be- 
fore the  first  national  convention  of  the  party, 
which  was  held  at  Columbus,  Ohio,  February 
22,  1872.  Nine  states  were  represented  by  194 
delegates.  The  platform  favored  the  legisla- 
tive prohibition  of  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquor,  abolition  of  the  fee  system,  lower  rates 
of  postage  and  transportation,  suffrage  for 
women  and  promotion  of  immigration.  James 
Black  of  Pennsylvania,  was  nominated  for 
President,  and  received  a popular  vote  of  5,608, 
almost  all  of  the  votes  being  cast  in  Ohio, 
Pennsylvania  and  Michigan. 

The  second  convention  of  the  party  was  held 
at  Cleveland,  Ohio,  in  May,  1876.  Green  C. 
Smith  was  the  presidential  nominee  of  the 
Prohibition  Reform  party,  as  it  called  itself. 
In  the  preamble  of  the  platform,  it  stated  that 
the  party  was  “organized  to  revive,  enforce, 
and  perpetuate  in  the  government  the  doctrines 
of  the  Declaration  of  Independence.”  It  ad- 
vocated prohibition  by  Congress  of  importation, 
exportation,  manufacture  and  traffic  in  alco- 
holic beverages  in  all  places  subject  to  the  con- 
trol of  Congress;  an  amendment  to  the  Con- 
stitution to  make  prohibition  permanent  and 
universal ; treaty  stipulations  to  prevent  im- 
portation or  exportation  of  alcoholic  bever- 
ages. It  also  advocated  equal  suffrage,  reduc- 
tions in  transportation  charges,  suppression  of 
lotteries,  abolition  of  polygamy,  observance  of 
the  Sabbath,  compulsory  education,  use  of  the 
Bible  in  schools,  international  arbitration, 
civil  service  reform,  protection  to  immigrants, 
reduction  of  salaries  of  public  officials.  A 
popular  vote  of  9,522  was  cast,  mostly  in  New 
York,  Ohio,  Nebraska  and  Pennsylvania. 

In  1880,  the  convention  was  again  held  at 
Cleveland,  Ohio.  Twelve  states  were  repre- 
sented by  142  delegates.  Neal  Dow  of  Maine 
was  nominated  for  President,  on  a platform 
similar  to  the  one  of  1876.  The  popular  vote 
was  10,305,  of  which  2,616  were  cast  in  Ohio. 

In  1884,  there  were  the  American  Prohibi- 
tion, and  the  regular,  or  Prohibition-Home- 
Protection,  parties.  The  former  held  a mass 
convention  at  Chicago,  and  nominated  S.  C. 
Pomeroy  for  President.  The  regular  Prohibi- 
tionists met  at  Pittsburgh,  and  nominated 
John  P.  St.  John  for  President.  In  the  plat- 
form adopted,  both  the  Republican  and  Demo- 
cratic parties  were  arraigned  for  their  records 
on  the  liquor  question.  The  platform  was 
rather  long,  with  much  of  the  “stump  speech” 
in  it.  The  popular  vote  went  up  to  150,369, 
and  of  these  votes,  25,016  were  cast  in  New 
York.  Since  the  Democratic  plurality  in  that 
state  was  only  1,149,  it  is  readily  seen  that  the 
Prohibitionists  held  the  balance  of  power  there. 
This  was  also  true  of  Connecticut  and  New 
Jersey.  Clinton  B.  Fisk  was  nominated  for 
President  in  the  Indianapolis  convention  of 
1888,  in  which  almost  all  the  states  were  rep- 
resented and  all  the  former  candidates  for 

77 


PROMOTIONS  IN  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE 


President  except  one  were  present.  In  addi- 
tion to  its  former  principles,  the  party  ad- 
vocated the  protective  system.  The  popular 
vote  was  250,125,  enough  in  Connecticut,  In- 
diana, New  York,  Ohio  and  Virginia  to  have 
changed  the  electoral  vote  of  those  states.  In 
1802  John  Bidwell  was  nominated  for  Presi- 
dent. The  platform  contained  the  usual  pro- 
visions, and  also  equal  salaries  for  women, 
government  control  of  corporations,  new  nat- 
uralization laws,  opposition  to  sectarian 
schools.  The  popular  vote  was  271,058,  an 
increase  of  about  five  thousand  over  the  pre- 
ceding presidential  vote. 

In  the  campaign  of  1896,  there  was  a split 
in  the  party  over  the  silver  question  (see  Sil- 
ver Coinage  Controversy)  . Four  years  before 
this  question  was  a prominent  one  in  the  con- 
vention, and  the  provision  for  free  and  unlimit- 
ed coinage  of  silver  had  been  voted  down  by  a 
vote  of  596  to  335.  In  the  Pittsburgh  Con- 
vention of  1896  were  two  factions,  the  “narrow 
gaugers,”  opposed  to  the  free-silver  principle, 
and  the  “broadgaugers,”  favoring  the  inclusion 
of  several  other  planks  in  the  platform,  in  ad- 
dition to  the  usual  liquor  provision.  The 
“narrow  gaugers”  won  the  preliminaries,  and 
the  majority  report  of  the  committee  was  a 
platform  directed  against  the  liquor  interests. 
The  defeated  faction  withdrew  from  the  con- 
vention, and  the  remaining  delegates  nominat- 
ed Joshua  Levering  for  President.  The  “broad 
gaugers”  met  and  organized  the  “National” 
party.  In  addition  to  the  plank  on  the  liquor 
question,  the  principal  planks  were  for  the 
free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  at  the 
rate  of  16  to  1,  without  consulting  other  na- 
tions; a national  income  tax;  abolition  of  tbe 
contract  labor  system ; direct  election  of  Presi- 
dent, Vice-President  and  United  States  Sena- 
tors ; exclusion  of  alien  paupers  and  criminals ; 
initiative  and  referendum ; proportional  repre- 
sentation. Rev.  Charles  E.  Bentley  was  nomi- 
nated for  President.  The  popular  vote  was 
141,676,  about  one-tenth  of  which  was  cast 
by  the  “broad  gaugers.” 

In  recent  years  the  party  has  been  united. 
The  platform  of  1908  was  a short  one;  in  ad- 
dition to  the  usual  provision  on  the  liquor  ques- 
tion, it  advocated  the  election  of  Senators  by 
popular  vote,  a graduated  income  and  inheri- 
tance tax,  postal  savings  banks,  a permanent 
tariff  commission,  uniform  marriage  and  di- 
vorce laws,  employers’  liability  act,  court  re- 
vision of  post  office  decisions,  prohibition  of 
child  labor  in  mines  and  workshops,  intel- 
lectual test  for  voting,  conservation  of  re- 
sources, improvement  of  highways  and  water- 
ways, and  equal  suffrage  for  women.  E.  W. 
Chaff n was  the  presidential  nominee.  The 
popular  vote  was  252,683.  The  same  candi- 
date was  nominated  in  1912  and  received 
a popular  vote  of  207,965.  The  platform  in 
addition  to  the  usual  planks  contained  the  fol- 
lowing: one  presidential  term  of  six  years; 

78 


protection  of  the  rights  of  labor  without  im- 
pairment of  the  rights  of  capital;  arbitration 
for  international  disputes;  initiative  and  ref- 
erendum ; an  elastic  currency  adequate  to  in- 
dustrial needs ; regulation  and  control  of  cor- 
porations engaging  in  interstate  business; 
greater  efficiency  and  economy  in  Government 
service.  The  Prohibition  party  has  never  elect- 
ed a presidential  elector,  and  is  not  likely  to 
become  a great  party,  but  it  has  had  a great 
influence.  The  anti-saloon  league,  state  pro- 
visions for  local  option  and  other  movements 
have  probably  been  responsible  for  the  loss  in 
Prohibition  votes. 

See  Liquor  Legislataon  ; Presidential 
Elections. 

References;  J.  A.  Woodburn,  Pol.  Parties 
(1909),  142;  D.  R.  Dewey,  Rational  Problems 
(1907),  ch.  viii;  E.  Stanwood,  Hist,  of  the 
Presidency  (1898),  passim-,  T.  H.  McKee,  Na- 
tiotial  Conventions  and  Platforms  (1901). 

T.  N.  Hoover. 

PROMOTIONS  IN  THE  CIVIL  SERVICE. 

Advancement  in  rank  or  salary  in  the  civil 
service  is  generally  in  the  control  of  the  ap- 
pointing power.  Legislative  bodies,  however, 
in  exercising  their  power  to  create  positions 
and  appropriate  for  their  salaries,  not  infre- 
quently provide  for  the  promotion  of  particu- 
lar individuals  or  classes  of  employees.  The 
framers  of  civil  service  laws  in  this  country 
have  recognized  that  promotions  as  well  as 
original  appointments  in  the  public  service 
have  been  governed  by  political  influences 
wherever  the  spoils  system  has  prevailed  and 
have  therefore  inserted  provisions  for  their 
regulation.  Nevertheless  the  principle  of  pro- 
motion based  upon  competitive  examination 
has  not  generally  been  carried  out.  It  is 
recognized  that  the  actual  record  of  work  per- 
formed by  the  employee  during  his  service  is 
a factor  of  importance  in  determining  his  qual- 
ification for  promotion,  and  by  many  persons 
it  is  believed  that  this  factor  should  alone  con- 
trol. The  United  States  Civil  Service  Com- 
mission has  not  as  yet  attempted  to  introduce 
competitive  examinations  for  promotions  to 
any  considerable  extent,  although  it  has  en- 
couraged and  approved  department  regula- 
tions providing  for  the  keeping  of  efficiency 
records  as  a basis  for  promotion.  Arti- 
cle V,  Sec.  9 of  the  New  York  state  con- 
stitution requires  promotions,  as  well  as 
original  appointments,  to  be  “made  accord- 
ing to  merit  and  fitness,  to  be  ascertained,  so 
far  as  practicable,  by  examinations,  which  30 
far  as  practicable,  shall  be  competitive.”  Com- 
petitive promotion  examinations  always  take 
into  account  the  previous  service  of  the  can- 
didates as  shown  by  department  records  and 
to  this  as  well  as  to  seniority  in  service  a con- 
siderable weight  is  given.  These  examinations 
have  reached  their  highest  development  and 
proved  most  successful  in  the  New  York  City 


PROPERTY,  RIGHTS  OF— PROPERTY,  THEORY  OF 


service,  particularly  in  the  police  and  fire  de- 
partments. Increases  in  salary  as  well  as  ad- 
vancement in  position  are  recognized  by  law 
as  promotions  and  the  civil  service  commis- 
sion is  empowered  to  establish  salary  grades 
for  purposes  of  promotion  examination. 

See  Appointments  to  Office;  Civil  Serv- 
ice Examination;  Civil  Service,  Federal; 
Civil  Service,  State. 

References:  Civil  Service  Commission,  U.  S., 
New  York  State,  New  York  City,  Chicago,  etc., 
Reports;  National  Civil  Service  Reform 
League,  Publications,  especially  Special  Com- 
mittee on  Promotions  in  the  Civil  Service, 
Report,  1910;  E.  B.  K.  Foltz,  Federal  Civil 
Service  as  a Career  (1909),  179-185. 

Elliot  H.  Goodwin. 

PROPERTY,  RIGHTS  OF.  Conceptions  of 
property  rights  as  well  as  of  personal  freedom 
antedate  organized  government  and  therefore 
do  not  spring  from  but  are  merely  recognized 
by  the  American  state  constitutions  which 
were  designed  for  the  protection  of  the  people 
in  the  enjoyment  of  their  rights  and  liberties 
by  the  establishment  of  a more  perfect  system 
of  government  than  that  to  which  the  colonists 
had  been  subject.  The  nature  and  extent, 
therefore,  of  property  rights  and  the  remedies 
available  for  their  protection  must  be  deter- 
mined by  the  rules  and  principles  of  the  sys- 
tem of  law  which  prevailed  in  the  colonies 
and  was  recognized  under  the  governments 
established  by  the  people  with  such  modifica- 
tions as  were  introduced  by  subsequent  legis- 
lation. Our  written  constitutions,  therefore, 
guarantee  and  protect  property  rights  but  do 
not  create  them.  The  fundamental  constitu- 
tional conception  is  that  it  is  beyond  the  power 
of  government  to  take  property  from  one  per- 
son in  order  to  confer  it  upon  another  or  to 
interfere  with  the  enjoyment  of  private  prop- 
erty save  for  some  of  the  recognized  purposes 
for  which  governments  are  created  and  estab- 
lished. 

But  some  interference  with  the  ownership 
and  use  of  private  property  is  inherently 
necessary  in  the  exercise  of  the  functions  of 
government.  Thus  it  may  be  necessary  to  ap- 
propriate private  property  for  public  use  (see 
Eminent  Domain  ) . Interference  with  the  use 
of  property  or  even  its  entire  destruction  may 
be  essential  for  the  protection  of  the  govern- 
ment, as  in  military  operations;  or  for  the  pro- 
tection or  preservation  of  the  paramount  in- 
terest of  the  public,  as  in  the  prevention  or 
suppression  of  disease  or  in  avoiding  over- 
whelming disaster  to  many;  or  for  the  pro- 
tection of  individuals  from  injury  or  damage 
which  would  result  from  the  unreasonable  ex- 
ercise of  his  property  rights  by  another. 

For  its  own  support  and  in  order  to  provide 
for  the  discharge  of  its  proper  functions  gov- 
ernment may  properly  exact  the  payment  of 
taxes  which  may,  among  other  methods,  be 


levied  on  the  owners  of  property  in  proportion 
to  its  value,  the  limitation  on  this  power  be- 
ing that  the  burdens  of  government  shall  not 
be  unjustly  and  without  reason  imposed  upon 
particular  persons  or  classes  of  persons  in 
order  to  relieve  other  persons  or  classes  from 
bearing  their  just  proportion. 

In  the  exercise  of  the  police  power  already 
referred  to  those  who  devote  their  property  to 
a public  use  so  as  to  affect  it  with  a public 
interest  may  be  required  to  do  so  under  reason- 
able regulations  as  to  rates  and  charges  and 
without  unreasonable  discrimination  ( see 
Munn  vs.  Illinois;  Prices  and  •Charges). 

The  essential  constitutional  guaranty  of 
property  rights  is  that  no  person  shall  be 
deprived  of  his  property  without  due  process 
of  law  (see  Due  Process  of  Law),  a provision 
founded  upon  Magna  Charta  and  embodied  in 
some  form  in  all  state  constitutions  and  now 
effectually  guaranteed  against  federal  en- 
croachment by  the  Fifth  Amendment  and 
against  state  encroachment  by  the  Fourteenth 
Amendment  to  the  Federal  Constitution.  The 
reduction  of  rates  and  charges  in  such  a degree 
as  to  deprive  the  owner  of  property  of  reason- 
able returns  has  been  held  to  be  a deprivation 
of  property  without  due  process  (Smyth  vs, 
Ames,  109  U.  S.  466) . 

See  Bills  of  Rights;  Fourteenth  Amend- 
ment; Police  Power;  Public  Use. 

References:  F.  J.  Goodnow,  Social  Reform 
and  the  Constitution  (1911),  2.3,  264-274;  T. 
M.  Cooley,  Principles  of  Constitutional  Law 
(3d  ed.  1898),  206,  240,  260,  345-377. 

Emlin  McClain. 

PROPERTY  TAX.  See  Tax,  Property. 

PROPERTY,  THEORY  OF.  Whenever  and 
wherever  there  is  any  appropriable  thing  which 
is  scarce  relatively  to  human  desires,  that  is, 
when  there  is  not  enough  of  it  to  go  around 
and  satisfy  every  one,  then  and  there  men  will 
try  to  get  more  of  it.  But  the  very  condition 
of  scarcity  makes  it  inevitable  that  if  some 
get  all  they  want  others  will  get  less  than  they 
want,  and  some  may  not  get  any  at  all.  In 
the  absence  of  any  social  regulation  or  law, 
written  or  unwritten,  regarding  it,  there  is 
likely  to  be  a general  scramble,  each  one  get- 
ting what  he  can  and  keeping  what  he  is  able. 
When  by  some  social  arrangement,  regulation, 
or  law,  the  terms  are  laid  down  under  which 
one  may  acquire  and  keep  or  enjoy  a portion 
of  the  thing  in  question,  and  these  terms  are 
enforced  by  some  kind  of  governmental  or 
social  compulsion,  then  there  is  property. 
Otherwise  there  is  not. 

Two  facts  are  important:  (1)  nothing  is 
made  the  object  of  a property  right  unless  it 
is  scarce  and  needs,  therefore,  to  be  econo- 
mized; (2)  mere  possession  of  a thing  does  not 
constitute  property  in  it.  There  must  be  some 
kind  of  a social  recognition  of  the  right  to 


PROPORTIONAL  REPRESENTATION 


possess  and  use  it,  and  some  kind  of  public 
defense  of  that  right.  The  sole  legitimate  pur- 
pose of  such  laws  is  to  conserve  and  economize 
scarce  goods  and  see  that  they  go  to  the  per- 
sons who  ought  to  have  them  rather  than  mere- 
ly to  the  strongest.  Two  basic  rules  are  gen- 
erally admitted:  (1)  he  who  finds  or  first  ap- 
propriates a natural  object  shall  possess  it  and 
be  defended  in  his  possession;  (2)  he  who 
makes  a useful  thing  out  of  it  shall  possess  it 
and  be  defended  in  his  possession.  The  right 
of  possession  usually  carries  with  it  the  right 
of  transfer,  and  this,  in  turn,  the  right  to 
acquire  by  transfer  from  another.  Then  follow 
endless  modifications  and  refinements. 

See  Cost;  Price;  Value. 

References:  T.  Hobbes,  The  Leviathan 

(1845);  J.  Locke,  Treatise  on  Civil  Govern- 
ment (1884);  J.  Bentham,  Principles  of  Mor- 
als and  Legislation  (1879)  ; G.  D.  Argyll,  The 
Unseen  Foundations  of  Society,  an  examina- 
tion of  the  fallacies  and  failures  of  economic 
science,  due  to  neglected  elements  (1893);  T. 
N.  Carver,  “The  Economic  Basis  of  the  Prob- 
lem of  Evil”  in  Harvard  Theological  Review, 

I,  1.  T.  N.  C. 

PROPORTIONAL  REPRESENTATION.  Its 

Principles. — Proportional  representation  in 
legislative  bodies  is  obtained  in  theoretical 
perfection  when  each  political  party  or  group 
is  represented  by  a number  of  delegates  in 
exact  proportion  to  the  number  of  votes  cast  for 
each  group.  In  common  practice  it  is  not 
covered  by  the  term  “minority  representation” 
(see)  for  the  latter  usually  provides  merely 
for  some  sort  of  recognition  of  the  chief  mi- 
nority group  without  regard  to  the  proportion 
of  its  voting  population.  To  obtain  the  cor- 
rect proportion  various  systems  of  voting  have 
from  time  to  time  been  brought  forward.  The 
first  to  attract  general  public  attention  was 
that  of  Thomas  Hare,  whose  treatise  appeared 
in  England  in  1859.  Hare’s  ideas  were  given 
extensive  publicity  through  the  writings  and 
parliamentary  activity  of  John  Stuart  Mill, 
and  since  that  time  various  modifications  of 
the  plan  have  been  proposed  and  in  certain 
instances  adopted.  These  variations  differ 
chiefly  in  the  devices  used  for  obtaining  ap- 
proximate mathematical  exactitude  in  the  em- 
ployment of  all  votes  cast.  LTnder  plain  ma- 
jority rule  a minority  which  is  but  one  less 
than  the  prevailing  party  may  go  for  years 
without  a delegate  in  the  legislature.  The 
nearest  approach  to  a remedy  under  that  sys- 
tem is  to  divide  the  country  into  districts  ex- 
actly equal  in  population  with  one  representa- 
tive from  each,  but  even  here  one  party  may 
get  all  of  the  representatives,  and  usually  does 
obtain  delegates  greatly  out  of  proportion  to 
its  voters.  The  ideal  basis  upon  which  to 
determine  public  opinion  would  be  the  whole 
country  acting  as  a single  voting  district,  but 
practically  this  is  unwieldy,  hence  all  systems 

80 


of  proportional  representation  make  use  of 
the  next  best  thing,  which  is  a large  district 
from  which  several  delegates,  preferably  up- 
wards of  five,  are  elected  at  the  same  time. 
From  such  a group  of  candidates  it  is  possible 
either  for  the  voters  by  one  system  to  select 
by  preference,  or  by  another  to  have  their 
votes  take  effect  for  their  group  in  proportion 
to  their  strength.  In  either  case  the  next 
step  is  to  establish  the  quota,  or  number  of 
votes  necessary  to  elect  one  delegate.  If  there 
are  ten  places  to  fill  each  candidate  requires 
one-tentli  of  the  votes  cast,  hence  under  all 
systems  the  simple  quota  is  obtained  by  di- 
viding the  votes  cast  by  the  number  of  rep- 
resentatives. As  in  practice  there  frequently 
occurs  after  division  a large  remainder,  some- 
times almost  equal  to  a quota  for  one  delegate, 
it  has  been  found  more  nearly  correct  to 
divide  by  the  number  of  delegates  plus  one. 
This  is  called  from  the  author  the  Droop  quota. 

Hare  System. — Under  the  Hare  system  the 
citizen  is  given  but  a single  vote,  but  he  may 
indicate  his  preference  among  the  candidates 
by  numbering  them  all  as  first  choice,  second 
choice,  and  so  on  to  the  end.  The  quota  is 
ascertained  and  then  in  counting  the  votes  a 
candidate  of  the  first  choice  is  given  just 
enough  of  his  votes  to  fill  his  quota,  the  re- 
mainder being  passed  on  to  candidates  not  yet 
elected,  in  the  order  of  the  expressed  prefer- 
ences. If  any  candidate  is  elected  by  his  own 
votes  as  second  choice,  the  surplus  votes  are 
all  given  to  a third  choice,  and  so  on  until 
the  full  list  of  seats  is  filled.  Theoretically 
this  allows  the  fewest  possible  votes  to  go  to 
waste.  In  practice  the  system  is  difficult  to 
apply  to  large  districts  because  the  ballot 
boxes  must  all  be  brought  to  a central  bureau 
to  be  counted.  There  is  also  a considerable 
amount  of  chance  in  the  order  in  which  the 
ballots  are  counted,  although  various  devices 
have  been  suggested  to  insure  accuracy.  This 
single  transferable  vote  with  modifications  of 
the  Hare  system  is  in  use  in  Denmark,  Iceland, 
Moravia,  and  Tasmania. 

List  System. — The  list  system  recognizes  not 
only  the  individual  voter,  but  also  gives  oppor- 
tunity for  the  expression  of  party  or  group 
opinion.  Parties  may  nominate  tickets  con- 
taining as  many  names  as  there  are  places  to 
fill.  The  citizen  has  as  many  rotes  as  there 
are  delegates  to  elect  and  may  scatter  them 
among  candidates  of  different  parties  if  he 
wishes.  In  a constitutency  of  60,000  voters 
with  ten  delegates  to  be  elected  from  three 
competing  parties  we  may  suppose  the  vote 
to  have  fallen  out  as  follows:  Liberals  30,000, 
Conservatives  18,000,  Socialists  12,000.  The 
electoral  quotient  found  by  dividing  the  total 
vote  by  10  is  6000.  This  would  give  the  Lib- 
erals 5 delegates,  the  Conservatives  3,  and  the 
Socialists  2.  Under  the  ordinary  form  of  ma- 
jority rule  the  Liberals  having  the  highest 
number  of  votes,  although  they  form  but  half 


PROPRIETARY  VILLAGES— PROSLAVERY 


of  the  electorate,  would  have  obtained  all  of 
the  delegates.  Elections,  however,  do  not  fall 
out  in  such  convenient  round  numbers,  hence 
there  are  various  plans  for  justly  computing 
the  value  of  remainders  and  for  giving  credit 
both  to  the  voice  of  party  and  to  the  personal 
choice.  In  eight  of  the  cantons  of  Switzerland 
proportional  representation  obtains  either  with 
the  simple  quota  or  the  quota  plus  one.  In 
Belgium  and  a few  other  states  a system  of 
computation  is  used  which  was  first  proposed 
by  Victor  D’Hondt.  The  vote  of  each  party 
is  divided  first  by  one,  then  by  two,  three,  four, 
etc.,  up.  to  the  number  of  delegates.  The  quo- 
tients are  arranged  in  order  of  size  and  the 
largest  after  the  last  division  becomes  the 
electoral  quotient  below  which  no  one  can  be 
elected.  Using  the  example  given  above  the 
result  is  the  same,  but  where  the  votes  cast 
are  more  irregularly  divided  the  system  reach- 
es approximate  justice  without  arbitrary  use 
of  remainders  to  fill  out  the  proper  number 
of  delegates.  The  chief  objection  is  the  diffi- 
culty of  making  clear  to  the  ordinary  voter 
the  mathematical  reason  for  this  procedure. 
The  simple  quota  is  plainly  the  share  of  each 
man  and  the  party  gets  as  many  delegates 
as  it  has  shares. 

Variations.— Among  the  variations  which 
may  be  mentioned  the  Hagenbach-Biscliof  sys- 
tem simplifies  the  D’Hondt  calculation  by  first 
using  the  simple  quota  plus  one,  then  assign- 
ing unfilled  seats  according  to  percentages  of 
party  vote  as  before.  The  Gove  system  is  an 
adaptation  of  the  Hare  preferential  vote  but 
the  order  of  preference  is  fixed  by  the  candi- 
date by  public  announcement  in  advance.  The 
voter  needs  to  mark  only  the  name  of  the 
candidate  whose  preferential  list  he  approves. 
The  Cleveland  plan  is  also  a preferential  sys- 
tem under  which  the  first  choice  is  given  addi- 
tional weight  of  numbers.  If  ten  names  are 
voted  the  first  choice  is  given  ten  tallies  and 
the  tenth  choice  one.  The  tallies  for  each 
candidate  are  added  and  the  ten  highest  are 
elected. 

See  Minority  Representation-,  Party, 
Place  and  Significance  of. 

References:  J.  R.  Commons,  Proportional 
Representation  (1907)  ; J.  H.  Humphries,  Pro- 
portional Representation  (1911)  ; Library  of 
Congress,  A List  of  Books  with  References  to 
Proportional  Representation  (1904)  ; R.  E. 
Curtis,  “Proportional  Representation”  in  Wis- 
consin Library  Commission,  Comparative  Legis- 
lation Bulletin,  No.  H (1908). 

J.  M.  Vincent. 

PROPRIETARY  VILLAGES.  In  the  mining 
regions  of  the  far  western  states,  mining  cor- 
porations in  many  cases  own  all  the  land 
in  mining  villages,  and  through  this  owner- 
ship control  many  matters  often  regulated 
by  public  officials.  In  such  towns,  sanitary 
conditions  are  apt  to  be  better  than  usual  in  i 


frontier  communities;  and  by  excluding  sa- 
loons and  gambling  places  from  the  company’s 
property,  the  moral  conditions  are  much  im- 
proved. The  companies  often  furnish  water 
and  light,  and  sometimes  schools,  churches 
and  other  social  institutions  for  the  benefit 
of  their  employees.  Resident  officials  of  the 
companies  take  an  active  part  in  school  man- 
agement. See  Towns  and  Townships;  Vil- 
lages Incorporated.  Reference:  F.  A.  Fair- 
lie,  Local  Gov.  in  Counties,  Towns  and  Villages 
(1906),  211.  J.  A.  F. 

PROROGATION  OF  PARLIAMENT.  See 

Parliament,  Prorogation  and  Dissolution 
of. 

PROSECUTING  ATTORNEY.  See  Attor- 
ney General,  State. 

PROSLAVERY.  The  term  proslavery,  ap- 
parently first  applied  by  the  opponents  of 
slavery,  was  accepted  by  the  friends  of  the 
institution.  It  included  many  shades  of  opin- 
ion with  regard  to  the  institution,  from  the 
planter  who  hated  the  system  but  saw  no  way 
of  getting  rid  of  it,  to  the  most  ardent  fire- 
eater  who  wanted  to  extend  the  system  as  far 
as  possible.  The  proslavery  men  had  all  the 
advantage  of  a long  existing  system,  which 
had  in  it  an  element  of  the  care  of  the  strong 
for  the  weak,  and  seemed  embedded  in  the 
social  existence  of  the  South.  Much  was  made 
in  proslavery  publications  of  the  mild  and 
kindly  side  of  slavery. 

The  proslavery  argument  took  on  several 
additional  phases  which  were  very  prejudicial 
to  the  continuance  of  slavery.  One  was  the 
theory  that  slavery,  which  in  a late  period 
was  hailed  as  the  corner  stone  of  the  South, 
could  not  publicly  be  criticised;  that  it  was 
a public  danger  to  debate  it  in  Congress;  and 
that  the  northern  states,  in  comity  if  not  in 
law,  ought  to  prohibit  the  discussions  of  the 
abolitionists  there.  If  it  were  true  that  slav- 
ery could  not  bear  discussion,  then  its  end 
was  not  far  off.  Nobody  used  the  obvious 
argument  of  inducing  known  abolitionists 
to  go  down  to  the  South  and  see  the  institu- 
tion at  short  range,  expecting  that  any 
intelligent  man  who  examined  slavery  must 
approve  it. 

During  the  period  previous  to  1830,  south- 
ern writers  on  the  subject  were  chiefly  hostile 
to  slavery;  but  when  the  southern  agitation 
died  out,  and  the  northern  abolitionists  (see) 
began  a literary  and  journalistic  campaign 
against  slavery,  the  friends  of  the  slave  system 
replied  in  a literature  of  defensive  argument, 
enlarged  by  many  public  addresses  on  the  sub- 
ject. Thus  in  1856,  Robert  Tombs  of  Georgia, 
lectured  in  Boston  in  favor  of  slavery. 

The  propaganda  was  much  aided  by  these 
arguments  from  those  who  best  knew  the  actu- 
al conditions  of  slavery,  although  the  most 


PROTECTION — PROTECTION  TO  AMERICAN  CITIZENS  ABROAD 


important  defensive  works  appeared  very  late 
in  the  controversy.  Both  in  books  and  in 
speeches,  there  was  a tendency  to  ignore  the 
dilliculties  of  the  argument,  and  to  insist  that 
slavery  was  in  its  details  almost  universally 
humane  and  easy.  From  the  argument  that 
slavery  was  unassailable,  it  was  a short  step 
to  the  argument  that  it  was  a positive  good 
which  ought  to  be  extended,  including  (in  some 
books)  a demand  for  a restoration  of  the  slave 
trade. 

Proslavery  was  for  thirty  years  on  the  de- 
fensive, but  as  a propaganda  was  weakened  by 
abuses  of  slavery  that  could  have  been  spared 
without  yielding  the  main  issue  of  keeping  up 
the  institution. 

See  Slavery  as  an  Economic  System; 
Slavery  Controversy. 

References:  A.  B.  Hart,  Slavery  and  Aboli- 
tion (1906),  ch.  x;  J.  H.  Hopkins,  Scriptural, 
Ecclesiastical  and  Historical  View  of  Slavery 
(1864),  The  Proslavery  Argument  (1852); 
H.  A.  Hilary,  Abolition  Crusade  and  its  Con- 
sequences (i9T2);  E.  A.  Pollard,  Black  Dia- 
monds (1859)  ; S.  D.  Smedes,  Memorials  of  a 
Southern  Planter  ( 1887 ) ; bibliography  in 
Channing,  Hart  and  Turner,  Guide  to  Am, 
Hist.  (1913),  §§  209-212.  A.  B.  H. 

PROTECTION.  See  Free  Trade  and  Pro- 
tection ; Tariff,  Protective. 

PROTECTION  TO  AMERICAN  CITIZENS 
ABROAD.  Basis  of  the  Right. — The  basis  of 
the  right  to  protect  citizens  or  nationals 
abroad  lies  in  a state’s  primary  right  of  self- 
preservation.  The  right  of  a state  to  protect 
its  nationals  abroad  extends  to  the  protection 
of  property  as  well  as  of  person.  Coincident 
with  the  duty  of  allegiance  by  the  national 
is  the  duty  of  the  state  to  protect  him  wherever 
he  may  be. 

When  a state  admits  a national  of  another 
state  within  its  territory  it  assumes  a duty  in 
international  law  to  the  state  to  which  such 
individual  owes  allegiance.  This  duty  is  to 
extend  to  such  individual  a regime  of  law,  and 
to  protect  him  and  his  property  under  such 
regime  against  all  denials  of  justice.  These 
comprise  not  only  the  oppressive,  wilful,  and 
fraudulent  proceedings  of  courts,  but  all  acts  of 
governmental  authorities  which  arbitrarily  in- 
terfere with  the  alien  or  deprive  him  of  life, 
liberty,  and  property  without  due  process  of 
law,  using  these  words  in  the  broadest  sense. 

Such  being  the  duty  of  one  state  to  the  na- 
tionals of  another  within  it,  the  second  has  the 
right  to  demand  of  the  first  that  it  perform 
its  duty.  The  duty  is  owed  by  state  to  state. 
The  state  to  whom  the  duty  is  owed  is  the 
subject  of  the  right;  while  the  individual  is 
the  object  of  the  right  and  duty. 

Those  Entitled  to  Protection. — A state  has 
the  right  to  protect  all  who  owe  it  allegiance 
when  beyond  its  borders.  The  conditions  which 

82 


govern  the  duty  to  protect  such  nationals 
depend  upon  a state’s  treaty  arrangements, 
its  municipal  law,  and  its  policy,  when 
not  in  conflict  with  international  law.  All 
wdiose  allegiance  it  recognizes  are  entitled 
in  some  circumstances  to  the  protection  of 
the  United  States,  whether  citizens,  in  the 
constitutional  sense,  or  nationals,  not  being 
citizens,  such  as  Indians  in  tribal  rela- 
tions and  the  inhabitants  of  the  dependencies. 
The  degree  of  protection  afforded  depends  not 
upon  status  under  the  Constitution  but  upon 
the  tie  of  allegiance.  The  United  States  also 
extends  protection  to  quasi-nationals,  those 
resident  aliens  who  have  begun  but  not  com- 
pleted the  process  of  naturalization.  Such 
protection  is  strictly  limited  by  the  act  of 
Congress  passed  in  1907.  On  the  other  hand 
the  United  States  has  disclaimed  any  duty 
of  protecting  nationals  who  have  acquired  a 
foreign  domicile.  The  earlier  doctrine  was 
that  foreign  domicile  worked  a de  facto  ex- 
patriation and  a loss  of  right  to  protection. 
The  later  doctrine  is  that  change  in  domicile 
does  not  work  change  of  nationality  and 
that  the  duty  of  protection  persists.  Under 
the  act  of  1907  it  would  seem  that  nationality 
under  the  United  States  is  dissolved  only  by 
the  positive  breaking  of  the  tie  of  allegiance 
through  naturalization  into  another  state. 

Right  to  Protection  against  Individuals. — 
As  it  is  the  act  or  omission  of  the  state  which 
produces  denial  of  justice,  the  right  which  the 
United  States  claims  of  protecting  its  na- 
tionals abroad,  is  directed  against  an  offending 
state  and  not  against  the  individual.  If  an 
American  national  abroad  is  injured  by  breach 
of  contract  or  tort  by  a national  of  such  for- 
eign state,  he  must  ordinarily  seek  redress  in 
the  courts  of  such  country.  The  United  States 
will  intervene  only  if  the  court  has  denied 
justice  by  failing  to  act  or  by  acting  in  bad 
faith. 

Right  to  Protection  against  States.— (1) 
When  an  American  national  engages  in  rebel- 
lion or  revolution  against  a foreign  state  he 
will  generally  be  held  to  have  forfeited  his 
right  to  protection,  especially  if  he  be  domiciled 
in  such  foreign  state.  The  United  States  has, 
however,  intervened  to  secure  to  such  national 
the  rights  afforded  bv  the  laws  of  war.  (2)  In 
time  of  war,  while  the  United  States  does  not 
usually  intervene  to  protect  its  nationals  from 
acts  arising  from  the  operations  of  vTar,  it  is 
justified  in  securing  for  them  compensation 
for  property  taken  for  belligerent  use  or  when 
damage  has  been  caused  by  violation  of  the 
recognized  rules  of  warfare.  (3)  The  United 
States  has  been  conservative  as  to  the  protec- 
tion of  its  nationals  against  breaches  of  con- 
tract entered  into  by  them  with  foreign  states. 
At  one  time  its  policy  was  to  use  its  good  of- 
fices only.  The  later  policy  has  been  to  inter- 
vene more  actively  by  requesting  arbitration 
etc.,  when  a foreign  state  has  declared  such 


PROTECTIVE  TARIFF— PROTECTORATES,  AMERICAN 


contract  forfeited  for  causes  arising  outside 
the  contract  itself.  Even  when  the  national 
has  waived  recourse  to  diplomatic  action  by 
the  terms  of  the  contract,  the  United  States 
has  not  held  itself  inhibited  from  exercising 
its  right  of  protection.  Under  Convention  II 
of  the  Hague  Conference  of  1907,  ratified  by 
this  government,  the  United  States  has  bound 
itself  not  to  use  force  for  the  recovery  of 
such  contractual  claims  unless  arbitration  has 
been  refused  or  abandoned  by  the  offending 
state. 

Acts  Arising  out  of  Torts. — These  are  de- 
scribed as  denials  of  justice  in  the  broadest 
sense.  The  policy  of  the  United  States  has 
been  to  assert  the  right  of  protection  over  its 
nationals  abroad  when  they  are  injured  or 
threatened  with  injury  as  to  person  or  prop- 
erty; either  positively,  by  the  oppressive  or 
arbitrary  acts  of  state  authorities,  or  nega- 
tively by  the  failure  of  the  government  of  the 
foreign  state,  as,  e.  g.,  when  an  American 
is  subjected  to  mob  violence  because  of  his 
nationality. 

See  Alien;  Claims,  International;  Drago 
Doctrine  ; Expatriation  ; Extradition  ; 
Hague  Conferences;  International  Law, 
Private;  Kozta  Incident;  War,  Inter- 
national Relations  of. 

References:  Am.  Soc.  of  Int.  Law,  Proceed- 
ings, 1910,  46-122,  126-192;  “Citizenship  of 
the  U.  S.,  Expatriation,  and  Protection 
Abroad”  in  House  Docs.,  59  Cong.,  2 Sess.,  No. 
326  (1906);  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law 
(1906),  VI,  605-1037;  Elihu  Root,  “Basis  of 
Protection  to  Citizens  Residing  Abroad”  in 
Am.  Jour.  Int.  Law,  IV  (1910),  517-528. 

J.  S.  Reeves. 

PROTECTIVE  TARIFF.  See  Tariff,  Pro- 
tective. 

PROTECTORATES.  See  Dependent  States. 

PROTECTORATES.  International.— This 
word,  as  originally  used,  denoted  a legal  re- 
lationship which  arose,  usually  by  treaty 
arrangement,  between  two  states,  one  of  which 
took  another  under  its  protection.  Such,  e.  g., 
is  the  relationship  between  Italy  and  the  re- 
public of  San  Marino.  The  term  was  next  used 
to  describe  the  relationship  between  a state  and 
the  territories  of  a country  which,  although 
not  a state  in  the  strict  international  sense, 
remained  independent,  e.  g.,  the  protectorates 
of  France  over  Tunis,  of  Great  Britain  over 
Zanzibar,  and  of  Japan  over  Korea.  The  colo- 
nial protectorate  is  the  latest  form,  and  is 
usually  a temporary  expedient,  being  a step 
toward  the  complete  incorporation  of  the  pro- 
tected territory  as  a colonial  possession.  Pro- 
tectorates of  this  type  have  played  a large  part 
in  the  partition  of  Africa  among  the  European 
powers.  They  are  assumed  either  as  a result 
of  so-called  treaties  between  the  agents  of  the 


European  powers  and  the  native  chiefs,  or  of 
occupation  without  such  treaties.  In  order  to 
fix  a state’s  responsibility  for  such  actions, 
the  General  Act  of  the  Berlin  Conference  in 
1885  stipulated  that  the  assumption  of  a pro- 
tectorate by  a European  state  must  at  once 
be  notified  to  the  other  signatories  of  the  Gen- 
eral Act.  A state  in  creating  such  a condi- 
tion usually  discloses  the  intention  of  exer- 
cising sovereignty  over  the  territories  concerned 
and  thereby  assumes  some  responsibility  for 
administration.  (Most  colonial  protectorates  in 
Africa  have  become  typical  colonies  upon  the 
organization  of  governmental  administration. 
See  Canal  Zone;  Cuba  and  Cuban  Diplo- 
macy; Hawaii;  Hayti;  Liberia;  Mexico; 
Panama,  Republic  of;  Samoa;  San  Domingo; 
Territory,  Constitutional  Questions  of; 
West  Indies.  References:  J.  Westlake,  Chap- 
ters on  the  Principles  of  Int.  Law  (1894), 
177-178,  International  Law  (1906),  I,  119- 
127 ; E.  Nys,  Le  Droit  International  (1904),  I, 
364-6;  T.  J.  Lawrence,  Principles  of  Int.  Law 
(4th  ed.,  1910),  168-173;  W.  E.  Hall,  Foreign 
Powers  and  Jurisdiction  of  the  British  Crown 
(4th  ed.,  1895),  207-220;  E.  Engelhardt,  Lcs 
Protectorats  Anciens  et  Hodernes  (1896). 

J.  S.  R. 

PROTECTORATES,  AMERICAN.  A pro- 
tectorate is  a state  whose  complete  inde- 
pendence is  definitely  limited  by  the  control  of 
another;  the  term  also  designates  the  relation 
thus  established.  In  this  exact  sense  the  Unit- 
ed States  has  certain  protectorates,  and  to 
other  countries  holds  a protective  attitude. 

Cuba. — Cuba  (see)  is  an  undoubted  protec- 
torate. The  LTnited  States  administered  it 
from  1898  to  1902;  then  acknowledged  its  in- 
dependence, subject  to  control  in  certain  par- 
ticulars which  were  specified  in  the  Cuban 
constitution  and  subsequently  in  a treaty,  May 
22,  1903.  Later,  when  a revolution  seemed 
impending,  the  United  States  again  established 
a provisional  government,  which  continued  from 
1906  to  1909,  and  threatened  to  intervene  once 
more  in  1912. 

Panama. — The  protectorate  over  Panama 
(see)  is  technically  based  upon  the  first  article 
of  the  treaty  of  May  18,  1903:  “The  United 
States  guarantees  and  will  maintain  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  Republic  of  Panama.”  May, 
1908,  the  Secretary  of  War  made  a special 
trip  to  the  country  to  prevent  a threatened 
revolution.  This  is  an  extension  of  a guar- 
anty made  by  the  treaty  with  Colombia  in 
1846,  by  which  the  isthmus  transit  was  placed 
under  the  protection  of  the  United  States. 
The  Clayton-Bulwer  treaty  of  1850  (see)  sub- 
stantially asserted  a joint  British-American 
protectorate  over  any  isthmus  canal,  but  was 
abrogated  in  1902. 

Samoa. — The  Samoan  islands  were  under 
the  joint  protectorate  of  Great  Britain,  Ger- 
many and  the  United  States,  in  accordance  with 


83 


PROTHONOTARY— PROVINCE,  ROYAL,  IN  AMERICA 


tlu!  provisions  of  the  General  Act  of  Berlin  in 
1880,  till  the  subdivision  by  a joint  treaty  in 
1899. 

Liberia. — Liberia  (see)  was  founded  jointly 
by  American  colonization  societies  and  the 
United  States  Government,  in  the  twenties,  and 
has  frequently  sought  counsel  and  aid  from  the 
United  States.  Responding  to  its  urgent  ap- 
peal the  government  sent  a commission  of  in- 
vestigation to  Liberia  in  1909,  and  has  since 
assisted  it  in  its  administration  and  its  for- 
eign affairs. 

Hawaii. — Hawaii  (see)  was  under  American 
protective  influence  from  about  1842  until 
1898.  Webster  promised  in  1851  that  the 
navy  would  safeguard  the  independence  of  the 
islands.  By  the  treaty  of  1875,  Hawaii  con- 
ceded important  privileges  definitely  denied 
to  all  other  states. 

Texas. — Texas  (see)  was  a virtual  protector- 
ate from  1830  to  1845,  during  the  continuous 
agitation  for  its  annexation. 

Mexico. — Mexico  may  be  considered  a com- 
mercial protectorate,  due  to  the  great  influence 
of  American  capital  there  invested. 

San  Domingo. — San  Domingo  is,  in  reality, 
a financial  protectorate.  According  to  the 
treaty  of  1907,  the  United  States  supervises 
its  customs  and  controls  its  debt.  Similar 
relations  will  probably  be  established  with  the 
Central  American  republics  and  Hayti,  though 
treaties  with  Honduras  and  Nicaragua  to  that 
effect  in  1912  were  not  ratified. 

Nicaragua. — In  July,  1913,  a treaty  was 
negotiated  with  Nicaragua  which,  if  ratified, 
will  make  Nicaragua  a definite  protectorate 
of  the  United  States,  under  substantially  the 
same  limitations  as  those  which  have  been 
placed  upon  Cuba. 

See  Cuba  and  Cuban  Diplomacy;  Depend- 
encies of  the  United  States;  Hayti;  Liber- 
ia ; Mexico  ; Philippine  Annexation  ; Samoa  ; 
West  Indies. 

References:  A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government 
(1908),  373-376;  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  hit. 
Law  (1906),  I,  475-520,  545-554,  III,  46-55, 
130-136,  V,  762-768;  J.  H.  Latang,  Am.  as  a 
World  Power  (1907),  179-181,  220,  279-282. 

George  H.  Blakesi.ee. 

PROTHONOTARY.  The  clerk  of  the  court 
of  common  pleas  in  Pennsylvania  and  Dela- 
ware. See  Court  of  Common  Pleas;  Court 
of  Probate;  State  Judiciary.  J.  A.  F. 

PROTOCOL.  The  term  “protocol”  as  a term 
in  international  law  has  several  distinct  mean- 
ings, the  two  most  important  being:  (1)  as 
descriptive  of  the  papers  and  records  of  the 
meetings  preliminary  to  and  attending  the 
negotiation  of  international  agreements;  (2) 
as  the  name  of  a written  international  agree- 
ment itself  which  states  definitely  the  points 
of  agreement  between  the  contracting  powers 
upon  which  it  is  proposed  to  base  a final  and 


complete  treaty.  The  agreement  signed  by  the 
Allies  at  Pekin  in  1901,  after  the  Boxer 
troubles  (.see),  though  termed  a protocol,  was, 
in  some  respects,  more  of  the  nature  of  a mil- 
itary convention.  Some  of  its  provisions  were, 
indeed,  of  a character  that  would,  under  usual 
circumstances,  find  embodiment  in  a final 
treaty.  See  Diplomacy  and  Diplomatic 
Usage;  Diplomatic  Correspondence;  Nego- 
tiation of  Treaties  by  the  United  States. 
References:  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law 
(1906);  J.  W.  Foster,  Practice  of  Diplomacy 
(1910).  W.  W.  Willoughby. 

PROVIDENCE  PLANTATIONS.  See 

Rhode  Island. 

PROVINCE,  ROYAL,  IN  AMERICA.  Al- 
though the  royal  province,  from  economic 
causes,  came  later  into  the  field  than  the  pro- 
prietary colony,  it  represented,  throughout,  the 
type  at  which  English  colonization  aimed. 
From  an  imperial  standpoint  the  benefits  con- 
ferred by  colonies  could  not  be  secured  except 
by  means  of  an  executive  in  close  touch  with 
the  home  government;  and  it  was  the  presence 
of  such  an  executive  that  differentiated  the 
royal  from  the  other  types  of  colony.  Al- 
though, in  fact,  the  presence  of  a nominated 
council  and  the  recognition  of  the  Crown’s 
ownership  of  the  public  lands  encouraged  aris- 
tocratic tendencies,  the  system  was  compatible 
with  democracy,  its  one  essential  being  that 
the  governor  should  be  directly  responsible  to 
the  Crown,  forming  part  of  the  English  gov- 
ernmental machinery.  It  was  a pale  imitation 
of  the  English  constitution,  the  governor  repre- 
senting the  Crown,  the  legislative  council  the 
House  of  Lords,  and  the  assembly  the  House  of 
Commons ; but  the  governor  was  not  even  a 
viceroy;  the  council  was  small  in  numbers  and 
without  the  prestige  or  influence  of  a heredit- 
ary aristrocracy ; while  the  question  how  far 
the  representative  assembly  partook  of  the 
nature  of  a parliament  or  how  far  it  was  mere- 
ly a municipal  institution  never  received  a final 
answer  during  the  colonial  period. 

Lack  of  Elasticity. — Moreover,  the  system 
showed  no  capacity  of  adaptation  to  circum- 
stances, through  the  development,  as  the  work 
of  the  governor  increased,  of  separate  heads  of 
departments,  out  of  the  material  provided  by 
the  executive  council.  Without  individual  re- 
sponsibility, and  consisting  of  members  ap- 
pointed in  England,  who  might  not  be  in  sym- 
pathy with  the  governor’s  policy,  the  council 
was  either  a mere  echo  of  his  voice;  or  else, 
in  a few  cases,  a centre  of  factious,  because 
irresponsible,  opposition.  The  rule  that  made 
the  second  branch  of  the  legislature  the  con- 
fidential advisers  of  the  governor,  led,  in  Mass- 
achusetts, to  the  paradox  that  a popularly 
elected  legislative  council,  consisting  of  twenty- 
eight  members,  might  be  consulted  as  to  the 
legality  of  legislation  passed  by  itself. 

84 


PROXY 


Lack  of  Effectiveness. — The  antinomy  caused 
by  a governor  possessing,  in  theory,  complete 
executive  power,  and  an  assembly,  able,  through 
the  power  of  the  purse,  to  bring  pressure  upon 
him,  was  common  to  both  the  royal  and  pro- 
prietary colonies,  but  the  greater  prestige  of 
the  governor  in  the  royal  province,  as  the 
direct  servant  of  the  Crown,  made  his  failures 
the  more  conspicuous.  The  reason  for  such 
failures  lay,  not  merely  in  the  coercive  charac- 
ter of  a refusal  to  vote  supplies,  but  also  in 
the  fact  that  the  system,  by  making  him  re- 
sponsible for  every  department  of  government 
(the  customs  and  admiralty  officials  need  not 
for  this  purpose  be  considered),  demanded  the 
impossible;  thus  creating  neglected  fields  of 
government,  into  which  the  committees  of  the 
assembly  entered  without  effective  resistance. 
Accordingly,  after  the  removal  of  the  royal 
governor  at  the  time  of  the  Revolution,  pub- 
lic affairs  went  on  much  as  before. 

Progress  of  Movement  towards  Single  Type. 
— Throughout  the  colonial  period,  Virginia  was 
the  typical  royal  province.  One  main  cause  of 
controversy  which  elsewhere  arose  was  here 
removed,  through  the  assembly  having  voted 
to  the  governor  a permanent  salary;  in  return 
for  which  an  absentee  governor  in  England 
took  the  money,  doing  his  work  by  deputy. 
Xew  York  became  a royal  province  on  James 
II’s  accession  in  1685;  New  Jersey  by 
surrender  of  the  proprietors  in  1702;  and  in 
like  manner  South  and  North  Carolina  in 
1719  and  1722.  New  Hampshire  became  a sep- 
arate royal  province  in  1691,  and  the  cor- 
porate colony  of  Massachusetts  at  the  same 
time  underwent  the  same  fate,  so  far  as  it  was 
brought  about  by  the  engrafting  of  a governor, 
appointed  by  the  Crown,  upon  a vigorously  in- 
dependent self-governing  community.  The 
compromise  under  which  the  main  privileges 
of  the  original  charter  were  restored,  in  re- 
turn for  the  peaceable  acceptance  of  a royal 
governor  seemed  a step  forward  in  the  con- 
solidation of  the  empire  for  military  and 
trade  purposes.  It  is  true  that  the  governor 
proved  impotent  to  enforce  the  trade  laws,  in 
the  face  of  a public  opinion  wholly  hostile,  hut 
the  part  played  by  Massachusetts  in  the  re- 
sistance to  France  from  1745  to  1763,  was 
rendered  more  effective  by  being  in  touch, 
through  its  governor,  with  the  British  govern- 
ment. 

Later  Development. — The  colonies  which 
were  won  from  the  French — Nova  Scotia  and 
Canada — naturally  became  royal  provinces; 
representative  institutions  being  withheld  at 
first.  With  their  introduction  the  evils  of  the 
old  system  of  government  again  became  ap- 
parent, and  it  was  not  till  the  triumph  of  re- 
sponsible government  (circ.  1848),  under  which 
the  government  lay  with  a ministry  possessing 
the  confidence  of  a majority  of  the  legislature, 
that  a solution  was  found  for  the  problem. 

The  modern  British  colonial  system  is  to  con- 


fer full  responsible  government,  representative 
government  and  crown  colony  government, 
according  to  the  character  of  the  population; 
whereas  in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  cen- 
turies the  same  form  of  royal  province  was 
considered  appropriate  wherever  there  were 
English  inhabitants.  Consequently  the  expres- 
sion “crown  colony,”  in  the  Rules  and  Regula- 
tions of  the  Colonial  Office,  meaning  a colony 
in  which  the  Crown  has  the  entire  control  of 
legislation,  while  the  administration  is  carried 
on  by  public  officers,  under  the  control  of  the 
home  government,  has  no  connection  with  the 
royal  province  of  the  seventeenth  and  eight- 
eenth centuries. 

See  Colonization  by  Great  Britain  in 
America;  Colonial  Government, Proprietary. 

References:  Sources  for  the  working  of  the 
royal  provinces  in  “Official  Letters  of  Alexander 
Spotswood”  in  Virginia  Historical  Society  “Col- 
lections, I-II  (1854-1860);  “The  Official  Rec- 
ords of  R.  Dinwiddie”  in  ibid,  III,  IV ; E.  B. 
O’Callaghan,  Documents  Relating  to  the  Col- 
onial Hist,  of  New  York  (1853-1861)  ; W.  A. 
Whitehead,  Documents  Relating  tc  the  Colonial 
Hist,  of  New  Jersey  (1880-1904)  ; Thos.  Hutch- 
inson, Hist,  of  the  Province  of  Massachusetts 
Bay,  1691-1750  (2d  ed.,  1768);  E.  B.  Greene, 
Provincial  Governor  in  the  English  Colonies  of 
North  America  (1898),  H.  L.  Osgood,  English 
Colonies  in  the  Seventeenth  Century  (1907), 
III ; P.  A.  Bruce,  Institutional  Hist,  of  Va.  in 
Seventeenth  Century  (1910)  ; O.  M.  Dickerson, 
Am.  Col.  Government,  1696-1765  (1912);  the 
chief  authority  for  the  necessity  of  responsible 
government  is  Lord  Durham,  Report  on  the 
Affairs  of  British  North  America  (C.  P.  Lucas, 
Ed.,  1912)  ; J.  Howe,  Speeches  and  Public  Let- 
ters (1858);  for  the  present  British  colonial 
system,  A.  B.  Keith,  Responsible  Government 
in  the  Dominions  (1912)  ; II.  Jenkyns,  British 
Rule  and  Jurisdiction  Beyond  the  Seas  (1902)  ; 
Colonial  Office  List  (annual).' 

H.  E.  Egerton. 

PROXY.  A written  authority  given  by  one 
person  to  another  to  act  in  his  stead  in  a 
meeting  of  which  the  giver  of  the  proxy  is  a 
member,  or  which  he  has  the  right  to  attend. 
Proxies  are  much  used  in  the  proceedings  of 
corporations,  which  are  commonly  attended  by 
only  a few  persons,  particularly  if  a stock 
vote  is  called  for.  Proxies  are  also  sometimes 
given  to  members  of  fraternal  or  other  conven- 
tions. From  the  governmental  standpoint  they 
are  especially  important  because  used  in  po- 
litical committees,  which  are  often  so  large 
that  it  is  difficult  to  get  adequate  representa- 
tion. Hence,  a member  who  cannot  be  present 
authorizes  a friend,  presumably  of  the  same 
political  faith,  to  act  for  him.  Proxies  are  al- 
lowed in  national  party  committees,  and  in 
many  less  important  meetings.  They  are  often 
sought  in  advance  so  as  to  assure  a majority  to 
a particular  combination  of  men.  No  proxies  are 


PSYCHOLOGY  OF  THE  CROWD 


ever  allowed  for  members  of  public  legislative 
bodies,  city  councils,  legislatures,  or  Congress. 
They  are  sometimes  used  in  local  and  state 
conventions  but  not  in  national  conventions 


PSYCHOLOGY  ( 

Crowd  Personality. — Every  crowd  has  a per- 
sonality of  its  own.  Only  in  rare  instances 
does  this  personality  reflect  a mere  average, 
or  a mere  blend,  of  the  mental  traits  of  the 
persons  who  compose  it.  The  mind  of  the 
crowd  is  unique  and  in  many  particulars  un- 
like the  minds  of  its  constituent  members. 

Variations. — There  is  naturally  wide  varia- 
tion in  the  peculiarities  of  crowds,  depending 
in  part  upon  the  character  of  the  people  form- 
ing them,  in  part  upon  the  conditions  under 
which  they  are  brought  together.  A crowd  of 
politicians  assembled  to  nominate  a ticket 
presents  features  differing  markedly  from  those 
of  a religious  assembly  gathered  for  worship, 
and  each  is  quite  remote  in  its  attributes 
from  the  traits  of  a mob  bent  on  murder. 
Nevertheless  all  crowds  present  certain  com- 
mon characteristics,  in  so  far  as  they  fall  under 
any  single  dominating  mental  influence.  A 
mass  of  persons  passing  to  and  fro  in  the 
street  is  not  psychologically  speaking  a crowd. 
The  same  mass  of  persons  arrested  to  watch  a 
conflagration,  and  much  more  when  gathered 
to  hear  a speaker,  is  a crowd  in  the  sense  here 
contemplated. 

Crowd  Intelligence. — The  conditions  under 
which  crowds  gather  are  commonly  unfavor- 
able to  reflective  and  critical  thinking.  Hence 
it  comes  about  that  the  level  of  intelligence 
to  which  successful  appeal  can  be  made  is 
generally  low.  Political  speakers  often  take 
advantage  of  this  fact  to  employ  analogies  by 
way  of  argument  such  as  would  never  for  a 
moment  stand  the  scrutiny  of  a calmer  mo- 
ment. Moreover,  a speaker  who  wanders  long 
from  the  obvious  and  the  concrete,  pays  the 
penalty  by  loss  of  attention,  which  is  merely 
loss  of  contact  with  his  hearers’  minds.  In 
comparison  with  the  normal  individual  con- 
sciousness, the  mind  of  the  crowd  is  frag- 
mentary, discontinuous  and  especially  suscep- 
tible to  suggestions.  It  forgets  the  most  evi- 
dent facts,  it  leaps  to  conclusions  over  chasms 
of  limitless  depths,  it  follows  with  unbridled 
enthusiasm  the  leader  who  once  holds  it  in 
his  grip  with  little  regard  to  rational  conti- 
nuity of  thought. 

Loss  of  Personal  Responsibility. — In  crowds 
moved  to  excitement  there  is  a curious  and 
well  recognized  diminishment  or  loss  of  the 
sense  of  personal  responsibility.  The  individ- 
ual’s own  personality  shrinks  and  is  enfolded 
within  the  mass  of  the  mob.  This  is  no  doubt 
in  part  an  immediate  result  of  the  sheer  awe- 


where  their  place  is  taken  by  the  system  of 
alternates.  See  Alternates;  Committee 
System  in  United  States;  Committees, 
Party.  A.  B.  H. 


)F  THE  CROWD 

someness  of  the  multitude.  Where  a clever 
speaker  has  been  haranguing  the  crowd,  a con- 
dition analogous  to  hypnosis  supervenes.  The 
mind  is  kept  riveted  upon  one  line  of  thought 
until  opposing  ideas  have  become  few  and 
feeble,  and  one  is  forthwith  ready  to  act.  In 
mobs  which  are  being  incited  to  violence,  any 
overt  move  on  the  part  of  a leader,  when 
passion  has  been  thus  deeply  stirred,  may 
suffice  to  precipitate  united  action,  action  of 
which  no  one  of  the  participants  could  possibly 
be  guilty  when  alone.  Nor  must  one  suppose 
that  such  unreflective  and  impulsive  conduct 
is  evoked  only  in  response  to  unworthy  appeals 
and  in  the  interests  of  criminal  violence.  A 
similar  reaction  may  be  elicited  by  an  appeal 
to  protect  the  flag,  to  succor  the  oppressed, 
to  rescue  the  Holy  City.  Every  race  and  every 
generation  furnish  abundant  witness  to  the 
variety  of  ways  in  which  the  mob  spirit  finds 
expression. 

Religious  Revivals. — Few  more  typical  ex- 
amples of  the  psychology  of  the  crowd  are 
to  be  found  than  those  afforded  by  revival 
services.  This  fact  implies  neither  criticism 
nor  approval  of  the  institution.  As  conducted 
today  we  find  a carefully  executed  prelimi- 
nary campaign,  in  which  by  various  devices 
public  expectation  and  interest  are  aroused. 
At  the  service  itself  there  is  a skillful  com- 
bination of  emotionally  stirring  music  with 
a persuasive  address  from  the  revivalist.  Lit- 
tle by  little,  step  by  step,  the  listener  is  car- 
ried along  until  the  hypnotic  spell  of  the  speak- 
er, together  with  the  concentrated  thrust  of 
the  great  sympathetic  crowd,  sweeps  him 
wholly  off  his  feet;  he  obeys  the  invitation  to 
rise,  or  to  come  forward,  or  to  do  whatever 
else  is  called  for,  from  those  who  wish  to 
be  saved.  No  sooner  does  one  start  than  a 
dozen  follow.  All  over  the  house  people  are 
weeping.  The  choir  is  chanting  softly.  The 
spell  is  irresistible.  No  doubt  all  forms  of 
public  worship  contain  a similar  element  of 
hypnotic  influence.  The  revival  service  stands 
out  conspicuously  chiefly  because  of  the  vio- 
lence of  the  reactions  it  invites.  In  the  old 
“camp  meeting”  days  these  expressions  often 
partook  of  the  pathological  and  hysterical. 

Group  Psychology. — There  is  a group  psy- 
chology closely  related  to  the  psychology  of 
the  crowd.  Sects  and  castes  often  exercise 
upon  one  another  influences  which  closely  re- 
semble those  already  described,  and  without 
essential  regard  to  the  physical  presence  to- 


PUBLIC  ACCOUNT  SYSTEM— PUBLIC  ACCOUNTS 


getlier  of  the  members  of  the  group.  Any  opin- 
ion or  belief  held  by  a group  is  thereby  likely 
to  be  more  confidently  cherished.  We  crave 
such  support  for  both  our  convictions  and 
our  practices,  and  our  loyalty  to  them  bears 
a very  direct  relation  to  the  attitude  toward 
them  of  our  set.  To  do  as  others  do,  to 
think  as  others  think  has,  since  the  beginning 
of  society,  been  the  comfortable  thing,  the 
thing  rewarded  by  neighborly  confidence  and 
approval.  To  dissent  has  always  required 
high  courage  and  something  of  the  martyr’s 
spirit.  In  primitive  society  the  dissenter  gen- 
erally gets  short  shrift.  Few  of  us  have 
evolved  so  far  as  to  have  had  this  lesson  of 
our  ancestors  bred  wholly  out  of  our  bones. 

Nowhere  are  these  tendencies  to  yield  to 
group  pressure  more  obvious  than  in  the  realm 
of  convention  and  fashion.  To  violate  the 
established  traditions  of  one’s  profession,  to 
outrage  the  conventions  of  one’s  social  peers, 
these  are  hardly  more  audacious  enterprises 
than  wholly  to  flout  the  demands  of  fashion. 
So  well  do  we  all  know  this,  and  so  con- 
vinced are  we  of  the  inflexible  irrationality 
of  our  contemporaries,  that  we  gladly  conform, 
allow  our  wives  to  wear  each  season  the  latest 
incongruity  in  dress  and,  yielding  to  an  an- 
cient human  desire  to  avoid  ridicule  and  an 
unflattering  eminence,  we  do  as  we  are  bid 
by  the  tradesmen  who  fatten  on  our  compli- 
ance. 

Distinctions. — The  psychology  of  the  group 


then  is  largely  keyed  to  two  notes,  both  more 
or  less  consciously  recognized:  (1)  the  de- 
sire for  moral  backing  and  sympathetic  sup- 
port in  our  beliefs  and  our  practices;  (2)  a 
keen  instinct  to  avoid  the  suspicion  of  being 
“queer,”  to  escape  the  ignominy  of  ridicule. 
Both  these  motives  lead  us  to  cultivate  our 
imitative  capacities  almost  exclusively.  For- 
tunately, most  of  us  have  too  much  independ- 
ence of  spirit  to  conform  wholly.  But  few 
of  us  go  so  far  as  to  isolate  ourselves  from 
the  rank  and  file  by  an  independence  in  which- 
they  could  see  only  idiosyncracy. 

The  psychology  of  the  crowd  on  the  other 
hand  is  almost  wholly  determined  by  subcon- 
scious, or  at  least  by  unrecognized,  influences, 
by  awe,  by  excitement,  by  semihypnotic  sug- 
gestion and  fascination  and  the  like.  Rational 
and  well-considered  motives  are  often  min- 
gled with  these,  but  the  typical  “crowd”  or 
“mob”  consciousness  is  essentially  emotional, 
suggestible,  fragmentary  and  unreflective.  It 
touches  springs  which  lie  far  back  in  the  dim 
twilight  of  the  history  of  the  race. 

See  Mobs;  Sociology. 

References:  G.  Le  Bon,  The  Crowd  (1900); 
G.  Tarde,  Les  Lois  de  l’ Imitation  (1895), 
265-394;  E.  A.  Ross,  Social  Psychology 
(1909),  43-110,  346-55. 

James  R.  Angell. 

PUBLIC  ACCOUNT  SYSTEM.  See 

Prison  Labor,  Public  Account  System  of. 


PUBLIC  ACCOUNTS 


Definition  and  Necessity. — Public  accounts 
deael  with  the  operations  incident  to  the  re- 
ceipt and  expenditure  of  public  moneys.  The 
subject  naturally  divides  itself  into  two 
branches : ( 1 ) the  system  of  accounting  as 

a method  of  administration;  (2)  the  accounts 
themselves  which  are  available  for  public  scru- 
tiny and  popular  judgment.  A division  is  also 
to  be  made  between  the  accounts  of  the  Fed- 
eral Government  and  those  of  states  and  mu- 
nicipalities. 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  de- 
mands that  “ a regular  statement  and  account 
of  the  receipts  and  expenditures  of  all  public 
money  shall  be  published  from  time  to  time” 
(Art.  I,  Sec.  ix,  If  7).  There  is  also  a pro- 
vision that  “no  money  shall  be  drawn  from 
the  treasury  but  in  consequence  of  appropria- 
tions made  by  law.”  To  carry  out  these  pro- 
visions it  is  necessary  that  accounts  shall  be 
kept  in  an  orderly  manner  which  will  admit 
of  public  presentation ; and  that  a careful 
system  of  checks  be  adopted  to  prevent  pay- 
ments not  authorized  by  Congress. 

Legal  Provision  for  Payments. — By  the  act 
of  1789,  establishing  the  Treasury  Depart- 

87 


ment,  the  system  of  accounting  was  placed  in 
the  hands  of  four  officers : a comptroller,  au- 
ditor, treasurer,  and  register.  (1)  The  comp- 
troller was  to  examine  the  propriety  of  the 
accounts,  i.  e.,  determine  whether  they  had 
been  authorized  by  law;  (2)  the  auditor,  to 
see  that  the  accounts  were  presented  in  proper 
form;  (3)  the  treasurer,  to  act  as  custodian 
of  public  funds  and  allow  no  money  to  pass 
from  the  safe-keeping  save  on  proper  war- 
rants; (4)  the  register,  to  act  as  bookkeeper 
and  keep  a record  of  all  vouchers. 

In  practical  operation  the  system  was  as 
follows:  to  be  sure  that  no  money  was  paid 
out  except  under  a congressional  appropria- 
tion; (1)  the  executive,  represented  by  an 
auditor  and  comptroller,  scrutinizes  and  en- 
dorses the  account;  (2)  a warrant  must  be 
signed  by  the  secretary  of  the  treasury;  (3) 
countersigned  by  tbe  comptroller;  (4)  re- 
corded by  the  register;  (5)  then  payment 
could  be  made  by  the  treasurer.  The  system 
was  admirable  from  tbe  standpoint  of  safety, 
and  for  many  years  met  the  requirements  of 
business  convenience.  Although  it  was  the 
original  intention  that  all  accounts  should  be 


PUBLIC  ACCOUNTS 


“settled  first  and  last”  in  the  Treasury  De- 
partment, changes  on  account  of  the  increase 
of  financial  operations  were  introduced.  Ac- 
countants or  auditors  were  appointed  in  the 
Post  Office,  War  and  Navy  Departments,  in 
order  to  provide  for  a more  accurate  and  ex- 
peditious settlement  of  accounts.  Thus  the 
accounts  in  these  departments  received  a 
double  audit,  first  in  an  executive  department, 
and  second,  in  the  accounting  offices  of  the 
Treasury  Department.  It  was  also  found  nec- 
essary to  make  another  departure  from  the 
original  uniform  system  in  permitting  agents, 
scattered  throughout  the  country,  to  act  as 
disbursing  officers  for  certain  appropriations. 
Under  this  practice  certain  claims  may  be 
paid  before  the  account  has  been  finally  certi- 
fied by  an  accounting  officer. 

Various  changes  took  place  in  the  develop- 
ment of  the  accounting  system;  new  comp- 
trollers and  auditors  were  added  as  business 
increased  and  new  governmental  bureaus  es- 
tablished. The  system,  however,  became  more 
and  more  complicated,  resulting  in  friction 
between  different  officials  and  delays  in  set- 
tlement. Particularly  was  this  so  at  the  time 
of  the  Civil  War,  when  the  accounting  officers 
were  swamped  with  accounts  and  claims,  many 
of  which  remained  unsettled  for  years. 

Example  of  the  Routine  in  Passing  upon  an 
Account. — The  following  illustration  may  be 
cited  from  a description  given  by  the  court  of 
claims  in  1877.  (1)  An  account  in  the  War 

Department  relating  to  clothing  of  the  army 
is  received  and  examined  by  the  second  au- 
ditor; when  examined,  the  auditor  certifies 
the  balance  and  transmits  the  certificate  and 
vouchers  to  the  second  comptroller.  (2)  The 
latter,  after  examination  and  comparison  with 
the  law  making  the  appropriation,  certifies  the 
proper  balance  and  returns  to  the  auditor, 
(3)  who  transmits  the  certificate  to  the  Sec- 
retary of  War  for  a requisition.  (4)  The 
Secretary  of  War  draws  a requisition  on  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  requesting  him  to 
issue  a warant.  (5)  This  requisition  is  then 
forwarded  to  the  second  comptroller,  who 
countersigns  it  and  once  more  sends  it  to 
the  second  auditor.  (6)  He  records  the  requi- 
sition, certifies  to  it,  and  sends  it  to  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasury.  (7)  A warrant  is 
then  drawn,  addressed  to  the  treasurer,  (8) 
examined  by  one  of  the  assistant  secretaries, 
(9)  signed  by  the  Secretary  or  an  assistant 
secretary,  (10)  sent  to  the  first  comptroller, 
who  countersigns,  (11)  then  to  the  register, 
and  (12)  finally  to  the  treasurer,  who  may 
issue  the  draft.  (13)  The  draft,  however,  must 
first  go  to  the  register  for  record  and  certifica- 
tion before  delivery  to  the  patient  auditor. 

Such  a procedure  naturally  could  not  long 
be  tolerated.  It  meant  a triplicate  system  of 
examination,  delays,  and  solidifying  auditing 
officials  into  automatons  who  were  unable  to 
exercise  any  real  judgment  which  might  se- 

88 


cure  economy  in  the  expenditure  of  public 
money. 

Accounting  Reforms. — In  1894  a reform  was 
made  as  a result  of  an  exhaustive  investi- 
gation by  the  Dockery  Commission.  The  new 
law  (July  31,  1894)  provided  for  one  comp- 
troller and  six  auditors.  The  administrative 
officers  approve  or  disapprove  claims  and  ac- 
counts and  submit  their  evidence  or  comment 
for  the  information  of  the  auditors.  These 
latter  then  examine  the  account  and  certify 
their  findings,  which  are  final,  subject  to  ap- 
peals to  the  comptroller,  and  to  the  power 
of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  direct  a 
reexamination  of  the  account.  This  reform 
lessens  the  number  of  accounting  officers,  plac- 
ing greater  responsibility  upon  the  auditors, 
who  are  held  responsible  for  the  settlement 
of  accounts  and  advances  of  money  to  dis- 
bursing officers.  The  duty  of  the  comptroller 
is  confined  more  strictly  to  the  construction  of 
the  statutes.  Under  this  new  procedure  the 
register  practically  drops  out  of  the  account- 
ing system,  so  far  as  taking  any  part  in  the 
accounting  of  receipts  and  expenditures  is 
concerned. 

It  is  believed  by  competent  experts  that 
still  further  reforms  in  the  interest  of  econ- 
omy and  efficiency  are  needed  in  the  auditing 
department.  As  the  auditors  are  not  in  the 
classified  civil  service,  appointments  are  fre- 
quently made  for  political  reasons.  It  is  also 
asserted  that  there  should  be  greater  central- 
ization, placing  all  the  auditors  under  the 
supervision  of  one  auditor-in-chief. 

The  whole  accounting  system  is  antiquated. 
Not  till  under  Secretary  Cortelyou,  was  the 
system  of  double  entry  bookkeeping  intro- 
duced into  the  federal  service.  Trial  balances 
and  proofs  of  accounts  were  apparently  un- 
known; hence  in  1911,  a special  commission 
was  directed  to  examine  the  system  and  re- 
port. 

Unadjusted  Accounts. — Under  the  elaborate 
system  of  checks  and  balances  which  has  been 
described,  the  public  funds  have  been  reason, 
ably  protected,  and  the  intention  of  the  law, 
in  the  main,  has  been  carried  out.  So  far 
as  the  law  is  impractical,  the  accounting 
branch  of  the  government  cannot  be  held  re- 
sponsible. The  only  serious  loss  on  the  books 
of  the  government  has  been  the  so  called  “State 
Deposit”  of  $27,000,000,  made  with  the  states 
from  the  federal  treasury  under  the  act  of 
June  23,  1836.  This  deposit,  was  generally 
regarded  as  a gift;  but  in  order  to  remove 
all  doubts,  Congress,  in  1910,  authorized  the 
accounting  officers  to  place  to  the  credit  of  the 
treasurer  the  amount  of  the  public  moneys 
deposited  with  the  states.  Some  slight  losses 
have  been  due  to  mismanagement  in  subtreas- 
ury offices  from  which  the  treasurer  has  also 
been  relieved.  In  1910  there  was  still  out- 
standing against  the  office  of  the  treasurer 
•SI, 483, 000,  a sum  accumulating  pver  a long 


PUBLIC  ACCOUNTS 


period  of  years,  reaching  back  in  part  to  1857, 
and  for  which  the  office  will  not  probably  be 
held  liable  either  for  fault  or  negligence.  The 
larger  part  of  the  above  sum  is  due  to  defal- 
cations in  subtreasuries  and  mint  deposits. 
As  illustrating  the  magnitude  of  bookkeeping 
operations  of  the  government,  the  following 
statistics  may  be  cited  for  1911;  appropria- 
tion accounts  were  opened  during  the  year  to 
the  number  of  6500;  8000  active  accounts  of 
collecting  and  disbursing  officers  were  carried ; 
and  124,695  receipt  and  pay  warrants  were 
issued  during  the  year,  aggregating  about 
$3,681,000,000. 

Publication  of  Accounts. — Information  in  re- 
gard to  public  accounts  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment is  to  be  sought  in  the  annual  reports 
of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  in  bound 
form,  commonly  called  the  Finance  Report. 
In  the  text  is  generally  to  be  found  a state- 
ment of  receipts  and  disbursements,  summar- 
ized for  the  current  year,  for  receipts  under 
50  headings;  and  for  disbursements  under 
nearly  180  headings.  In  the  statistical  part 
will  be  found  tables  showing  receipts  and 
expenditures  by  years  since  the  establishment 
of  the  government,  under  four  general  head- 
ings ( see  Expenditures,  Federal;  Revenue, 
Public)  . 

Formerly,  the  reports  of  the  auditors  and 
comptrollers,  which  contain  additional  data, 
were  included  in  the  Finance  Report ; but  since 
1899  they  have  been  omitted  and  are  issued 
as  separate  documents.  The  figures  in  these 
reports,  however,  are  not  conveniently  classi- 
fied. In  the  annual  Statistical  Abstract,  re- 
ceipts and  expenditures  are  classified  in  great- 
er detail  than  in  the  Finance  Report.  Re- 
ceipts, for  example,  are  shown  under  customs, 
for  87  headings;  under  internal  revenue,  for 
8 headings;  and  under  other  items  for  nearly 
40  headings.  Disbursements  are  distributed 
under  90  headings. 

Considering  the  variety  and  magnitude  of 
the  operations  of  government  administration, 
there  is  much  to  be  desired  in  the  presentation 
of  the  public  accounts.  Improvement,  how- 
ever, is  not  likely  to  be  made  until  steps  are 
taken  to  secure  the  framing  of  an  orderly 
budget  ( see  Budgets,  Federal).  Particularly 
to  be  desired  is  a classification  of  expenditures 
according  to  objects  for  which  money  is  spent, 
rather  than  by  departments.  In  1911  Presi- 
dent Taft  appointed  a Commission  on  Economy 
and  Efficiency,  which  has  endeavored  to  intro- 
duce some  reform  in  this  direction. 

State  and  Local  Accounts. — The  accounting 
systems  of  many  states  and  cities  have  been  of 
a primitive  character  from  the  standpoint  of 
public  information;  and  in  many  instances  the 
machinery  for  safeguarding  funds  has  been 
inadequate.  Within  recent  years  there  has 
been  some  improvement,  particularly  in  the 
field  of  municipal  accounting.  As  a rule  there 
are  two  principal  officers — the  comptroller  or 

89 


auditor  and  the  treasurer.  In  small  cities  the 
town  clerk  or  recorder  performs  the  duties  of  a 
comptroller.  In  some  municipalities  the  only 
books  of  account  are  those  of  the  treasurer. 
The  comptroller  (in  Boston,  the  auditor)  pass- 
es on  all  bills,  and  after  certification  transmits 
them  to  the  treasurer  for  payment. 

In  a few  states  and  cities  the  comptroller 
has  the  power  of  inspection  of  work  and  sup- 
plies for  which  the  bills  are  rendered,  but  as 
a rule  he  depends  upon  the  endorsement  of  the 
department  or  bureau  in  which  the  expense 
was  incurred.  This  is  almost  invariably  true 
in  the  handling  of  bills  submitted  by  school 
departments  in  cities.  A more  flagrant  evil 
is  the  not  uncommon  practice  in  some  cities 
of  officials  incurring  bills  in  excess  of  appro- 
priations, in  the  expectation  that  the  city 
council  will  subsequently  vote  the  deficiency. 
The  tendency,  however,  is  to  increase  the  pow- 
er of  the  comptroller  or  to  require  the  previous 
consent  of  the  mayor  for  expenditures  not 
specifically  authorized. 

Uniformity  of  Accounts. — From  the  point  of 
view  of  the  taxpayer,  a serious  defect  lies  in 
the  lack  of  uniformity  of  city  accounts.  The 
financial  experience  of  one  city  cannot  be  com- 
pared with  that  of  another.  An  attempt  to 
remedy  this  defect  has  been  made  recently, 
by  the  Bureau  of  the  Census  which  now  pub- 
lishes an  annual  volume  on  Statistics  of  Cities 
Having  a Population  of  over  30,000.  Reports 
are  analyzed  so  as  to  show  the  cost  of  con- 
ducting the  city’s  business,  together  with  the 
revenue  collected  and  the  debt  incurred.  These 
reports  also  contain  valuable  discussions  of 
accounting  terminology. 

Only  with  great  difficulty  has  the  Bureau 
been  able  to  reduce  the  data  into  comparative 
tables.  Financial  terms,  such  as  expenses,  ex- 
penditures, revenues  and  income,  are  used  with 
different  meanings.  Especially  confusing  is 
the  use  in  some  cities,  of  “funds.”  Receipts 
are  distributed  into  many  so-called  funds,  or 
accounts,  in  accordance  with  the  old  English 
practice  of  voting  supplies  for  a specific  ex- 
penditure. The  result  is  the  keeping  of  a 
separate  account  for  each  fund.  As  Plehn  re- 
marks, “With  the  exception  of  a few  trust 
funds,  these  funds  are  in  effect  mere  book- 
keeping contrivances.” 

State  Supervision. — Of  interest  also  is  the 
tendency  for  state  governments  to  exercise 
some  form  of  state  supervision  over  the  ac- 
counts of  municipalities.  Some  25  states  now 
attempt  this,  either  by  requirement  of  accounts 
according  to  uniform  schedules,  by  examina- 
tion of  accounts,  or  by  simply  receiving  the 
reports  for  purposes  of  compilation.  Influ- 
ence toward  an  improvement  of  accounting  is 
also  being  exercised  by  the  National  Municipal 
League  and  the  National  Association  of  Comp- 
trollers and  Accounting  Officers. 

See  Appropriations,  American  System  of; 
Auditor  of  the  Treasury;  Budgets,  Fed- 


PUBLIC  ACCOUNTS,  BOARDS  OF— PUBLIC  BUILDINGS 


eral;  Budgets,  State  and  Local;  Commis- 
sions on  Administrative  Methods;  Comp- 
troller of  the  Treasury;  Fiscal  Year;  Pur- 
chase of  Public  Supplies  and  Property; 
Uniformity  of  Public  Accounts. 

References:  U.  S.  Treasury  Dept.,  Account- 
ing System  of  the  U.  S.  from  1789  to  1910 
(1011);  U.  S.  Census  Bureau,  Statistics  of 
Cities  (1908),  Wealth,  Debt,  and  Taxation 
(1007);  Massachusetts  Bureau  of  Statistics, 
Statistics  of  Municipal  Finance  (annual)  ; Na- 
tional Municipal  League,  Proceedings  (annu- 
al) ; Am.  Year  Boole,  1911,  238,  ibid,  1912, 
201-203,  and  year  by  year. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

PUBLIC  ACCOUNTS,  BOARDS  OF.  Several 
states,  as  for  example,  Texas,  Colorado  and 
Connecticut,  have  within  a few  years  cre- 
ated boards  of  state  accounting  or  account- 
ancy; in  some  states  simply  to  reform  the 
bookkeeping  of  the  state ; in  others  to  examine 
and  certify  public  accountants.  See  Budgets, 
State  and  Local;  Expenditures,  State  and 
Local;  Public  Accounts;  Public  Property; 
Revenue,  Public,  Collection  of.  Reference: 
N.  Y.  State  Library,  Index  of  Legislation  ( an- 
nual), title.  Accounts.  A.  B.  II. 

PUBLIC  ACCOUNTS,  UNIFORMITY  OF. 

See  Uniformity  of  Public  Accounts. 

PUBLIC  AID  TO  RAILROADS.  See 

Railroads,  Public  Aid  to. 

PUBLIC  BUILDINGS,  FEDERAL,  STATE 
AND  MUNICIPAL.  Colonial.— The  English 
colonists  of  Amefica  brought  with  them  a dig- 
nified tradition  of  the  public  buildings  of  the 
mother  country  including  churches,  castles, 
palaces,  town  halls,  public  markets,  and  other 
structures.  The  first  buildings  constructed  at 
the  public  charge  in  the  colonies  were  the 
churches,  built  in  New  England  by  the  towns, 
in  the  South  by  the  parishes;  then  followed 
townhouses,  courthouses,  and  houses  of  as- 
sembly, of  which  several  have  lasted  till  the 
present  day,  among  these  the  old  statehouses 
of  Boston  and  Providence. 

The  Continental  Congress  met  in  what  eame 
to  be  known  as  Independence  Hall  in  Phila- 
delphia and  subsequently  in  several  borrowed 
halls  in  other  places.  A building  fitted  up  in 
New  York  in  1789  by  subscription  for  the  re- 
ception of  the  first  Congress  was  known  as 
Federal  Hall. 

Early  National  and  State. — The  United 
States,  after  it  had  selected  the  seat  of  gov- 
ernment in  1700  (see  Capitol  of  the  United 
States),  proceeded  to  construct  two  buildings 
in  Washington,  which  have  had  great  influence 
on  the  architecture  of  the  United  States;  the 
President’s  house,  said  to  have  been  modeled 
from  the  palace  of  an  Irish  nobleman;  and  the 
Capitol,  first  sketched  by  Dr.  Eustis,  who  was 

90 


not  an  architect,  and  subsequently  worked  out 
by  Bullfinch.  Outside  of  Washington,  most  of 
the  new  federal  public  buildings  were  of  the 
Greek  temple  type,  with  a portico  of  heavy 
columns. 

In  the  South  there  has  been  a strong  influ- 
ence from  the  Georgian  brick  architecture  of 
the  colonial  period,  and  many  modern  county 
buildings  are  of  that  type.  The  capitol  at 
Richmond  resembles  a temple,  but  many  of 
the  states  have  followed  the  type  of  the  federal 
capitol,  the  splendid  dome  of  which,  completed 
about  1865  is  one  of  the  architectural  tri- 
umphs of  the  world.  It  set  an  example  fol- 
lowed by  many  of  the  states,  which  construct- 
ed for  various  purposes  domed  buildings  of  an 
inferior  model. 

The  United  States,  from  1789  to  1861,  built 
a number  of  custom-houses,  usually  including 
court  chambers,  most  of  them  in  the  classical 
style;  and  after  1830  began  the  construction 
of  elaborate  post  office  buildings.  Most  of  the 
states  built  their  capitols  a few  years  after 
tl.eir  admission,  and  then  put  their  construc- 
tive energy  into  their  penitentiaries  and  in- 
sane hospitals,  most  of  which  were  put  up 
with  little  architectural  skill  or  supervision 
by  state  authorities.  As  a consequence  many 
of  them  have  been  destroyed  by  fire. 

A second  era  of  capitol  building  set  in  after 
the  Civil  War;  elaborate  new  buildings  have 
been  constructed  up  to  1913  by  Massachusetts, 
Rhode  Island,  Connecticut,  New  York,  Penn- 
sylvania, Texas,  Minnesota  and  Wisconsin. 

Early  Municipal. — For  many  years  the  mu- 
nicipalities had  few  buildings  except  a city 
hall,  of  which  a good  type  is  in  the  lower  end 
of  New  York.  After  1830  the  localities  began 
to  build  city  sehoolhouses,  mostly  plain  and 
incommodious  buildings.  From  1850  onward 
they  were  busy  with  engine-houses  for  the 
public  fire  apparatus,  with  high  schools  and 
with  enormous  grade  school  buildings.  The 
first  public  libraries  of  architectural  preten- 
tions date  from  after  the  Civil  War,  as  do  the 
municipal  bathhouses,  park  pavilions,  and 
pumping  stations. 

After  1865  the  Federal  Government  put  up 
in  most  of  the  large  cities  immense  buildings 
of  a different  type,  imitated  from  the  French 
mansard;  a style  followed  by  the  state  and 
municipal  buildings  of  that  epoch,  and  exem- 
plefied  by  the  Philadelphia  City  Hall.  After 
1880,  principally  under  the  influence  of  the 
great  architect,  Richardson,  began  a period  of 
Romanesque  buildings,  with  porticos,  round 
arches,  broad  spaces,  calculated  balance  of 
parts,  and  careful  attention  to  the  interior. 

Methods  of  Building. — For  this  vast  expend- 
iture of  public  money,  the  governments  of 
every  type  have  had  a poor  and  extravagant 
method.  The  Federal  Government  retains  a 
public  architect,  but  many  federal  buildings 
have  been  planned  and  at  least  in  part  exe- 
cuted by  private  architects.  Since  1893  the 


PUBLIC  BUILDINGS,  FEDERAL,  STATE  AND  MUNICIPAL 


states  of  New  York,  Iowa,  Illinois,  Nebraska, 
and  Kansas  have  provided  for  state  architects, 
all  of  whom,  except  Nebraska,  appear  to  be 
in  service  in  1913.  As  the  architect’s  fee  is 
a percentage  of  the  cost  of  the  building,  this 
sometimes  creates  a profitable  job;  and  archi- 
tects are  often  selected  by  political  influence. 
A dishonest  or  incompetent  architect  will  al- 
low disadvantageous  contracts  and  jobbery. 
Many  modern  public  buildings  are  built  on 
plans  chosen  from  a competition,  the  selection 
made  by  a group  of  disinterested  professional 
architects. 

The  question  of  site  is  difficult  to  adjust. 
In  New  York  the  authorities  were  busy  from 
1910  to  1913  trying  to  make  up  their  minds 
where  to  put  a new  court  house.  Many  Amer- 
ican public  buildings  are  wedged  into  narrow 
spaces,  instead  of  choosing  a site  fronting  a 
park  or  the  end  of  a street  where  the  great 
building  could  be  seen.  A frequent  method  of 
adjusting  this  question  is  to  create  a commis- 
sion of  public  officials,  sometimes  of  private 
citizens,  who  have  authority  to  make  a selec- 
tion. 

The  question  of  outlay  for  public  buildings 
is  closely  allied  to  the  whole  question  of  the 
contract  system  of  public  works  (see).  The 
advantage  of  contracts  is  that  the  total  cost 
of  the  building  is  supposed  to  be  known  in 
advance;  and  by  competitive  bids  it  is  ex- 
pected that  the  profit  to  the  contractor  will 
be  brought  down  to  a reasonable  amount. 
These  expectations  often  fail,  for  several  rea- 
sons : ( 1 ) the  contract  may  not  include  the 
whole  building,  which  it  is  expected  will  be 
put  up;  (2)  it  may  omit  expensive  items  of 
interior  finish;  (3)  it  rarely  includes  furnish- 
ings and  fittings,  which  may  add  one-half  or 
more  to  the  cost  of  the  whole  installation; 
(4)  it  may  not  include  proper  guarantees  for 
the  carrying  out  of  the  contract,  exact  suffi- 
cient bond,  or  contain  an  adequate  penalty 
for  delay.  Contracts  are  further  uncertain  be- 
cause changes  are  likely  to  be  made  during 
construction  and  little  or  no  allowance  can  be 
secured  for  things  that  are  left  out,  while 
extra  construction  has  to  be  paid  for  on  a non- 
competitive basis. 

The  supervision  of  public  buildings  is  in 
general  poor.  The  contractor  may,  as  a mat- 
ter of  fact,  be  compelled  by  political  influences 
to  employ  people  who  can  give  him  no  aid 
in  the  construction.  Failure  to  make  sure 
that  the  materials  are  of  the  quality  specified 
are  frequent.  Federal  structures  are  better 
looked  after  than  others,  but  the  neglect  to 
hold  contractors  up  to  the  requirements  is  a 
constant  complaint  in  American  public  build- 
ing. 

Building  on  public  account  suffers  also  from 
delays,  from  fraudulent  purchases  of  material 
and  from  subcontracts  at  high  rates.  Public 
buildings  put  up  on  this  plan  are  sometimes 
years  in  construction;  in  the  meantime  there 
104  i 


may  be  a succession  of  architects  and  super- 
visors, and  as  in  the  case  of  the  New  York 
capitol  at  Albany,  the  plan  of  the  building 
may  be  seriously  changed  after  it  is  far  ad- 
vanced. 

Scandals. — Some  of  the  great  public  build- 
ings have  been  the  subject  of  serious  scandals. 
The  New  York  state  capitol  cost  $25,000,000 
and  though  supposed  to  be  fire  proof  was  badly 
damaged  by  fire  in  1911.  The  old  state  capitol 
of  Pennsylvania  at  Harrisburg  was  myster- 
iously burned  in  1897,  and  a new  building  was 
constructed  by  a commission  of  which  the  gov- 
ernor and  the  state  treasurer  were  members. 
When  the  capitol  was  finished  the  commission 
boasted  that  it  had  been  constructed  within 
the  appropriation  of  $4,000,000.  A new  state 
treasurer,  as  soon  as  he  came  into  office,  in 
1900,  found  evidence  on  the  books  of  the  state 
to  show  that  this  statement  was  not  true,  and 
that  the  building  was  enveloped  in  colossal 
frauds.  The  accounts  when  properly  made  up 
showed  that  the  shell  of  the  building  had  cost 
$3,970,000;  that  the  “decorations”  had  cost 
in  addition  $7,721,000;  besides  $881,000  for 
“furnishing”;  that  some  of  the  marbles  for 
which  the  state  paid  were  nothing  but  painted 
stucco;  that  a million  dollars  had  been  paid 
for  metal  filing  cases;  that  contracts  had  been 
made  for  artistic  bronzes  by  the  pound;  that 
the  building  was  crowded  with  bronze  cande- 
lebra  bought  at  outrageous  figures.  The  total 
cost  of  the  building  when  ready  for  occupancy 
was  $12,572,000  instead  of  the  $4,000,000 
appropriated.  The  next  governor  instituted 
suits  which  resulted  in  the  conviction  of  the 
former  state  treasurer,  architect  and  several 
contractors,  who  all  received  state  prison  pen- 
alties. 

Present  Results. — Notwithstanding  these  dif- 
ficulties the  United  States  abounds  in  magnif- 
icent public  buildings.  Besides  the  superb  fed- 
eral Capitol,  White  House,  and  Library  of 
Congress  in  Washington,  there  are  beautiful 
state  capitol  buildings  in  Texas,  Minnesota, 
Rhode  Island,  Wisconsin  and  Minnesota.  The 
City  Hall  of  Philadelphia  is  an  enormous  and 
very  expensive  building  which,  however,  has  a 
monumental  character.  Types  of  good  small- 
er municipal  buildings  are  the  City  Halls  of 
Cambridge,  Massachusetts  arid  Des  Moines, 
Iowa.  In  many  communities  the  schoolhouses 
are  the  most  imposing  buildings.  Many  of 
the  modern  ones,  particularly  the  high  schools, 
show  great  architectural  skill,  as  in  Okla- 
homa City  and  Los  Angeles.  The  most 
beautiful  buildings  recently  put  up  at  state 
expense  are  to  be  found  in  some  of  the  uni- 
versities and  normal  schools,  as  in  the  Uni- 
versities of  California  and  Illinois,  and  the 
Western  Normal  School  of  Macomb,  Illinois. 
The  public  libraries  are  often  very  good.  Bos- 
ton and  New  York  possess  two  of  the  most 
famous  buildings  in  the  country.  The  latter 
is  almost  the  only  public  American  building 


PUBLIC  DOMAIN— PUBLIC  HEALTH  SERVICE 


which  suggests  the  splendor  of  buildings  of 
imperial  Rome. 

See  Bridges,  Public;  Contract  System  of 
Public  Works;  Expositions,  Public  aid  to; 
Monuments,  Public;  Public  Works,  Nation- 
al, State  and  Municipal;  School  Property. 

References:  A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government 
(1908),  §§  150-152;  Architect  of  the  Capitol, 
“Annual  Reports”  to  date  in  Sec.  of  War,  An- 
nual Reports  (1862-1901);  Superintendent, 
Capitol  Buildings  and  Grounds,  Annual  Reports 
(1881  to  date,  not  in  Cong.  Docs.)  ; Supervising 
Architect,  “Reports,”  1862  to  date,  in  Sec.  of 
the  Interior,  Annual  Reports;  F.  L.  Lord, 
“Groupings  of  Public  Buildings”  in  Municipal 
Art  Society  of  Hartford,  Bulletin,  No.  2 
(1904)  ; G.  Brown,  “Hist,  of  U.  S.  Capitol”  in 
Senate  Docs.,  56  Cong.,  1 Sess.,  No.  646  (1904), 
Hist.  Public)  Buildings  under  Control  of  the 
Treasury  Department  ( 1901 ) . 

Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

PUBLIC  DOMAIN.  This  term  is  generally 
applied  to  the  lands  owned  by  the  United 
States  and  subject  to  disposition  under  the 
authority  of  the  National  Government.  See 
Public  Lands  and  Public  Land  Policy. 

P.  J.  T. 

PUBLIC  HEALTH  SERVICE.  The  only 
branch  of  the  Government  charged  directly 
with  the  health  of  the  nation  is  the  Public 
Health  Service,  a bureau  of  the  Treasury  De- 
partment, formerly  called  the  Public  Health 
and  Marine  Hospital  Service.  This  service 
has  many  public  duties,  such  as  the  conduct 
of  maritime  quarantine,  the  collection  of 
information  of  the  occurrence  and  distribu- 
tion of  disease,  the  management  and  sup- 
pression of  epidemics,  the  medical  inspec- 
tion of  immigrants,  the  maintenance  of  a hy- 
gienic laboratory,  the  enforcement  of  inter- 
state quarantine,  the  control  of  interstate 
traffic  in  serums,  vaccines  and  other  biological 
products,  the  conduct  of  marine  hospitals  for 
sick  and  disabled  sailors  of  the  merchant  ma- 
rine, the  examination  of  pilots  for  color  blind- 
ness, the  conduct  of  a tuberculosis  sanatorium, 
the  maintenance  of  a leprosy  investigating 
station  in  Honolulu,  of  a plague  laboratory 
in  California  and  other  matters  affecting  the 
public  health.  The  service  is  presided  over 
by  a surgeon  general  with  a staff  of  assistant 
surgeons  general  entrusted  with  the  manage- 
ment of  its  various  division  details. 

This  medical  service,  which  is  quasi-mili- 
tary in  organization,  dates  from  July  10,  1798, 
when  Congress  passed  an  act  for  sick  and  dis- 
abled seamen  creating  a fund  designated  the 
Marine  Hospital  Fund.  In  1872  the  “Marine 
Hospital  Service”  was  reorganized  and  many 
additional  duties  were  imposed  upon  it  by 
Congress.  In  1902  Congress  changed  its  name 
to  the  “Public  Health  and  Marine  Hospital 
Service”  at  the  same  time  further  enlarging 

92 


its  scope  and  powers.  By  an  act  approved 
Aug.  14,  1912,  the  name  of  the  service  was 
again  changed  to  the  Public  Health  Service; 
its  powers  were  materially  enlarged  so  that  it 
now  constitutes  a public  health  service  in  both 
name  and  fact.  The  service  publishes  numer- 
ous reports,  pamphlets  and  bulletins  of  gener- 
al sanitary  and  scientific  interest. 

The  Public  Health  Service  numbers  (1913) 
143  commissioned  medical  officers,  221  acting 
assistant  surgeons,  and  48  pharmacists,  in  ad- 
dition to  other  officers  and  employees.  The 
commissioned  medical  officers  are  commissioned 
by  the  President  by  and  with  the  consent  of 
the  Senate  and  are  thereby  assured  a life  tenure 
of  office. 

Among  the  fundamental  duties  imposed 
upon  the  federal  Public  Health  Service  is  that 
of  keeping  constantly  informed  of  the  preva- 
lence and  geographic  distribution  of  disease 
and  of  the  sanitary  conditions  of  localities. 
This  information  is  published  for  the  benefit 
of  health  authorities  and  those  engaged  in  sani- 
tary work  in  the  Public  Health  Reports,  a 
publication  issued  weekly  in  editions  of  8,000 
copies.  In  this  same  publication  are  printed 
currently  the  sanitary  laws  and  regulations 
enacted  and  promulgated  by  states  and  cities. 

The  Surgeon  General  of  the  Public  Health 
Service  is  required  by  law  to  hold  at  least  one 
conference  each  year  with  the  state  health 
authorities  for  the  discussion  of  current  sani- 
tary problems  and  to  effect  uniformity  in  pub- 
lic health  administration  and  practice,  in  so 
far  as  practicable. 

One  of  the  important  functions  of  a public 
health  service  consists  in  fostering  scientific 
researches  upon  the  problems  with  which  it 
has  to  deal.  For  this  purpose  the  government 
maintains  in  Washington  a hygienic  labora- 
tory consisting  of  four  divisions;  viz.,  pathol- 
ogy and  bacteriology,  zoology,  pharmacology 
and  chemistry.  It  has  a corps  of  forty  to  fifty 
research  workers  and  during  its  short  exist- 
ence has  solved  important  problems  connected 
with  the  hookworm  disease,  typhoid  fever,  tu- 
berculosis, yellow  fever,  plague,  diphtheria,  tet- 
anus, new  remedies,  milk  and  its  relation  to 
the  public  health,  etc.  Researches  have  also 
been  conducted  in  tropical  diseases  by  com- 
missions and  special  studies  upon  leprosy  have 
been  made  with  the  result  that  the  bacillus 
of  leprosy  has  been  isolated  in  pure  culture, 
and  further  advances  achieved  that  promise 
results  in  the  prevention  and  cure  of  this 
loathsome  disease. 

See  Contagious  Diseases  ; Health,  Public, 
Regulation  of;  Hospitals,  Public;  Quaran- 
tine; Tuberculosis,  Care  and  Regulation 
of. 

References:  Public  Health  and  Marine  Hos- 
pital Service,  Annual  Reports  (1872)  Hygienic 
Laboratory  Bulletins ; Public  Health  Reports; 
Am.  Year  Book,  1912,  152,  715. 

M.  J.  Rosenau. 


PUBLIC  LANDS  AND  PUBLIC  LAND  POLICY 


PUBLIC  LANDS  AND  PUBLIC  LAND  POLICY 


One  of  the  most  important  factors  in  the 
building  up  of  the  United  States  as  a nation 
has  been  the  public  domain  and  its  disposi- 
tion. The  presence  of  great  areas  of  unappro- 
priated land,  from  the  beginning  of  the  his- 
tory of  the  country  to  the  present  time,  has 
affected  the  social  and  economic  development 
of  the  people  and  profoundly  influenced  the 
political  history  as  well.  The  history  of  the 
West  has  been  largely  written  in  terms  of 
land,  and  the  West  (see)  has  been  an  ever 
shifting  region.  With  a rich  empire  of  agri- 
cultural lands  at  its  disposal  Congress  has 
been  able  to  encourage  immigration,  education, 
and  internal  improvements.  Free  lands  and 
cheap  lands  have  meant  an  independent  body 
of  home-makers.  Democracy  owes  much,  from 
every  point  of  view,  to  the  public  lands  and 
their  wise  disposition. 

Colonial  Lands. — Within  the  thirteen  colo- 
nies lands  were  held,  by  the  terms  of  their 
grants  and  charters,  from  the  Crown  in  free 
and  common  socage.  The  Indians  were  consid- 
ered to  have  merely  an  occupancy  claim,  which 
was,  in  most  cases,  extinguished  by  purchase, 
at  first  on  the  part  of  the  settlers  and  later  by 
or  for  the  colony  alone.  Each  colony  disposed 
of  its  own  lands.  In  the  royal  and  proprietary 
(see)  provinces,  although  grants  were  made  to 
encourage  settlement,  still  an  effort  was  made 
to  secure  a small  revenue  from  the  land.  And 
in  every  case  the  use  of  quitrents  is  found. 
These  were  small  in  amount  but  were  univer- 
sally detested  by  the  grantees  and  were  col- 
lected with  difficulty.  Not  until  the  Revolu- 
tion were  they  given  up,  in  New  York  not  till 
after  1840  ( see  Anti-Rent  Riots).  In  New 
England  a different  system  was  employed.  The 
prominent  feature  was  the  town  grant,  made 
by  the  colony  to  settlers  or  proprietors  and 
subdivided  by  them.  The  sale  of  land  by  the 
colony  appeared  only  in  the  18th  century,  and 
quitrents  were  rarely,  if  ever,  used.  Various 
social,  economic,  and  climatic  conditions  caused 
the  development  of  small  holdings  in  New  Eng- 
land and  larger  estates  in  the  South.  In  New 
York,  alone,  were  fully  developed  manors 
found.  During  the  Revolution  the  states  suc- 
ceeded to  the  rights  of  the  Crown  or  propri- 
etors. There  was,  therefore,  at  the  close  of 
the  Revolution  no  uniform  land  system,  while 
in  other  portions  of  the  present  United  States 
lands  were  granted  under  the  French  and  Span- 
ish systems. 

Origin  of  the  Public  Domain. — At  the  close 
of  the  Revolution  all  lands  within  the  United 
States  were  considered  parts  of  the  original 
states.  Although  this  was  questioned  in  re- 
spect to  lands  beyond  the  Appalachian  moun- 
tains, the  issue  was  never  joined.  The  public 

93 


domain  originated  in  the  cessions  (see  Ces- 
sions by  States)  by  certain  states  of  their 
claims  to  lands  beyond  the  mountains.  Some 
of  these  claims  were  of  doubtful  value,  but 
controversy  was  eliminated  by  the  acceptance 
of  all  the  claims.  The  first  cessions  (see)  be- 
tween 1782  and  1787  served  to  unite  the 
loosely  confederated  states;  while  in  accept- 
ing them  and  providing  for  their  disposition, 
Congress  exceeded  its  small  powers  under  the 
Articles  of  Confederation.  Virginia  inserted 
in  her  deed  of  cession  that  the  lands  should  be 
considered  “a  common  fund,  for  the  use  and 
benefit  of  such  of  the  United  States  as  have 
become  or  shall  become  members  of  the  Con- 
federation . . . according  to  their  usual 

respective  proportions  in  the  general  charge 
and  expenditure,  and  shall  be  faithfully  and 
bona  fide  disposed  of  for  that  purpose,  and 
for  no  other  use  or  purpose  whatsoever.” 
North  Carolina  and  Georgia  made  almost  sim- 
ilar conditions.  This  clause  was  frequently 
cited  against  special  grants  of  public  lands 
for  private  purposes;  although  the  Constitu- 
tion of  1789  provided  that  “the  Congress  shall 
have  Power  to  dispose  of  and  make  all  needful 
Rules  and  Regulations  respecting  the  Territory 
or  other  Property  belonging  to  the  United 
States.” 

Growth  of  the  Public  Domain. — The  follow- 
ing table  gives  the  growth  of  the  public  domain 
in  square  miles: 


State  cession,  1782-1802  (nominally)  404,956 

Louisiana  purchase,  1803  875,025 

Florida,  1819  70,107 

Oregon,  1846  288,689 

Mexican  cession,  1848  523,802 

Texas  cession,  1850  101,360 

Gadsden  purchase,  1853  36,211 

Alaska,  1867  599,446 


Various  reservations  and  protected  claims 
reduced  the  amount  of  public  lands  in  the 
state  cessions  to  approximately  340,227  square 
miles.  In  the  various  foreign  cessions  exist- 
ing land  titles  or  legal  claims  were  protected. 
By  1904,  33,440,482  acres  were  thus  confirmed, 
largely  in  New  Mexico,  California,  and  Louisi- 
ana. 

Origin  of  the  National  Land  System  (1785- 
1800). — The  first  act  for  the  disposal  of  the 
public  domain  was  the  Land  Ordinance  of 
1785.  Congress  drew  upon  the  experience  of 
all  the  states  and  worked  out  a plan  which 
was  superior  to  any  then  in  use,  and  which 
has,  in  its  most  important  particular,  come 
down  to  our  time.  The  public  lands  were 
looked  upon  as  a source  of  revenue,  and  the 
land  ordinance  was  drawn  with  this  in  view. 
As  the  lands  lay  north  of  the  Ohio  it  seemed 
that  they  would  be  most  in  demand  by  New 
England  settlers,  and  the  ordinance  was  framed 


PUBLIC  LANDS  AND  PUBLIC  LAND  POLICY 


to  meet  tlieir  desires.  It  called  for  the  survey 
of  all  land  into  townships,  six  miles  square. 
Half  of  the  townships  were  to  he  sold  intact — 
the  New  England  system.  The  rest  might  be 
sold  in  lots,  one  mile  square.  The  minimum 
price  was  $1.00  an  acre  in  specie  or  certificates, 
plus  the  survey  charges,  sales  to  be  at  auc- 
tion. One  section  of  one  square  mile  in  every 
township  was  reserved  for  the  support  of  edu- 
cation. 

The  most  striking  feature  of  this  ordinance 
was  that  of  rectangular  prior  surveys  (see 
Surveys).  It  was  the  extension,  over  a great 
stretch  of  territory,  of  the  system  used  in 
New  England  on  a smaller  scale.  It  would 
have  been  cheaper  and  more  convenient  to 
sell  land  warrants,  subject  to  location  by  the 
purchasers,  but  this  would  have  bred  a host 
of  conflicting  boundaries  and  law  suits.  The 
township  system  of  settlement  did  not  prove 
adapted  to  the  West,  and  so  a regular  devel- 
opment of  the  land  system  was  the  reduction 
in  the  size  of  the  minimum  lot.  In  1800  some 
half-sections  (320  acres)  were  offered;  in  1804 
a quarter-section  was  the  minimum;  in  1820, 
an  eighty-acre  tract;  and  in  1832,  forty  acres. 
Little  land  was  sold  under  the  Ordinance  of 
1785,  because  of  Indian  difficulties  in  the 
Northwest,  but  it  introduced  the  system  of 
rectangular  surveys  which  has  been  of  such 
great  service  in  the  orderly  settlement  of  the 
public  lands. 

The  first  important  sales  were  to  companies. 
Several  applications  were  made  but  only  two 
sales  were  effected : to  the  Ohio  Company 
(see)  1787,  and  to  John  Cleve  Symmes  (see) 
1788.  The  former  contracted  for  about  7,500,- 
000  acres  at  two-thirds  of  a dollar  an  acre, 
but  eventually  secured  about  1,000,000  acres, 
paying  part  in  securities  worth  about  twelve 
and  a half  cents  to  the  dollar,  part  in  military 
warrants,  while  100,000  acres  were  donated  by 
Congress.  Symmes  contracted  for  1,000,000 
acres,  and  paid  for  250,000  in  securities  and 
warrants.  These  sales  were  desirable  at  a 
time  when  money  was  needed  and  settlers  were 
wanted  on  the  frontier.  But  this  method  of 
disposing  of  the  public  lands  was  not  em- 
ployed later. 

Credit  Sale  Period  (1800-1820). — Before 
1800  certain  lines  of  development  had  been 
marked  out.  Bounties  (sec)  for  military  serv- 
ice had  been  offered  during  the  Revolution. 
These  were  employed,  also,  for  the  War  of 
1812  and  the  Mexican  War,  and  in  1850  and 
1855  even  more  liberal  provisions  for  former 
service  were  made.  Educational  reserves  were 
made  in  1785  and  in  the  sales  to  companies, 
but  were  omitted  in  1700  and  1800,  and  only 
restored  in  the  Ohio  Enabling  Act  of  1802 
(see  Educational  Land  Grants).  Large 
grants  for  a university  were  made  to  the  Ohio 
Company,  and  several  years  later  to  Symmes. 
Grants  for  religious  purposes  appeared  only 
in  the  sales  to  companies.  In  the  Northwest 


the  presence  of  land  claims  founded  on  grants 
of  foreign  powers  led  to  troublesome  problems 
of  their  confirmation,  as  new  regions  were  ac- 
quired. The  Indian  occupancy  and  the  foreign 
land  claims,  more  than  anything  else,  served 
to  retard  the  regular  extension  of  the  land 
system.  The  minimum  price  per  acre  was  in- 
creased to  $2.00  in  1796,  with  one  year  credit, 
and  the  surveys  were  to  be  paid  for  by  the 
government. 

In  1800  the  act  which  determined  the  land 
system  for  twenty  years  was  passed.  This 
introduced  an  extended  credit  period;  one- 
fourth  must  be  paid  within  forty  days  of  the 
sale,  and  five  years  credit  was  allowed  on  the 
balance  with  interest  at  six  per  cent.  The 
auction  system  was  retained.  Under  this  law 
four  land  offices  were  established  in  Ohio.  In 
spite  of  the  high  price  for  land  the  sales  rap- 
idly increased.  The  Indian  title  was  gradu- 
ally extinguished,  the  surveys  were  extended, 
new  land  offices  were  opened,  and  in  1815  the 
sales  north  of  the  Ohio  reached  1,000,000  acres. 
A payment  of  $128.00 — one-fourth  the  mini- 
mum price  plus  fees, — gave  a settler  the  use 
of  a half-section  for  five  years;  the  enthusi- 
astic pioneers  believed,  often  mistakenly,  that 
at  the  end  of  the  credit  period  they  would  be 
able  to  make  final  payment.  As  the  sales  in- 
creased the  unpaid  balances  grew  higher.  Af- 
ter 1804  repeated  efforts  were  made  to  reduce 
the  price  of  the  land  and  the  size  of  the 
minimum  tract,  and  to  demand  cash  payments. 
By  1820  over  $24,000,000  was  due  the  govern- 
ment, largely  the  result  of  speculation  in  Mis- 
sissippi and  Alabama.  That  year  a general 
act  abolished  the  credit  system,  reduced  the 
price  to  $1.25  an  a?re,  and  the  minimum 
tract  to  eighty  acres.  The  credit  system  was 
not  bad  in  itself,  but  in  its  administration. 
The  government  could  not  enforce  penalties 
for  non-payment,  so  that  recklessness  was  en- 
couraged; and  in  the  end  the  delinquents  bene- 
fited, for  between  1821  and  1832  eleven  acts 
granted  the  debtors  further  credit,  a discount 
for  cash,  or  a relinquishment  of  part  of  their 
lands.  In  recent  years  the  credit  system  has 
been  used  in  certain  special  sales  of  reserva- 
tion or  irrigated  land. 

Cash  Sale  Period  (1820-1841 ).— From  1820 
to  1841  the  public  lands  became  more  and  more 
involved  in  the  political  struggles  in  Washing- 
ton. With  the  admission  of  public-land  states 
an  increasing  element  in  Congress  insisted  up- 
on a sympathetic  land  policy.  These  men 
sought  preemption  and  even  donations  for  the 
settlers.  They  desired  grants  of  land  for  the 
use  of  their  states,  and  some  sought  a cession 
to  the  states  of  the  lands  within  their  limits. 
Measures  for  a general  distribution  of  the 
public  lands  or  their  proceeds — for  education ; 
for  internal  improvements,  or  for  general  pub- 
lic purposes — were  brought  before  Congress. 
At  this  time  the  western  members  stood  to- 
gether on  public  land  questions,  apparently 
94 


PUBLIC  LANDS  AND  PUBLIC  LAND  POLICY 


bartering  for  concessions  with  the  North  or 
South,  with  the  high  or  low  tariff  advocates. 
In  this  period  the  granting  of  land  for  im- 
provements within  the  public-land  states  be- 
gan. The  canal  and  wagon-road  grants  date 
from  1827,  and  river-improvement  grants  from 
the  next  year.  The  period  closed  with  the 
passage  of  Clay’s  Distribution  Bill  in  1841, 
to  which  a general  preemption  measure  was 
added.  The  struggle  for  preemption  (see) 
had  been  in  process  for  forty  years.  It  was 
only  won  when  the  need  of  revenue  was  slight 
and  the  political  power  of  the  West  was  great. 
From  this  time  the  old  auction  system  of  dis- 
posing of  public  lands  was  of  little  import- 
ance, for  most  of  the  good  land  was  taken  up 
under  preemption. 

Land  Grant  Period  (1841-1862). — During  the. 
next  twenty  years  Congress  bestowed  the  public 
lands  with  lavish  hand.  New  canal  grants 
.were  made,  the  first  state  railway  grant  was 
authorized  in  1850,  and  in  1849-50  the  great 
swamp-land  grants  to  the  states  were  made 
(see  Land  Grants).  Between  1854  and  1862 
the  Graduation  Act  permitted  the  sale  of  land 
long  on  the  market  to  actual  settlers  for  from 
$1.00  to  twelve  and  a half  cents  an  acre.  From 
1852  to  1862  a strong  effort  was  made  to 
write  a homestead  law  (see)  upon  the  statutes 
as  the  final  act  in  the  increasingly  sympathetic 
treatment  of  the  home-seeker.  The  issue  be- 
came a political  and  a sectional  one,  demanded 
by  the  North  and  resisted  by  the  South.  A 
partial  measure  was  vetoed  by  President  Bu- 
chanan, in  1860;  and  two  years  later,  in  the 
midst  of  the  Civil  War,  this  important  step 
was  taken.  To  such  an  extent  was  the  reve- 
nue side  of  the  land  policy  subordinated  to 
the  encouragement  of  settlement,  that  the  spe- 
cial needs  of  the  treasury  during  the  war  could 
not  impede  this  legislation.  For  fifty  years 
the  United  States  has  been  engaged  in  giving 
away  homesteads  to  all  qualified  applicants 
therefor. 

Period  of  Rapid  Disposal  (1862-1880). — The 

opening-up  of  the  far  West  presented  new 
conditions  which  were  met,  in  part,  by  new 
laws.  Prior  to  the  Civil  War  the  government 
had  principally  in  mind  the  agricultural  land, 
save  the  saline,  lead,  copper,  and  iron  lands 
which  were  limited  in  amount.  California 
suddenly  presented  the  problem  of  mineral 
lands;  the  forests  of  the  Pacific  coast  became 
valuable  as  population  increased;  and  in  the 
lands  of  little  rain  a distinction  between  agri- 
cultural and  grazing  land  was  necessary.  The 
tree  claim  system  (see)  was  carelessly  drawn 
and  incompletely  administered.  The  railroad 
land  grants  (see),  beginning  in  1862,  hastened 
the  building  of  the  transcontinental  roads 
and  the  advance  of  population  (see  Pacific 
Railroads  ) . These  railroads  were  soon  engaged 
in  a great  land-office  business,  disposing  of 
their  enormous  grants.  Land  legislation  has 
always  loitered  behind  the  needs  of  the  hour. 


Coal  lands  (see)  were  not  subject  to  special 
terms  of  sale  until  1864.  The  first  mineral 
act  (see),  applicable  to  the  gold  fields,  was 
not  passed  until  1866.  The  timber  act  (see) 
dates  from  1878.  No  distinction  was  made 
between  agricultural  and  grazing  land,  nor 
was  provision  made  for  leasing  the  latter;  and 
as  no  man  could  afford  to  buy  the  necessary 
land,  it  became  the  custom  for  the  first  comers 
to  take  up  small  tracts  controlling  the  water 
supply  of  great  ranges. 

The  forty  years  from  1865  to  1905  mark  the 
rapid  disposal  of  the  desirable  public  lands. 
The  people  of  the  public-land  states  and  ter- 
ritories, especially,  looked  upon  the  lands  as 
their  peculiar  heritage  and  the  land  laws  as 
a means  to  that  end.  Public  opinion  generally 
seemed  to  sanction  evasion  of  the  law.  When 
land  was  abundant  no  one  cared  how  home- 
steads were  taken  or  timber  lands  sold.  The 
preemption,  homestead,  timber,  and  timber- 
culture  laws  were  constantly  violated.  The 
trouble  was  not  so  much  with  the  laws  as 
with  their  administration.  And  as  long  as 
public  opinion  was  indifferent  to  a rigid  en- 
forcement of  the  law  it  was  too  much  to 
expect  the  land  officers  to  go  behind  the  per- 
jured oaths  which  were  freely  taken  before 
them. 

Proposed  Reforms  (1880-1909). — In  1879  a 

commission  was  appointed  by  Congress  to  ex- 
amine and  report  on  the  land  system.  In 
carrying  out  its  instructions  the  commission 
compiled  all  the  land  laws,  temporary  and  in 
force,  and  Mr.  Donaldson  edited  the  Public 
Domain,  which  remains  the  most  useful  com- 
pilation of  statistics  regarding  the  public 
lands.  The  commission  prepared  a land  bill 
which  covered  the  public-land  system  and  was 
proposed  as  a substitute  for  the  existing  sec- 
tions of  the  Revised  Statutes.  It  advised  a 
classification  of  the  lands  into  arable,  irrig- 
able, pasturage,  timber  and  mineral;  the  re- 
peal of  the  preemption  law ; the  disposal  of 
arable  lands  in  the  West  only  under  the  home- 
stead law;  the  reduction  of  the  homestead 
period  to  three  years  and  the  withdrawal  of 
the  right  of  commutation;  the  sale  of  grazing 
lands  at  a low  price;  the  sale  of  timber  apart 
from  the  land;  the  location  of  scjuare  mining 
claims  without  the  right  to  follow  the  lode; 
the  abolition  of  the  office  of  receiver.  Con- 
gress, however,  failed  to  act  on  this  careful  and 
searching  report.  Some  of  the  urgent  recom- 
mendations were  enacted  eleven  years  later, 
and  others  have  been  repeatedly  laid  before 
Congress  to  this  day.  It  was  the  old  diffi- 
culty. Western  congressmen  advocated  a lib- 
eral land  system  and  men  from  the  East  were 
too  much  interested  in  other  questions  to  wor- 
ry about  the  public  domain. 

During  this  period  it  was  possible  for  a 
person  to  acquire  legally  1,120  acres  of  arable 
land,  under  the  homestead  (160  acres),  pre- 
emption (160  acres),  timber-culture  (160 


PUBLIC  LANDS  AND  PUBLIC  LAND  POLICY 


acres),  and  desert-land  (640  acres),  acts,  as 
well  as  large  quantities  of  coal,  timber,  and 
mineral  lands.  This  was  altered  in  1890,  by 
an  act  which  made  320  acres  the  total  amount 
which  might  be  entered  by  an  individual  under 
all  these  laws. 

In  1891  the  first  important  act  for  the  pres- 
ervation of  the  remaining  lands  was  passed. 
Up  to  this  time,  in  general,  the  tendency  of 
the  land  laws  was  toward  the  easy  disposition 
of  the  lands;  after  this,  a few  conservative 
measures  gradually  find  a place  in  the  stat- 
utes. This  act  repealed  the  preemption  and 
timber  culture  laws;  increased  the  residence 
period  for  commuted  homesteads  to  fourteen 
months;  abolished  the  public  sale  of  land  save 
in  the  case  of  special  tracts  (the  private  sale 
had  been  abolished  in  1889)  ; authorized  the 
reservation  of  forest  lands;  and  extended  cer- 
tain of  the  land  laws  to  Alaska.  Agricultural 
lands  could  now  only  be  obtained  under  the 
homestead  or  desert-land  laws,  with  the  320 
acre  total,  but  great  quantities  were  still  pro- 
curable from  the  railroads  and  the  states,  and 
by  means  of  bounty  warrants  and  various 
forms  of  scrip. 

Conservation  of  Land  (1901-1910).— The  ten 
years  from  1901  to  1911  mark  the  rise  of  the 
conservation  movement.  As  the  desirable 
lands  rapidly  decreased,  their  value  rose.  The 
demand  for  land  called  attention  to  the  abuses 
under  the  existing  system  of  disposition. 
Clear-visioned  men  aroused  public  opinion 
which  responded  to  their  appeals.  The  forest 
(see)  reserve  policy  was  generally  endorsed, 
and  the  extension  of  the  principle  was  urged 
in  the  case  of  coal  and  oil  resources.  The 
land  laws  were  more  vigorously  enforced,  and 
corruption  in  high  places  was  unearthed.  Ex- 
ploiters of  the  public  lands  soon  realized  the 
change.  Homestead  proofs  were  more  care- 
fully examined,  desert-land  claims  were  now 
inspected,  timber  and  coal  lands  were  ap- 
praised. Congress  was  asked  for  laws  to  meet 
the  new  conditions;  and,  pending  legislation, 
great  areas  of  coal  and  other  lands  were  with- 
drawn from  entry.  In  1903  President  Roose- 
velt appointed  a Public  Lands  Commission 
which  presented  partial  reports  in  1904  and 
1905,  the  appendix  to  which  is  a valuable  ex- 
tension of  Donaldson’s  Public  Domain.  Once 
again  the  land  laws  and  their  administration 
were  denounced  as  antiquated  and  ill  adapted 
to  the  existing  situation.  The  commission  rec- 
ommended a careful  classification  of  the  re- 
maining land;  the  sale  of  timber  and  not  of 
the  land;  the  modification  of  the  commutation 
clause  of  the  homestead  act  to  three  years  resi- 
dence; the  insistence  upon  residence  and  culti- 
vation on  desert-land  claims;  the  regulation 
of  grazing  privileges;  and  legislation  designed 
to  prevent  the  acquisition  of  large  estates. 
Four  years  later  the  National  Conservation 
Commission  reported,  January  11,  1909,  along 
very  similar  lines,  and  asserted  that  “the  pres- 


ent public  land  laws  as  a whole  do  not  sub- 
serve the  best  interests  of  the  nation.” 

Although  no  general  revision  of  the  land 
laws  has  resulted  from  these  recommendations 
an  indication  of  the  future  developments  is 
found  in  the  acts  of  1910  which  permitted  the 
entry  of  the  surface  of  coal  lands  (see)  as 
agricultural  lands  with  the  reservation  to  the 
United  States  of  the  coal  and  the  right  to 
prospect  for,  mine,  or  remove  the  same,  and 
which  authorized  the  President  temporarily 
to  withdraw  lands  from  entry  for  the  purpose 
of  classification  or  other  public  purposes.  In- 
clusive of  Alaska  there  remains  711,986,409 
acres  of  unappropriated  and  unreserved  public 
lands.  Little  of  this  is  of  present  value,  some 
will  be  reclaimed  by  the  national  and  state 
irrigation  projects  (see  Irrigation;  Reclama- 
tion), some  will  be  adapted  to  dry  farming 
or  timber  culture,  while  a careful  classification 
will  doubtless  show  a wealth  of  coal  and  oil 
where  little  is  now  expected. 

The  Federal  Government  and  the  States. — 
The  public  lands  have  frequently  involved  the 
Federal  Government  and  the  new  states  in  con- 
troversies; the  states,  in  general,  believing 
that  their  sovereignty  was  impaired  by  the 
large  holdings  of  federal  lands  within  their 
limits.  In  Ohio,  the  first  state  to  be  erected 
in  the  public  domain,  no  question  was  raised 
as  to  the  right  of  the  Federal  Government  to 
continue  its  control  of  the  public  lands  within 
the  limits  of  the  proposed  state.  Moreover 
the  Ordinance  of  1787  had  bound  the  legisla- 
tures of  the  new  states  in  the  Northwest  never 
to  interfere  with  the  primary  disposal  of  the 
soil  by  Congress  nor  with  any  regulations 
which  Congress  might  find  necessary  for  se- 
curing the  title  in  the  soil  to  bona  fide  pur- 
chasers. No  tax  could  be  imposed  on  lands 
the  property  of  the  United  States.  However, 
under  the  system  of  credit  then  in  vogue  there 
was  a question  as  to  the  right  of  the  state  to 
tax  lands  during  the  occupancy  of  the  pur- 
chaser but  before  a patent  had  issued.  To  meet 
this  difficulty  Congress  offered  Ohio  a grant 
of  school  lands,  salt  lands  (see  Salt  Licks) 
and  five  per  cent  of  the  net  proceeds  of  lands 
sold  within  the  state  on  condition  that  no  tax 
be  levied  on  public  lands  until  five  years  after 
the  date  of  sale.  This  form  of  compact  was 
used  for  a number  of  years  and  seemed  satis- 
factory, although  some  of  the  states  raised  the 
protest  that  they  were  losing  more  by  the  tax 
remission  than  they  gained  from  the  land 
grants. 

Tennessee  was  the  only  state  in  the  public 
lands  to  receive  all  the  unappropriated  lands 
within  its  limits.  This  was  conceded  by  Con- 
gress because  so  generally  had  the  lands  there 
been  taken  up  under  North  Carolina  warrants 
that  the  extension  of  the  federal  land  system 
over  the  scattered  remainders  would  have  oc- 
casioned too  great  an  expense.  In  the  twen- 
ties, however,  it  was  occasionally  urged  that 


PUBLIC  LANDS  AND  PUBLIC  LAND  POLICY 


the  new  states  had  a right  to  all  the  lands 
within  their  limits.  This  was  maintained  in 
Congress  and  as  stoutly  resisted.  Many  plans 
for  distributing  the  lands  were  based  on  the 
alleged  dangers  of  federal  interference  with 
the  states.  It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  any 
danger  existed  comparable  to  the  evil  of  hav- 
ing the  western  lands  subject  not  to  one  but 
to  twenty  or  more  land  systems,  as  would 
have  been  the  case  had  they  not  been  admin- 
istered by  Federal  authority. 

A gradual  development,  instead,  was  the 
granting  of  lands  to  the  states  for  public 
purposes.  Large  as  were  these  grants  for 
canals,  wagon  roads,  river  improvements,  and, 
finally,  railroads,  they  were  small  in  compari- 
son with  the  repeated  requests  of  the  states. 
The  grants  in  the  enabling  acts  also  increased 
in  size  and  new  objects  were  enumerated  for 
the  enlarged  grants.  After  1836  the  five  year 
tax  exemption  was  dropped,  as  the  credit  sys- 
tem had  been  abandoned  in  1820;  but  a com- 
pact containing  a stipulation  that  the  public 
lands  were  to  be  free  from  taxation  was  re- 
tained. After  1864  the  land  grants  in  the  en- 
abling acts  were  made  without  condition,  as 
an  exercise  of  the  unlimited  power  of  Congress 
over  the  public  lands;  but  the  n.ew  states  had 
to  disclaim  any  authority  over  the  public 
lands,  although  the  form  of  a compact  was  no 
longer  used.  Within  recent  years  the  issue 
has  again  been  raised  between  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment and  some  of  the  states.  The  policy 
of  reserving  forest  and  other  lands  within  the 
states  has  been  opposed  as  derogatory  to  the 
rights  of  the  states  and  contrary  to  the  spirit 
of  the  land  system,  that  the  lands  should  be 
“disposed  of.”  Taxation  of  lands  within  the 
forest  reserves  has  been  suggested  on  the 
ground  that  as  the  Federal  Government  had 
broken  the  compact  by  failing  to  dispose  of 
the  lands  so  the  states  were  no  longer  bound 
by  the  tax-exemption  agreement.  The  forest 
policy  has,  however,  been  supported  by  the 
Supreme  Court  under  the  unlimited  authority 
of  Congress  over  the  public  lands.  The  appro- 
priation of  all  the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands 
within  the  western  states  for  irrigation  works, 
1902,  was  a measure  which  would  have  been 
hotly  contested  a few  decades  ago,  although 
manifestly  designed  for  the  common  good  in 
the  largest  sense  of  the  term. 

Present  Land  System. — Public  lands  may  be 
acquired  by  individuals,  and  in  some  cases  by 
associations,  under  the  homestead,  timber  and 
stone,  desert-land,  mining,  military  bounty, 
and  town  site  acts.  Abandoned  reservations, 
isolated  tracts,  and  certain  other  limited 
amounts  of  land  are,  from  time  to  time,  sub- 
ject to  cash  sale.  A large  amount  of  land  is 
also  patented  each  year  to  the  land-grant  rail- 
roads and  to  the  states  in  satisfaction  of 
grants,  and  is,  thereupon,  generally  subject  to 
sale  at  a low  price.  Private  land  claims,  for- 
est lieu  selections,  Indian  allotments,  and  va- 

97 


rious  kinds  of  land  scrip  form  a good  part  of 
the  remaining  entries  each  year. 

Public  Land  Statistics. — The  cash  sales 
to  1909,  including  original  desert-land  entries, 
were  289,293,608  acres.  The  aggregate  receipts 
from  all  sources  of  public  lands,  to  1909  were 
$423,451,673.  The  following  table  summarizes 
public  land  transactions  in  acres: 


Final  homestead  entries 115,124,296  acres 

Bounty-land  warrants  issued 68,790,510  acres 

Confirmed  private  land  claims,  to 

1904  33,440,482  acres 

Timber  and  stone  entries  (inc.  in 

Cash  Sales)  12,556,015  acres 

Final  timber  culture  entries  9,855,175  acres 

Commuted  timber-culture  entries 

(inc.  in  Cash  Sales)  1,010,305  acres 

Final  desert-land  entries  (inc.  in 

Cash  Sales)  5,149,546  acres 

Mineral  land  (inc.  in  Cash  Sales)  1,575,679  acres 
Coal-land  entries  (inc.  in  Cash 

Sales)  505,919  acres 

Donations,  estimated  3,200,000  acres 

Grants  to  the  States. 

Schools  77,359,443  acres 

Swamp  lands  65,582,503  acres 

Railroads  37,853,079  acres 

Internal  improvements  12,651,482  acres 

Education,  etc.  18,407,480  acres 

Canals  4,598,668  acres 

Wagon  roads 2,986,632  acres 

River  improvement  2,245,252  acres 

Public  buildings 1,362,731  acres 

Reclamation  297,665  acres 

Grants  to  railroads 76,486,980  acres 


See  Boundaries  of  the  United  States, 
Interior;  Cessions  by  States;  Conserva- 
tion; Irrigation  and  Irrigated  Lands;  Land 
Grants;  Land  Office;  Public  Lands,  Res- 
ervation of;  Surveys  of  Land;  West  as  a 
Factor  in  American  Politics. 

References:  T.  Donaldson,  Public  Domain 
(rev.  ed.,  1884)  ; Public  Lands  Commission, 
Report,  1880,  Report  with  Appendix,  1905; 
National  Conservation  Commission,  Report, 
1909 ; Commissioner  of  the  General  Land 
Office,  Annual  Reports-,  “Public  Lands”  in 
American  State  Papers  (1832—1861);  J.  W. 
Magrath,  “Public  Lands”  in  Cyclopedia  of 
Law  and  Procedure  (1909),  XXXII,  759-1247; 
F L.  Osgood,  Am.  Colonies  in  the  Seventeenth 
Century  (1904),  I,  ch.  xi,  II,  ch.  ii;  Shosuke 
Sato,  Hist,  of  the  Land  Question  in  the  U.  S. 
(1886)  ; A.  B.  Hart,  “Disposition  of  our  Pub- 
lic Lands”  in  Practical  Essays  on  Am.  Gov. 
(1894),  ch.  x;  P.  J.  Treat,  National  Land 
System,  1785-1820  (1910)  ; C.  R.  Van  Hise, 
Conservation  of  National  Resources  (1910), 
279-297 ; Monis  Bitch,  “Public  Lands  of  the 
U.  S.”  in  His.  Assoc.  Rev.,  CXCII  (1910),  387- 
402;  Biorin  and  Dioane,  Laws  of  the  U.  S. 
(1815)  ; Existing  Laws  of  the  U.  S.  of  a Gen- 
eral Permanent  Character , and  Relating  to  the 
Public  Domain  (1884)  ; Laics  of  the  U.  S.  of  a 
Local  or  Temporary  Character  and  Exhibiting 
the  Entire  Legislation  of  Congress — Public 
Land  Titles  (1884)  ; A.  C.  Ford,  Colonial  Prec- 
edents of  our  National  Land  System  (1910)  ; 
R.  T.  Hill,  Public  Domain  and  Democracy 
(1910);  Am.  Year  Book,  1911,  418,  420,  and 
year  by  year.  Payson  J.  Treat. 


PUBLIC  LANDS,  PREEMPTION  OF— PUBLIC  LANDS,  RESERVATION  OF 


PUBLIC  LANDS,  PREEMPTION  OF.  Pri- 
or to  1841  public  lands  could  ordinarily  be 
purchased  only  after  survey  and  at  auction. 
This  was  considered  a hardship  by  the  pioneers, 
who  desired  a preferential  right  to  purchase, 
at  the  minimum  price,  the  lands  improved  by 
them  prior  to  the  offering.  Under  the  land 
laws  these  men  who  moved  in  advance  of  the 
surveyors  were  law-breakers;  but  owing  to 
the  slowness  of  the  surveys  and  the  fact  that 
they  were  extended  over  good  and  bad  land 
alike  it  followed  that  the  “squatters”  were 
often  located  miles  in  advance  of  the  rodmen. 
As  long  as  the  lands  were  needed  for  revenue 
it  was  fitting  that  every  acre  should  bring  the 
highest  possible  price,  but  when  the  govern- 
ment grew  more  prosperous  it  became  easy  to 
favor  the  pioneers.  In  granting  preemption 
Congress  lost  little  in  revenue,  for  the  price 
of  lands  had  averaged  close  to  the  minimum 
for  many  years.  The  preemption  right  was 
gradually  granted.  Before  1800,  four  special 
preemption  acts  were  passed;  from  that  time 
to  1830  it  was  the  practice  to  grant  preemp- 
tion, for  a limited  period,  to  settlers  in  regions 
where  foreign  land  claims  retarded  the  sur- 
veys; between  1830  and  1841  temporary  pre- 
emption laws  of  a general  nature  were  passed ; 
and  in  the  latter  year  a general  preemption 
was  carried,  under  which  the  normal  method 
of  acquiring  land  became  actual  residence  for 
six  months  on  1G0  acres,  and  the  payment  of 
$1.25  an  acre  therefor.  The  operation  of  this 
law  was  always  accompanied  with  much  fraud. 
After  the  Homestead  Act  of  1862  preemption 
became  of  less  service  to  actual  settlers  and  of 
more  value  to  speculators.  For  many  years 
the  repeal  of  the  preemption  law  was  urged, 
but  it  was  not  carried  until  1891.  Under  the 
law  the  right  of  preemption  was  based  on 
residence  and  cultivation  for  the  exclusive  use 
of  the  settler.  The  tract  was  originally  640 
acres,  but  was  reduced  to  160.  Payment  was 
made  at  the  mimimum  price.  See  Public 
Lands  and  Public  Land  Policy;  Public 
Lands,  State.  References:  T.  Donaldson, 
Public  Domain  (1884)  ; U.  /S',  statutes  at  Large 
(1841),  ch.  16,  (1891),  ch.  561.  P.  J.  T. 

PUBLIC  LANDS,  RECLAMATION  OF.  See 

Reclamation  of  Public  Lands. 

PUBLIC  LANDS,  RESERVATION  OF. 

From  time  to  time  public  lands  have  been  re- 
served from  disposition  for  various  purposes. 
These  reservations  are  made  by  Congress,  by 
the  treaty-making  power,  or  by  the  President 
as  chief  executive.  Early  reservations  were 
those  of  four  sections  in  each  township  (1785- 
1804),  military  bounty  lands  (see),  salines, 
school  lands  in  the  territories,  naval  timber 
lands,  townsites,  etc.  Later  large  areas  were 
proclaimed  as  Indian  reservations.  In  1880, 
154,436,362  acres  were  thus  reserved,  but  with 
the  development  of  the  policy  of  allotments 


only  48,326,908  acres  remained  in  1910  (sec 
Allotment  of  Land  to  Indians).  Of  recent 
years  lands  have  been  principally  reserved  for 
forest  purposes.  The  act  of  March  3,  1891,  au- 
thorized the  President  to  set  apart  forest  re- 
serves in  any  state  or  territory  having  public 
lands  bearing  forests;  and  the  act  of  June  4, 
1897,  provided  for  the  administration  of  the  re- 
reserves and  for  the  exchange  of  land  on  the 
part  of  persons  holding  valid  claims  or  patents 
within  their  limits.  Under  this  act  some  187,- 
406,376  acres,  in  153  national  forests,  located 
within  twenty-two  of  the  states  and  terri- 
tories, were  set  apart  by  executive  order  prior 
to  June  30,  1912. 

The  withdrawal  of  these  large  areas  from 
sale,  save  as  mineral  land  (although  agricul- 
tural lands  within  the  forests  may  be  entered 
under  the  homestead  law),  has  occasioned  con- 
siderable criticism  in  the  states  concerned.  Eith- 
er the  whole  theory  of  conservation  is  opposed 
because  of  the  checking  of  settlement  and  the 
loss  of  state  and  local  revenue  from  taxation, 
or  it  is  urged  that  the  states  rather  than  the 
National  Government  should  administer  the 
reserves.  The  authority  of  the  President  to 
withdraw  lands  for  the  public  use  or  welfare 
has  been  upheld  by  the  courts,  as  well  as  the 
constitutionality  of  the  creation  of  the  nation- 
al forests  within  the  states.  The  administra- 
tion of  these  forests  is  in  the  charge  of  the 
Forest  Service,  under  the  Secretary  of  Agri- 
culture. Thirteen  national  parks,  totaling  4,- 
600,000  acres,  are  also  reserved,  the  Yellow- 
stone Park,  2,142,720  acres,  being  established 
in  1872.  Under  the  act  for  the  preservation 
of  American  antiquities,  1906,  a number  of 
places  of  prehistoric  and  historic  importance 
or  of  scientific  interest  have  been  reserved  as 
national  monuments.  Since  1903  small  areas 
have  been  reserved  as  bird  reserves.  It  is  also 
possible  for  the  President  temporarily  to  sus- 
pend from  entry  portions  of  the  public  domain. 
Since  1906,  pending  the  passage  of  much-needed 
legislation,  great  areas  of  coal  lands,  and  small- 
er tracts  of  oil,  phosphate,  and  power-site 
lands  were  withdrawn.  This  action  aroused 
criticism  in  the  western  states,  and  the  power 
of  the  President  was  questioned.  By  act  of 
June  25,  1910,  however,  congressional  sanction 
of  the  practice  was  given  and  the  right  to  with- 
draw temporarily  for  classification  or  other 
public  purposes  was  authorized.  Mining  rights 
on  the  lands  so  withdrawn,  save  for  coal,  oil, 
gas,  and  phosphates,  were  continued,  as  were 
homestead  and  desert-land  entries.  But  in 
seven  of  the  western  states  no  new  forests  can 
be  created  except  by  act  of  Congress. 

See  Coal  Lands;  Conservation;  Irriga- 
tion; Mineral  Land;  Public  Land  Policy  of 
the  United  .States;  Salt  Licks;  Timber 
Lands;  Water  Power. 

References:  U.  S.  Secy,  of  the  Interior,  An- 
nual Reports-,  U.  S.  Secy,  of  Agriculture,  An- 
nual Reports,  Payson  J.  Treat. 


98 


PUBLIC  LANDS,  STATE — PUBLIC  MORALS,  CARE  FOR 


PUBLIC  LANDS,  STATE.  State  lands  are 
of  two  kinds:  those  held  by  the  states  prior 
to  the  formation  of,  or  admission  to,  the  Union, 
and  those  granted  by  the  LTnited  States  to  the 
states.  Of  the  original  states,  Massachusetts, 
New  York,  Virginia,  the  Carolinas,  and  Geor- 
gia, possessed  considerable  areas  of  ungranted 
land,  even  after  they  had  ceded  their  western 
claims.  Pennsylvania  also  had  state  lands. 
Connecticut,  which  had  no  ungranted  lands 
within  her  limits,  reserved  3,300,000  acres  from 
her  cession  ( see  Western  Reserve  ) . The 
other  original  states  possessed  small  areas. 
These  states  proceeded  to  dispose  of  their  lands 
by  grant,  by  sale,  and  in  satisfaction  of  mili- 
tary bounty  warrants.  Sales  were  made  at 
auction,  by  tender,  or  for  a fixed  price.  Ver- 
mont and  Kentucky,  on  admission  to  the 
Union,  had  lands  at  their  disposal.  Tennessee, 
which  comprised  the  North  Carolina  cession, 
never  came  under  the  national  land  system 
because  of  the  difficulties  arising  from  the 
stipulation  that  North  Carolina  warrants 
should  be  located  therein.  By  acts  of  1806 
and  1846  Congress  vested  in  Tennessee  any 
unappropriated  lands  within  her  limits. 
Maine,  on  separation  from  Massachusetts,  re- 
ceived half  the  unappropriated  lands,  some 
of  which  are  still  subject  to  disposition.  Texas 
retained  her  vacant  lands  on  admission  to  the 
Union.  Large  areas  were  granted  for  railroads, 
education,  and  public  purposes.  At  present 
there  are  no  unappropriated  lands  there,  but 
great  tracts  of  school  lands  are  subject  to 
lease.  The  enormous  grants  of  lands  to  the 
states  for  education,  internal  improvements, 
railroads  and  public  purposes,  have  been  admin- 
istered and  disposed  of  in  many  ways.  In 
general  the  lands  have  been  rapidly  sold  at  a 
low  price,  especially  the  school  lands.  A few 
states  have  managed  their  property  more  wise- 
ly and  have  either  used  a system  of  lease  or 
else  have  postponed  the  sale  until  the  land 
could  bring  a fair  price.  See  Cessions  by 
States;  and  also  states  by  name.  References: 
Public  Lands  Commission,  Report,  1905,  26- 
65;  P.  J.  Treat,  'National  Land  System,  1788— 
1820  (1910),  340-355.  P.  J.  T. 

PUBLIC  MINISTERS.  See  Ambassadors; 
Diplomatic  Service;  Minister,  Plenipoten- 
tiary. 

PUBLIC  MONEY,  DIVISION  OF.  The  Divi- 
sion of  Public  Money  is  one  of  the  divisions 
of  the  United  States  Treasury  Department 
(see).  It  exercises  a certain  supervision  over 
the  nine  subtreasuries,  designates  national 
bank  depositories,  and  exacts  the  deposit  of 
proper  securities  from  them,  records  receipts 
into  the  treasury,  issues  directions  to  public 
officers  with  respect  to  their  deposits,  and  to 
depositaries  with  respect  to  the  safekeeping  of 
the  funds.  See  Bank  of  the  U.  S. ; Deposit 
of  Public  Funds;  Subtreasury  System. 


Reference:  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  Annual 
Report.  A.  N.  II. 

PUBLIC  MORALS,  CARE  FOR.  The  statute 
books  of  American  states  too  often  contain 
much  legislation  that  represents  merely  the 
“moral  yearnings  of  the  community”  as  a 
witty  district  attorney  once  put  it,  and  is  quite 
incapable  of  enforcement.  Standards  of  con- 
duct in  public  morals  reflect  public  sentiment 
and  prejudice  and  may  be  intolerant,  arbitrary 
and  despotic  even  in  an  otherwise  enlightened 
democracy.  They  are  more  often  expressed  in 
statutes  that  are  dead  letters  and  weaken  the 
whole  fabric  of  respect  for  law  and  govern- 
ment. 

The  exercise  of  the  police  power  for  the  pro- 
tection of  public  morals,  says  Freund,  pro- 
ceeds upon  a number  of  grounds:  that  vice  is 
intrinsically  evil  and  has  no  right  to  exist- 
ence or  toleration;  that  it  impairs  the 
strength  of  the  community;  that  its  practice  is 
of  evil  example  and  tends  to  corrupt  others; 
that  its  manifestation  is  offensive  to  the  pub- 
lic and  violates  the  implied  conditions  of 
community,  life  whereby  each  is  bound  not  to 
outrage  in  an  offensive  manner  prevailing 
public  sentiment.  Measures  to  secure  these 
ends  imply  a greater  assertion  of  governmen- 
tal authority  than  the  protection  of  the  physic- 
al welfare  of  the  community  through  peace, 
safety  and  order.  Some  of  the  commonest 
forms  of  regulations  of  public  morals  deal 
with:  Sunday  observance,  not  as  a religious 
principle,  but  as  a day  of  rest  and  quiet  (see 
Sunday  Legislation);  gambling  (see);  sale 
and  use  of  intoxicating  liquors;  drunkenness 
and  disorderly  conduct;  sexual  immorality; 
lewd  and  lascivious  conduct;  acts  of  indecency 
committed  in  public;  obscene  literature  or 
performances;  prostitution  (see  Social  Evil)  ; 
brutality  and  brutal  sports  or  entertainments 
(see  Cruelty  to  Animals;  Cruelty  to  Chil- 
dren); public  amusements  (see);  stage  cen- 
sorship; cigarette  prohibitions;  curfew  laws; 
and  regulation  of  public  speech  of  a seditious 
or  libellous  character. 

In  spite  of  the  constitutional  guarantees  of 
religious  liberty  and  of  freedom  of  speech  and 
press  such  freedom  does  not  leave  public 
morals  unprotected  and  government  impotent 
to  punish  abuse  of  freedom.  It  has  been 
held  by  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  that 
public  morals  may  not  be  perverted  through 
the  plea  of  religious  freedom,  for  example  in 
the  matter  of  plural  marriages  dictated  by 
religious  beliefs  (Reynolds  vs.  U.  S.,  98  V.  S. 
145,  upholding  Edmunds-Tucker  law  forbidding 
polygamy  in  Utah,  also  116  U.  S.  55). 

Some  very  important  economic  legislation 
has  grown  out  of  the  regulation  of  public 
morals  though  later  based  on  other  legal 
grounds  of  state  intervention.  Thus  the  begin- 
nings of  factory  legislation  in  England  -were 
contained  in  the  Health  and  Morals  of  Ap- 


PUBLIC  OFFICE  IS  A PUBLIC  TRUST— PUBLIC  OFFICERS 


prentices  Act  (1802).  In  the  regulation  of 
pure  foods  and  fabrics,  weights  and  measures, 
and  all  sorts  of  deceptive  practices  in  trade 
and  commerce  the  courts  often  sustain  legis- 
lation or  set  it  aside  on  grounds  of  well  de- 
fined public  opinion,  having  its  basis  in  the 
principles  of  public  morals,  of  which  the 
court  will  take  judicial  cognizance  or  refuse 
to  do  so.  Thus  when  Tennessee  prohibited 
(Acts,  1897,  ch.  30)  the  sale,  offering  to  sell 
or  bringing  into  the  state  for  the  purpose  of 
selling,  giving  away,  or  otherwise  disposing 
of  any  cigarettes,  cigarette  paper  or  substi- 
tute for  the  same,  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court,  while  upholding  the  statute  as  a legiti- 
mate exercise  of  the  police  power,  declined  to 
follow  the  supreme  court  of  Tennessee  which 
held  that  cigarettes  were  not  legitimate  articles 
of  commerce  and  said:  “Cigarettes  are  but  one 
of  the  numerous  manufactures  of  tobacco  and 
we  cannot  take  judicial  notice  of  the  fact 
that  it  is  more  noxious  in  this  form  than  in 
any  other.”  Probably  if  the  facts  concerning 
the  injury  to  health  and  morals  of  minors 
caused  by  the  use  of  tobacco  in  this  form  upon 
which  public  opinion  is  pretty  definitely  settled, 
had  been  placed  before  the  court  or  if  they 
are  brought  to  its  attention  in  future  cases 
that  may  arise,  it  will  hold  that  public  morals 
require  the  court  to  take  judicial  notice  that 
tobacco  in  this  form  is  more  noxious  than  in 
many  others. 

Justice  Brewer  once  said: 

The  police  power  aims  primarily  at  the  good  of 
the  individual,  and  it  is  only  incidentally  that 
the  state,  as  an  organized  entity,  is  benefited.  It  1 


cares  for  the  health,  the  safety,  the  life,  the  good 
morals  of  the  community.  In  each  of  these  cases 
it  is  the  individual  who  is  directly  affected,  the 
individual  whose  health,  safety,  life  and  morals 
are  cared  for,  while  the  state,  as  an  organized 
entity,  receives  its  compensation  only  in  securing 
through  the  exercise  of  the  police  power,  strong, 
healthy,  moral  citizens. 

See  Amusements,  Public  ; Amusements, 
Regulation  of;  Gambling;  Health,  Public, 
Regulation  of;  Police  Power;  Race  Track 
Gambling;  Sunday  Legislation. 

References:  Ernst  Freund,  The  Police 

Power  (1904);  James  Bryce,  Am.  Common- 
wealth (4th  ed.,  1910),  II,  ch.  xcii,  on  Laissez 
Faire,  and  Part  IV  on  Public  Opinion;  D.  J. 
Brewer,  “Legitimate  Exercise  of  the  Police 
Power”  in  Charities  and  the  Commons,  XXI, 
Nov.,  1908,  238. 

Samuel  McCune  Lindsay. 

PUBLIC  OFFICE  IS  A PUBLIC  TRUST. 

An  expression  which  became  the  rallying  cry 
of  the  civil  service  reformers  who  supported 
Grover  Cleveland  (see)  in  the  campaign  of 
1884.  The  expression  has  often  been  attributed 
to  Grover  Cleveland,  and,  although  the  senti- 
ment was  his,  the  exact  words  probably  were 
not.  As  early  as  1881  he  stated  that  “public 
officials  are  the  trustees  of  the  people.”  The 
principle,  however,  was  expressed  by  Calhoun 
as  early  as  1835  when  he  said,  “The  very 
essence  of  a free  government  consists  in  con- 
sidering offices  as  public  trusts.”  The  words 
in  the  exact  form  of  the  title  above  are  found 
in  T.  M.  Cooley’s  Principles  of  Constitutional 
Law  (1st  ed.,  1880).  O.  C.  H. 


PUBLIC  OFFICERS,  CLASSIFICATION  AND  DUTIES  OF 


Officers  and  Persons  Employed  under  Con- 
tract.— The  state  or  government  may  contract 
for  services  to  be  rendered  to  it,  like  an  indi- 
vidual or  a corporation.  Such  a contract  is, 
subject  to  special  statutory  provisions,  gov- 
erned by  the  ordinary  principles  of  private 
law,  and  is  protected  by  the  Federal  Consti- 
tution (Art.  I,  Sec.  X,  f 1)  against  impair- 
ment by  subsequent  legislation  (Hall  vs.  Wis- 
consin, 103  U.  S.  5).  Such  contracts  are  com- 
mon in  the  carrying  out  of  public  works  and 
services ; thus  the  mail  is  carried  under  con- 
tract, while  it  is  collected  and  delivered  by 
officers.  An  office  rests  upon  appointment, 
which  is  a governmental  act,  and  not  upon 
contract.  While  in  the  earlier  English  law  an 
office  was  regarded  as  a species  of  property, 
and  one  American  jurisdiction  (North  Caro- 
lina, Hoke  vs.  Henderson,  15  N.  C.  1 ) at  one 
time  regarded  it  as  a contractual  relation,  this 
idea  is  now  universally  rejected.  An  office  is 
therefore  never  a vested  right,  and  the  Federal 
Constitution  protects  it  neither  under  the  con- 
tract clause  nor  under  the  due  process  clause 


against  legislative  action  abolishing  the  office 
or  ousting  the  officer. 

Officers  and  Clerical  Employees. — Clerical 
employees  share  the  official  status  in  so  far 
as  they  have  no  contractual  rights  against  the 
government.  The  line  between  them  and  officers 
cannot  be  sharply  drawn.  The  functions  of  a 
clerical  employee  are,  however,  regularly  as- 
signed by  his  chief  or  superior,  and  never  dis- 
tinctively conferred  upon  the  place  by  law; 
the  acts  of  a clerical  employee  do  not  carry 
official  authority  and  he  never  exercises  com- 
pulsory power.  For  the  latter  reason  a deputy 
sheriff  or  a policeman  is  not  a clerical  em- 
ployee, although  the  functions  of  each  particu- 
lar place  are  not  specified  by  law.  The  posi- 
tions of  officers  are  generally  created  by  express 
legal  provision,  while  those  of  clerical  em- 
ployees are  merely  authorized  by  appropriating 
a sufficient  amount  of  money.  An  officer  al- 
ways takes  an  oath  of  office,  and  generally  is 
given  a commission,  while  the  latter  is  not 
issued  to  a clerical  employee,  and  he  does  not 
necessarily  take  an  oath.  Legally  the  distinc- 


100 


PUBLIC  OFFICERS,  CLASSIFICATION  AND  DUTIES  OF 


tion  is  important  in  so  far  as  constitutional 
provisions  regarding  officers  do  not  necessarily 
cover  employees.  Thus  there  are  persons  in 
the  official  service  of  the  United  States,  who 
are  appointed  neither  by  the  President,  nor 
by  heads  of  departments,  nor  by  courts  of 
justice,  as  the  Constitution  (Art.  II,  Sec.  ii, 
112)  prescribes  with  regard  to  officers  (U.  S. 
vs.  Smith,  124  U.  S.  525),  and  if  the  provision 
that  offices  shall  be  held  for  definite  terms  ap- 
plied to  clerical  employees,  it  would  be  im- 
possible to  protect  them  by  civil  service  laws. 
An  officer  has  a title  that  can  be  questioned 
by  quo  warranto  (see)  proceedings,  and  he 
can  be  reached  by  writ  of  mandamus  (see)  ; 
neither  of  these  remedies  is  applicable  to  a 
clerical  employee. 

Civil  and  Military  Officers. — The  distinction 
appears  from  the  designation.  The  chief  execu- 
tive does  not  cease  to  be  a civil  officer  by  reason 
of  being  commander-in-chief  of  the  armed 
forces.  The  diplomatic  and  consular  service 
belongs  to  the  civil  service,  but  constitutes  a 
distinct  branch. 

Legislative  Officers. — Where  the  administra- 
tive department  of  the  government  is  carried 
on  in  the  name  of  the  king,  and  officers  are 
regarded  as  the  king’s  servants,  the  represen- 
tatives of  the  people  or  other  members  of  par- 
liament are  not  officials,  since  they  do  not 
derive  their  authority  from  the  Crown  nor 
exercise  it  in  subordination  to  the  same.  In 
America  a member  of  the  legislature  has  been 
held  not  to  be  a civil  officer  within  the  con- 
stitutional provision  regarding  impeachment, 
this  form  of  dealing  with  misfeasance  being 
either  inconsistent  with  the  power  of  each 
house  over  its  members,  or  superfluous  in  view 
of  it.  Otherwise,  however,  members  of  the 
legislature  must  be  regarded  as  officers.  They 
enjoy  various  privileges  enumerated  in  the 
constitutions,  the  principal  one  being  their 
immunity  from  civil  liability  for  acts  done 
in  their  capacity  as  members. 

Judicial  Officers. — The  judges  of  superior 
courts  of  record  are  distinguished  by  special 
constitutional  provisions  intended  to  safe- 
guard their  independence;  as  a matter  of  com- 
mon law  they  also  enjoy  absolute  immunity 
from  civil  liability  by  reason  of  their  official 
acts.  Inferior  judicial  officers,  notably  jus- 
tices of  the  peace,  have  this  immunity  only 
when  they  act  within  their  jurisdiction.  It 
was  in  connection  with  judicial  officers  that 
the  view  of  office  as  a beneficial  franchise  was 
first  questioned  and  eventually  broke  down. 

Ministerial  Officers. — Sheriffs,  recorders, 
clerks,  highway  and  election  officers  are  fre- 
quently designated  as  ministerial.  The  chief 
legal  consequence  of  the  ministerial  character 
of  the  office  is  that  the  officer  acts  at  his  peril 
in  misjudging  law  or  fact,  although  with  re- 
gard to  election  officers  this  liability  is  much 
controverted.  Ministerial  officers  may  be  com- 
pelled by  mandamus  to  do  official  acts;  for  this 


purpose,  however,  the  character  of  the  particu- 
lar function  rather  than  that  of  the  office  is 
controlling.  Thus  certain  acts  of  high  exec- 
utive officers,  like  heads  of  departments,  and 
also  acts  of  judges  may  be  treated  as  minister- 
ial; while  the  President  is  never  held  to  act 
ministerially.  The  term  quasi-judicial  is  often 
used  to  designate  acts  of  administrative  officers 
which  are  not  ministerial. 

Constitutional  and  Statutory  Officers. — The 
Federal  Constitution  provides  in  terms  for  few 
offices — Congress,  President  and  Vice-Presi- 
dent, Supreme  Court;  the  state  constitutions, 
for  nearly  all  the  principal  offices  of  the  state 
and  county  government.  If  an  office  is  pro- 
vided for  in  the  Constitution,  the  functions 
usually  appertaining  to  it  cannot  be  abrogated 
by  statute  or  taken  from  the  holder  of  the 
office.  Aside  from  the  fact  that  constitutional 
provisions  cannot  be  impaired  by  legislation, 
constitutional  officers  have  no  status  superior 
to  that  of  officers  created  by  statute;  and 
especially  the  difference  does  not  affect  the 
liability  to  judicial  control. 

State  and  Local  Officers. — The  difference  re- 
lates chiefly  to  territorial  jurisdiction;  the 
authority  of  most  state  officers  extends  to 
every  part  of  the  state.  The  local  office  more 
particularly  is  one  that  is  constituted  on  the 
basis  of  local  self-government  or  has  at  least 
some  organic  connection  with  the  organization 
of  local  government.  Within  the  locality 
(county,  city,  etc.)  a further  distinction  is 
made  between  officers  exercising  delegated 
functions  of  the  general  governments  and  those 
exercising  corporate  functions.  For  the  de- 
fault or  misfeasance  of  the  former  the  local 
government  in  its  corporate  capacity  incurs  no 
liability,  and  some  courts  claim  that  there  is 
an  implied  constitutional  guaranty  that  corpo- 
rate offices  shall  be  filled  on  the  principle  of 
local  self-government,  i.  e.,  not  by  state  appoint- 
ment. Officers  dealing  with  justice,  police, 
health  and  education  are  deemed  to  exercise 
general  governmental  functions. 

Office  and  Commission. — It  is  sometimes  de- 
clared that  an  office  is  a more  or  less  perma- 
nent place  under  the  government,  and  on  that 
basis  is  distinguished  from  commissions  creat- 
ed for  temporary  purposes,  and  whose  author- 
ity ends  when  their  purpose  is  accomplished. 
The  Supreme  Court  of  Illinois  sustained  the 
legislative  creation  of  a commission,  although 
the  constitution  prohibited  the  legislature  from 
appointing  or  electing  officers  (Bunn  vs.  Peo- 
ple, 45  III.  397 ) . The  definition  of  office  in 
the  present  constitution  of  Illinois  is  derived 
from  this  decision. 

See  Appointments  to  Office;  Employees 
of  Government;  Governor;  Superior  Offi- 
cers; Office;  Patronage. 

References:  F.  J.  Goodnow,  Am.  Adminis- 
trative Law  (1905);  F.  R.  Mecliem,  Law  of 
Public  Officers  (1889);  M.  H.  Throop,  Law 
of  Public  Officers  (1892).  Ernst  Freund. 


101 


TUBLIC  OPINION  AND  POPULAR  CONTROL 


PUBLIC  OPINION  AND  POPULAR  CONTROL 


Definition. — It  is  not  easy  to  limit  by  pre- 
cise definition  the  term  “public  opinion.”  It 
may  he  the  mere  “prevalent  impression  of  the 
moment”  of  some  fraction,  however  small, 
of  human  society;  or  it  may  be  the  permanent 
and  general  conviction  of  a whole  nation,  or 
of  the  world.  It  generally  represents  the  aver- 
age of  what  men  believe  and  feel  upon  a given 
subject  within  a given  social  unit  and  it  is 
commonly  the  result  of  the  action  and  re- 
action of  the  thoughts,  feelings,  wishes  and 
prejudices  of  individuals  upon  each  other 
which  produces  a result  in  which  the  element 
of  pure  personal  conviction  is  comparatively 
small.  It  may  be  applied  to  every  conceivable 
object  of  thought  or  feeling.  We  can  trace 
it  in  the  development  of  painting,  sculpture, 
architecture,  poetry  and  other  literature,  and 
of  the  moral,  political  and  religious  ideals  of 
different  times  and  in  different  communities. 
It  has  existed  from  the  foundation  of  human 
society;  it  underlies  the  customs  of  barbarous 
tribes  which  it  enforces  without  laws  or  courts, 
as  well  as  the  elaborate  jurisprudence  of  civil- 
ized nations  and  empires.  And  yet  at  times 
it  exerts  its  power  against  the  law,  for  it  not 
only  changes  legislation,  it  not  only  uproots 
and  overthrows  the  institutions  and  ideals  of 
the  past,  but  it  may  also  defeat  and  nullify 
existing  provisions. 

Even  in  autocratic  or  aristocratic  govern- 
ments it  has  often  exercised  a greater  influ- 
ence upon  institutions  and  policies  than  the 
will  of  the  ruler  or  of  the  ruling  class.  Very 
few  despotisms,  even  military  tyrannies,  which 
persistently  disregard  it  are  permanently  suc- 
cessful and  an  oligarchy  is  obliged,  from  time 
to  time,  to  consult  it  and  to  conform  to  its 
desires  (as  the  nobles  of  Venice  did)  in  order 
to  retain  a secure  tenure  of  power. 

Public  opinion  being  a composite  of  individ- 
ual opinions  is  formed  of  the  same  elements: 
(1)  consciousness  and  knowledge,  real  or 
imagined  of  certain  facts;  (2)  feeling  and 
desire  which,  rather  than  mere  judgment,  is 
the  predominant  motive  for  action;  (3)  voli- 
tion, the  resolve  to  act — “Let  us  march  against 
Philip;”  witness  the  general  volunteering  for 
service  “to  save  their  country”  during  the  first 
period  of  the  Civil  War. 

Sources. — The  sources  of  public  opinion  are 
manifold.  It  may  grow  spontaneously  or  it 
may  be  designedly  created  or  encouraged.  It 
is  formed  wherever  human  beings  come  to- 
gether for  social  intercourse  or  wherever  they 
use  the  same  written  vehicles  for  the  com- 
munication of  thought — in  the  home,  the 
school  (and  there  are  few  places  where  it  is 
more  arbitrary),  in  the  village  store  or  post 
office,  in  the  street,  in  the  marts  of  business. 


in  public  conveyances,  in  the  town  hall,  the 
courtroom,  the  church,  the  lyceum,  the  the- 
atre. It  is  especially  disseminated  by  volun- 
tary associations  formed  for  the  purpose  like 
the  anti-slavery,  civil  service,  municipal  re- 
form and  peace  and  temperance  societies  as 
well  as  by  political  meetings  and  conventions, 
by  party  organizations  and  perhaps  most  of 
all  by  the  press.  Newspapers  have  a power- 
ful though  not  always  a controlling  influence 
over  it.  “Newspapers,”  says  Bryce,  “are  nar- 
rators, advocates  and  weathercocks.”  Their 
influence  as  advocates  has  diminished  some- 
what with  the  disappearance  of  the  “great 
editors”  from  Franklin  to  Greeley.  Public 
opinion  is  now  influenced  quite  as  much  by 
the  facts  contained  in  their  news  columns  as 
by  their  arguments;  and  the  tendency  of  many 
of  them  to  follow  and  conform  to  it,  so  as  to 
maintain  and  increase  their  circulation,  makes 
such  papers  more  reliable  as  an  index  of  what 
current  sentiment  is  than  as  a guide  to  what 
it  ought  to  be.  The  ownership  of  newspapers 
by  great  capitalists,  the  alliance  of  some  of 
them  with  certain  special  interests,  local  and 
otherwise  (sometimes  unknown  to  their  read- 
ers), and  their  frequent  subservience  to  the 
desires  of  influential  advertisers  often  arouse 
public  distrust  and  make  them  less  the  oracles 
they  used  to  be  and  still  are  in  a country 
like  England.  Still  they  are  powerful  agents 
in  controlling  opinion,  and  are  so  recognized 
by  the  important  offices  often  given  as  govern- 
ment patronage  to  their  editors  or  proprietors. 

Characteristics. — In  spite  of  great  diversity 
of  views  upon  other  questions,  public  opinion 
has  been  quite  uniform  in  America  upon  cer- 
tain principles  considered  fundamental;  for 
instance,  as  to  freedom  of  speech  and  of  the 
press,  complete  religious  toleration,  separation 
of  church  and  state,  jury  trial,  freedom  from 
monarchy  or  hereditary  nobility,  the  public 
school  system,  etc.  There  is  also  a very  deep 
devotion  to  the  Federal  Constitution,  so  great 
as  to  render  any  specific  amendments  to  that 
instrument  quite  difficult.  But  the  Consti- 
tution has  grown  under  interpretation.  This 
interpretation  was  inevitable  and  arose  from 
the  necessities  of  a growing  and  changing  civ- 
ilization, and  especially  from  the  greater  con- 
centration of  power  in  the  Federal  Government 
required  by  our  increased  interstate  com- 
merce as  developed  by  improved  transporta- 
tion facilities  (see  Constitution,  Growth 
of).  Public  opinion  has  generally  justified 
(and  perhaps  required)  the  rules  of  inter- 
pretation adopted  (see  Growth  of  the  Con- 
stitution ) . 

Within  recent  years,  moreover,  a doubt  is 
beginning  to  arise  whether  American  institu- 


102 


PUBLIC  OPINION  AND  POPULAR  CONTROL 


tions  are  in  all  respects  so  excellent  as  we 
had  imagined  them.  The  great  power  of  in- 
dustrial combinations  to  control  political  ac- 
tion, the  enormous  fortunes  and  aggregations 
of  capital  and  the  enormous  inequalities  in 
the  distribution  of  wealth  have  convinced 
many  that  fundamental  changes  may  be  neces- 
sary to  give  the  government  fuller  control  than 
at  present  over  combinations,  both  of  labor 
and  capital,  which  injuriously  affect  public 
life.  How  far  this  discontent  will  spread  and 
how  radical  the  changes  it  will  effect,  it  is  now 
impossible  to  foresee. 

Public  opinion  has  been  less  dependent  upon 
leadership  in  America  than  elsewhere,  although 
not  unaffected  by  hero-worship.  The  aver- 
age of  intelligence  being  high  and  the  citizens 
self-confident  and  conscious  of  their  political 
responsibility,  the  standard  of  politicians  be- 
ing often  low  and  influenced  by  special  in- 
terests, each  man  relies  more  upon  his  own 
conclusions  as  formed  or  modified  by  his  gen- 
eral environment,  than  upon  any  special  lead- 
er or  organ.  Yet  there  has  been  less  indi- 
viduality of  political  conviction  than  in  many 
other  places,  and  a greater  willingness  to  sub- 
ordinate one’s  individual  views  not  to  a leader, 
but  to  the  will  of  the  majority.  Nowhere  is 
there  a stronger  conviction  that  it  is  vain  to 
oppose  this  will,  and  the  minority,  accepting 
defeat  with  good  grace,  is  often  persuaded  that 
the  decision  made  was  right.  Public  opinion 
and  government  itself  acquires  great  strength 
and  solidity  from  this  fact,  although  at  some 
expense  of  individuality.  Majorities  have  not 
often  been  wantonly  tyrannical.  They  have 
been  more  arbitrary  in  regard  to  slavery  and 
in  matters  of  race  prejudice  than  upon  any 
other  subject.  The  American  people  generally, 
are  good-natured  and  tolerant — often  far  too 
tolerant  of  abuses  till  these  become  insupport- 
able, when  they  suddenly  rise  and  overthrow 
them  and  then  relapse  again  into  inactivity. 

Public  opinion  varies  somewhat  in  different 
sections.  It  is  controlled  in  the  East  more 
by  the  commercial  and  manufacturing,  and 
in  the  west  more  by  the  agricultural,  interests. 
It  has  special  currents  on  the  Pacific  slope 
and  particularly  in  the  South  where  race  ques- 
tions assume  a greater  importance  than  else- 
where. Party  feeling  is  strong,  though  it  can- 
not count  today  upon  so  much  blind  adher- 
ence as  in  the  past.  Independence  of  politi- 
cal organizations  is  undoubtedly  increasing. 

Independent  opinion  is,  however,  often  dif- 
ficult to  express.  It  may  seek  first  to  obtain 
its  desires  within  one  of  the  parties;  failing 
this,  to  organize  a new  party  of  its  own ; or 
if  that  be  impracticable,  to  support  tbe  party 
offering  the  greatest  concessions  to  its  views 
( see  Party,  Place  and  Significance  of). 

Effect  on  Government. — In  a general  way 
public  opinion  must  finally  control  the  politi- 
cal action  of  every  popular  government,  and 
there  is  no  other  country  in  which  it  is  so 


powerful  as  in  the  United  States.  Neverthe- 
less, there  are  many  instances  in  which  it  has 
been  slow  and  sometimes  ineffective  in  estab- 
lishing that  control,  both  on  account  of  the 
lack  of  accurate  information,  and  on  account 
of  defects  in  the  methods  of  representation. 

(1)  Lack  of  knowledge  exists  not  so  much 
in  regard  to  the  particular  questions  at  issue 
as  in  respect  to  the  qualifications  of  the  lep- 
resentative.  People  are  often  mistaken  as  to : 
(a)  his  views;  (b)  his  intelligence;  (c)  his 
honesty.  He  may  disappoint  them  in  support- 
ing measures  they  do  not  approve,  especially 
as  to  questions  which  have  arisen  since  his 
election ; he  may  unconsciously  be  tricked  into 
a false  course,  or  he  may  betray  them  for  a 
consideration  in  money,  office,  or  other  ad- 
vantage. No  constituency  can  always  predict 
the  conduct  of  its  representative,  especially  if 
he  be  an  untried  man.  To  remedy  this  in- 
firmity the  recall  of  the  representative  has 
been  tried  with  more  or  less  success  in  various 
municipalities  (see  Recall).  The  objection 
to  this  is  that  the  liability  to  be  recalled  may 
well  discourage  men  of  independent  views  from 
running  for  office  and  may  thus  lower  the 
character  of  the  place  or  the  representative 
body,  though  it  will  certainly  make  it  more 
answerable  to  public  control. 

The  ignorance  of  the  public  regarding  t lie 
qualifications  of  candidates  is  further  accentu- 
ated by  the  large  number  of  elective  officers 
to  be  chosen  at  a single  election  and  the  ten- 
dency to  place  more  and  more  names  upon  the 
official  ballot.  The  voter  rarely  knows  any- 
thing about  the  qualifications  of  the  candi- 
dates  and  is  thus  often  driven  into  the  blind 
support  of  a complete  party  ticket.  The 
“short  ballot”  (see  Ballot,  Short)  is  now 
devised  to  remedy  this  defect. 

(2)  Even  if  a constituency  were  perfect- 
ly informed  as  to  its  candidates  it  would 
often  happen  that  a large  portion  of 
that  constituency  would  not  get  the  men  it 
wanted,  (a)  They  may  have  merely  a choice 
between  objectionable  candidates  forced  up- 
on them  by  a primary  system,  in  which 
they  have  no  adequate  voice,  especially  if 
they  are  independent  in  politics.  To  rem- 
edy the  evils  of  the  system  of  party  conven- 
tions and  delegates,  which  commonly  prevails 
for  the  selection  of  candidates,  direct  primary 
laws  have  been  enacted  in  a number  of  states 
and  the  system  is  rapidly  spreading  though 
all  the  difficulties  attending  it  have  not  been 
overcome  (see  Direct  Primaries),  (b)  Rep- 
resentation in  legislative  bodies  being  mainly 
by  districts  or  wards,  it  often  occurs  that  a 
majority  of  close  districts  may  favor  policies 
obnoxious  to  the  majority  of  the  entire  com- 
munity and  misrepresentation  follows.  This 
result  is  sometimes  accentuated  by  the  gerry- 
mander (see),  where  districts  are  formed  by 
the  action  of  a party  for  the  express  purpose 
of  perpetuating  its  power  even  against  the 


103 


PUBLIC  OPINION  AND  POPULAR  CONTROL 


popular  will.  This  evil  can  be  remedied  (as 
in  Switzerland)  by  a system  of  proportional 
representation  ( see  Minority  Representa- 
tion ) , which  seems  particularly  applicable  to 
municipalities,  where  the  evils  of  a division 
of  the  representative  body  into  small  and  in- 
dependent groups,  to  which  it  may  lead,  would 
seem  less  than  in  national  affairs. 

In  the  Federal  Government  defective  repre- 
sentation also  results  from  the  constitution 
of  the  Senate,  where  the  equal  votes  of  the 
smaller  states  may  outweigh  the  vast  popula- 
tions of  the  greater  ones;  also  in  the  electoral 
college  which,  voting  by  states,  as  entireties, 
without  regard  to  popular  majorities,  some- 
times chooses  a President  (c.  g.,  Benjamin 
Harrison)  whose  competitor  may  receive  a 
majority  of  the  popular  vote  cast.  To  remedy 
these  defects  an  amendment  to  the  Federal 
Constitution  would  be  necessary,  and  as  to 
Senators,  such  an  amendment  would  require 
the  consent  of  all  the  states,  which  it  would 
undoubtedly  be  impossible  to  secure.  The 
federal  Senate  may  also  be  unrepresentative 
from  the  fact  that  the  state  legislatures  by 
which  Senators  are  elected,  may  not  properly 
represent  the  people  in  their  choice.  To  rem- 
edy this,  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution 
providing  for  the  election  of  Senators  by  direct 
vote  has  been  adopted  (see  Senate;  Sena- 
tors). (c)  Another  defect  in  representa- 
tion results  from  the  nature  of  representative 
government  itself.  Such  government  seems  in- 
evitably to  be  a government  by  political 
parties  and  the  party  candidate  represents  the 
sum  total  of  the  principles  for  which  the 
party  stands ; at  all  events  he  represents  a 
certain  aggregate  of  views  upon  various  sub- 
jects. Many  of  the  voters  agree  with  him  on 
some  of  these  and  differ  from  him  on  others. 
They  must,  therefore,  support  a man  who  will 
misrepresent  them  on  certain  questions,  and 
the  aggregate  often  involves  a misrepresenta- 
tion of  the  opinion  of  a majority  of  the  whole 
constituency  upon  these  questions  (see  Rep- 
resentation; Representative  Government). 
(d)  The  views  of  the  community  itself  may 
change  subsequent  to  the  election,  in  which 
case,  the  representative,  if  he  follow  the  policy 
to  which  he  was  pledged,  must  inevitably  mis- 
represent his  constitutency.  Bryce  tells  us 
that  the  Americans  are  a changeable  people. 
American  opinion  regarding  public  men  has 
sometimes  shown  itself  quite  volatile,  and  of- 
ten in  regard  to  public  measures  unexpected 
waves  of  public  sentiment  sweep  over  large 
portions  of  the  country.  When  this  occurs 
during  the  term  of  one  elected  under  the  older 
regime,  misrepresentation  may  result.  For 
this  also  the  recall  may  be  an  appropriate 
remedy,  but  the  two  most  commonly  urged 
for  all  defects  in  representation  in  city  and 
state  governments  (they  are  not  applicable  in 
national  affairs)  are  the  initiative  (.see)  to 
compel  the  enactment  of  desired  legislation 


and  the  referendum  (see)  to  defeat  laws  that 
are  not  desired  (see  Legislation,  Direct). 
The  United  States  seems  to  become  more  and 
more  a democracy,  so  far  as  the  vast  popula- 
tion and  complex  system  of  government  ren- 
ders this  possible. 

But  public  opinion,  as  we  have  seen,  may 
not  only  create  and  modify  legislation,  it  may 
defy  and  even  paralyse  it.  This  appears,  not 
only  in  the  disregard  of  obsolete  laws  (like  the 
common-law  wager  of  battle  or  the  blue  laws 
in  New  England  which  fell  into  disuse  before 
repeal)  but  also  by  the  frequent  ineffectiveness 
of  new  legislation;  for  instance,  prohibitory 
liquor  laws  and  laws  against  prostitution  in 
local  communities  which  do  not  desire  them. 
It  also  appears  in  unpunished  lynchings  and 
white-capping  for  criminal  or  unpopular  con- 
duct and  in  the  persistence,  especially  in  the 
South  and  West,  of  the  “unwritten  law”  or 
right  of  private  vengance  for  offenses  against 
the  chastity  of  the  female  members  of  a man’s 
household.  In  these  cases  opinion  is  stronger 
than  law  and  an  entire  community  sometimes 
unites  to  set  the  law  at  naught. 

Indeed  many  communities  have  far  too  little 
respect  for  law.  This  is  caused,  in  part,  by 
the  delays  and  miscarriages  of  justice,  especial- 
ly in  criminal  jurisprudence,  and  points  out 
the  need  of  a stricter  criminal  code  and  a speed- 
ier and  more  effective  procedure.  But  this  is 
by  no  means  the  only  cause  of  lawlessness.  It 
is  often  the  result  of  mere  passion  and  preju- 
dice, and  the  tortures  and  burnings  by  which 
(especially  in  the  South)  it  is  sometimes  ac- 
companied reflect  the  utmost  discredit  upon 
the  communities  where  they  occur  and  even 
upon  the  country  in  which  such  things  are  pos- 
sible. 

The  decisions  of  our  courts  as  well  as  the 
verdicts  of  juries  are  sometimes  bent  (often 
unconsciously)  in  favor  of  the  thing  which 
public  opinion  demands,  a fact  which  adds  to 
the  uncertainties  of  litigation.  While  over  the 
judiciary  public  opinion  ought  not  to  have 
unlimited  control,  yet  even  here  the  gen- 
eral sentiment  of  the  people  is  sure  to  be 
ultimately  recognized  in  interpreting  and  de- 
veloping existing  law.  Judges,  like  all  other 
humans  beings,  are  swayed  by  the  beliefs  and 
feelings  of  the  times.  Mr.  A.  V.  Dicey  has 
shown  in  his  Law  and  Public  Opinion  in  Eng- 
land that  English  public  opinion  is  ultimately 
supreme  even  in  common  law  decisions  and 
he  has  traced  the  three  phases  of  such  opinion 
during  the  last  century  (Toryism,  1800-1830; 
Individualism,  1825-1870;  and  Collectivism, 
1865-1000),  as  reflected  in  the  judgments  of 
the  courts,  sometimes  in  advance  of  Parlia- 
mentary enactment.  The  same  thing  is  true 
in  America;  but  judges  ought  to  be  protected 
against  the  need  of  yielding  to  mere  temporary 
currents  of  opinion  to  such  an  extent  that  jus- 
tice and  the  rights  of  litigants  under  existing 
law  will  be  disregarded.  From  this  point  of 


104 


PUBLIC  POLICY 


view,  the  project  of  making  judges  subject  to 
arbitrary  recall  is,  therefore,  fraught  with  se- 
rious danger. 

General  Effects. — But  whatever  may  be 
thought  of  its  injurious  influence  in  excep- 
tional cases  and  of  the  folly  of  certain  tem- 
porary manifestations,  like  the  free  silver 
movement,  or  of  local  prejudices  like  those 
prevailing  against  the  negro  or  against  Ori- 
entals (which  seem  to  be  increasing  rather 
than  diminishing)  it  must  be  said  that  the 
general  effect  of  public  opinion  upon  both 
private  and  official  life  has  been  wholesome. 
It  has  helped  to  preserve  morality  and  the  in- 
tegrity of  the  family,  it  has  restrained  both 
private  and  public  peculation  and  corruption, 
it  has  restricted  the  selfish  machinations  of 
professional  politicans  who  are  always  alert 
to  watch  it  and  to  follow  it  but  who  seldom 
anticipate  or  lead  it.  It  acts  with  peculiar 
force  upon  immigrants  to  America,  moulding 
them  sooner  or  later  into  citizens  with  Ameri- 
can sympathies  and  aspirations.  It  has  dis- 
couraged class  feeling;  it  is  divided,  as  Bryce 
says,  by  lines  vertical  rather  than  horizontal. 
The  poor,  even  where  they  preponderate  great- 
ly at  the  ballot  box,  have  seldom  sought  to 
despoil  or  injure  the  rich,  or  destroy  the 
rights  of  property,  the  conviction  being  gen- 
eral that  the  protection  of  these  rights  is  de- 
manded by  the  welfare  of  all.  In  most  par- 
ticulars the  tendency  of  opinion  in  late  years 
is  to  become  more  and  more  forbearing  and 
reasonable,  although  the  deep  feeling  now 
arising  between  certain  labor  unions  on  the 
one  hand  and  corporations  and  other  employ- 
ers on  the  other,  threatens  to  become  an  ex- 
ception to  this  salutary  condition  and  to  give 
rise  to  more  class  feeling  than  has  heretofore 
existed. 

While  public  opinion  often  errs  as  to  mere 
methods  and  in  the  complex  details  of  ad- 
ministration, yet  it  is  essentially  reliable  as 
to  ultimate  aims  and  ideals.  Give  the  Ameri- 
can people  a simple  proposition  and  time 
enough  to  think  it  over  carefully  and  dis- 
passionately and  they  will  nearly  always  de- 
cide it  right. 

Public  opinion  has  operated  more  beneficent- 
ly in  the  whole  nation  as  expressed  through 
federal  laws  and  administration  than  in  the 
smaller  units  of  government,  the  states  and 
municipalities.  Thus  the  anti-trust  and  anti- 
railroad  laws  of  various  states  as  well  as 
numerous  other  laws  and  city  ordinances  af- 
fecting public  service  corporations  have  often 
been  ill  devised  and  ineffective  where  not  posi- 
tively unjust  or  corrupt,  and  federal  legisla- 
tion, in  spite  of  many  shortcomings  has  been 
slower  but  more  salutary.  Federal  officials 
(except  in  the  South,  where  public  opinion  has 
less  influence)  are  generally  of  a higher  grade. 
Thus  the  dogma  that  popular  government  is 
only  suitable  in  small  communities  is  abun- 
dantly refuted. 


The  power  of  public  opinion  depends  first 
upon  its  extent  and  second  upon  its  intensity. 
If  it  be  practically  universal  and  sufficiently 
strong  nothing  can  withstand  it.  It  often  ex- 
ercises a power  over  individuals  greater  than 
the  fear  of  death  itself,  and  while  its  ephemer- 
al or  local  phases  may  often  be  disregarded 
or  ridiculed,  nothing  is  more  reliable  than  its 
widespread  and  uniform  convictions  extending 
over  considerable  periods  of  time.  But  this 
need  for  time  and  reflection  should  not  be 
overlooked.  Even  in  such  measures  as  the 
initiative,  referendum,  and  recall,  which  are  de- 
signed to  give  more  immediate  effect  to  popu- 
lar desires,  there  should  still  be  left  a reason- 
able opportunity  for  reflection  and  for  the 
subsidence  of  those  sudden  gusts  of  passion 
and  prejudice  which  may  make  of  the  opinion 
of  the  moment  an  untrustworthy  guide. 

See  Popular  Government;  Representative 
Government;  Sociology,  Theory  of. 

References:  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Commonwealth 
(4th  ed.,  1910),  II,  252;  J.  W.  Jenks,  “Guid- 
ance of  Public  Opinion”  in  Am.  Journal  of 
Sociology,  I (1895)  ; E.  A.  Ross,  “Social  Con- 
trol” in  ibid,  I,  II  (1895-6);  A.  V.  Dicey, 
Law  and  Public  Opinion  in  England  (1905)  ; 
W.  Kittle,  “The  Making  of  Public  Opinion” 
in  the  Arena,  XLI  (1909),  433-450;  W.  J. 
Shepard,  “Public  Opinion”  in  Am.  Jour.  Soci- 
ology, XV  (1909),  22-60. 

William  Dudley  Foulke. 

PUBLIC  POLICY.  That  principle  of  the  law 
which  holds  that  no  person  can  lawfully  do 
any  act  which  has  a tendency  to  be  injurious 
to  the  public  or  against  the  public  good.  The 
term  is  not  susceptible  of  precise  definition, 
for  it  changes  with  changes  in  the  law,  and 
with  the  controlling  current  conceptions  of 
what  is  right  and  politic.  By  it  all  agree- 
ments, contracts  or  acts,  having  for  their 
object  that  which  is  repugnant  to  justice  or 
good  morals,  or  in  derogation  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  common  law,  or  violative  of 
statutes,  are  forbidden  and  void.  Whether  an 
act,  agreement  or  contract  is  contrary  to  pub- 
lic policy,  must  be  determined  with  reference 
to  its  “probable  effect,  tendency  or  object,  con- 
sidered with  reference  to  the  social  or  politi- 
cal well-being  of  the  state.”  The  United 
States  Supreme  Court  has  indicated  a nar- 
rower test  as  to  the  scope  of  the  term  for 
judicial  purposes,  saying: 

The  question  what  is  the  public  policy  of  a 
state,  and  what  is  contrary  to  it,  if  inquired 
into  beyond  these  limits  Tthe  Constitution  and 
laws  and  judicial  decisions]  will  be  found  to  be 
one  of  great  vagueness  and  uncertainty,  and  to 
involve  discussions  which  scarcely  come  within 
the  range  of  judicial  duty  and  functions,  and 
upon  which  men  may  and  will  complexionally 
differ. 

References:  E.  Greenhood,  Public  Policy 
(1886),  2;  Vidal  vs.  Girard,  2 Howard  127, 
197 ; Egerton  vs.  Brownlow,  4 House  of  Lords 
Cases  1.  H.  M.  B. 


105 


PUBLIC  PROPERTY 


PUBLIC  PROPERTY 


The  largest  property  owner  in  the  United 
States  is  the  United  States  Government;  in 
each  state,  the  state  government;  in  eaeli  mu- 
nicipality, the  city  government;  chiefly  because 
of  the  possession  of  land  and  buildings,  but 
also  because  of  cash  in  hand,  supplies,  and 
military  material,  including  ships  of  war. 

Public  Money. — Inasmuch  as  the  states  have 
no  coinage  power,  or  authority  to  issue  paper 
money,  the  great  accumulations  of  specie  and 
evidences  of  public  debt  are  in  the  hands 
of  the  Federal  Government.  During  the  pe- 
riod of  the  first  two  national  banks  (1791- 
1811  and  181 G— 1833 ) the  balances  of  the  Fed- 
eral Treasury  were  deposited  in  the  United 
States  Bank;  but  for  a brief  period  (1840- 
1841)  and  since  1846,  the  Treasury  has  kept 
its  own  balances.  On  June  30,  1912,  the  Treas- 
ury held  a reserve  fund  of  .$150,000,000  in  gold 
coin  and  bullion;  frust  funds  in  amount  equal 
to  the  paper  currency  outstanding,  $1,524,- 
535,369,  of  which  $1,040,057,369  was  in  gold 
coin  and  bullion;  and  a balance  in  the  general 
fund  of  $167,152,479,  of  which  $48,506,186  was 
in  national  bank  depositories.  On  May  31, 
1913,  the  total  cash  holdings  (assets)  were 
$1,976,659,034.23;  the  available  cash  balance 
was  $133,977,282;  and  the  total  cash  in  sub- 
treasuries was  $353,612,436. 

The  cash  balances  of  the  state  or  local  gov- 
ernments are  commonly  deposited  in  banks, 
either  public  money  subject  to  the  check  of 
disbursing  officers,  or  deposited  to  the  private 
account  of  the  financial  official,  who  is  re- 
sponsible for  its  repayment.  Inasmuch  as  tax- 
es are  collected  commonly  once  a year  (in  some 
communities  twice  a year),  the  available  cash 
varies  from  month  to  month,  but  the  state 
and  local  governments  together  probably  have 
not  less  than  $100,000,000  on  deposit. 

Public  Land. — The  Federal  Government  and 
many  of  the  states  own  tracts  of  land  which 
have  never  been  in  private  hands.  The  Federal 
Government  is  the  prime  possessor  of  the  un- 
granted lands,  but  several  of  the  original 
states  hold  large  areas  of  public  land  which 
were  in  their  possession  before  the  Revolution, 
while  other  states  have  obtained  large  grants 
for  various  purposes  from  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment. The  area  of  land  held  by  the  Federal 
Government  in  the  continental  United  States, 
exclusive  of  Alaska  on  July  1,  1912,  was 
314,874,119  acres.  The  holdings  of  the  states 
cannot  be  ascertained,  but  it  lias  been  the 
practice  of  the  states  quickly  to  dispose  of 
lands  granted  to  them  by  giving  them  away, 
by  granting  them  as  an  aid  to  the  construc- 
tion of  roads  and  canals,  or  by  selling  them 
and  applying  the  proceeds  to  public  purposes. 
Maine  still  has  some  original  public  land,  as 


has  also  New  York;  and  in  the  states  admit- 
ted since  1889  there  are  still  large  areas  held 
over  from  the  grants  transferred  by  the  Fed- 
eral Government  when  those  states  came  into 
the  Union.  Most  of  Alaska  is  still  the  prop- 
erty of  the  United  States,  and  in  the  Phil- 
ippine Islands  nine-tenths  of  the  area  belongs 
to  the  Insular  Government. 

The  policy,  both  of  the  nation  and  the  states, 
has  been  to  divest  itself  of  public  land,  but 
the  conservation  policy  has  caused  a change, 
and  the  tendency  is  now  to  withhold  forest 
areas  supposed  to  protect  the  head  waters  of 
navigable  streams,  water  power  sites  and  ir- 
rigation sites,  and  thus  to  conserve  the  gifts 
of  nature  for  the  interest  of  future  generations. 

Real  Estate. — Practically  all  governments 
have  a title  to  real  estate  held  for  common  pur- 
poses. Roads  and  streets  are  either  public 
property  outright  or  the  public  has  the  sole 
right  to  use  them  for  transportation  and  for 
collateral  purposes,  such  as  carrying  sewers, 
and  water,  gas  and  electric  mains.  The  title 
is  usually  vested  in  the  local  government,  but 
sometimes  in  the  states.  All  roads  are  subject 
to  being  designated  by  the  Federal  Government 
as  post  roads,  which  does  not  affect  the  title, 
but  makes  them  interstate  highways. 

Another  class  of  real  estate  is  the  public 
buildings,  often  placed  in  large  grounds.  The 
United  States,  besides  a group  of  enormous 
structures  in  Washington,  has  hundreds  of 
public  buildings,  used  as  courthouses,  post  of- 
fices, custom-houses,  and  internal  revenue  of- 
fices, and  the  number  is  constantly  increasing. 
The  military  posts  and  navy  yards  occupy  sites 
which  in  many  cases,  like  the  Presidio  in  San 
Francisco  and  the  navy  yards  of  Brooklyn  and 
Boston,  have  become  very  valuable.  Many 
cities  have  costly  city  halls,  sclioolhouses  are 
built  in  the  smallest  school  districts,  and  police 
stations  and  engine-houses  make  up  an  enor- 
mously valuable  property. 

One  of  the  most  important  classes  of  real 
estate  is  the  parks,  playgrounds,  and  boule- 
vards, in  many  cases  acquired  when  land  was 
cheap,  now  lying  in  the  midst  of  thickly  built 
quarters.  All  three  types  of  government,  na- 
tional, state  and  local,  have  such  pleasure 
grounds,  varying  in  size  from  the  Yellowstone 
National  Park  and  the  Palisades  along  the 
Hudson  to  the  little  common  of  a New  England 
town. 

In  acquiring  public  real  estate  the  right 
to  condemn  land  by  eminent  domain  (see)  is 
essential,  though  tracts  are  frequently  bought 
by  mutual  agreement. 

Productive  Property  in  the  United  States.— 
Few  efforts  are  made  to  set  on  foot  public  en- 
terprises which  shall  return  a profit.  A great 


106 


PUBLIC  PURPOSES  OF  TAXATION— PUBLIC  RECORDS 


exception  is  in  the  field  of  water  supply,  for 
which  the  rates  are  commonly  sufficient  to  ex- 
tinguish the  cost  of  the  enterprise  in  the  course 
of  years;  but  American  municipalities  are  ob- 
liged from  time  to  time  to  extend  their  water- 
works both  in  the  enlargment  of  the  supply 
and  in  its  distribution — and  it  is  doubtful 
whether  any  such  can  actually  show  a credit 
balance  for  the  conduct  of  its  waterworks. 
Some  cities  have  municipal  gas  works  (see 
Municipal  Ownership)  which  are  seldom  prof- 
itable in  the  long  run;  and  many  more  have 
municipal  light  and  power  works  upon  which  at 
least  a paper  profit  appears.  Two  cities 
(New  Orleans  and  Cincinnati)  own  railroads. 
The  Cincinnati  Southern  road  has  sunk  about 
$20,000,000;  the  other  is  a belt  line  the 
productivity  of  which  has  not  yet  developed. 

Many  foreign  cities  realize  large  sums  from 
breaking  new  streets  through  contracted  quar- 
ters, taking  the  whole  area  affected,  readjust- 
ing the  street  lines,  and  selling  the  improved 
lots.  This  is  the  means  by  which  Paris  has 
been  rebuilt;  but  only  very  few  American  cities 
have  received  authority  to  engage  in  a real 
estate  business  of  this  kind. 

Supplies  and  Munitions  of  War. — Local  gov- 
ernments often  own  road  machinery  and  fire 
engines:  some  cities  have  plants  for  prepar- 
ing road  material;  and  schools  and  other  pub- 
lic institutions  keep  a stock  of  supplies,  such 
as  stationery,  furniture  and  fuel.  All  the 
states  have  some  stock  of  military  clothing, 
equipment,  arms  and  ammunition,  and  own  a 
few  pieces  of  ordnance. 

The  United  States  has  a much  larger  amount 
of  property  in  supplies.  In  its  58,700  post 
offices  there  lie  constantly  small  stocks  of  sta- 
tionery; there  is  also  an  equipment  of  mail 
bags  and  other  paraphernalia.  In  the  depart- 
ments in  Washington  there  is  a similar  accu- 
mulation of  material,  but  the  largest  accumula- 
tion of  government  property  exists  in  military 
supplies;  the  arsenals  contain  machinery  and 
stocks  of  weapons,  explosives,  and  ammuni- 
tion; quantities  of  military  clothing  are  kept 
on  hand  and  also  a supply  of  food  for  the 
Army  and  Navy.  The  Government  books  do  not 
show  the  value  of  this  moveable  property,  but 
it  is  not  less  than  $100,000,000. 

Neither  the  states  nor  smaller  localities  have 
public  vessels,  except  a few  municipal  ferry 
boats  and  tugs  for  health  officers;  but  the 
United  States  owns,  in  addition  to  other  craft, 
a fleet  of  over  150  naval  vessels,  and  the  invest- 
ment in  this  class  of  property  is  constantly 
rising. 

Defects  of  the  System. — The  main  trouble 
with  public  property  in  the  United  States  is 
that  it  is  carelessly  and  improvidently  used. 
An  immense  mineral  value  lying  below  the 
surface  of  former  public  lands  has  gone  into 
private  ownership;  the  forests  which  are  a very 
important  federal  property,  and  which  the 
states  are  now  acquiring  by  purchase  or  gift, 
105 


are  as  yet  crudely  administered;  supplies  are 
not  properly  accounted  for.  Almost  no  govern- 
ment of  any  kind  takes  the  precaution  followed 
by  a cautious  business  man  of  making  an  inven- 
tory of  its  property  every  year.  Some  cities 
have  not  even  a register  of  municipal  real 
estate,  and  condemned  property  is  sold  in  an 
improvident  and  irregular  way.  In  fact,  the 
ordinary  American  conception  of  public  prop- 
erty is,  in  general,  that  it  is  an  adjunct  to  the 
regular  public  service;  engine-houses,  school- 
houses  and  arsenals  are  looked  upon  merely 
as  agencies  for  protection  from  fire,  for  educa- 
tion, and  for  the  supply  of  the  army,  and  not 
as  pieces  of  property  which  might  be  turned 
from  one  use  to  another;  and  the  condition  of 
which  is  a matter  of  public  concern. 

See  Conservation;  Currency;  Hospitals, 
Public;  Museums,  Public;  Parks  and  Boul- 
evards; Public  Domain;  Public  Utilities; 
Public  Works,  National,  State  and  Munic- 
ipal; Purchase  of  Public  Supplies;  Rail- 
roads, Public  Ownership  of;  Real  Estate, 
Public  Ownership  of;  Roads;  Streets;  and 
under  Public  Lands. 

References:  Com.  on  Econ.  and  Effic.,  “Re- 
port, Dec.  15,  1911,”  in  House  Docs.,  62  Cong., 
2 Sess.,  No.  670  (1912)  ; U.  S.  Census  Bureau, 
Statistics  of  Cities  Having  a Population  of 
over  30,000  (1902  to  date)  ; A.  B.  Hart,  Actual 
Govt.  (1909),  § 181;  D.  Kinley,  Independent 
Treasury  of  the  U.  S.  (1893);  J.  B. 
McCrellis  (compiler),  Mil.  Reservations,  Nat. 
Mil.  Parks  and  Nat.  Cemeteries,  Title 
and  Jurisdiction  (rev.  ed.,  1907);  Na- 
tional Park  Conference,  Annual  Proceedings 
(1911  to  date)  ; H.  S.  Burrage,  Gettysburg  and 
Lincoln  (1906);  J.  R.  Bartlett,  Soldiers’  Nat. 
Cemetery  at  Gettysburg  (1874);  George  Hess, 
Hist,  of  Antietam  Nat.  Cemetery  (1890)  ; U. 
S.  Quartermaster  Gen.,  Regulations  for  Gov- 
ernment of  National  Cemeteries  (1911)  ; U.  S. 
Secretary  of  the  Interior,  General  Information 
regarding  Yellowstone  National  Park  (1912), 
Yosemite  National  Park  (1912),  Sequoia  and 
General  Grant  National  Parks  (1912),  Mt.  Ra- 
nier  Nat.  Park  (1912),  Mesa  Verde  Nat.  Park 
(1912),  Glacier  Nat.  Park  (1912),  Casa  Grande 
Ruin  (1913),  Crater  Lake  Nat.  Park  (1912), 
Laws  Relating  to  Yellowstone  Nat.  Parle 
(1908),  Hot  Springs  Reservation  (1883),  Gla- 
cier Nat.  Park  (1911)  ; J.  I.  Mitchell,  The  Na- 
tional Home  (1891)  ; C.  E.  Hay,  U.  S.  Mil. 
Reservations,  Nat.  Cemeteries,  and  Mil.  Parks 
(1904);  John  Muir,  Our  National  Parks 
(1901)  ; D.  W.  Reed,  National  Cemeteries  and 
National  Mil.  Parks  (1898). 

Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

PUBLIC  PURPOSES  OF  TAXATION.  See 

Taxation,  Public  Purposes  of. 

PUBLIC  RECORDS.  The  English  have  al- 
ways been  careful  to  preserve  their  documents 
and  records,  partly  because  private  property 


107 


PUBLIC  REVENUE,  COLLECTION  OF— PUBLIC  SERVICE  COMMISSIONS 


and  corporate  and  municipal  rights  were  so 
dependent  upon  a preservation  of  muniments; 
partly  from  a veneration  for  the  past.  The 
colonies  kept  up  the  habit,  both  for  colonial 
and  local  purposes;  and  followed  the  English 
practice  of  keeping  a journal  of  the  proceedings 
of  deliberative  bodies,  such  as  the  legislatures, 
town  meetings,  county  courts,  the  New  Eng- 
land Confederation,  and  the  Continental  Con- 
gresses. 

All  public  records  are  public  property  (see) 
and  no  one  can  obtain  a title  to  the  documents 
by  long  possession ; but  many  executives  have 
looked  upon  it  as  their  right  to  take  away  the 
correspondence  and  other  papers  accumulated 
during  their  term  of  office ; or  have  made  a 
distinction  between  private  and  public  corres- 
pondence, so  that  the  records  are  impaired. 

Later  generations  have  been  less  regardful 
of  the  sanctity  of  the  records  of  their  ances- 
tors. Massachusetts,  Connecticut  and  New 
York,  are  among  the  few  states  that  have  well 
organized  archives  going  back  to  the  colonial 
period.  Many  significant  documents  are  neg- 
lected, fall  into  decay,  or  are  sold  for  waste 
paper.  ' 

Since  the  Revolution,  parts  of  the  early  pub- 
lic records  have  been  gathered  up  and  printed 
by  enterprising  states,  and  some  current  rec- 
ords are  printed  at  or  near  the  time  when 
they  are  made.  All  the  states  (except  Rhode 
Island)  print  the  journals  of  their  two  houses, 
their  statutes  and  the  decisions  of  their  Su- 
preme courts ; some  of  them  have  series  of 
reports  of  heads  of  state  departments  and 
other  public  officials.  The  cities  rarely  print 
their  journals  except  in  a few  cases  where 
there  is  an  official  newspaper,  but  they  issue 
plenteous  financial  reports,  and  reports  of  their 
principal  public  services  from  year  to  year. 

The  manuscript  records  of  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment are  enormous  in  extent,  notwithstand- 
ing destructive  tires  in  1814  and  again,  in 
the  Treasury  Department,  in  1833.  Parts  of 
these  records  have  been  transferred  to  the 
Library  of  Congress ; and  pressure  has  been  ex- 
ercised to  secure  an  archive  building. 

The  printed  records  of  the  Government  in- 
clude journals  of  the  two  houses,  statutes,  re- 
ports of  the  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
and  a complex  mass  of  reports  of  committees, 
of  executive  officials,  and  other  matter.  Print- 
ed editions  of  the  statutes,  both  federal  and 


state,  are  by  law  made  the  official  text,  not- 
withstanding any  variations  from  the  original 
manuscript  rolls.  In  addition  the  Federal 
Government,  down  to  1873  subsidized  pub- 
lications of  its  debates,  and  since  that  time 
has  issued  an  official  Congressional  Record, 
containing  those  debates.  No  state  or  city 
legislature  is  thus  reported. 

See  Debates  in  Legislature;  Messages, 
Executive;  Publications,  Governmental; 
Reports,  Judicial;  Reports  of  Committees. 

References:  Committee  on  Documentary  Hist. 
Publications  of  U.  S.  Gov.,  “Report”  in  <S 'en. 
Docs.,  60  Cong.,  2 Sess.,  No.  714  (1909); 
lists  and  bibliography  in  Clianning,  Hart  and 
Turner,  Guide  to  Am.  Hist.  (1912),  §§  42-44. 

A.  B.  Hart. 

PUBLIC  REVENUE,  COLLECTION  OF.  See 

Revenue,  Public,  Collection  of. 

PUBLIC  REVENUE,  SOURCES  OF.  See 

Revenue,  Public  Sources  of. 

PUBLIC  ROADS,  OFFICE  OF.  The  Office  of 
Public  Roads  is  one  of  the  bureaus  of  the  De- 
partment, of  Agriculture  (see  Agriculture, 
Department  of).  The  Office  has  no  general 
powers  of  road  administration,  construction, 
or  maintenance,  but  confines  its  activity  to 
educational  and  scientific  work.  It  gives  in- 
struction in  methods  of  road-building,  through 
the  medium  of  short  object-lesson  roads,  built 
at  local  expense,  under  the  supervision  of  an 
engineer  from  the  office,  furnishes  advice  to 
local  road  authorities  upon  request,  and  ar- 
ranges for  lectures  and  the  supply  of  informa- 
tion on  good  roads  throughout  the  United 
States.  It  also  tests  road  materials,  and  un- 
dertakes other  scientific  investigations  relating 
to  the  improvement  of  roads,  especially  in 
rural  districts.  See  Roads.  Reference:  De- 
partment of  Agriculture,  Annual  Reports. 

A.  N.  H. 

PUBLIC  SCHOOLS.  See  Schools,  Public. 

PUBLIC  SERVICE.  A term  denoting  both 
the  appointive  and  elective  official  positions  in 
government.  It  also  applies  to  military  serv- 
ice. It  is  sometimes  used  to  denote  the  duties 
of  such  service  performed  in  an  honorable 
manner.  0.  C.  H. 


PUBLIC  SERVICE  COMMISSIONS 


Public  service  commissions  are  of  two  kinds, 
state  and  municipal.  Although  the  two  classes 
are  created  for  the  same  general  purpose  and 
possess  certain  characteristics  in  common, 
they  are  so  different  in  functions  that  they 
should  be  treated  separately. 


State  Commissions. — Although  commissions 
having  jurisdiction  over  particular  classes  of 
corporations  had  been  established  earlier,  the 
New  York  statute  of  1907  was  the  first  to 
create  a “public  service  commission.”  When 
Governor  Hughes  took  office  in  New  York  in 


10S 


PUBLIC  SERVICE  COMMISSIONS 


1905,  he  stated  that  the  time  had  come  for  a 
revision  of  the  statutes  relating  to  the  regula- 
tion of  public  service  corporations;  for  the 
extension  of  the  field  of  control,  and  for  the 
consolidation  of  the  various  authorities  having 
to  do  with  its  various  phases.  He  urged  upon 
the  legislature  the  enactment  of  a law  carry- 
ing out  these  general  recommendations,  and 
although  there  was  considerable  opposition 
from  the  corporations  upon  the  one  hand  and 
certain  politicians  upon  the  other,  the  Public 
Service  Commissions  Law  of  1907  was  finally 
adopted  with  singular  unanimity,  only  five 
votes  being  recorded  against  it  in  both 
branches  of  a legislature  having  a total  mem- 
bership of  200. 

Following  the  example  of  New  York,  other 
states  have  established  similar  commissions. 
In  some  instances,  (e.  g.,  Vermont  and  Ohio) 
they  are  called  public  service  commissions; 
in  others,  public  utilities  commissions  (e.  g., 
Connecticut  and  Kansas)  ; elsewhere,  corpora- 
tion commissions  (e.  g.,  Virginia  and  Okla- 
homa) ; and  also  railroad  commissions  ( e . g., 
Wisconsin  and  Georgia).  Although  varying 
greatly  in  organization,  powers  and  duties, 
there  is  no  fundamental  difference  represented 
by  their  differences  in  name.  Most  commis- 
sions have  developed  out  of  or  been  formed 
about  the  railroad  commissions  found  in  prac- 
tically every  state. 

Scope. — Generally  speaking,  common  carri- 
ers, and  particularly  steam  railroads,  were 
the  first  public  utilities  to  be  subjected  to 
public  regulation,  largely  for  the  reasons  that 
local  authorities  were  unable  to  deal  effective- 
ly with  them ; that  the  abuses  which  had 
grown  up  were  more  numerous  and  more  wide- 
spread than  in  other  fields ; and  that  the  com- 
mercial development  of  the  country  was  more 
dependent  upon  transportation  facilities  than 
upon  any  other  public  utility.  Consequently, 
at  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  century, 
nearly  every  state  in  the  United  States  had  a 
railroad  commission.  These  commissions  were 
dissimilar  in  many  regards,  but  generally 
their  functions  were  limited  to  railroads  and 
other  common  carriers  connected  therewith, 
street  railways  occasionally  being  included. 

Recently,  the  movement  for  regulation  and 
control  of  all  public  service  corporations  has 
gained  considerable  headway.  Massachusetts 
was  the  pioneer  state  with  its  Gas  and  Electric 
Light  Commission  of  1885;  but  for  fifteen 
years  Massachusetts  was  practically  the  only 
state  which  provided  for  effective  control  of 
lighting  companies.  In  certain  states  the 
movement  for  public  regulation  has  resulted 
in  the  extension  of  the  functions  of  the  rail- 
road commission  to  include  other  corporations, 
so  that  the  title  railroad  commission  may  give 
no  adequate  idea  of  the  functions  performed  or 
of  the  corporations  under  its  jurisdiction.  In 
other  states,  the  railroad  commission  has  been 
abolished  or  reorganized  and  given  a new  title 


(see  instances  mentioned  above).  In  others, 
the  functions  distributed  among  various  de- 
partments have  been  transferred  to  one  de- 
partment and  its  jurisdiction  extended  to 
many  matters  theretofore  outside  of  the  field 
of  supervision. 

New  York. — In  New  York  two  public  service 
commissions  were  created.  One,  officially 
known  as  the  Public  Service  Commission  for 
the  first  district,  was  given  general  jurisdic- 
tion over  public  service  corporations  in  New 
York  City,  although  in  certain  respects  its 
jurisdiction  extends  beyond  city  boundaries. 
The  other,  officially  known  as  the  Public  Serv- 
ice Commission  for  the  second  district,  was 
given  general  jurisdiction  over  the  rest  of  the 
state,  although  in  certain  respects  its  jurisdic- 
tion extends  within  the  City  of  New  York. 
In  addition  to  the  regulation  of  railroad,  street 
railroad  and  other  common  carrier  corpora- 
tions, and  gas,  electric  light,  telephone  and 
telegraph  companies,  the  Public  Service  Com- 
mission for  the  first  district  may  construct, 
equip,  lease  and  operate  rapid  transit  lines  or 
award  franchises  to  private  corporations,  sub- 
ject to  the  approval  of  the  city  authorities. 

Functions. — Generally  speaking,  public  serv- 
ice commissions  and  the  other  state  boards 
having  a similar  title,  supervise  and  regulate 
the  principal  public  service  corporations.  Al- 
though, naturally,  the  functions  of  the  various 
commissions  vary  greatly  in  detail,  the  more 
important  have  power:  (1)  to  fix  maximum 
rates  charged  for  various  classes  of  service; 

(2)  to  prescribe  the  character  and  kind  of 
service  rendered,  e.  g.,  number  of  trains  and 
cars  operated,  time  schedules,  speed,  quality 
and  pressure  of  gas,  quality  of  water  supplied; 

(3)  to  order  repairs,  improvements  and 
changes  in  plant,  such  as  tracks,  terminals, 
stations,  motive  power,  gas  works,  electric 
lines,  telephone  and  telegraph  systems,  water 
supplies,  etc.,  in  order  that  the  company  may 
have  the  proper  equipment  with  which  to  give 
adequate  service;  (4)  to  require  the  installa- 
tion of  devices  to  promote  health,  safety  and 
convenience  to  the  public,  such  as  automatic 
couplers,  air  brakes,  fenders,  wheelguards, 
signal  systems,  ventilation  facilities,  etc.;  (5) 
to  investigate  accidents  and  to  determine 
whether  changes  in  plant,  equipment  or 
method  of  operation  should  be  adopted  in  or- 
der to  prevent  repetition;  (6)  to  receive  and 
investigate  complaints  by  aggrieved  persons 
and  to  order  such  relief  as  the  facts  warrant; 
(7)  to  establish  uniform  systems  of  accounts 
and  prescribe  the  manner  in  which  records 
shall  be  kept,  including  the  form  of  annual, 
quarterly  and  other  periodic  reports;  (8)  to 
test  gas  and  electric  meters;  (9)  to  authorize 
the  issuance  of  stock,  bonds  and  other  finan- 
cial obligations;  (10)  to  approve  franchises, 
rights  and  privileges  which  have  just  been 
granted  or  which  have  not  heretofore  been  ex- 
ercised, including  the  right  to  determine 


PUBLIC  SERVICE  CORPORATIONS 


whether  convenience  and  necessity  require  the 
construction  and  operation  of  transportation 
lines  and  other  means  of  communication,  light- 
ing systems  and  water  works ; (11)  to  examine 
into  the  general  condition  and  management  of 
public  service  corporations  and  to  keep  in- 
formed as  to  their  methods,  practices  and  regu- 
lations, in  order  to  enforce  the  fulfillment  of 
obligations  to  the  public  and  the  proper  man- 
agement of  their  property.  In  addition  a few 
commissions  have  a limited  jurisdiction  over 
municipal  plants  (e.  g.,  New  York,  Massa- 
chusetts and  particularly  Wisconsin). 

Legislative,  Judicial  and  Administrative 
Control. — It  is  apparent  that  some  of  these 
functions  are  legislative,  others  quasi-judicial 
and  others  administrative.  For  example,  the 
rate-making  authority  ordinarily  belongs  to 
the  legislative  branch,  but  the  courts  have 
held  that  the  delegation  of  such  powers  to 
administrative  bodies  is  constitutional.  Ex- 
perience has  shown  that  regulation  by  legisla- 
tive act,  by  judicial  decree  or  by  a suit  at 
law,  is  ineffective.  Legislatures  are  not  al- 
ways in  session,  in  some  states  only  once  in 
two  years;  their  problems  are  numerous  and 
varied;  they  do  not  have  the  time  or  the 
staff  of  experts  to  deal  with  corporation  prob- 
lems; their  work  must  necessarily  be  restrict- 
ed to  the  establishment  of  certain  broad  prin- 
ciples. The  application  of  these  principles 
must  be  turned  over  to  special  departments. 

The  principal  function  of  the  judiciary  is  to 
rule  upon  questions  of  law  and  not  to  estab- 
lish new  rules  of  conduct.  Judges  are  selected 
presumably  because  of  their  legal  knowledge 
and  attainments.  Familiarity  with  public 
utilities  and  the  needs  of  the  people  are  not 
within  the  usual  requirements  for  judicial 
position.  The  courts  have  no  staff  of  experts 
and  are  not  organized  to  direct  such  a staff 
if  one  were  established.  The  reasons  are 
plain,  therefore,  why  regulation  through  the 
judiciary  and  through  law  suits  did  not  prove 
satisfactory. 

A properly  organized  public  service  commis- 
sion has  a staff  of  experts;  its  members  have 
a knowledge  of  the  special  problems  with  which 
they  have  to  deal;  the  commission  is  constant- 
ly in  session;  its  attention  is  not  diverted  to 
other  and  dissimilar  matters;  and  when  it  has 
acquired  experience,  it  deals  with  corporation 
problems  promptly  and  fairly. 

Organization. — The  organization  of  commis- 
sions varies  considerably.  The  number  of 
members  is  usually  three  or  five.  Their  sal- 
aries rarely  exceed  $5,000,  but  in  New  York 
each  member  is  paid  $15,000  a year.  Terms 
of  office  usually  range  from  three  to  six  years, 
and  members  are  generally  appointed  by  the 
governor,  although  in  some  states  they  are 
elected.  The  number  of  employees  varies 
greatly.  In  the  larger  states  where  great 
powers  have  been  conferred,  there  is  a con- 
siderable staff,  consisting  of  engineers,  ac- 


countants, statisticians,  clerks  and  lawyers. 
Generally  speaking,  the  appropriations  are  too 
small  for  efficient  regulation. 

Municipal  Commissions. — Since  1908,  public 
service  commissions,  or  authorities  having  a 
similar  title,  have  been  established  in  about 
ten  cities — St.  Louis,  Kansas  City,  and  three 
other  Missouri  cities,  Denver,  Seattle,  Los 
Angeles,  Wilmington,  Del.,  and  Houston,  Tex- 
as. The  Denver  Public  Utilities  Commission 
was  established  to  acquire  and  operate  water 
works,  and  in  this  respect  differs  from  the 
authorities  in  other  cities.  Generally  speak- 
ing, these  commissions  do  not  have  authority 
to  issue  orders  or  to  exercise  the  powers  above 
stated  as  appertaining  to  state  commissions. 
Ordinarily,  they  investigate  complaints,  in- 
quire into  the  enforcement  of  franchise  pro- 
visions and  ordinances  affecting  public  service 
corporations,  recommend  rates  to  be  estab- 
lished and  regulations  as  to  service,  report 
upon  applications  for  franchises  and  superin- 
tend construction  work. 

In  a few  instances  they  have  gone  further. 
Thus  the  Wilmington  commission,  established 
under  a special  act  of  the  legislature,  has  au- 
thority to  issue  orders  requiring  safe  and  ade- 
quate service,  prescribing  an  accounting  sys- 
tem, and  fixing  rates;  and  no  franchise  may 
be  granted  without  the  commission’s  certificate 
that  it  is  necessary  and  proper  for  public  con- 
venience. The  St.  Joseph  commission  was  also 
established  under  a special  act  and  has  sim- 
ilar powers,  including  approval  of  transfers, 
assignments,  leases  or  contracts  relating  to  a 
franchise,  the  acquisition  of  stocks  and  bonds 
of  one  corporation  by  another,  and  the  is- 
suance of  bonds. 

In  two  cities  these  powers  are  vested  in  a 
single  individual.  In  the  others,  they  are 
exercised  by  a board  having  three  or  five  mem- 
bers. Their  salaries  are  not  large,  and  the 
staff  is  naturally  limited  in  numbers. 

See  Boards,  Municipal;  Charters,  Munici- 
pal; City  and  the  State;  Commission  Sys- 
tem of  City  Government;  Municipal  Govern- 
ment; Municipal  Government  in  Conti- 
nental Europe;  Municipal  Ownership, 
Functions  of;  Public  Service  Corporations; 
Railroad  Commissions,  State;  Transit  in 
Cities,  Problems  of. 

References:  M.  Thelen,  Report  on  Leading 
Railroad  and  Public  Service  Commissions 
(1911);  A.  R.  Foote,  Regulation  of  Public 
Utilities  (1911);  Laics  of  Massachusetts,  New 
York  and  Wisconsin  Regulating  Gas  and  Elec- 
tric Companies,  published  by  National  Elec- 
tric Light  Association  (1908)  ; Am.  Year 
Book,  1910,  313-316,  1911,  446-452,  1912,  280- 
283 ; B.  H.  Meyer,  “Central  Utility  Commis- 
sions and  Home  Rule,”  Am.  Pol.  Sci.  Rev., 
V,  Aug.,  1911.  Milo  R.  Maltbie. 

PUBLIC  SERVICE  CORPORATIONS.  Pub- 
lic service  corporations  (sometimes  called 


PUBLIC  SERVICE  CORPORATIONS 


quasi-public  corporations)  have  certain  char- 
acteristics of  public  or  municipal  corporations. 
They  have  also  many  of  the  essential  charac- 
teristics of  private  corporations,  e.  g.,  limited 
liability,  perpetual  existence  and  the  right 
to  sue  and  be  sued.  They  have  also  certain 
powers  and  duties  which  do  not  attach  to  pri- 
vate corporations,  although  there  is  no  sharp 
dividing  line  of  demarcation. 

Statutory  definitions  vary  (for  example, 
Ohio,  Maryland  and  Vermont  laws)  ; but  gen- 
erally speaking,  a public  service  corporation 
is  one  which  operates  a public  utility  (see) 
and  it  is  largely  the  public  character  and 
necessity  of  the  service  supplied  that  leads 
to  the  application  of  certain  rules  which  do 
not  apply  to  private  corporations.  A corpor- 
ation operating  a telephone  system  upon  pri- 
vate property  for  its  own  use  is  not  a public 
service  corporation.  On  the  other  hand,  gen- 
eral use  by  the  public  does  not  alone  define 
a public  service  corporation ; a corporation 
supplying  food  products  performs  a general 
function,  but  it  is  not  considered  a public 
service  corporation. 

Eminent  Domain. — The  right  to  take  land 
necessary  for  the  service  is  another  character- 
istic. A railroad  corporation  would  be  practic- 
ally helpless  without  such  right,  for  the  refusal 
of  a few  owners  to  sell  their  property  might 
effectually  block  the  construction  of  the  road. 
The  public  necessity  and  convenience  of  trans- 
portation systems  is  so  great  and  the  exist- 
ence and  development  of  a community  so 
largely  depend  upon  adequate  transportation 
that  it  is  considered  proper  to  clothe  a public 
service  corporation  with  the  right  to  condemn 
private  property  for  public  uses.  This  power 
is  not  vital  to  all  public  service  corpo- 
rations, for  many  need  private  property  only 
to  a limited  degree;  gas  and  electric  com- 
panies often  do  not  possess  such  right,  for 
they  can  usually  secure  what  land  is  needed 
without  recourse  to  condemnation  proceedings. 

Franchises. — Usually  a public  service  cor- 
poration must  have  a special  local  franchise 
in  addition  to  its  corporate  charter.  The  right 
to  be  a corporation  does  not  necessarily  con- 
fer any  authority  to  occupy  the  streets,  high- 
ways or  public  places,  and  most  public  serv- 
ices involve  such  use.  But  neither  street  use 
nor  a special  franchise  is  absolutely  necessary 
to  a public  service  corporation:  express  com- 
panies usually  operate  without  such  franchise, 
and  common  carriers  may  operate  wholly  on 
private  land. 

Obligations. — Because  of  the  public  nature 
of  the  industry  and  the  special  powers  con- 
ferred, public  service  corporations  have  im- 
portant duties  and  are  subject  to  restrictions 
that  do  not  apply  to  private  corporations 
generally.  In  the  first  place,  they  must  serve 
everyone  who  complies  with  reasonable  regu- 
lations. The  private  corporation  may  refuse 
to  supply  a person  because  its  managers  may 


not  like  his  religion,  race  or  habits;  but  the 
public  service  corporation  must  serve  all  in- 
dividuals regardless  of  personal  likes  or  dis- 
likes. Passengers,  shippers  and  consumers  may 
be  classified  and  regulations  may  be  enforced 
to  protect  the  interests  of  the  corporation,  but 
this  power  may  not  be  used  to  deny  service  to 
anyone  or  to  any  class. 

Public  service  corporations  must  provide 
adequate  facilities.  The  private  corporation 
has  no  such  duty.  The  grocer  is  under  no 
legal  obligation  to  provide  an  adequate  supply 
of  potatoes;  and  if  he  does  not,  the  citizen 
has  no  legal  remedy.  He  must  raise  his  own 
potatoes  or  secure  them  from  some  other 
grocer.  A gas  company,  upon  the  other  hand, 
must  provide  sufficient  gas  to  supply  every- 
one applying.  The  consumer  has  the  right  to 
legal  redress  if  the  company  is  careless  and 
indifferent  as  to  the  supply. 

All  charges  must  be  reasonable,  and  excessive 
or  extortionate  rates  are  illegal ; a private  cor- 
poration may  ordinarily  exact  all  it  can  col- 
lect, particularly  if  there  is  actual  and  free 
competition.  A public  service  corporation  may 
not  overcharge,  even  though  it  may  have  a 
monopoly. 

Further,  it  may  not  discriminate  or  grant 
undue  preference.  This  principle  does  not 
mean  that  everyone  must  be  charged  the  same 
rate  or  that  there  must  be  one  rate  for  every 
commodity  or  kind  of  service.  Classification  of 
service  and  consumers  is  permissible,  provided 
such  classification  does  not  result  in  discrimi- 
nation or  preferential  treatment.  But  when  a 
classification  has  been  made  which  is  proper, 
every  person,  community,  or  locality  within 
each  class  must  be  charged  exactly  the  same 
rate  and  no  variance  is  permissible.  The  pri- 
vate corporation  incurs  no  legal  penalty  when 
it  violates  such  a principle  and  may  serve 
one  consumer  free  while  charging  another 
under  the  same  circumstances. 

Such  are  the  principal  features  of  public 
service  corporations.  But  the  list  of  specific 
public  services  covered  is  enlarging  from  de- 
cade to  decade,  for  functions  which  were  once 
considered  private  and  which  were  defined  by 
contract  are  now  regulated  by  law  and  ad- 
ministrative order.  In  essence  the  duties  and 
obligations  of  public  service  corporations  are 
not  new,  but  only  in  recent  times  have  they 
been  worked  out  in  such  detail  and  made  to 
apply  to  such  a variety  of  services. 

Publicity. — Two  public  demands  have  been 
prominent  in  recent  years,  of  which  the  first 
is  publicity  (see).  It  is  ordinarily  impossible 
for  the  public  to  secure  accurate  information 
regarding  the  operations  of  private  companies. 
Even  stockholders  are  not  able  to  get  full  in- 
formation, and  it  is  not  considered  desirable 
that  a private  corporation  should  be  required 
to  make  public  all  of  its  business  relations. 
A public  service  corporation  has  unusual 
corporate  powers,  and  has  public  duties  to 


111 


PUBLIC  USE— PUBLIC  UTILITIES 


perform.  Naturally  neither  the  public  which 
it  serves  nor  the  governmental  authorities,  who 
are  supposed  to  keep  it  within  proper  hounds, 
are  able  to  act  wisely  and  intelligently  unless 
they  have  complete  and  accurate  information. 
It  is  advantageous  also  to  a corporation  which 
is  conducting  its  business  properly  to  have 
the  facts  placed  before  the  public.  The  refusal 
to  give  information  and  protests  against  pub- 
licity usually  inspire  suspicion  and  invite  at- 
tack. The  corporations  which  have  received 
most  consideration  and  have  been  most  fairly 
dealt  with  are  those  who  have  followed  a policy 
of  publicity  and  frankness. 

Government  Regulations. — The  second  great 
public  demand  is  for  governmental  regulation, 
and  within  the  last  decade  it  has  spread  wide- 
ly and  rapidly.  Regulation  by  statute  and 
judicial  decision  have  been  found  inadequate 
to  protect  the  interests  of  the  public,  and 
many  states  have  established  administrative 
bodies  for  that  purpose.  Public  service  cor- 
porations have  existed  so  long  without  ade- 
quate regulation  and  the  laisscz  faire  doctrine 
has  had  such  a strong  hold  that  the  extent  of 
regulation  has  not  kept  pace  with  the  need 
for  it.  In  ordinary  business,  competition  sup- 
plemented by  statutes  requiring  competitors  to 
keep  within  certain  bounds,  has  been  considered 
sufficiently  forceful  to  protect  the  public 
against  poor  service,  high  rates  and  improper 
treatment  in  other  directions.  The  movement 
towards  monopoly,  however,  has  been  so  strong 
and  the  elimination  of  competition  has  been 
so  complete  that  the  state  has  had  to  step  in. 
Even  competing  services,  such  as  gas  and  elec- 
tricity, have  frequently  been  brought  under 
a single  management,  and  there  are  a number 
of  holding  companies  which  control  public  serv- 
vice  corporations  scattered  throughout  the 
United  States.  In  the  face  of  such  a general 
and  widespread  movement,  the  individual  has 
been  helpless  without  the  aid  of  governmental 
supervision. 

See  Business,  Government  Restriction  on; 
Corporations,  Bureau  of;  Franchises  to 
Corporations;  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission; Laissez  Faire;  Municipal  Owner- 
ship; Public  Service  Commissions;  Pub- 
licity of  Corporate  Accounts;  Railroads, 
Public  Ownership  of. 

References;  Bruce  Wyman,  Special  Law  Gov- 
erning Public  Service  Corporations  (1011); 
Ivins  and  Mason,  Control  of  Public  Utilities 
(1908).  Milo  R.  Maltbie. 

PUBLIC  USE.  Some  constitutional  ques- 
tions as  to  the  acquisition,  deprivation  or  con- 
trol of  property  depend  for  their  solution  on 
the  question  whether  the  use  or  purpose  for 
which  it  is  taken  or  acquired  is  public. 

(1)  The  owner  of  private  property  may 
be  deprived  of  its  ownership  or  use  without 
his  consent  under  the  exercise  of  the  power 
of  eminent  domain  only  where  it  is  taken 


for  or  appropriated  to  a public  purpose  (see 
Eminent  Domain). 

(2)  The  power  of  taxation  is  a sovereign 
power,  the  exercise  of  which  results  in  a 
forced  appropriation  to  the  public  use  of  pri- 
vate property,  and  such  appropriation  can 
only  be  justified  within  the  proper  limits  of 
the  taxing  power  when  the  purpose  is  pub- 
lic. Otherwise  such  appropriation  constitutes 
a deprivation  in  violation  of  due  process  of 
law  (sec  Lo an  Association  vs  Topeka). 

(3)  Private  property  devoted  by  its  owner 
to  a public  use  becomes  subject  in  various 
ways  to  governmental  regulation,  especially 
with  reference  to  the  rates  of  charge  which 
may  be  made  for  the  use  of  the  property  thus 
employed  ( see  Munn  vs.  Illinois;  Prices 
and  Charges ) . 

The  purposes  or  uses  which  have  been  con- 
sidered to  be  public  in  these  three  groups  of 
cases  are  not  capable  of  very  exact  definition 
nor  are  they  the  same  in  one  group  as  in 
another.  They  are  the  subject  primarily  of 
the  exercise  of  legislative  discretion  under 
general  constitutional  limitations  relating  to 
the  exercise  of  the  sovereign  power  over  indi- 
viduals and  property. 

Other  proper  interference  with  private  prop- 
erty amounting  even  to  a complete  destruction 
or  deprivation  of  a beneficial  use  may  be  in- 
volved in  the  exercise  by  the  states  or  the 
LTnited  States  of  their  essential  powers  of 
sovereignty. 

See  Due  Process  of  Law;  Nuisances, 
Abatement  of;  Police  Power;  Property, 
Rights  of. 

Reference:  F.  J.  Goodnow,  Social  Reform  and 
the  Constitution  (1911),  264-274. 

Emlin  McClain. 

PUBLIC  UTILITIES.  This  phrase  has  re- 
cently been  coined  and  has  as  yet  no  clear 
definition  except  as  defined  in  certain  statutes 
for  a special  purpose  as  in  New  Jersey  and 
California.  Ordinarily,  it  includes  railroads, 
street  railroads  and  other  common  carriers, 
water  works,  gas  works,  electricity  supplies, 
and  telegraph  and  telephone  systems — plants 
used  by  the  ‘public  for  the  transportation  of 
persons,  property  and  communications,  with 
specific  compensation.  Streets,  sewers  and 
bridges  are  not  ordinarily  included,  for  a specif- 
ic charge  is  not  made  for  the  service  rendered, 
although  in  a broad  sense  they  are  public 
utilities;  but  where  a charge  is  made,  like  a 
bridge  toll,  they  are  properly  included  under 
the  definition. 

Public  use  is  an  important  element,  for  a 
railroad  operated  wholly  upon  private  prop- 
erty to  which  the  public  has  no  access  is  not 
a public  utility.  The  existence  or  non-exist- 
ence of  a franchise  is  not  a determining  char- 
acteristic, although  most  public  utilities  can- 
not legally  be  operated  without  it;  but  there 
are  exceptions,  such  as  express  companies. 


PUBLIC  UTILITIES,  VALUATION  OF— PUBLIC  WORKS 


which  ordinarily  have  no  franchise.  Use  of 
the  public  highways  is  not  definitive.  A rail- 
road may  be  operated  exclusively  upon  pri- 
vate property,  not  even  crossing  a street,  but 
in  ordinary  parlance  it  is  considered  a public 
utility.  Likewise,  a warehouse  for  the  storage 
and  transfer  of  grain  is  in  certain  states  in- 
cluded among  public  utilities.  The  method  of 
operation  is  unimportant,  for  many  utilities 
are  operated  directly  by  public  authorities 
while  others  are  in  the  hands  of  private  corpo- 
rations subject  to  governmental  control  to  a 
greater  or  lesser  degree. 

See  Express  Service,  Regulation  of;  Fran- 
chises to  Corporations  ; Lighting,  Electric  ; 
Public  Service  Corporations;  Railroads, 


Regulation  of;  Railroads,  Street;  Tele- 
graph ; Telephones  ; Transit  in  Cities,  Prob- 
lems of;  Water  Supply. 

References:  Bruce  Wyman,  The  Special  Law 
Governing  Public  Service  Corporations  (1911)  ; 
E.  W.  Bemis,  Municipal  Monopolies  (1899). 

M.  R.  Maltbie. 

PUBLIC  UTILITIES,  VALUATION  OF 

See  Valuation  of  Public  Utilities. 

PUBLIC  WORKS,  BOARDS  OF.  See  Boards 
of  Public  Works. 

PUBLIC  WORKS,  CONTRACT  SYSTEM  OF. 

See  Contract  System  of  Public  Works. 


PUBLIC  WORKS,  NATIONAL,  STATE,  AND  MUNICIPAL 


Variety. — The  term  “public  works”  may  be 
defined  as  physical  constructions  or  improve- 
ments carried  out  by  governmental  agency  for 
the  benefit  of  the  public.  Works  of  this  kind 
are  inaugurated  and  prosecuted  by  every  type 
of  public  administrative  body  from  the  Con- 
gress of  the  United  States  to  the  village 
council,  acting  directly  or  through  authorized 
agencies. 

The  United  States  Government  has  been  en- 
gaged in  enterprises  of  this  kind  almost  from 
the  time  of  its  organization.  The  public  works 
of  the  United  States  Government  have  been 
of  a varied  character  and  are  administered 
by  different  departments.  Military  fortifi- 
cations and  tiver  and  harbor  improvements 
are  under  the  charge  of  the  War  Department; 
the  construction  of  naval  vessels  under  the 
Navy  Department;  the  construction  and  main- 
tenance of  lighthouses  and  of  public  buildings 
under  the  Treasury  Department ; and  the  recent 
extensive  irrigation  and  desert  reclamation 
work  under  the  Department  of  the  Interior. 

Of  the  several  kinds  of  public  work  men- 
tioned, the  improvement  of  the  rivers  and  har- 
bors of  the  country  is  perhaps  of  most  im- 
portance and  interest  to  the  public. 

Constitutional  Question. — The  authority  of 
the  national  government  to  engage  in  the  con- 
struction of  lighthouses,  the  improvement  of 
rivers  and  harbors  and  other  public  projects 
is  usually  derived  from  that  clause  of  the 
Constitution  which  confers  upon  Congress  the 
right,  “to  regulate  commerce  with  foreign 
nations,  and  among  the  several  states,  and 
with  the  Indian  tribes”  (Art.  I,  Sec.  viii,  3). 
It  has  generally  been  accepted  that  this  clause 
implies  the  right  and  duty  of  the  national 
government  to  control  the  physical  agencies 
and  facilities  of  foreign  and  interstate  com- 
merce, including  the  development  and  improve- 
ment of  rivers  and  harbors,  so  far  as  they  are 
an  element  in  such  commerce. 


The  question  whether  the  national  govern- 
ment may  undertake  public  improvements  that 
are  purely  intrastate,  or  that  may  be  main- 
ly for  the  benefit  of  a part  of  the  nation  only, 
was  raised  and  vigorously  discussed  in  the 
early  history  of  the  government.  One  political 
party  strongly  advocated  the  right  and  duty 
of  the  Government  to  engage  in  the  construc- 
tion of  canals  and  highways  in  the  interior 
of  the  country  that  had  little  or  no  relation  to 
foreign  or  interstate  commerce,  or  which  were 
wholly  within  the  limits  of  a single  state; 
while  the  other  party  stood  for  a strict  inter- 
pretation of  the  language  of  the  Constitution, 
as  they  understood  it. 

Up  to  1829  Congress  was  not  far  from  even- 
ly divided  upon  the  question;  numerous  acts 
were  passed  appropriating  money  for  such 
internal  improvements,  some  of  which  were 
approved  and  some  vetoed  by  the  different 
Presidents;  for  the  famous  Cumberland  Road 
(see)  appropriations  aggregating  about  seven 
millions  of  dollars,  were  made  from  time  to 
time.  Both  Presidents  Madison  and  Monroe 
in  veto  messages  entered  into  exhaustive  dis- 
cussions of  the  constitutional  question  in- 
volved. 

Appropriations  for  National  Improvements. 

— From  1829  to  1860  it  semed  to  be  concede! 
generally  that  the  strict  construction  view  was 
right;  but  soon  after  the  close  of  the  Civil 
War,  Congress  began  making  liberal  appro- 
priations for  river  and  harbor  improvements, 
without  strict  regard  to  whether  they  were 
interstate  or  intrastate  in  character,  and  in 
time  Congress  became  very  lavish  with  such 
appropriations.  The  controlling  motive  of 
many  congressmen  seemed  to  be  to  obtain 
the  largest  possible  amount  of  money  to  be 
expended  in  their  own  districts,  with  little 
regard  to  the  total  cost  of  the  improvements 
or  their  adequacy  for  any  useful  purpose.  The 
practice  of  members  joining  their  efforts  to 


113 


PUBLIC  WORKS,  NATIONAL,  STATE,  AND  MUNICIPAL 


secure  desired  local  appropriations,  commonly 
called  “log-rolling,”  was  freely  resorted  to  in 
the  effort  of  each  to  obtain  as  large  a share 
of  the  spoils  as  possible.  In  hundreds  of 
cases  the  money  thus  appropriated  and  expend- 
ed was  practically  squandered,  and  served 
no  public  purposes.  Little  or  no  permanent 
benefit,  even  local,  resulted  from  many  of 
these  hastily  planned  and  executed  projects, 
and  many  of  them  have  long  since  passed  into 
desuetude  and  oblivion. 

Furthermore,  the  appropriations  for  worthy 
projects  were  generally  inadequate,  partly  at 
least,  because  of  the  dissipation  of  the  ag- 
gregate appropriations  available  among  petty 
and  ill  considered  projects;  and  the  works  of 
real  importance  were  hampered  and  delayed 
by  the  want  of  funds  to  carry  them  on  prop- 
erly, so  that  in  the  end  they  cost  far  more 
than  they  should. 

Eventually,  public  opinion  forced  upon  Con- 
gress a more  reasonable  and  conservative 
policy,  and  at  the  present  time  it  is  very 
difficult  to  obtain  government  aid  for  a river 
and  harbor  improvement  that  is  not  warrant- 
ed by  its  prospective  usefulness.  The  ap- 
propriations are  concentrated  upon  projects  of 
actual  value  and  provision  is  usually  made  to 
carry  out  meritorious  projects  without  delay 
or  the  lack  of  funds  to  conduct  the  work  in  the 
most  economical  manner. 

Engineer  Corps. — Improvements  of  rivers 
and  harbors  have  been  carried  out  almost 
wholly  by  the  War  Department  through  the 
agency  of  the  Engineer  Corps  of  the  United 
States  Army.  As  early  as  1824  Congress 
enacted  that  all  such  work  should  be  executed 
under  the  control  of  the  Army  engineers,  and 
that  policy  has  been  continued  ever  since.  The 
Engineer  Corps  of  the  Army  is  a body  of  able 
engineers  built  up  by  selecting  from  each 
graduating  class  at  the  West  Point  Military 
Academy  a small  number  of  the  ablest  and 
most  promising  young  men,  those  standing 
highest  in  each  class,  and  assigning  them  to 
permanent  duty  in  the  Engineer  Corps,  where 
in  course  of  regular  service  they  acquire 
practical  knowledge  and  experience  in  conduct- 
ing public  works.  The  record  of  this  body  of 
men,  both  for  ability  and  integrity  has  been 
remarkable.  In  the  long  period  during  which 
the  members  of  the  corps  have  had  control  of 
work  of  great  magnitude,  involving  the  ex- 
penditure of  enormous  sums  of  money,  often 
under  conditions  that  presented  peculiar  oppor- 
tunities for  wrong  doing,  only  a very  few  in- 
dividuals have  been  convicted  of  unfaithful- 
ness or  dishonesty. 

The  extent  and  magnitude  of  the  work,  par- 
ticularly since  the  Civil  War,  has  made  it 
necessary  to  employ  a large  number  of  civilian 
engineers  under  the  title  of  U.  S.  assistant 
engineers,  to  whom,  in  a large  measure,  the 
details  and  actual  supervision  of  the  work 
has  been  entrusted,  under  the  general  direc- 


tion of  the  officers  of  the  Engineer  Corps,  and 
the  records  of  this  body  of  civilian  assistants 
for  ability,  integrity  and  faithful  service  have 
compared  very  favorably  with  those  of  the 
members  of  the  corps  itself. 

The  work  has  been  done  under  the  laws, 
rules,  and  regulations  of  the  Army,  which 
while  doubtless  admirably  adapted  to  the  con- 
trol of  military  operations,  are  in  many  re- 
spects not  so  well  suited  for  the  conduct  of 
civil  public  works,  and  this  fact  has  made  the 
efficient  and  economical  administration  of  such 
work  more  difficult  and  perplexing. 

The  long  experience  of  the  War  Department 
in  conducting  civil  public  works  has  developed 
a very  complete  and  effective  organization  and 
system  of  administration.  Under  the  Secre- 
tary of  War,  the  executive  head  of  the  Engi- 
neer Corps  is  the  Chief  of  Engineers.  The 
country  is  divided  into  geographical  districts 
to  the  general  charge  and  control  of  each  of 
which  is  assigned  one  of  the  senior  or  more 
able  officers  of  the  Corps.  These  districts 
may  be  divided  into  subdistricts  in  charge  of 
younger  officers,  many  of  whom  are,  however, 
assigned  to  the  immediate  charge  of  some  in- 
dividual project  though  these  are  more  fre- 
quently under  the  direct  charge  of  the  U.  S. 
assistant  engineers.  The  strict  discipline  of 
the  military  arm  of  the  service  is  enforced  in 
the  engineer  corps  and  its  work,  with  such 
modifications  only  as  the  different  nature  of 
the  work  makes  necessary. 

Expenditures  and  Notable  Works. — The  to- 
tal amount  appropriated  by  Congress  for  the 
improvement  and  maintenance  of  rivers,  har- 
bors and  canals,  and  for  examinations,  surveys 
and  contingencies  relating  thereto,  up  to  the 
end  of  1910,  has  been  nearly  $625,000,000, 
of  which  only  about  2.7  per  cent  was  ap- 
propriated before  the  close  of  the  Civil  War, 
and  over  43  per  cent  was  appropriated  in 
the  period  from  1900  to  1910  inclusive.  This 
does  not  include  the  expenditures  for  the 
Panama  Canal. 

The  most  important  public  work  upon  which 
the  government  is  now  engaged,  and  one  of 
the  greatest  works  of  the  age,  is  in  the  con- 
struction of  the  ship  canal  across  the  Isthmus 
of  Panama  (see  Canal  Diplomacy;  Panama 
Canal).  Congress  placed  the  construction  of 
this  gigantic  project  under  the  direction  and 
control  of  the  President  of  the  LTnited  States, 
though  the  work  is  being  done  under  the  im- 
mediate superintendence  of  officers  of  the  Engi- 
neer Corps  of  the  Army. 

Other  Federal  Public  Work. — The  construc- 
tion and  maintenance  of  lighthouses  and  lights 
along  the  coasts  and  upon  the  navigable  waters 
of  the  country  is  one  of  the  most  important 
services  and  aids  to  the  commerce  of  the 
country.  This  work,  under  the  Treasury  De- 
partment, is  in  charge  of  the  Light  House 
Board,  composed  of  two  Navy  officers,  two 
officers  of  the  Corps  of  Engineers  of  the  Army, 


114 


PUBLIC  WORKS,  NATIONAL,  STATE,  AND  MUNICIPAL 


and  two  civilians  of  high  scientific  attainments. 
The  work  in  this  department  has  been  of  a 
high  character,  comparing  very  favorably  with 
that  of  any  other  nation. 

The  Treasury  Department  also  has  charge  of 
the  construction  and  -maintenance  of  the  gov- 
ernment buildings  of  the  country,  such  as  post 
offices,  custom-houses,  courthouses,  etc.  This 
work  is  under  the  immediate  direction  and  con- 
trol of  the  “Supervising  Architect  of  the  Treas- 
ury” by  whom  plans  for  new  buildings  are 
prepared  or  approved  and  the  buildings  erected. 

The  very  extensive  desert  land  reclamation 
work  now  being  carried  on  under  the  Interior 
Department  through  the  reclamation  depart- 
ment of  the  Interior  Department  is  not,  strict- 
ly speaking,  government  public  work.  Its 
object  is  to  expedite  the  reclamation  of  desert 
lands  by  the  construction  of  irrigation  projects 
the  cost  of  which  is  to  be  refunded  to  the 
government  within  stated  times  by  the  owners 
of  the  reclaimed  land.  The  work  has  been  con- 
ducted on  a very  large  scale  with  eminent 
success,  and  it  affords  some  quite  remarkable 
examples  of  modern  engineering  work  and  skill. 

State  Works. — Public  works  confined  within 
the  limits  of  a single  state,  other  than  those 
relating  to  general  commerce,  are  carried  out 
under  the  direction  of  and  at  the  expense  of 
the  individual  states.  Such  projects  belong  to 
the  class  to  which  the  general  name  “internal 
improvements”  is  usually  applied.  Projects  of 
this  class  have  a very  wide  range  in  character 
and  extent,  and  the  tendency  seems  to  be  to 
enlarge  the  sphere  of  the  state  activities  to 
embrace  classes  of  public  work  that  hereto- 
fore have  been  assumed  by  counties  and  munic- 
ipalities, such  as  the  construction  of  high- 
ways and  the  control  of  water  resources  for 
power  or  for  domestic  use.  In  the  earlier  his- 
tory of  many  of  the  states  large  sums  were 
contributed  by  the  legislatures  to  private  per- 
sons or  corporations  to  encourage  and  assist 
in  the  construction  of  public  projects  that 
were  deemed  important  for  the  development 
and  prosperity  of  the  state,  such  as  highways, 
canals  and  railroads. 

The  methods  adopted  for  carrying  out  public 
enterprises  by  the  state  have  not  been  uniform. 
In  the  majority  of  cases  they  have  been  execut- 
ed under  the  immediate  direction  and  control 
of  some  state  department  or  officer,  either 
existing  or  created  for  the  purpose,  but  in 
many  cases  special  boards  or  commissions  have 
been  appointed  to  carry  out  individual  projects. 

Canals  and  Highways. — In  the  earlier  history 
of  the  country,  before  the  era  of  railroads, 
facilities  for  transportation  were  considered  of 
prime  importance  and  very  large  sums  of 
money  were  expended  by  the  states  in  the 
construction  of  canals  and  highways.  New 
York,  Pennsylvania  and  Ohio  particularly,  ex- 
pended sums  that,  for  the  period,  may  fairly 
be  termed  enormous,  in  the  construction  of 
canals,  whose  life  and  usefulness  were  cut 


short  by  the  rapid  and  extensive  development 
of  railroads.  The  Erie  Canal,  first  opened 
from  Buffalo  to  Albany  in  1842,  was  not  only 
one  of  the  most  notable  public  works  of  the 
period,  exerting  a vast  influence  on  the  com- 
merce of  the  state  and  the  country,  but  its 
useful  life  has  extended  down  to  the  present 
time,  and  it  is  now  (1314)  being  rebuilt  on  a 
much  larger  scale  at  an  expense  to  the  state 
of  more  than  one  hundred  millions,  and  its 
friends  predict  a great  enlargement  and  a long 
extension  of  its  life  of  usefulness  (see  Canals 
and  Other  Artificial  Waterways). 

At  the  present  time  the  revival  and  ex- 
tension of  the  work  of  building  highways  is 
perhaps  the  most  notable  feature  of  state  pub- 
lic work.  In  a large  number  of  the  states 
special  departments  have  been  created  to  deal 
with  the  matter,  and  very  large  sums  of  money 
are  expended  every  year  to  aid  the  counties 
and  municipalities  in  the  construction  and 
maintenance  of  improved  roads. 

Contract  System. — Public  work,  whether  na- 
tional, state,  or  municipal  is  to  a large  extent, 
carried  out  under  the  contract  method,  though 
a great  deal  of  river  and  harbor  work  has  been 
done  by  the  government  by  the  direct  or  day’s 
work  method  (see  Contract  System  of  Pub- 
lic Works).  This  has  been  resorted  to  in 
many  cases  because  the  contractors  defaulted 
or  failed  to  satisfactorily  prosecute  their  work. 
Whatever  may  be  the  cause,  such  failure  seems 
to  be  more  frequent  in  the  case  of  national 
government  contracts  than  in  any  other  class. 
Furthermore,  not  a little  of  the  work  is  of- 
such  a character  that  it  is  difficult  to  esti- 
mate in  advance  its  quantity,  cost,  or  the  dif- 
ficulties to  be  encountered,  and  contractors  can 
not  intelligently  submit  proposals,  particular- 
ly in  view  of  the  rigid  compliance  with  con- 
tracts and  specifications  which  the  officers  in 
charge  have  no  choice  but  to  enforce. 

State  public  work  is  in  most  cases  carried 
out  under  the  contract  system  and  the  state 
laws  frequently  permit  no  other  course,  though 
in  many  instances  it  would  be  better  if  the 
state  authorities  were  permitted  to  exercise 
their  discretion  in  the  matter. 

In  a great  majority  of  American  cities  the 
laws  require  that  all  construction  of  public 
works  shall  be  awarded  at  public  letting  to 
the  lowest  responsible  bidder,  although  in  ex- 
ceptional cases  the  work  could  doubtless  be 
done  both  more  satisfactorily  and  economically 
by  the  municipality  itself.  As  a rule,  however, 
the  prosecution  of  public  works  under  the  con- 
tract system  has  been  proved  by  long  ex- 
perience to  be  preferable. 

See  Aqueducts;  City  Planning;  Contract 
System  of  Public  Works  ; Eminent  Domain  ; 
Experts  in  American  Government;  Good 
Roads  Movement;  Panama  Canal;  Parks 
and  Boulevards;  Public  Buildings,  Federal, 
State  and  Municipal;  Roads;  Street  Com- 
missions and  Commissioners. 


115 


PUBLIC  WORKS,  STATE  ACCOUNT  SYSTEM  OF— PUBLICATIONS,  GOVERNMENTAL 


References:  W.  M.  Black,  United  States  Pub- 
lic Works  (1895)  ; Chief  of  Engineers,  U.  S.  A. 
Annual  Reports ; A.  B.  Hart  “Biography  of  a 
River  and  Harbor  Bill”  in  his  Practical  Essays 
in  Am.  Gov.  (1894),  eh.  ix;  U.  S.  Secretary 
of  War,  “Preliminary  Examinations,  Surveys, 
Projects  and  Appropriations”  in  House  Docs., 
55  Cong.,  2 Sess.,  No.  482  (1898),  57  Cong., 
2 Sess.,  No.  421  (1892)  ; American  Year  Boole, 
1V10,  and  year  by  year. 

Samuel  Whinery. 

PUBLIC  WORKS,  STATE  ACCOUNT  SYS- 
TEM OF.  Under  the  state  account  system  of 
public  works,  the  government,  city,  state  or 
national,  undertakes  to  do  the  work  directly 
and  not  by  contract,  furnishing  the  capital, 
the  material,  the  tools,  the  machinery,  employ- 
ing the  labor,  etc.  The  fundamental  defect  in 
constructing  public  works  indirectly  through 
contract  instead  of  directly  by  government 
officials  is  the  ever-present  temptation  of  dis- 
honesty. The  contractor’s  compensation  is  the 
difference  between  what  the  work  costs  him 
and  what  the  government  pays  him  for  doing 
it.  He  is,  therefore,  too  often,  tempted,  by 
peculation,  fraud  and  corruption,  to  increase 
his  compensation  in  the  numerous  ways  known 
to  the  contractor.  Another  defect  in  practice 
has  been  the  collusion  or  pooling  of  interests 
so  that  bids  are  not  competitive,  and  that  the 
price  at  which  the  work  is  done  bears  no  con- 
sistent relation  to  its  actual  cost.  Moreover, 
the  governmental  activities  involved  in  the 
adequate  inspection  of  work  done  under  con- 
tract necessitates  as  expert  knowledge  as  if  the 
public  authorities  were  doing  the  work  them- 
selves. The  third  defect  in  the  contract  method 
lies  in  careless,  inadequate  inspection  through 
collusion  between  the  inspector  and  the  con- 
tractor. A troublesome  defect  lies  in  the  speci- 
fications given  in  the  requests  for  bids.  Unless 
these  are  drawn  with  as  great  care  as  if  the 
public  authorities  were  to  do  the  work  them- 
selves, there  is  opportunity  for  needless  leak- 
age of  public  moneys. 

Those  who  favor  the  direct  system  of  build- 
ing public  works  urge  that  these  various  de- 
fects and  wastes  can  be  eliminated.  They 
point  to  the  quality,  durability,  usefulness  and 
reasonableness  of  cost  with  which  such  works 
have  been  accomplished.  The  opponents  of 
direct  government  action  dwell  on  the  possi- 
bilities of  political  interference.  To  this  the 
friends  of  the  method  reply  that  political 
interference  is  no  greater  under  the  direct  sys- 
tem than  under  the  contract  system,  and  that 
there  is  no  essential  reason  why  public  activi- 
ties of  this  direct  nature  should  be  allowed 
to  become  either  a pension  agency,  a charitable 
organization,  or  an  adjunct  to  a political 
party. 

See  Contract  System  of  Public  Works; 
Public  Works,  National,  State  and  Mu- 
nicipal. Clyde  L.  King. 


PUBLICATION.  (1)  Publishing  and  distrib- 
uting copies  of  a law.  This  is  no  part  of 
the  enactment  of  law,  and  should  not  be  con- 
fused with  promulgation.  (2)  The  declara- 
tion by  a testator  that  a certain  writing  is 
his  will.  (3)  The  opening  of  depositions,  in 
chancery,  to  the  inspection  of  the  parties.  (4) 
Advertising  in  a newspaper  or  otherwise  the 
summons  or  other  process  or  order  in  a case. 

( 5 ) The  communication  of  a libelous  state- 
ment to  third  persons.  (6)  In  copyright  law, 
making  public  a book,  chart,  map  or  picture. 

H.  M.  B. 

PUBLICATIONS,  GOVERNMENTAL.  The 

official  publications  of  the  United  States  Gov- 
ernment are  classed  as  congressional  or  depart- 
mental according  as  the  order  to  print  origi- 
nates with  the  legislative  or  the  executive 
branch',  court  reports  being  as  a rule  issued 
by  private  publishers. 

Congressional  publications  include  the  Jour- 
nals of  each  house,  the  debates  ( see  Congres- 
sional Record),  House  Reports  and  Senate 
Reports,  House  Documents  and  Senate  Docu- 
ments, bills  and  resolutions,  testimony  taken 
at  committee  hearings  and  other  material 
printed  for  legislative  use.  The  House  and 
Senate  Journals,  published  generally  at  the 
close  of  each  session,  contain  the  official  min- 
utes of  the  legislative  proceedings  as  distin- 
guished from  the  full  report  of  debates  printed 
in  the  Congressional  Record.  The  House  and 
Senate  Reports  are  strictly  legislative,  being 
the  reports  of  committees  on  bills  and  resolu- 
tions referred  to  them.  The  House  and  Senate 
Documents  include  Presidents’  messages  and 
the  foreign  relations;  reports  of  the  executive 
departments,  bureaus,  commissions  and  other 
government  establishments,  and  estimates  of 
appropriations,  transmitted  annually  to  Con- 
gress in  accordance  with  law;  various  other 
departmental  publications,  of  which  an  edi- 
tion is  provided  for  congressional  distribution; 
the  official  Congressional  Directory ; House 
and  Senate  Manuals  of  procedure;  and  mis- 
cellaneous publications  ordered  to  be  printed 
for  the  use  of  either  house.  The  Reports  and 
Documents  in  each  series  are  now  numbered 
consecutively  throughout  the  Congress  to 
which  they  belong  and,  beginning  with  the 
15th  Congress,  are  made  up  into  numbered 
volumes  known  collectively  as  “Congressional 
Documents.”  Bills  and  resolutions  are  printed 
when  introduced  and  reprinted  with  amend- 
ments at  various  stages  of  their  legislative 
history,  for  the  use  of  members.  The  text 
of  a bill  is  occasionally  printed  in  the  report 
upon  it  and  efforts  have  recently  been  made 
to  induce  Congress  to  provide  for  its  inclusion 
in  the  case  of  every  public  bill.  Testimony 
taken  at  hearings  is  generally  printed  for  the 
use  of  the  committee,  occasionally  included 
or  summarized  in  the  committee’s  report,  and, 
in  the  case  of  the  more  important  legislation, 


116 


PUBLICATIONS,  GOVERNMENTAL 


printed  also  as  a House  or  Senate  Document. 

The  Journal  of  the  Executive  Proceedings 
of  the  Senate,  as  a part  of  the  treaty-making 
power  or  on  nominations  of  public  officers,  is 
not  published  until  after  the  lapse  of  several 
years.  Treaties  submitted  for  ratification  and 
executive  communications  relating  thereto  are 
printed  as  confidential  documents  and  are  not 
made  public  until  the  injunction  of  secrecy  is 
removed  by  order  of  the  Senate. 

Publication  of  historical  documents  and 
records,  has  been  provided  for  or  authorized  by 
Congress  from  time  to  time  but  no  definite 
plan  has  been  followed.  The  creation  of  a 
permanent  commission  on  national  historical 
publications,  as  proposed  by  an  advisory  com- 
mittee of  historians  to  the  Committee  on  De-, 
partment  Methods  in  1900,  is  urgently  needed 
both  in  the  interest  of  economical  expenditure 
for  this  purpose  and  to  provide  that  the  whole 
field  of  American  history  shall  be  adequately 
covered.  The  principal  collections  which  have 
been  published  officially  are : American  Ar- 
chives, a documentary  history  of  the  American 
Revolution,  nine  volumes  covering  the  period 
1774-1776;  Public  and  Secret  Journals  of  the 
Continental  Congress;  Revolutionary  Diplo- 
matic Correspondence ; American  State  Papers, 
38  volumes  of  selected  documents  covering  the 
early  Congresses  (down  to  1838  in  some  cases) 
and  classified  in  ten  divisions — foreign  rela- 
tions, Indian  affairs,  finance,  commerce  and 
navigation,  military  affairs,  naval  affairs,  post 
office,  public  lands,  claims,  and  miscellaneous; 
Documentary  History  of  the  Constitution ; 
Journals  of  the  Confederate  Congress;  the  Re- 
bellion Records;  Messages  and  Papers  of  the 
Presidents. 

Departmental  publications  may  be  grouped 
by  subject  matter  in  the  following  classes: 
(1)  Law  and  administration — laws,  treaties 
and  executive  proclamations,  issued  by  the 
State  Department;  opinions  of  the  attorneys 
general,  and  decisions,  rules  and  regulations 
made  under  the  laws  relating  to  the  public 
treasury,  customs,  internal  revenue,  money 
and  banking,  interstate  commerce,  shipping, 
quarantine,  immigration,  naturalization,  pub- 
lic lands,  patents,  pensions,  food  and  drug  in- 
spection, etc.,  by  the  executive  officers  charged 
with  their  administration;  annual  adminis- 
trative reports,  official  registers,  manuals,  or- 
ders and  circular  instructions  for  the  various 
branches  of  the  civil,  military  and  naval  serv- 
ices. In  other  countries,  much  of  this  ma- 
terial, here  issued  in  numerous  leaflets  and 
pamphlets,  is  included  in  a single  publication, 
the  official  Gazette.  (2)  Foreign  affairs — dip- 
lomatic correspondence  and  international  law 
publications  ( State  Dept. ) . (3)  Territories  and 
insular  possessions — reports  of  territorial  gov- 
ernors and  on  Indian  affairs  (Interior  Dept.) 
and  Porto  Rico  and  the  Philippines  (Insular 
Bureau).  (4)  Economic  and  social  condi- 
tions— statements  of  the  public  finances, 


money  in  circulation,  condition  of  the  national 
banks,  production  of  precious  metals  (Treas- 
ury Dept.);  census  reports  and  bulletins  on 
population,  vital  statistics,  occupations,  agri- 
culture, manufacturing  and  other  industries, 
wealth,  debt  and  taxation,  dependents,  de- 
linquents and  defectives;  statistics  of  com- 
merce and  navigation;  consular  reports  and 
special  investigations  of  trade  conditions 
abroad;  reports  on  industrial  combinations 
(Department  of  Commerce)  ; reports  and  bul- 
letins on  labor  statistics  and  social  conditions, 
and  on  infant  mortality  and  child  welfare 
(Department  of  Labor)  ; statistics  of  railways 
(Interstate  Commerce  Commission);  statistics 
of  crops  and  farm  animals  (Department  of 
Agriculture)  and  of  mineral  production  (Geo- 
logical Survey).  (5)  Results  of  scientific  inves- 
tigations— in  relation  to  the  following;  agricul- 
ture, horticulture,  forestry,  animal  industry 
and  foods  (Department  of  Agriculture)  ; fish 
and  fishculture  (Bureau  of  Fisheries);  nat- 
ural history  (National  Museum  and  Biologi- 
cal Survey)  ; geology,  water  supply  and  min- 
eral resources  (Geological  Survey)  ; mining 
(Bureau  of  Mines);  weights  and  measures 
(Bureau  of  Standards)  ; aids  to  navigation 
(Coast  Survey,  Hydrographic  Office,  Naval  Ob- 
servatory and  Nautical  Almanac  Office)  ; con- 
tagious and  infectious  diseases  and  public  hy- 
giene (Public  Health  Service)  ; American 
Indians  (Bureau  of  American  Ethnology). 
(6)  Public  works — reports  on  river  and  har- 
bor improvements  (Engineer  Corps)  ; the 
Panama  Canal  (Isthmian  Canal  Commission)  ; 
irrigation  works  (Reclamation  Service),  etc.; 
tests  of  engineering  materials  (Ordnance 
Board)  and  of  road  making  materials  (Public 
Roads  Office).  (7)  Public  instruction — reports 
and  bulletins  of  the  Bureau  of  Education. 

Each  state  issues  its  session  laws,  legisla- 
tive journals,  and  reports  of  the  various  state 
officers,  departments,  bureaus,  boards,  commis- 
sions, and  state  educational,  charitable,  and 
correctional  institutions.  In  many  states  a 
collected  edition  of  these  reports  ( e.  g.,  “Ap- 
pendix to  the  Journals,”  “Documentary  Jour- 
nal,” “Public  Documents”  or  “Reports”)  is 
published  in  addition  to  the  separate  issues. 
The  journals  often  include  governors’  messages 
and  reports  of  legislative  committees;  but  in 
Massachusetts  these,  together  with  bills,  re- 
ports of  special  commissions,  etc.,  form  sepa- 
rate series  of  house  and  senate  documents. 
Pennsylvania  is  the  only  state  which  publishes 
its  legislative  debates.  Proceedings  of  con- 
stitutional conventions  are  generally  reported 
currently  in  local  newspapers  and  afterwards 
reprinted.  Among  other  state  publications  are 
legislative  manuals,  compilations  of  laws,  pub- 
lic service  regulations,  school  documents,  sta- 
tistics, bulletins  on  agriculture,  geology  and 
mining,  natural  history,  public  health,  chari- 
ties and  corrections,  historical  records  and  the 
publications  of  state  historical  societies,  and 


117 


PUBLICITY 


reports  of  agricultural,  horticultural  and  live 
stock  associations. 

See  Act  of  Congress;  Congressional  Rec- 
ord; Government  Printing  Office;  Journals 
of  Legislative  Bodies  ; Library  of  Con- 
gress; Reports  of  Heads  of  Departments; 
Reports  of  Judicial  Cases. 

References:  A.  W.  Greely,  Public  Documents 
of  the  First  Fourteen  Congresses,  1789-1817 
(1900);  B.  P.  Poore,  Descriptive  Catalogue 
of  the  Government  Publications  of  the 
V.  8.,  1771,-1881  (1885)  ; J.  G.  Ames,  Compre- 
hensive Index  to  the  Publications  of  the  U.  S. 
18S1-93  (1905);  Supt.  of  Documents,  Cata- 
Igue  of  the  Public  Documents,  1893-1907 
(1896-1912)  ; Monthly  Catalogue,  V.  8.  Pub- 
lic Documents  (current)  ; Tables  of  and  An- 
notated Index  to  the  Congressional  Series  of 
U.  8.  Public  Documents,  15th-52d  Cong.,  1817- 
93  ( 1902 ) , continued  by  Index  to  the  Reports 
and  Documents  for  each  session  to  the  62d 
Cong.;  Check  List  of  U.  8.  Public  Documents, 
1789-1909  (1911),  Vol.  I;  Lists  of  Congres- 
sional and  Departmental  Publications  (1911)  ; 
Committee  on  Department  Methods,  Re- 
port on  Documentary  Historical  Publica- 
tions of  the  U.  8.  Government  (1909)  ; E. 
Everhart,  Handbook  of  U.  S.  Public  Docu- 
ments (1910);  R.  R.  Bowker,  State  Publica- 
tions (1899-1908);  A.  R.  Hasse,  Index  of 
Economic  Material  in  Documents  of  the  States 
of  the  U.  8.  to  1901,  (1907-12),  in  progress, 
12  vols.  issued  to  date,  viz.  N.  Y.,  N.  H.,  Vt. 
Me.,  Mass.,  R.  I.,  Cal.,  111.,  Del.,  Kv. ; Library 
of  Congress,  Monthly  list  of  State  Publications 
(current).  J.  David  Thompson. 

PUBLICITY.  In  a popular  government  a 
large  amount  of  publicity  concerning  public 
affairs,  is  absolutely  necessary.  For  the  people 
to  decide  any  public  question,  knowledge  is 
requisite  and  knowledge  by  the  people  means 
publicity.  No  popular  government  can  thrive 
without  it.  The  genius  for  publicity,  an  in- 
quisitive desire  for  news  (greatly  promoted 
by  newspaper  enterprise)  ; nay  more,  an  ina- 
bility to  keep  even  those  tilings  secret  which 
ought  to  be  kept  secret,  seems  to  be  one  of  the 
characteristics  of  the  American  people.  Com- 
pare for  instance  the  state  secrets  of  the  Vene- 
tian oligarchy,  secrets  which  after  centuries  are, 
many  of  them,  still  unrevealed,  with  the  piti- 
ful and  unsuccessful  effort  to  keep  from  the 
press  the  proceedings  of  our  federal  Senate 
when  in  executive  session.  The  desire  for 
publicity  as  well  as  the  need  of  it,  increases 
with  the  present  tendency  toward  a more  com- 
plete democracy  as  shown  in  the  adoption  by 
many  municipalities  and  by  some  states  of  the 
initiative,  referendum  and  recall. 

In  the  earlier  days  of  our  republic  the  need 
for  publicity  was  by  no  means  as  apparent  as 
it  is  at  the  present  time.  The  United  States 
Senate  sat  with  closed  doors  until  February 
12,  1794,  when  a resolution  passed  that 


these  should  be  opened  at  the  beginning  of  the 
following  session  at  all  times  while  the  Senate 
was  engaged  in  its  legislative  duties.  Its 
executive  sessions  are  still  secret.  This  is 
quite  proper  while  that  body  is  considering 
foreign  treaties  or  other  diplomatic  business, 
but  in  the  consideration  of  general  executive 
appointments  there  is  doubt  whether  it  has 
not  produced  far  more  harm  than  good.  The 
purpose  is  to  secure  greater  freedom  of  dis- 
cussion regarding  the  records  and  character 
of  the  men  nominated  to  office;  but  the  free- 
dom thus  secured  is  not  only  subject  to  abuse, 
but  like  all  other  secret  proceedings,  it  is 
open  to  suspicion  even  where  it  is  not  abused 
( see  Senate).  It  is  natural  that  the  people 
should  distrust  what  is  concealed  from  them. 
This  distrust  also  extends  to  all  legislative 
proceedings  which  are  not  published — to  hear- 
ings upon  particular  measures  by  committees 
with  closed  doors;  to  the  smothering  of  vari- 
ous projects  in  such  committees;  to  the  secret 
agencies  by  which  bills  are  prepared  outside 
of  the  legislature  itself;  to  the  manipulations 
of  secret  caucuses  and  of  political  rings  and 
bosses  which  determine  what  bills  shall  pass 
and  what  shall  be  defeated  or  suppressed. 
This  distrust  has  led  to  a demand  for  increased 
action  by  the  executive  as  the  responsible  head 
of  the  community,  even  in  matters  which  prop- 
erly belong  to  legislative  bodies.  It  has  also 
led  to  greater  constitutional  restrictions,  limit- 
ing the  powers  of  such  bodies  and  the  terms 
of  their  sessions,  and  to  the  further  demand 
for  the  direct  participation  of  the  people  in 
the  election,  for  instance,  of  United  States 
Senators,  and  in  the  determination  of  measures 
of  various  kinds  by  popular  vote. 

It  is  everywhere  realized  that  secrecy  pro- 
tects corruption,  that  jobs  are  undertaken  and 
bad  appointments  made  in  inverse  ratio  to  the 
notice  they  attract;  that  publicity  not  only 
exposes  impurities,  for  removal  or  salutary 
treatment,  but  also  of  itself  purifies  the 
currents  of  governmental  affairs  and  gives  to 
the  people  that  confidence  and  hopefulness 
necessary  to  the  success  of  their  institutions. 
Publicity  in  official  accounting,  publicity  in 
campaign  contributions,  publicity  in  corporate 
management,  are  only  three  illustrations  of 
that  general  publicity  desirable  in  all  public 
affairs  in  every  department  of  government  and 
in  regard  to  all  matters  in  which  the  people 
have  a general  concern.  Only  three  important 
exceptions  still  remain:  secrecy  is  still  con- 
sidered indispensable  in  war.  in  diplomacy  and 
for  the  detection  of  criminals. 

See  Popular  Government;  Public  Opinion 
and  Popular  Control;  Publicity  of  Corpo- 
rate Accounts. 

References:  F.  Lieber,  Civil  Liberty  and  Self- 
Government  (1859),  eh.  xiii;  J.  Bryce,  Am. 
Commonwealth  (4th  ed.,  1910),  II,  252,  et  seq. ; 
Woodrow  Wilson,  Address  at  Portland,  Ore- 
gon, May  18,  1911  (reported  in  press  the  fol- 


118 


PUBLICITY  OF  CORPORATE  ACCOUNTS— PULLMAN  CARS,  REGULATION  OF 


lowing  day)  ; H.  W.  Steel,  “Publicity  in  Social 
Work”  in  Conference  of  Charities  and  Correc- 
tion, Proceedings  (1908),  262-7;  C.  J.  Bona- 
parte, “Gov.  by  Public  Opinion”  in  Forum,  XI 
(1908),  384-90;  A.  T.  Vance,  “Value  of  Pub- 
licity in  Reform”  in  Am.  Acad,  of  Polit.  and 
Soc.  Sci.,  Annals,  XXIX  (1907),  87-92. 

William  Dudley  Foulke. 

PUBLICITY  OF  CORPORATE  ACCOUNTS. 

Publicity  of  corporate  accounts  involves:  (1) 
the  prescription  by  competent  authority  of 
forms  of  account  in  which  the  results  of  the 
business  of  public  service  corporations  may  be 
clearly  stated;  (2)  the  publication  of  these 
reports  in  a form  available  for  general  use. 

Advantages. — The  advantages  of  publicity 
are:  (1)  public;  (2)  private.  In  the  field  of 
public  service  corporations  the  right  and  duty 
of  the  legislature  to  regulate  rates,  fares  and 
prices,  either  directly  or  by  commissions  to 
which  its  authority  is  delegated,  is  generally 
admitted.  This  duty  cannot  be  properly  dis- 
charged without  full  knowledge  on  the  part  of 
the  regulating  body  of  the  financial  condition 
and  the  operating  results  of  the  companies 
which  it  is  desired  to  regulate.  It  is  also 
important  that  the  public  whose  intelligent 
support  and  cooperation  is  necessary  to  the 
satisfactory  working  of  any  plan  of  regulation, 
should  be  fully  informed  as  to  the  affairs  of 
the  corporation  subject  to  regulation,  so  that 
an  intelligent  public  opinion  can  be  developed 
as  to  the  rights  and  duties  of  public  service 
corporations. 

The  private  advantages  of  publicity  relate 
to  the  investor.  If  a full  disclosure  at  regular 
intervals  is  made  of  the  condition  of  a cor- 
poration, including  its  income  and  operating 
accounts,  and  a statement  of  its  assets  and 
liabilities,  the  investor  can  buy  its  stocks  or 
bonds  on  the  basis  of  an  investigation  of  their 
value  as  revealed  by  the  reports.  There  is, 
moreover,  less  opportunity  for  the  carrying 
on  of  speculative  manipulations  in  securities 
when  the  facts  concerning  these  securities  are 
generally  known. 

Custom. — Publicity  is  now  the  rule  in  the 
United  States.  All  railroads  doing  an  inter- 
state business  are  required  to  file  complete 
statements  annually  with  the  Interstate  Com- 
merce Commission  as  well  as  brief  statements 
of  earnings,  etc.,  monthly.  The  public  service 
commissions,  now  found  in  many  of  the  larger 
states,  require  similar  statements  from  all  cor- 
porations subject  to  their  jurisdictions.  These 
reports  are  published  and  are  available  to  any 
citizen. 

It  is  now  the  custom  of  most  industrial  cor- 
porations, although  this  may  not  be  required 
by  any  public  authority,  to  issue  to  their 
(stockholders  fairly  complete  reports  of  their 
condition.  These  reports  made  out  in  great 
detail  are  also  furnished  to  stockholders  by 
the  railroad  companies.  Similar  reports  are 


required  by  all  stock  exchanges  for  listed  secur- 
ities. All  reports  furnished  to  stockholders  in 
advance  of  the  annual  meetings  are  promptly 
sent  to  the  newspapers,  and  receive  extended 
reviews  in  the  financial  columns. 

Effect  of  Taxation. — The  Corporation  Tax 
Law  requires  annual  statements  of  income  ami 
expenditure  to  be  filed  with  the  various  com- 
missioners of  internal  revenue  by  every  cor- 
poration whose  net  income  exceeds  $5,000,  to 
be  used  as  a basis  for  assessing  the  tax.  These 
reports  are  considered  as  confidential  so  far 
as  the  general  public  is  concerned,  but  any 
stockholder  of  any  company,  and  in  the  case 
of  companies  making  a public  offering  of  se- 
curities, or  whose  stocks  or  bonds  are  dealt 
in  on  any  public  exchange,  any  person  having 
a legitimate  interest,  may  upon  application  to 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  obtain  permis- 
sion to  inspect  these  confidential  records  and  to 
make  copies  of  the  figures  therein  contained. 
As  a result  of  this  permission,  it  is  not  going 
too  far  to  assert  that  publicity  of  corporation 
accounts  is  now  universal  in  the  United 
States. 

See  Banks,  Examination  of;  Franchises 
to  Corporations;  Inspection  as  a Function 
of  Government;  Public  Service  Commis- 
sions; Public  Service  Corporations;  Rail- 
roads, Physical  Valuation  of;  Stockhold- 
ers, Legal  Status  of;  Uniformity  of  Public 
Accounts. 

References:  C.  E.  Littlefield,  “Publicity  and 
the  Trusts”  in  Independent,  LV  (1903),  539; 
F.  E.  Horack,  Organization  and  Control  of 
Industrial  Corporations  (1903);  E.  S.  Mead, 
Trust  Finance  (1903),  371-374;  Arthur  W. 
Machen,  Jr.,  Treatise  on  the  Modern  Law  of 
Corporations  ( 1908 ) , ch.  xviii. 

E.  S.  Mead. 

PUBLICITY  OF  PARTY  EXPENDITURES. 

See  Party  Expenditures,  Publicity  of. 

PULLMAN  CARS,  REGULATION  OF.  By 

an  amendment  to  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Act  in  1906,  sleeping-car  companies  were  de- 
clared to  be  common  carriers  within  the  mean- 
ing of  the  act  and  were  therefore  subjected  to 
all  its  provisions.  Two  classes  of  sleeping-car 
companies  exist:  those  owned  and  operated  by 
railroad  companies  as  a part  of  their  regular 
service,  and  hence  subject  to  the  act  from 
the  beginning;  and  independent  car-owning 
companies,  of  which  at  present  the  Pullman 
Company  is  the  sole  representative.  By  far 
the  greater  number  of  sleeping  cars  are  owned 
by  the  Pullman  Company  and  are  operated  by 
the  railroads  under  contract.  The  terms  of 
these  contracts  vary  greatly  and  involve 
numerous  details  as  to  the  care  and  repair 
of  ears,  their  equipment,  liability  for  accident, 
and  the  like,  but  the  principal  clause  usually 
provides  for  the  payment  by  the  railroad  for 
the  use  of  the  car,  of  mileage  graduated  ac- 


119 


PUNISHMENTS,  CRUEL  AND  UNUSUAI^-RURCHASE  OF  PUBLIC  SUPPLIES 


cording  to  Pullman  earnings.  The  Pullman 
Company  receives  in  addition  the  special  fares 
from  passengers.  . 

Sleeping-car  companies  have  claimed  that 
they  are  not  common  carriers  but  merely  equip- 
ment companies  engaged  in  providing  a special 
facility,  and  courts  have  in  past  years  some- 
times sustained  this  contention.  But  the  issue 
has  not  been  drawn  since  1906. 

The  commission  has  required  an  annual 
report  from  the  Pullman  Company  in  accord- 
ance with  the  provisions  of  the  Act  to  Regu- 
late Commerce  and  has  examined  and  to  some 
extent  modified  its  accounting  practice.  More- 
over, in  one  important  decision  (Loftus  vs. 
Pullman  Co.,  18  I.  C.  C.  Rep.  135,  19  I.  C.  C. 
Rep.  102),  it  has  lowered  certain  berth  rates, 
the  significant  point  of  the  decision  being 
the  creation  of  a discrimination  between  the 
rates  for  lower  and  upper  berths. 

See  Common  Carrier;  Interstate  Com- 
merce Decisions;  Interstate  Commerce 
Legislation;  Railroad  Commissions,  State; 
Sleeping  Cars. 

Reference;  E.  R.  Johnson  and  G.  G.  Hueb- 
ner,  Railroad  Traffic  and  Rates  (1911),  II, 
102-100.  F.  H.  D. 

PUNISHMENTS,  CRUEL  AND  UNUSUAL. 

The  Eighth  Amendment  to  the  Federal  Consti- 
tution provides  that  cruel  and  unusual  punish- 
ment shall  not  be  inflicted.  The  state  consti- 
tutions have  like  provisions.  The  Massachu- 
setts Body  of  Liberties  (1641)  contained 
words  of  similar  character  and  the  same  ex- 
pression was  used  in  the  English  Bill  of  Rights 
of  1088. 

What  punishments  are  cruel  and  unusual 
it  is  difficult  to  say.  Plainly  the  mere  novelty 
of  the  method  of  inflicting  punishment  does 
not  bring  it  within  the  prohibition.  Execution 
by  shooting  (Wilkerson  vs.  Utah,  99  17.  S. 
130)  and  also  the  infliction  of  death  by  elec- 
tricity (People  ex  rel.  Kemmler  vs.  Durston, 
119  N.  Y.  569)  have  been  upheld  as  not  cruel 
and  unusual.  Plainly  on  the  other  hand, 
punishments  involving  torture  or  lingering 
death  are  forbidden.  The  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States,  however,  in  1910  went  far- 
ther than  this  (Weems  vs.  U.  S.,  217  U.  S. 
349 ) , and  declared  an  act  void  because  the 
punishment  provided  by  statute  appeared  to 
be  altogether  disproportionate  to  the  offense. 

See  Crimes  ; Criminal  Law  ; Penalties  for 
Crime. 

References:  T.  M.  Cooley,  Constitutional 
Limitations  (6th  ed.,  1890),  401-403;  D.  K. 
Watson,  Constitution  of  the  U.  S.  (1910),  I, 
1512-1522.  A.  C.  McL. 

PUPILS  IN  SCHOOL,  LEGAL  RIGHTS  OF. 

In  general  public  schools  must  provide  instruc- 
tion for  all  children  that  are  defined  as  being 
of  legal  school  age.  It  is  necessary  to  provide 
this  instruction  only  within  the  district  where 


the  child  lives.  When  no  means  for  education 
are  at  hand  within  the  district  some  fair  ar- 
rangement must  be  made  such  as  the  pay- 
ment of  tuition  fees  in  a nearby  school  dis- 
trict. Instruction  can  be  refused  when  the 
child’s  conduct,  attitude,  or  health  is  a menace 
to  the  welfare  of  the  school.  The  power  of 
punishment  of  the  teacher  and  school  officials 
is  not  limited  to  acts  of  the  pupil  during 
school  hours  but  extends  to  acts  in  going 
to  or  returning  from  school,  and  even  beyond 
that  if  the  welfare  of  the  school  is  affected. 
It  has  been  held  that  regulations  for  the 
social  life  of  the  pupils  during  the  school  year 
are  valid.  Race  or  nationality  bars  no  child 
from  a public  school  unless  a special  school 
is  provided  that  furnishes  equal  privileges  and 
educational  facilities.  Pupils  need  not  do 
work  that  should  be  performed  by  school 
officials.  Teachers  have  the  right  to  punish 
so  long  as  they  are  not  actuated  by  malice, 
or  inflict  punishment  wantonly.  In  many 
states  pupils  are  required  to  attend  a certain 
number  of  days  each  year  unless  a reasonable 
excuse  is  accepted  by  the  truant  officer.  See 
Educational  Administration.  References: 
S.  M.  Wilcox,  “Legal  Rights  of  Children”  in 
Bureau  of  Education,  Circular,  No.  3 (1880) 
96;  R.  C.  Hill,  “High  School  Fraternities”  in 
Educational  Review  (Feb.,  1912).  J.  V.  B. 

PURCHASE  OF  PUBLIC  SUPPLIES  AND 
PROPERTY.  One  of  the  most  difficult  func- 
tions of  American  government  is  to  make  the 
necessary  purchases  of  materials  and  supplies 
for  public  use,  an  outlay  which  is  surpassed 
only  by  the  salaries  of  public  officers  as  a 
department  of  public  expenditure.  The  Ameri- 
can government  erects  public  buildings  and 
buys  building  materials  of  every  kind;  it  sup- 
ports paupers,  prisoners  and  other  dependents, 
and  provides  food,  clothing  and  other  neces- 
saries for  them;  it  constructs  public  works  in- 
volving heavy  purchases;  supplies  working  ma- 
terials and  tools,  work  animals  and  other 
forms  of  power;  purchases  large  quantities  of 
office  supplies  and  stationery.  Nowhere  in  the 
United  States  is  there  a proper  machinery  for 
this  public  function,  constructed  with  the  same 
skill  and  exercising  the  same  precaution  as  is 
daily  shown  by  the  purchasing  agents  of  rail- 
roads and  other  great  corporations. 

A prime  difficulty  is  the  diffusion  of  pur- 
chases among  a multitude  of  individuals  and 
boards.  Normally,  every  separate  organiza- 
tion, such  as  school  trustees  in  a district, 
wardens  of  county  jails,  overseers  of  the  poor, 
highway  commissioners,  managers  of  public 
bathhouses,  city  school  boards,  trustees  of  in- 
sane hospitals  and  other  public  institutions 
and  each  of  hundreds  of  state  and  national 
bureaus  and  executive  officers  have  legal  au- 
thority to  make  purchases  for  public  purposes. 
This  means  waste,  since  quantities  are  never 
very  economically  calculated;  it  means  dupli- 


120 


PURCHASE  OF  PUBLIC  SUPPLIES  AND  PROPERTY 


cation,  since  the  same  kind  of  thing  is  bought 
or  made  at  different  places  for  different  insti- 
tutions; it  means  great  difficulty  in  securing 
the  quality  of  the  article  ordered;  it  means 
also  indefinite  opportunities  for  fraud  in  both 
qualities  and  quantities.  The  whole  system  is 
an  invitation  to  extravagance,  to  looseness  of 
business  methods,  and  to  positive  frauds  in 
which  public  officers  are  too  frequently  parties. 

Audit. — Various  means  have  been  devised  for 
the  reform  of  this  notable  evil.  The  first  is 
the  use  of  a complicated  accounting  system, 
in  which  one  officer  is  appointed  to  check  up 
the  accounts  of  another.  Most  large  offices 
have  by  law  an  official  commonly  called  an 
auditor,  who  passes  upon  bills  that  are  to  be 
paid,  and  who  is  in  a position  to  detect 
obvious  errors,  such  as  rendering  more  than 
one  bill  for  the  same  transaction ; raising 
prices  above  the  agreed  amount;  and  false 
additions  or  multiplication.  On  the  whole  this 
system  strains  out  the  grosser  frauds  and 
errors.  Sometimes  it  is  carried  to  preposter- 
ous lengths.  Under  the  old  Indian  service  of 
the  United  States  the  accounts  were  so  con- 
torted that  a squaw  could  not  draw  a paper 
of  pins  from  the  agency  store  without  the 
words  “paper  of  pins”  being  written  or  print- 
ed in  the  accounts  of  the  government  twenty- 
seven  times;  and  yet  no  department  of  the 
government  is  more  subject  to  frauds  in  pur- 
chases than  the  Indian  service. 

Boards  of  Control. — A reform  which  is  now 
making  rapid  headway  in  the  states  of  the 
Union,  is  to  bring  all  the  state  institutions 
under  one  direction  commonly  called  a board 
of  control  (see),  in  some  states  board  of 
affairs.  Minnesota,  West  Virginia  and  Okla- 
homa are  examples  of  states  in  which  the  sys- 
tem has  been  worked  out.  In  West  Virginia 
a board  of  three  persons  in  1911  took  over 
the  duty  of  boards  previously  aggregating 
about  120  people.  This  central  board  makes 
the  purchases  and  keeps  the  accounts  for  all 
the  institutions  committed  to  it;  thereby  a 
breach  is  made  in  one  of  the  chief  sources  of 
extravagance,  namely  the  habit  of  local  boards 
to  place  their  orders  only  with  local  business 
men.  However  honest  boards  and  purveyors 
may  be,  that  system  tends  to  higher  prices 
than  would  be  paid  in  the  open  markets  of 
the  state. 

A serious  difficulty  of  the  control  board 
system  is  that  it  has  in  several  states  collided 
with  the  state  educational  board  or  boards; 
thus  in  Minnesota  the  board  of  control  re- 
ceived authority  to  decide  on  the  scale  of  ex- 
penditures of  the  state  university,  leaving  the 
regents  of  the  university  the  task  of  making 
decisions  on  the  educational  question  with- 
out any  power  to  decide  in  what  direction  in- 
struction should  expand  or  contract. 

So  far,  boards  of  this  type  have  been  set 
up  in  few  municipalities;  the  finance  commis- 
sion of  Boston,  which  is  a part  of  the  city 


government,  answers  much  the  same  purpose 
through  its  power  to  call  public  attention  to 
irregularities  in  the  city  government.  Com- 
mission governments  become  substantially  one 
board  for  the  making  of  purchases. 

Uniform  Accounts. — Even  where  the  purchas- 
ing is  not  centralized  great  gains  may  be  made 
by  compelling  states  or  local  institutions  to 
submit  their  accounts  in  a prescribed  and 
uniform  system.  By  the  use  of  the  deadly 
per  capita  comparison  it  is  easy  to  see  where 
one  institution  is  paying  a higher  price  for 
the  same  kind  of  supplies  than  another.  The 
Federal  Government  now  systematically  collects 
and  compares  the  statistics  of  American  munic- 
ipalities, so  that  tax-payers  may  see  for  them- 
selves where  their  city  government  is  waste- 
ful or  dishonest. 

Competitive  Contracts. — The  commonest  re- 
striction on  public  purchases  is  that  they  shall 
be  made  by  contract  under  competitive  bids. 
Many  states  have  specific  laws  to  the  effect 
that  state  or  municipal  purchases  beyond  a 
certain  amount  (usually  from  $100  to  $500) 
shall  he  made  only  in  this  manner.  These 
acts  are  evaded  in  various  ways : ( 1 ) by 

simply  ignoring  them,  which,  however,  is  like- 
ly to  lead  to  trouble  with  the  auditor;  (2)  by 
allowing  favored  bidders  to  know  the  figures 
of  the  other  people;  (3)  by  encouraging  com- 
binations of  bidders  each  of  whom  gets  the 
contract  in  his  turn;  (4)  by  buying  succes- 
sive small  lots  of  supplies  just  under  the  limit 
for  non-advertised  purchases.  The  principal 
defect  of  the  contract  system  is,  however,  the 
difficulty  of  checking  up  deliveries  by  samples 
and  of  controlling  weights  and  measures.  Since 
purchases  are  made  in  so  many  varied  lots, 
different  standards  are  used;  and  in  the  pur- 
chase of  many  supplies  such  as  stationery,  tex- 
tiles, and  the  commoner  food  stuffs,  the  sam- 
ple or  the  standard  is  likely  to  be  ignored. 

Efficiency  Commissions. — Various  state  com- 
missions have  gone  into  the  question  of  pur- 
chases and  accounts  in  connection  with  the  gen- 
eral financial  system  of  states  and  cities;  but 
the  most  searching  investigation  has  been  made 
by  the  so  called  “President’s  Commission  on 
Economy  and  Efficiency”  appointed  in  1911 
by  President  Taft.  This  commission,  composed 
of  experts  in  municipal,  territorial  and  national 
finance  and  administration,  has  made  a care- 
ful study  of  the  purchasing  and  accounting 
methods  of  the  Federal  Government  with  a view 
to  standardizing  the  supplies,  concentrating 
the  purchasing  officials,  and  keeping  such  rec- 
ords as  will  enable  the  government  to  know 
where  its  supplies  go  and  how  they  are  used. 

The  Future. — The  ultimate  reform  in  this 
field  will  probably  be  in  all  types  of  Amer- 
ican government  the  designation  of  a central 
purchasing  authority — commissioner,  board  or 
office — through  whose  hands  all  orders  will 
pass,  and  who  will  make  it  his  business  to  see 
that  the  estimates  and  requisitions  are  for 


121 


PURE  FOOD 


needed  supplies;  and  that  the  goods  are  actual- 
ly delivered  in  the  quantities  and  qualities  or- 
dered; and  that  they  are  distributed  to  those 
officials  who  are  to  use  them. 

See  Appropriations,  American  System  of; 
Boards  of  Control,  State;  Boards,  State  Ex- 
ecutive; Committee  System  in  tiie  United 
States;  Cost  of  Government  in  the  United 
States;  Expenditures,  State  and  Local; 
Experts  in  American  Government;  Institu- 
tions, State  Administration  of;  Investiga- 
tions, Legislative;  Public  Accounts;  Pub- 
lic Property;  Treasury  Department. 

References:  Boston  Finance  Commission,  An- 
nual Report  (1909  to  date);  Commission  on 
Economy  and  Efficiency,  Reports  (1912-13); 
Sec.  of  Treasury,  Annual  Reports  (1789  to 
date).  Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

PURE  FOOD.  Most  people  regard  as  pure 
food  all  commercial  edibles,  which  are  not  de- 
based by  the  addition  of  chemical  preservatives, 
coloring  matter,  or  objectionable  outside  in- 
gredients, or  are  not  manufactured  out  of  unfit 
material.  There  is  considerable  confusion  be- 
tween “purity”  and  “quality.”  An  article 
of  diet  may  be  “pure,”  yet  of  a very  inferior 
quality;  or  on  the  other  hand,  it  may  be  high- 
grade  and  expensive,  yet  be  adulterated  and 
therefore  impure.  Food  adulteration  is  as  old 
as  trade,  but  the  concentration  of  what  used 
to  be  preserving  and  cooking  exclusively  by 
vast  commercial  corporations  has  increased  the 
possibilities  for  fraud;  and  also  makes  the 
sophistication  of  food  a serious  menace  to  the 
health  of  millions  of  people. 

Federal  Law. — After  twenty-five  years  of 
effort,  public  opinion  compelled  Congress  to 
enact  a federal  law  June  30,  1906,  called  the 
Food  and  Drugs  Act.  Foods  are  now  held 
to  be  adulterated  if  any  noil-nutritious  sub- 
stances have  been  substituted  for  them ; if 
any  valuable  constituent  of  the  article  has 
been  removed  (this  is  broadly  true  but 
must  be  limited  because  there  are  many 
cases  where  a valuable  constituent  is  ex- 
tracted in  the  preparation  of  food  and  no 
adulteration  practiced)  ; if  they  be  mixed,  col- 
ored, powdered,  coated  or  stained,  whereby  dam- 
age or  inferiority  is  concealed;  if  they  contain 
any  added  poisonous  or  other  deleterious  in- 
gredients which  may  render  the  foods  injurious 
to  health ; if  the  food  consists  of  a filthy  decom- 
posed or  putrid  animal  or  vegetable  substance, 
or  of  any  portion  of  an  animal  unfit  for  food. 
The  use  of  preservatives  by  external  applica- 
tion is  permitted  when  the  directions  for  their 
removal  are  printed  on  the  package. 

Violations  of  the  law  are  made  misdemeanors 
and  each  offense  is  punishable  by  fine  or  im- 
prisonment or  both.  Food  is  held  to  be  mis- 
branded when  the  container  bears  any  state- 
ment that  is  false  or  misleading. 

The  law  permits  the  sale  of  imitation  foods, 
if  manufacturers  label  them  imitations,  com- 


pounds or  blends.  The  jobber  or  retailer  buys 
them  as  “imitations,”  but  unless  they  are  con- 
tained in  the  original  packages  they  are  sold 
to  the  consumer  as  real,  genuine  food. 

This  Food  and  Drugs  Act  affords  pretty  ade- 
quate protection  to  people  intelligent  enough 
to  read  the  labels;  but  certain  manufacturing 
interests  which  insist  upon  artificial  preserva- 
tives, have  struggled  ceaselessly  to  nullify  some 
of  the  provisions  of  the  law.  Its  interpreta- 
tions, too,  by  bodies  outside  the  U.  S.  Bureau 
of  Chemistry  (and  by  certain  of  those  within) 
has  tended  to  combat  the  spirit  of  the  law 
itself. 

The  most  radical  and  far  reaching  extension 
of  the  Food  and  Drugs  Act  probably  ever  made 
went  into  effect  June  16,  1913,  putting  domes- 
tic meat  and  meat  food  products  for  the  first 
time  fully  under  the  provisions  of  the  Food 
and  Drugs  Act. 

This  action  was  taken  by  revoking  Regula- 
tion 39  which  specifically  exempted  meats  and 
meat  food  products  and  their  producers  from 
the  operation  of  the  Food  and  Drugs  Act. 

The  revocation  of  Regulation  39  now  gives 
the  Department  of  Agriculture  the  power  to 
treat  meats  and  meat  food  products  exactly 
like  any  other  food  in  interstate  commerce. 
The  change,  however,  in  no  way  interferes  with 
the  powers  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture 
conducted  under  the  Meat  Inspection  Law.  It 
simply  brings  meat  under  the  Food  Act,  as  well 
as  under  the  Meat  Inspection  Law,  and  thus 
gives  the  Government  control  over  meat  foods, 
not  only  in  the  federally  inspected  establish- 
ments, but  after  the  meat  product  has  left  such 
establishment  on  an  interstate  journey. 

State  and  Local  Laws. — Any  firm,  which  does 
not  carry  on  an  interstate  business  may  sell 
impure  foods  in  its  own  state,  without  being 
amenable  to  the  National  Food  Law.  These 
firms  are  governed  only  by  state  laws  and  the 
extent  of  adulteration  will  depend  upon  the 
character  of  these  statutes  and  the  manner  in 
which  they  are  enforced. 

Some  cities  have  “sanitary  codes.”  whose 
rulings  affect  hotels,  restaurants,  and  delicates- 
sens. Frequently,  however,  cheap  food  com- 
binations are  sold  in  poor  districts,  exposed  to 
flies,  animals  and  vermin.  All  such  articles 
might  be  technically  considered  as  “pure  food,” 
so  long  as  not  adulterated — yet  would  form  a 
serious  menace  to  health. 

Even  the  rich  who  can  afford  the  best  pro- 
ducts have  no  knowledge  outside  their  own 
houses  as  to  the  purity  of  the  food  they  are 
consuming.  Although  the  law  compels  cer- 
tain ingredients  to  be  stated  on  the  label  of  the 
original  package  or  container,  the  food  which 
is  taken  out  of  this,  and  served  upon  the  table 
in  dishes,  bears  no  label,  to  indicate  the  pres- 
ence of  chemical  preservatives,  etc. 

Among  some  of  the  adulterations  are:  (1) 
meats  treated  with  chemical  preservatives  and 
artificial  colors,  sausages,  and  other  prepared 


122 


PURE  FOOD 


meats  adulterated,  with  starch;  (2)  the  mix- 
ture of  lard  with  other  and  cheaper  fats; 
(3)  the  substitution  of  cheaper  meats  for  the 
genuine  article  in  potted  chicken,  and  the  sale 
of  diseased,  tainted  and  filthy  meat;  (4)  the 
canning  of  an  inferior  grade  of  fish,  or  even  a 
different  kind  of  fish  under  the  name  of  the 
better  species;  (5)  the  coloring  of  butter, 
cheese,  canned  fruit,  jellies,  ice  cream,  tea, 
cakes  and  other  products  with  coal  tar  and 
other  dyes,  and  misbranding  cheese  in  respect 
of  the  country  where  made,  the  selling  of 
oleomargarin  for  butter;  (C)  the  mixture  of 
rye  flour,  Indian  corn  flour,  wheat  flour  and 
other  ground  cereals  for  buckwheat;  (7)  the 
adulteration  of  canned  corn  with  saccharin, 
maize,  starch  and  bleaching  agents,  and  rye 
flour  by  the  admixture  of  flours  of  other 
cereals;  (8)  fruit  juice  is  found  preserved  by 
means  of  antiseptics,  fruit  syrups  imitated  by 
synthetic  products  and  jellies  artificially  fla- 
vored and  preserved  with  chemical  preserva- 
tives; (9)  olive  oil  is  adulterated  with  cot- 
ton seed  oil,  milk  with  chemical  preservatives 
and  water,  and  peppers  and  spices  with  coarse- 
ly ground  shells  and  fruit  stones;  (10)  filthy 
and  decayed  tomato  pulp  is  used  in  the  mak- 
ing of  ketchup;  (11)  candy  is  coated  and 
painted  with  varnish  and  even  soapstone  and 
has  been  found  to  contain  sulphites,  paraffin, 
gum  benzoin,  shellac  and  stearin.  A recent 


bulletin  from  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Agri- 
culture states  that  analysis  has  disclosed  the 
presence  of  considerable  arsenic  in  practically 
all  shellacs  used. 

The  “adulterators,”  the  manufacturers  who 
make  their  living  by  putting  up  foods  which 
are  treated  with  chemical  preservatives,  etc., 
oppose  all  good  food  legislation,  in  a systema- 
tized and  concerted  way.  The  only  solution  of 
the  problem  of  securing  absolutely  pure  food 
for  the  people,  is  an  educated  public  demanding 
government  inspection  of  factories  where  foods 
are  manufactured,  state  and  city  food  laws  in 
harmony  with  the  national  law,  and  the  strict- 
est health  regulations  and  legislation  requiring 
the  use  of  good  sound  raw  material,  and  for- 
bidding all  harmful  ingredients. 

See  Drugs,  Public  Regulation  of;  Health, 
Public,  Regulation  of  ; Markets,  Regulation 
of;  Meat  Inspection. 

References:  H.  C.  Wiley,  Foods  and  Their 
Adulteration  (1911);  C.  Baskerville,  Mu - 
nicipal  Chemistry  (1911),  chs.  ii,  ix,  xi ; 
U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  Food  Inspec- 
tions  Decisions  (issued  from  time  to  time); 
Rutledge  Rutherford,  “Child  Murder  Traffic”  in 
National  Food  Magazine,  August,  1911;  Com- 
mittee on  Expenditures  of  House  of  Rep.,  Re- 
port, 62  Cong.,  2 Sess.,  Jan.  22,  1912;  Am.  Year 
Book,  1910,  405-407,  and  year  by  year. 

Paul  Pierce. 


106 


123 


QUALIFICATIONS  FOR  OFFICE 


Q 


QUALIFICATIONS  FOR  OFFICE.  Federal. 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  states 
the  qualifications  for  holding  each  elective  ollice 
in  the  general  government  and  further  requires 
that  all  legislative,  executive  and  judicial  offi- 
cers in  the  states  and  nation  shall  be  bound  by 
oath  or  affirmation  to  support  the  Constitu- 
tion (Art.  I,  Sec.  ii,  U 2,  Sec.  iii,  If  3,  Art.  II, 
Sec.  i,  THf  2,  5,  Art.  VI,  If  3).  The  application 
of  any  religious  test  for  officeholders  under  the 
national  government  is  expressly  forbidden. 
No  federal  officeholder  may  be  a presidential 
elector.  These  are  the  only  general  limitations 
made.  Article  II  of  the  Constitution  declares 
that  “No  person  except  a natural-born  citizen, 
or  a citizen  of  the  United  States  at  the  time  of 
the  adoption  of  this  Constitution  shall  be  elig- 
ible to  the  office  of  President,”  nor  one  who  is 
not  thirty-five  years  of  age  and  for  fourteen 
years  a resident  within  the  United  States.  It 
also  prescribes  the  oath  of  office  and  provides 
that  the  Vice-President  shall  succeed  to  the 
office  of  President  when  for  any  cause  it  be- 
comes vacant.  Foreign-born  citizens  are  ex- 
cluded from  this  office.  Children  born  to  cit- 
izens temporarily  residing  abroad  are  counted 
as  native-born  citizens.  Although  the  Con- 
stitution places  no  restriction  on  reelection  to 
the  presidency  the  two-term  precedent  estab- 
lished by  Washington  has  so  far  (1914)  been 
followed.  (For  qualifications  arising  from  our 
party  system  see  Candidate;  Party  System  in 
Doubtful  States  ; Party'  System  in  Sure 
States.) 

A candidate  for  the  United  States  Senate 
must  be  at  least  thirty  years  of  age,  a citizen 
of  the  LTnited  States  for  nine  years  and  a resid- 
ent in  the  state  from  which  he  is  elected.  The 
last  provisions  does  not  prevent  Senators  from 
making  their  homes  in  Washington  while  pre- 
serving their  legal  residence  in  their  states. 
Representatives  meet  the  same  residence  re- 
quirement, but  need  be  only  twenty-five  years 
of  age  and  citizens  of  seven  years’  standing. 
No  member  of  either  house  of  Congress  during 
his  term  of  service  may  hold  any  other  office 
under  the  United  States.  If  a Representative 
or  Senator  accepts  a federal  office,  that  act 
vacates  his  seat  in  Congress.  Rut  if  the  holder 
of  a federal  office  is  elected  to  Congress  he 
may  continue  to  serve  until  he  is  ready  to  as- 
sume the  active  duties  of  the  House;  then 
the  other  office  becomes  vacant.  Members  of 
Congress  are  disqualified  until  the  end  of 
their  term  of  service  in  Congress  from  appoint- 
ment to  offices  which,  as  law-makers,  they  have 


created  or  the  salaries  attached  to  which  they 
have  increased. 

The  Constitution  places  no  limitations  as  to 
the  choice  of  justices  of  the  Supreme  Court  and 
other  federal  courts.  They  are  appointed  by 
the  President  with  the  approval  of  the  Senate. 
The  President  selects  his  Cabinet  without  re- 
striction, except  that  Congress  has  forbidden 
anyone  interested  in  import  trade  to  hold  the 
office  of  Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 

The  remaining  federal  offices  are  filled  by 
appointment,  which,  save  for  the  general  oath 
of  office,  is  limited  only  by  acts  of  Congress  or 
by  custom  (see  Appointments  to  Office). 
Women,  minors  and  aliens  may  and  do  hold  ap- 
pointive offices.  In  connection  with  foreign 
legations  and  consulships  citizens  of  foreign 
states  are  often  sworn  into  the  service  of  the 
LTnited  States.  Nothing  in  the  Constitution 
or  statutes  forbids  such  a practice.  By  stat- 
ute and  executive  order  an  increasing  number 
of  offices  in  the  civil  service  (see)  are  being 
put  under  the  “merit  system”  (see). 

State. — The  Federal  Constitution  at  first  lim- 
ited the  states  in  respect  to  office  only  by  the 
requirement  that  “all  state  and  local  officers 
shall  be  bound  by  oath,  or  affirmation,  to  sup- 
port the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.” 
The  Fourteenth  and  Fifteenth  Amendments 
(see)  have  made  only  a slight  change  in  the 
power  of  the  states  over  their  officers.  A state 
law  that  in  express  terms  deprived  a negro 
citizen  of  the  right  to  vote  or  hold  office  would 
be  held  unconstitutional;  but  state  laws  of 
disqualifying  effect  have  been  held  Y'alid  by 
federal  courts.  States,  therefore,  still  have 
practical  control  over  local  and  state  office. 

When  the  Constitution  was  adopted,  a major- 
ity of  the  states  required  religious  tests  for 
officeholders.  The  franchise  was  granted  in 
several  New  England  states  only  to  church 
members,  and  in  South  Carolina  (constitution 
of  1778)  only  to  those  who  “acknowledged  the 
being  of  a God  and  a future  state  of  rewards 
and  punishments.”  The  state  constitutions 
adopted  between  1776  and  1800  very  generally 
contained  some  sort  of  religious  test  as  a qual- 
ification for  office.  Members  of  the  state  legis- 
lature should  be  “Protestants,”  or  “Christ- 
ians,” or,  as  in  Pennsylvania  (1790),  they 
should  “believe  in  God  and  a future  state  of 
rewards  and  punishments,”  or,  as  in  Delaware 
(1776),  they  should  “believe  in  the  Trinity 
and  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures.”  With 
the  rise  of  Jeffersonian  democracy  to  power, 
religious  tests  gradually  disappeared,  although 


124 


QUARANTINE— QUASI-PUBLIC  CORPORATIONS 


a remnant  still  survives  in  eight  states.  South 
Carolina,  having  omitted  all  religious  tests 
from  the  constitution  of  1865,  inserted  a clause 
three  years  later  forbidding  anyone  to  hold 
the  office  of  governor  who  “denies  the  existence 
of  a Supreme  Being.”  This  clause  is  continued 
in  the  constitution  of  1895.  Property  qualifi- 
cations have  run  a similar  course  to  that  of 
religious  tests,  going  down  before  the  wave 
of  democracy  in  the  early  part  of  the  nine- 
teenth century.  The  required  amount  of  prop- 
erty usually  varied  with  the  dignity  of  the 
office.  In  the  Massachusetts  constitution  of 
1780,  for  example,  a graded  requirement  rises 
from  the  elector’s  freehold  yielding  a rent  of 
£3  to  the  governor’s  free-hold  of  £1000.  The 
governor’s  property  in  South  Carolina  at  the 
same  date  must  be  £19,000.  Property  or  tax- 
paying  limitations  in  recent  constitutions  of 
certain  southern  states  form  a part  of  the 
plan  to  exclude  negroes  from  vote  and  office. 

In  requirements  as  to  age,  residence  and 
citizenship  state  constitutions  resemble  the 
Federal  Constitution  with  varying  details.  For 
governor,  the  minimum  age  varies  from  twenty- 
five  to  thirty-five  years,  thirty  years  being  the 
prevailing  limit;  for  senator,  from  twenty-one 
to  thirty-five  years;  for  members  of  the  lower 
house,  ordinarily  twenty-one  years,  in  a few  in- 
stances twenty-five  years.  Citizenship  is  al- 
most universally  required  for  holding  any  state 
office.  A few  of  the  earlier  constitutions  speci- 
fied that  the  governor  should  be  native-born. 
Illinois  (1818)  required  a citizenship  of  thirty 
years;  Massachusetts  (1817)  one  of  twenty 
years;  Connecticut  (1818)  is  contented  with 
the  bare  fact  of  citizenship.  Within  these  lim- 
its the  variations  are  numerous.  The  present 
requirement  as  to  residence  within  the  state  va- 
ries from  the  bare  fact  of  residence  to  residence 
for  a period  of  ten  years  next  preceding  the 
election.  For  members  of  the  legislature  ten 
years  of  citizenship  is  now  the  maximum  re- 
quirement; five  years  is  ordinary;  and  several 
states  assign  no  mimimum  limit.  The  rule 
concerning  residence  within  the  state  varies 
from  no  limit  to  ten  years;  within  the  district 
it  is  nearly  always  one  year  for  both  senators 
and  representatives. 

These  constitutional  laws  usually  apply  only 
to  the  governor  and  members  of  the  legislature. 
Most  state  constitutions,  like  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution, fix  no  limitations  for  admission  to 
judicial  office.  But  the  constitution  of  Cali- 
fornia requires  members  of  the  Supreme  Court 
to  be  attorneys  with  a license  to  practice  be- 
fore the  court.  Colorado  specifies  qualifications 
of  other  executive  officers  along  with  the  gov- 
ernor and  requires  that  the  attorney  general 
shall  be  a lawyer  with  a license  to  practice 
before  the  supreme  court.  Oregon  requires 
of  the  judges  citizenship,  a three  years’  res- 
idence in  the  state  and  residence  in  the  dis- 
trict of  their  official  duties.  All  these  are  ex- 
ceptional provisions.  Except  in  the  states 


having  woman  suffrage  state  constitutions 
specify  “male  citizens”  as  having  a right  to 
vote,  but  most  constitutions  make  no  such 
specification  in  respect  to  the  holding  of  office. 
Consequently  women  have  made  good  their 
claim  to  the  right  of  holding  elective  offices. 
This  they  cannot  do  where  the  constitution 
contains  the  sweeping  provision  that  all  offi- 
cers chosen  by  election  shall  have  the  qualifi- 
cation of  electors  in  the  state. 

Quite  apart  from  constitutional  provisions 
state  legislatures  exercise  a wide  range  of 
powers  over  minor  offices.  Many  of  the  states 
have  elaborate  civil  service  laws.  But  the  most 
important  office  subject  to  regulation  by  state 
legislatures  is  that  of  teacher  in  the  public 
schools.  Every  state  prescribes  the  conditions 
for  entering  and  following  the  profession  of 
teaching. 

See  Appointments  to  Office;  Congress; 
Governor  ; President,  Power  and  Author- 
ity of;  Public  Officials. 

References:  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Government 
and  Politics  (1910),  ch.  vi;  F.  N.  Thorpe, 
Federal  and  State  Constitutions  (1909),  Con- 
stitutional Hist,  of  Am.  People  (1898), 

I,  ch.  iii,  II,  ch.  xiii;  B.  Moses,  Govern- 
ment of  U.  S.  (1906),  64,  73,  153;  A.  B. 
Hart,  Actual  Government  (1903),  128,  223;  F. 

II.  Miller,  “Legal  Qualifications  for  Office  in 
America,  1619-1899”  in  Am.  Hist.  Assoc.,  An- 
nual Report,  1899,  I,  87-154. 

Jesse  Macy. 

QUARANTINE.  The  word  is  derived  from 
the  Italian  quaranta,  and  refers  to  the  forty 
days’  detainment  customary  in  Italian  ports 
from  mediaeval  times  onward,  for  vessels  sus- 
pected to  be  infected  with  contagious  disease. 
Quarantine  was  the  earliest  and  the  crudest 
form  of  public  health  work  both  in  this  country 
and  elsewhere.  It  is  rapidly  becoming  sup- 
planted by  methods  which  tend  to  stamp  out 
the  disease  at  its  source,  as  yellow  fever  has 
been  stamped  out  in  Cuba.  See  Contagious 
Diseases;  Health,  Public,  Regulation  of. 

R.  C.  C. 

QUASI-PUBLIC  CORPORATIONS.  Nature; 
Definition;  Classes. — Some  corporations,  al- 
though in  nature  private,  are  organized  for  the 
transaction  of  kinds  of  business  which,  as  they 
directly  affect  the  public,  are  especially  sub- 
ject to  legislative  control,  or  for  the  manage- 
ment of  property  especially  devoted  to  a pub- 
lic use,  or  are  authorized  to  exercise  privileges 
especially  for  the  public  benefit,  and  are  there- 
fore said  to  be  quasi-public.  The  term  is 
inapt  for  they  are  not  public  corporations  nor 
quasi-corporations.  They  have  sometimes 
more  aptly  been  called  public  service  corpora- 
tions. The  public  nature  of  their  subject  mat- 
ter may  consist  in  the  fact  that  they  are  au- 
thorized to  exercise  the  power  of  eminent  do- 
main (see)  ; or  to  transact  for  the  profit  of 


125 


QUAY,  MATTHEW  STANLEY— QUEBEC 


their  members  business  which  the  state  might 
under  its  own  authority,  or  through  its  mu- 
nicipal corporations,  transact  directly  for  the 
public  benefit;  or  to  devote  property  to  gen- 
eral public  uses  ( see  Public  Use)  although 
for  their  own  profit;  or  to  engage  in  forms  of 
business  which  have  been  generally  regarded 
as  peculiarly  subject  to  legislative  regulation. 
These  classes  are  not  exclusive  nor  exhaustive 
hut  descriptive  only,  as  furnishing  one  or  more 
grounds  on  which  such  corporations  have  been 
subjected  to  various  forms  of  public  regula- 
tion (see  Granger  Cases;  Munn  vs.  Illinois). 
Within  the  description  of  this  title  have  been 
included  companies  authorized  to  construct 
and  operate  turnpikes,  bridges,  ferries,  rail- 
roads, street  and  interurban  railways,  tele- 
graph and  telephone  lines,  electric  light  and 
power  plants,  gas  and  water  plants,  heating 
plants,  grist  mills,  grain  elevators,  etc.;  also 
private  corporations  authorized  to  construct 
public  improvements,  such  as  irrigation  or 
drainage  ditches  and  levees,  and  companies  au- 
thorized to  improve  the  navigation  of  streams. 

Regulation  of  Business  and  Rates. — Although 
the  charters  or  franchises  granted  to  public 
service  corporations  are  contracts  which  can 
not  be  impaired  by  legislation  unless  the  right 
has  been  reserved  at  the  time  of  their  creation 
or  grant  (see  Charles  River  Bridge  vs.  War- 
ren Bridge;  Dartmouth  College  Case), 
nevertheless  the  nature  of  the  business  justi- 
fies such  regulation  and  control  as  might  be 
exercised  with  reference  to  like  forms  of  busi- 
ness conducted  by  private  individuals.  Such 
power  of  regulation  and  control  involves  the 
imposition  of  conditions  on  which  private  prop- 
erty may  be  taken  under  the  power  of  eminent 
domain,  and  public  property  such  as  highways 
and  streets  may  be  used ; the  regulation  of 
rates  which  may  be  charged;  and  requirements 
for  service  to  all  without  unreasonable  dis- 
crimination. In  the  regulation  of  rates,  leg- 
islative power  must  not  be  so  exercised  as  to 
deprive  the  corporation  of  a fair  return  upon 
the  reasonable  value  of  the  property  used,  or 
a fair  compensation  for  the  services  rendered ; 
for  to  deny  to  a private  corporation  a just 
compensation  for  its  services  or  for  the  use 
of  its  property  would  be  to  deprive  it  of  its 
property  without  due  process  of  law  in  viola- 
tion of  constitutional  provisions. 

See  Business,  Government  Restriction  of; 
Corporations,  Bureau  of;  Due  Process  of 
Law;  Franchises,  Corporation;  Monopolies; 
Public  Service  Corporations;  Public  Utili- 
ties; Railroad  Commissions,  State. 

Emlin  McClain. 

QUAY,  MATTHEW  STANLEY.  Matthew 
S.  Quay  (1S33-1004)  was  born  at  Dillsburg, 
Pa.,  September  30,  1833.  He  was  admitted  to 
the  bar  in  1854,  and  in  1856  and  1859  was 
elected  prothonotary  of  Beaver  county.  He 
served  in  the  Union  army  during  the  Civil 


War,  receiving  a congressional  medal  of  honor. 
From  1865  to  1867  he  was  a member  of  the 
Pennsylvania  legislature,  secretary  of  the  com- 
monwealth from  1872  to  1878  and  1879  to 
1882,  and  in  1885  state  treasurer.  By  this 
time  he  had  become  the  Republican  boss  of 
Pennsylvania,  was  elected  United  States  Sen- 
ator in  1887,  and  in  1888  was  chosen  chair- 
man of  the  Republican  national  committee. 
His  use  of  money  in  the  campaign,  in  part,  it 
was  alleged,  for  corrupt  purposes,  was  severely 
criticized;  and  he  was  further  believed  “to 
have  bound  Harrison  hard  and  fast  in  the  dis- 
pensing of  patronage.”  Harrison  freed  him- 
self in  the  course  of  his  administration,  and 
Quay  opposed  his  renomination  in  1892.  In 
1894  he  confessed  to  having  speculated  in  sugar 
stock,  anticipating  a rise  through  the  enact- 
ment of  the  Gorman- Wilson  tariff  (see  Wil- 
son-Gorman  Tariff).  In  1899  he  was  tried 
for  misappropriation  of  state  funds,  and  ac- 
quitted; the  same  day  he  was  appointed  Unit- 
States  Senator  ad  interim , and  in  1901  was 
reelected.  He  died  at  Beaver,  Pa.,  May  28, 
1904.  See  Boss  and  Boss  System  in  Party 
Organization;  Party  Organization  in  Penn- 
sylvania; Republican  Party.  References: 
Appleton’s  Annual  Cyclopaedia  (1887-1901)  ; 
H.  T.  Peek,  Twenty  Tears  of  the  Republic 
(1906).  W.  MacD. 

QUEBEC.  History. — Quebec  is  the  largest 
of  the  nine  provinces  of  Canada,  with  an  area 
of  over  350,000  square  miles.  It  comprises  the 
territory  lying  northward  of  the  Ottawa  and 
St.  Lawrence  rivers,  together  with  some  small- 
er areas  on  the  south  side  of  these  two  streams. 
The  population  of  the  province  at  the  last  offi- 
cial census  (1911)  was  2,002,712.  The  history 
of  Quebec  as  a British  province  begins  with 
the  capitulation  of  Montreal,  September  8, 
1760,  when  the  civil  government  of  New  France 
was  replaced  by  a temporary  system  of  mili- 
tary rule  by  the  British  conquerors.  After 
the  Treaty  of  Paris  (1763)  George  III  issued 
a royal  proclamation  establishing  a civil  ad- 
ministration consisting  of  a governor  appoint- 
ed by  the  Crown  and  a legislative  council  sim- 
ilarly appointed.  Quebec  was  therefore  gov- 
erned as  a crown  colony  until  1774.  In  1774 
the  British  Parliament  passed  the  Quebec  Act 
(14  Geo.  III.  c.  83)  which  greatly  extended  the 
boundaries  of  the  province,  reestablished  the 
old  French  system  of  law,  and  removed  exist- 
ing religious  disabilities.  It  did  not,  however, 
establish  representative  government,  but  left 
the  civil  administration  in  the  hands  of  the 
governor  and  council  as  before  (see  Quebec 
Act).  Under  these  arrangements  the  province 
passed  through  the  turmoils  accompanying  the 
American  Revolution  including  the  invasions 
of  1775-76. 

After  the  close  of  the  Revolutionary  War 
there  was  a large  immigration  of  Tories  from 
the  seaboard  states,  especially  from  New  Eng- 


126 


QUEBEC  ACT 


land  and  New  York.  Many  of  these  came 
northward  by  way  of  Lake  Champlain  and 
Richelieu  River,  and  took  up  lands  in  the 
territories  south  of  the  St.  Lawrence,  or  the 
“Eastern  Townships”  as  they  were  subsequent- 
ly called.  A larger  number,  however,  went  to 
the  regions  on  the  north  shore  of  Lake  On- 
tario, or  to  the  Niagara  peninsula.  This  influx 
of  settlers  had  two  important  political  results : 

( 1 ) it  accentuated  the  growing  demand  for  a 
system  of  representative  government;  (2)  it 
gave  rise  to  a movement  for  the  separation  of 
Quebec  into  two  provinces,  one  of  which  should 
contain  the  bulk  of  the  newly-arrived  Loyal- 
ists. Accordingly,  in  1791,  the  Imperial  Par- 
liament passed  an  enactment  commonly  known 
as  the  Constitutional  Act  (31  Geo.  III.  c.  31). 

By  the  provisions  of  the  Constitutional  Act 
the  territory  formerly  included  within  the 
province  of  Quebec  was  divided  into  two  prov- 
inces to  be  known  as  Upper  and  Lower  Canada. 
Each  province  was  given  a civil  administra- 
tion consisting  of  a governor,  appointed  by  the 
Crown,  a legislative  council  similarly  appoint- 
ed, and  an  elective  assembly.  In  Upper  Can- 
ada the  legislative  council  was  to  have  not 
less  than  seven  members,  and  an  assembly  of 
not  less  than  sixteen.  In  Lower  Canada  the 
council  was  not  to  be  less  than  fifteen,  and  the 
assembly  not  less  than  fifty  members. 

In  their  actual  workings  the  provisions  of 
the  Constitutional  Act  did  not  prove  satisfac- 
tory. The  governor  and  the  legislative  council, 
in  both  provinces,  came  into  frequent  and  some- 
times bitter  conflict  with  the  assembly,  so  that 
the  political  annals  of  Upper  and  Lower  Can- 
ada during  the  ensuing  forty  years  form  little 
more  than  a record  of  persistent  strife  over 
the  question  of  executive  responsibility.  After 
1830  matters  culminated  in  the  refusal  of  the 
assembly  to  vote  appropriations,  and  in  1837 
rebellions  broke  out  in  both  provinces.  These 
were  quelled  with  some  difficulty,  and  Lord 
Durham  was  sent  out  to  Canada  in  1838  to  in- 
vestigate and  report  upon  the  true  causes  of 
colonial  discontent.  As  a result  of  the  recom- 
mendations contained  in  his  famous  report, 
Parliament  in  1840  passed  an  act  for  the  re- 
union of  the  two  provinces. 

The  Union  Act  of  1840  (3  & 4 Viet.  c.  35) 
in  addition  to  providing  for  the  consolidation 
of  Upper  and  Lower  Canada  into  the  single 
province  of  Canada,  changed  the  structure  of 
government  so  that  it  henceforth  consisted  of 
a governor,  an  appointive  executive  council  or 
ministry,  an  appointive  legislative  council  of 
not  less  than  twenty  members,  and  an  elective 
assembly  of  eighty-four  ( see  Responsible  Gov- 
ernment in  Canada).  This  system  was  con- 
tinued until  1867  when,  under  the  provisions  of 
the  Confederation  Act  the  province  of  Canada 
was  again  divided  into  the  two  provinces  of 
Ontario  and  Quebec. 

Government. — Quebec  accordingly  became  one 
of  the  original  provinces  of  the  Dominion;  it 


has  its  own  provincial  constitution,  and  its 
own  provincial  government.  This  consists  of 
a lieutenant  governor,  appointed  for  a five- 
year  term  by  the  governor  general  of  the  Do- 
minion; a small  executive  council  or  ministry, 
named  by  the  lieutenant  governor  but  respon- 
sible to  the  assembly;  a legislative  council  of 
twenty-four  members  appointed  for  life  by  the 
lieutenant  governor  on  the  advice  of  his  min- 
istry and  an  elective  assembly  of  seventy-four 
members.  The  province  is  represented  in  the 
federal  parliament  by  twenty-four  senators  and 
sixty-five  members  of  the  house  of  commons. 
The  province  has  a code  of  civil  law  based 
largely  upon  the  old  French  system;  but  the 
English  system  of  criminal  law  prevails.  The 
public  schools  of  the  province  are  under  sec- 
tarian control ; but  a system  of  separate  schools 
is  provided  for  non-Catholics.  The  provincial 
capital  is  at  Quebec;  but  Montreal  is  the 
commercial  metropolis. 

See  Canada;  Canadian  Provinces. 

References:  F.  X.  Garneau,  Histoire  du  Can- 
ada (1882-1883)  ; Robert  Christie,  I list,  of  the 
Province  of  Lower  Canada  ( 1866 ) ; J.  A.  Chap- 
eau, The  Constitution  and  Government  of 
Canada  (1894)  ; J.  C.  Hopkins,  The  Canadian 
Annual  Review  of  Public  Affairs-,  G.  M.  Mo- 
rang,  The  Annual  Register  of  Canadian  Affairs. 

William  Bennett  Munro. 

QUEBEC  ACT.  According  to  the  Declaration 
of  Independence,  the  Quebec  act  was  designed 
“for  abolishing  the  free  system  of  English 
laws  in  a neighboring  province,  establishing 
therein  an  arbitrary  government,  and  enlarg- 
ing its  boundaries  so  as  to  render  it  an  example 
and  fit  instrument  for  introducing  the  same 
absolute  rule  into  these  colonies.”  More  accu- 
rately, it  was  the  result  of  a policy  naturally 
evolved  by  careful  attempts  to  solve  the  prob- 
lem of  governing  the  territory  ceded  by  France 
in  1763.  It  sanctioned  English  criminal  law 
with  jury  trial;  retained  French  law  in  civil 
suits;  practically  established  the  Roman 
Catholic  religion;  set  up  a highly  centralized 
government;  reserved  to  Parliament  a power 
of  taxation  except  for  local  purposes;  vested 
all  other  legislative  authority  in  a crown- 
appointed  council,  subject  to  royal  veto.  From 
considerations  of  policy  relating  to  Indians 
and  the  fur  trade,  it  extended  the  boundaries  of 
Quebec  to  include  the  future  Northwest  Terri- 
tory, which,  although  still  vaguely  claimed 
by  Virginia  under  the  extinct  charter  of  1609, 
was  considered  outside  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
coast  colonies  after  the  royal  proclamation  of 
1763.  See  Boundaries  of  the  United  States; 
Colonization  by  Great  Britain  in  America; 
Quebec.  References:  Victor  Coffin,  “Quebec 
Act  and  Am.  Revolution”  in  Am.  Hist.  Assoc., 
Report,,  1894,  273-79;  G.  E.  Howard,  Pre- 
liminaries of  the  Revolution  (1905),  276- 
79;  Am.  Hist.  Rev.,  I (1896),  436-442. 

J.  M.  Callahan. 


QUESTIONS  IN  PARLIAMENT— QUORUM 


QUESTIONS  IN  PARLIAMENT.  Questions 
may  be  asked  by  any  member  in  either  House 
of  Parliament.  They  are  usually  addressed  to 
a minister,  but  may  be  put  to  the  speaker  on 
a point  of  order  or  to  a private  member  re- 
garding business  for  which  he  is  personally 
responsible.  The  practice  is  nearly  two  cen- 
turies old  and  has  been  regular  for  some  fifty 
years.  The  procedure  in  the  Lords  is  more 
elastic  and  informal  than  in  the  Commons  but 
not  essentially  dissimilar.  Questions  in  the 
Commons,  unless  of  an  urgent  character,  are 
written  out,  handed  to  the  clerk  and  printed  in 
the  notice  paper.  When  time  for  questions 
arrives  the  speaker  puts  them  successively 
by  number.  If  an  oral  answer  is  desired,  the 
member  must  mark  his  question  with  an  as- 
terisk. A question  not  so  marked,  or  not 
reached,  or  for  which  the  member  putting  it 
does  not  rise  when  called,  is  answered  in  the 
published  Votes  and  Proceedings  of  the  fol- 
lowing day.  Questions  may  contain  no  argu- 
ments, epithets  or  statements  of  opinion  and 
no  recitals  of  fact  except  those  necessary  to 
clearness.  Their  object  is  information.  The 
motive  of  the  questioner  varies.  It  may  be  to 
get  information,  to  secure  notoriety,  to  air  a 
grievance,  to  embarrass  the  ministry,  or  even 
to  give  a minister  a chance  to  make  an  effect- 
ive statement. 

The  privilege,  though  often  abused,  is  a con- 
stant encouragement  to  publicity.  Ministers 
may  decline  to  answer,  but  a refusal,  without 
obvious  reason  assigned,  usually  leaves  a bad 
impression.  This  publicity,  moreover,  is  se- 
cured without  the  constant  risk  to  the  minis- 
try involved  in  interpellations  (see)  in  con- 
tinental chambers.  Supplementary  questions 
may  be  asked  within  narrow  limits,  but  an- 
swers are  followed  by  neither  debate  nor  vote. 

See  Cabinet  Government;  Executive  Sys- 
tem of  Great  Britain;  House  of  Commons; 
Legislation,  British  System  of;  Parlia- 
ment. 

References:  A.  L.  Lowell,  The  Government  of 
England  (rev.  ed.,  1008),  I,  331-333;  J.  Red- 
lich,  The  Procedure  of  the  House  of  Commons 
(1908),  II,  241-243. 

Henry  A.  Yeomans. 

QUIDS.  The  Quids  were  the  John  Randolph 
(see)  men,  opposed  to  Jefferson  and  Madison. 
They  formed  the  first  “third  party”  in  the 
United  States.  Randolph  claimed  that  his  were 
the  Republican  principles  of  1708,  and  that 
Jefferson  and  Madison  had  departed  from 
them.  The  Quids  opposed  the  Yazoo  land 
frauds,  the  West  Florida  (see)  affairs,  the 
purchase  and  government  of  the  Louisiana 
territory,  the  embargo  policy,  and  the  “back 
stairs”  influence  of  Jefferson  on  Congress. 
They  favored  Monroe  to  succeed  Jefferson,  and 
opposed  Madison.  They  did  not  become  a 
strong  factor  nor  influence  developments  very 
much.  See  Democratic  Party.  References: 


J.  A.  Woodburn,  Pol.  Parties  and  Party  Prob- 
lems (1909),  136;  E.  Channing,  Jeffersonian 
System  (1907),  ch.  x;  H.  Adams,  John  Ran- 
dolph ( 1887 ) , passim.  T.  N.  H. 

QUINCY,  JOSIAH.  Josiah  Quincy  (1772- 
1864)  was  born  at  Boston,  February  4,  1772. 
In  1793  he  was  admitted  to  the  bar.  In  1800 
he  was  the  Federalist  candidate  for  Congress, 
but  was  defeated.  He  was  elected  in  1804, 
however,  and  held  his  seat  until  1812,  when  he 
declined  a reelection.  He  was  a member  of  the 
Federalist  “Essex  junto”  (see),  and  was  bitter 
in  his  opposition  to  the  embargo  and  the  War 
of  1812.  In  1811  he  declared  in  the  House  his 
“deliberate  opinion”  that  the  admission  of 
Louisiana  as  a state  would  be  a virtual  dis- 
solution of  the  Union ; and  that  it  would  be  the 
right  and  duty  of  the  states  “to  prepare  defi- 
nitely for  a separation — amicably,  if  they  can; 
violently,  if  they  must.”  This  was  the  first 
enunciation  in  Congress  of  the  doctrine  of  se- 
cession. From  1814  to  1820  he  was  a member 
of  the  Massachusetts  senate,  a member  of  the 
state  constitutional  convention  in  1820,  and 
in  1821  speaker  of  the  house.  In  1823  he  be- 
came first  mayor  of  Boston,  declining  reelection 
in  1828.  From  1829  to  1845  he  was  president 
of  Harvard  College.  He  died  at  Quincy,  Mass., 
July  1,  1864.  He  wrote  a History  of  Harvard 
University  (2  vols.,  1840)  ; Municipal  History 
of  Boston  (1S52)  ; and  Memoir  of  J.  Q.  Adams 
(1858). 

See  Federalist  Party;  Secession  Contro- 
versy. 

References:  E.  Quincy,  • Life  of  Josiah  Quin- 
cy (1867);  Josiah  Quincy,  Speeches  delivered 
in  the  Cong,  of  the  U.  S.  (1874). 

W.  MacD. 

QUIT  RENT.  The  established  rents  of  free- 
holders and  copyholders  of  a manor,  so  called 
because  the  tenant  went  free  of  any  other 
services.  It  was  a service  to  the  king  or  lord. 
No  rent  of  this  sort  can  exist  in  the  United 
States,  but  the  term  is  sometimes  loosely  ap- 
plied to  other  forms  of  rent.  It  was,  however, 
common  in  the  colonies.  References:  W. 
Blackstone,  Commentaries  (1765),  II,  42;  W. 
S.  Holdsworth,  Hist  of  English  Law  (1909), 
III,  125.  ' H.  M.  B. 

QUORUM.  In  all  legislative  bodies  a cer- 
tain specified  number  of  members,  called  a 
quorum,  must  be  present  for  the  transaction 
of  business.  In  the  United  States  and  in  some 
of  the  countries  of  Europe,  this  number  is 
prescribed  by  the  constitution,  elsewhere  it  is 
fixed  by  statute  or  the  rules  of  procedure. 
In  the  British  Parliament,  the  presence  of  three 
members  constitutes  a quorum  in  the  House 
of  Lords  and  40  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  and 
those  of  most  of  the  states  declare  that  a 
majority  of  the  elected  members  to  each  house 


128 


QUO  WARRANTO 


shall  constitute  a quorum  therein  (Const.,  Art. 
I,  Sec.  v,  If  1).  In  a few,  however,  the  num- 
ber required  is  two-thirds.  The  constitution 
of  New  Hampshire  provides  that  not  less  than 
seven  members  of  the  senate  shall  make  a 
quorum.  That  of  Massachusetts  likewise  pro- 
vides that  not  less  than  16  members  of  the 
senate  and  60  members  of  the  house  shall  con- 
stitute a quorum.  It  is  generally  provided  that 
a smaller  number  than  a quorum  may  adjourn 
from  day  to  day  and  compel  the  attendance  of 
absent  members. 

In  the  House  of  Representatives  at  Washington 
the  practice  was  long  continued  of  noting  only  the 
members  voting  and  thus  by  refusing  to  vote  mem- 
bers might  break  a quorum.  In  1890,  Speaker 
Reed  “directed  the  Clerk  to  enter  on  the  journal 
as  part  of  the  record  of  a yea  and  nay  vote  names 
of  members  present  and  not  voting.”  ...  At  the 
time  of  the  establisnmeut  of  this  principle  the 
Speaker  revived  the  count  by  the  chair  as  a 
method  of  determining  the  presence  of  a quorum 


at  a time  when  no  record  vote  was  ordered 
(Hinds). 

See  Divisions;  Reed,  Thomas  B.;  Voting  in 
Legislative  Bodies. 

Reference:  A.  C.  Hinds,  House  Manual 
(1909),  §54.  J.  W.  G. 

QUO  WARRANTO.  This  ancient  writ  was 
a prerogative  writ  of  the  Crown,  against  one 
who  usurped  or  claimed  any  office,  franchise  or 
liberty  of  the  Crown,  demanding  by  what  right 
he  supported  his  claim.  In  modern  practice 
it  has  been  supplanted  by  an  “information 
in  the  nature  of  quo  warranto,”  criminal  in 
form,  presented  to  the  court  by  the  public 
prosecutor,  for  the  purpose  of  correcting  the 
usurpation,  misuser,  or  nonuser  of  a public 
office  or  corporate  franchise.  Reference:  J.  L. 
High,  Extraordinary  Legal  Remedies  ( 3d  ed., 
1896),  544-546.  H.  M.  B. 


129 


RACE  ELEMENTS— RACE-TRACK  GAMBLING 


R 


RACE  ELEMENTS.  The  United  States  is 
that  country  of  the  world  in  which  there  is 
the  greatest  variety  of  race  elements,  most  of 
them  settled  in  juxtaposition  to  each  other 
and  put  on  an  equal  political  footing.  An 
obvious  classification  of  these  race  elements 
is  as  follows:  (1)  the  native  race,  or  rather 
races,  since  there  are  several  definite  Indian 
stocks  within  the  present  area  of  the  United 
States;  (2)  the  African  race,  including  a 
small  Arab  element,  all  descended  from  African 
ancestors,  most  of  whom  arrived  here  between 
1700  and  1775;  (3)  the  European  races,  nearly 
all  the  race  stocks  of  Europe  having  large  rep- 
resentations, especially  the  Anglo-Saxon,  Ger- 
man, Italian,  Hebrew,  Hungarian  and  various 
Slav  races,  with  smaller  numbers  of  Greeks, 
Portuguese,  Russians  and  Turks;  (4)  Asiatic 
races,  of  which  only  two,  the  Chinese  and  Jap- 
anese have  a numerous  representation.  See 
Aborigines;  Census;  Foreign  Elements  in 
the  United  States;  Native  American  Race; 
Negro  Problem;  Population  of  the  United 
States.  References:  A.  M.  Low,  American 
People  (1909)  ; C.  D.  Wright,  Outline  of 
Practical.  Sociology  (rev.  ed.,  1909),  eh.  iv;  J. 

R.  Commons,  Races  and  Immigrants  in  Am. 
(1907)  ; C.  A.  Hanna,  Scotch-Irish  (1902)  ; A. 
B.  Faust,  German  Elements  (1909);  E.  G. 
Balch,  Our  Slavic  Fellow  Citizens  (1910);  C. 

S.  Bernheimer,  Russian  Jew  in  V.  S.  (1905); 

Eliot  Lord,  Italian  in  Am.  (1905)  ; L.  J.  Fos- 
diek,  French  Blood  (1906)  ; bibliography  in  A. 
B.  C.  Griffin,  Bibliography  on  Immigration 
(1907).  A.  B.  H. 

RACE-TRACK  GAMBLING.  Special  efforts 
have  been  made  to  prohibit  race-track  gambling 
because  of  the  vast  number  of  persons  who 
take  part  in  the  betting  on  the  outcomes  of 
races  held  on  race-tracks,  a form  of  betting 
not  prohibited  by  the  usual  anti-gambling  laws 
unless  so  specified,  and  a means  of  petty  gamb- 
ling that  has  worked  great  havoc  among  people 
of  small  means.  Vast  sums  of  money  have 
been  invested  in  race-tracks  and  horse  breeding, 
supposed  to  be  dependent  upon  the  bookmakers’ 
large  profits.  Agricultural  societies  and  the 
farmer  interest  were  generally  persuaded  that 
it  was  necessary  to  permit  this  form  of  gam- 
bling. Eleven  states  (Ariz.,  Colo.,  Ga.,  N.  H., 
N.  Mex.,  Okla.,  Ore.,  S.  C.,  Utah,  W.  Va.,  Wy.) 
have  no  legislation  bearing  on  race-track  gam- 
bling. Eight  states  (Fla.,  111.,  Ivans.,  Ky., 
Md.,  N.  D.,  Vt.,  Va. ) permit  it  in  licensed 
places;  the  remaining  27  states  prohibit  it 


unconditionally.  In  North  Carolina  it  is  re- 
stricted to  certain  counties  and  in  Montana, 
prohibited  on  Sundays. 

The  tenacity  of  the  gambling  interests  is 
best  illustrated  in  the  enactment  of  prohib- 
itive legislation  in  New  Jersey  and  New  York. 
In  New  York  as  early  as  1802  a bill  was  passed 
limiting  racing  to  certain  periods,  and 
to  courses  owned  by  recognized  racing  asso- 
ciations. The  Ives  Law  (1887)  allowed  horse 
racing  for  thirty  days  each  year  on  tracks 
controlled  by  the  racing  association,  and  re- 
quired five  per  cent  of  the  gate  receipts  to  be 
paid  to  the  state  treasury  for  prizes  to  the  state 
agricultural  societies  to  encourage  the  breeding 
of  horses.  The  state  constitution  (1894)  provided 
that  “no  lottery  or  sale  of  lottery  tickets,  pool 
selling,  bookmaking  or  any  other  kind  of  gam- 
bling shall  hereafter  be  authorized  or  allowed 
within  the  state,”  and  required  the  legislature 
to  pass  appropriate  laws  accordingly.  Amend- 
ments to  the  Penal  Code  ( 1895 ) and  the  Percy- 
Gray  Law  (1895,  ch.  570)  failed  to  do  this,  and 
left  ways  open  for  the  violation  of  the  con- 
stitutional provision.  Governor  Hughes  called 
attention  to  the  necessity  for  obeying  the 
constitutional  mandate;  and  after  two  years 
hard  campaigning  secured  the  enactment  of 
the  Agnew-Hart  bills  (1908)  which  appro- 
priated state  money  outright  for  the  encour- 
agement of  the  agricultural  societies,  and 
amended  the  penal  code,  making  the  penalty 
for  race-track  gambling  imprisonment  with- 
out the  option  of  a fine.  At  first  a way  for 
the  bookmaker  to  evade  this  law  was  found 
and  attempts  were  made  in  1909  to  again  go 
back  to  special  exemption  for  race-track  gam- 
bling; but  on  June  15,  1910,  as  the  result  of 
further  efforts  on  the  part  of  Governor  Hughes 
supplementary  legislation  was  enacted  which 
made  bookmaking  impossible  and  held  the  di- 
rectors of  corporations  or  racing  associations, 
like  individuals,  liable  for  the  presence  of 
gambling  in  rooms,  sheds,  tents,  tenements, 
booths,  buildings,  floats  or  vessels,  or  any  other 
enclosure  or  place,  and  also  did  not  make  writ- 
ten record  necessary  for  the  conviction  of  the 
bookmaker. 

See  Gambling;  Police  Power;  Public 
Morals,  Care  for. 

References:  The  New  York  City  Federation 
of  Churches  published  (May,  1909)  a full  ac- 
count of  the  anti-race-track  gambling  cam- 
paign in  N.  Y. ; L.  Scott,  “Horse  Racing  and 
the  Public”  in  World’s  Work,  XII,  Aug..  1906. 

H.  W.  Nunn. 


130 


RADICAL  PARTY— RAILROAD  CAPITALIZATION 


RADICAL  PARTY.  A name  sometimes  giv- 
en to  the  Republican  party  especially  soon 
after  the  Civil  War,  and,  while  often  applied 
generally  to  the  whole  party  by  its  opponents, 
more  commonly  applicable  to  the  extreme  ele- 
ment and  its  leaders  in  determined  opposition 
to  the  policy  and  acts  of  President  Johnson. 
See  Rads;  Reconstruction;  Republican  Par- 
ty. Reference:  Gideon  Welles,  Diary  (1911), 
II,  passim.  • A.  C.  McL. 

RADIO-TELEGRAPHY.  The  scientific  name 
for  wireless  telegraphy  (see).  A.  B.  H. 

RADS.  A term  of  contempt  applied  by  the 
Democrats,  especially  in  the  South,  to  the 
members  of  the  Republican  party  during  the 
reconstruction  days,  particularly  to  those  lead- 
ers in  Congress  who  formulated  the  recon- 
struction policy.  It  is  an  abbreviation  of  Rad- 
icals. See  Radical  Party;  Reconstruction. 

0.  C.  H. 

RAG  BABY.  A pictorial  invention,  the  crea- 
tion of  the  caricaturist  Thomas  Nast,  pub- 
lished in  Harpers’  Weekly,  September  4,  1876, 
and  much  used  by  political  speakers  in  the 
campaign  of  that  year  to  personify  green- 
back currency.  See  Greenback  Party;  Paper 
Money.  0.  C.  H. 

RAG  CURRENCY.  A derisive  term  applied 
to  paper  money  especially  in  the  period  of 
the  Greenback  agitation,  1866-84;  but  the  use 
of  the  term  rags  for  paper  money  appears  as 
early  as  1840  in  a political  song: 

“The  banks  are  all  clean  broke, 

Their  rags  are  good  for  naught.” 

See  Greenback  Party;  Paper  Money. 

O.  C.  H. 

RAILROAD  ACCIDENTS.  See  Accidents, 
Railroad  and  Steamship. 

RAILROAD  ACCOUNTS,  UNIFORMITY  OF. 

See  Uniformity  of  Railroad  Accounts. 

RAILROAD  ASSOCIATIONS.  As  soon  as 
railroads  were  established  in  the  United  States, 
some  provision  had  to  be  made  for  rates  and 
accounts  relating  to  the  passing  of  travel  and 


freight  from  one  railroad  to  another;  and  these 
relations  gradually  developed  into  railway 
clearing  houses,  a great  part  of  which  were 
consolidated  into  one  trunk  line  clearing  house 
in  1877.  As  competition  developed  among  the 
railroads,  and  a system  of  through  sleeping 
cars  and  through  tickets  was  worked  out,  agree- 
ments, understandings  and  meetings  became 
necessary  to  adjust  the  details  and  to  fix  rates 
so  that  they  would  be  approximately  equal  on 
all  lines  between  competing  points.  The  next 
step  was  the  formation  of  local  pools,  sub- 
sequently developing  into  a large  pool  on  all 
traffic  between  Chicago  and  other  western 
basing  points  and  the  Atlantic  coast.  This 
pool  assigned  to  each  road  a fixed  propor- 
tion of  the  tonnage  and  diverted  freight  to 
make  those  assignments  good.  The  practice  ir- 
ritated shippers  and  was  the  means  of  main- 
taining rates;  and  therefore  in  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Act  of  1887,  it  was  forbidden. 

The  railroads,  however,  continued  to  act 
through  associations,  which  adjusted  passen- 
ger and  freight  rates  for  large  sections  of  the 
country.  Since  about  1900,  the  Interstate  Com- 
merce Commission  has  assumed  authority  over 
the  results  of  such  deliberations.  In  addition 
to  these  associations,  the  largest  body  of 
which  is  the  American  Railway  Association, 
there  are  great  systems  having  common  owner- 
ship, which  of  late  have  developed  in  the  far 
West  into  the  Hill  roads  and  the  Harriman 
roads,  each  made  up  of  units  held  together 
by  a community  of  interest,  if  not  by  stock 
ownership.  The  four  or  five  great  express  com- 
panies of  the  country  are  practically  an  asso- 
ciation through  mutual  ownership  of  each 
other’s  stock.  In  1912  and  1913  the  admin- 
istration in  Washington  compelled  the  separa- 
tion of  the  Harriman  system  by  reversing  the 
union  of  the  Union  Pacific  and  the  Southern 
Pacific. 

See  Interstate  Commerce  Decisions;  In- 
terstate Commerce  Legislation;  Merger  of 
Railroads;  Pooling  in  Railroads;  Railroad 
Commissions,  State;  Transportation,  Regu- 
lation of. 

References:  F.  Hendrick,  Railway  Control 
by  Commission  (1900),  ch.  viii;  D.  C.  Knowl- 
ton,  ‘•Bibliography  of  Transportation”  in 
Teachers’  Hag.,  IV,  Oct.,  1913,  232-235. 

A.  B.  H. 


RAILROAD  CAPITALIZATION 


Capitalization  Statistics.— For  the  year  end- 
ing June  30,  1911,  railways  in  the  United 
States  with  a single  track  mileage  of  234,717 
miles,  reported  to  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  a capitalization  of  $19,208,935,- 
081,  made  up  of  $10,738,217,470  of  funded  debt 
and  $8,470,717,611  of  stock,  or  $41,489  of 


131 


bonds  and  $36,089  of  stock  per  mile  of  line. 
These  figures  were  gross.  In  order  to  arrive 
at  the  volume  of  securities  in  the  hands  of 
the  public,  it  is  necessary  to  deduct  inter- 
railway holdings  of  stocks  and  bonds,  amount- 
ing to  $4,164,452,187 ; and  in  order  to  ascertain 
the  securities  resting  solely  upon  the  rail- 


RAILROAD  CAPITALIZATION 


way  system,  $35,775,324  must  be  further  de- 
ducted as  assigned  to  other  than  railway  prop- 
erties. This  leaves  a net  capitalization  of 
$15,908,707,570,  or  $03,944  per  mile  of  line. 
The  figure  thus  arrived  at  is  43  per  cent,  of 
the  value  which  the  Census  placed  on  the  farm 
lands  and  buildings  of  the  country  in  1910; 
it  exceeds  by  36  per  cent  the  total  liabilities 
of  the  national  banks  in  the  United  States 
on  September  4,  1912;  and  it  is  greater  than 
the  value  of  the  products  of  all  our  mines  in 
1912  capitalized  at  12  per  cent. 

The  statistics  of  gross  capitalization  since 
1900  are  given  for  convenience  in  the  following 
table.  Figures  for  switching  and  terminal  com- 


panies 

are  excluded  in  1908  and  following 

years. 

Year 

Stock 

Funded 

Debt 

Total 

1912  — 
1911  ... 
1910  ... 
1909  ... 
1908  ... 

1907  

1906  — 
1905  ... 
1904  ... 
1903  — 
1902  ... 
1901  ... 
1900  — 

$8,469,560,687 

8,470,717,611 

8,113,657,380 

7,686,278,545 

7,373,212,323 

7,356,861,691 

6,803,760,093 

6,554,557,051 

6,339,899,329 

6,155,559,032 

6,024,201,295 

5,806,566,204 

5,845,579,593 

$11,064,190,115 

10,738,217,470 

10,303,474,858 

9,801,590,390 

9,394,332,504 

8,725,284,992 

7,766,661,385 

7,250,701,070 

6,873,225,350 

6,444,431,226 

6,109,981,669 

5,881,580,887 

5,645,455,367 

$19,533,750,802 

19,208,937,081 

18,417,132,238 

17,487,868,935 

16,767,544,827 

16,082,146,683 

14,570,421,478 

13,805,258,121 

13,213,124,679 

12,599,990,258 

12,134,182,964 

11,688,147,091 

11,491,034,960 

In  1911  and  1912  the  capitalization  of  rail- 
roads reporting  to  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  was  classified  as  follows : 


Classes  of  Securities 

1911 

1912 

Common  stock  

Preferred  stock  

Mortgage  bonds  

Collateral  trust  bonds 
Plain  bonds,  deben- 
tures and  notes  — 

Income  bonds  

Miscellaneous  obliga- 
tions   

Equipment  trust 

$7,074,917,501 

1,395,800,052 

7,825,269.102 

1,183,766,188 

951.377.S16 

261,777,220 

195,430,395 

319,596,749 

$6,882,813,008 

1,586,747.679 

8,019,700,886 

1,279,128,266 

1,067,567,350 

263,441,054 

116.170,300 

318,182,259 

Total  capital  

19,208.935,081 

19,533,750,802 

The  large  amount  of  collateral  bonds  was 
mainly  due  to  the  extensive  holdings  of  each 
other’s  securities  which  American  railroads 
have  acquired  in  the  past  few  years  in 
the  course  of  their  consolidation  into  a rel- 
atively small  number  of  great  systems.  More 
than  half  of  the  obligations  listed  as  “plain 
bonds,  debentures,  and  notes”  consisted  of  short 
time  notes,  payable  in  from  one  to  three  years 
from  date  of  issue,  and  bearing  a high  rate  of 
interest.  These  securities  were  sold  freely  in 
1907  and  1908  in  order  to  avoid  placing  long 
time  bonds  in  an  unfavorable  market.  The 
great  bulk  of  outstanding  bonds  were  in  1909, 
as  we  should  expect,  of  the  regular  mortgage 
variety;  the  holders  of  70  per  cent  of  them 
receiving  an  interest  of  from  four  to  six  per 
cent.  Income  bonds,  equipment  trusts,  and 
miscellaneous  together  made  up  less  than  one- 
tenth  of  the  total. 


Securities  per  Mile. — A cursory  examination 
of  official  figures  shows  that  the  amount  of 
securities  per  mile  of  line  varies  widely  in  dif- 
ferent countries  and  even  in  different  parts  of 
the  United  States.  There  were  no  less  than 
$423,705  of  stocks  and  bonds  per  mile  out- 
standing upon  the  eastern  section  of  the  New 
York  Central  in  1909,  and  $326,672  upon  the 
Pennsylvania.  The  average  capitalization  of 
railways  per  mile  in  England  was  $328,761  in 
1909.  The  book  cost  of  German  state  railways 
the  same  year  was  $115,989  per  mile,  and  of 
railways  in  France  it  was  $136,850  per  mile 
in  1908.  On  the  other  hand,  the  capitalization 
per  mile  of  the  Chicago,  Burlington  & Quincy 
west  of  the  Missouri  River  was  $35,680  in 
1909  and  that  of  the  Chicago,  Rock  Island  & 
Pacific  in  the  same  territory  $47,614. 

Capitalization  and  Cash  Investment. — Three 
standards  have  been  held  up  with  which  the 
volume  of  railroad  capitalization  has  been 
compared.  The  first  is  the  amount  of  cash 
invested  in  the  property  upon  which  the  capi- 
talization rests;  the  second  is  the  cost  of  re- 
producing that  property;  and  the  third  is  the 
capitalized  value  of  the  earnings. 

It  is  very  certain  that  in  the  history  of 
American  railroads  capitalization  and  invest- 
ment have  been  far  apart.  In  the  twenty-one 
years  from  the  beginning  of  1875  to  the  end  of 
1895,  railroads  to  the  extent  of  107,264  miles 
were  built  in  the  United  States.  At  an  es- 
timated cost  of  $30,000  a mile  the  total  ex- 
penditure for  construction  would  have  been 
$3,217,920,000,  to  which  should  perhaps  be 
added  $500,000,000  for  equipment.  During 
this  period,  however,  the  stock  outstanding  in- 
creased by  $3,191,124,513  and  the  funded  debt 
by  $3,571,708,675. 

Between  1895  and  1900  the  increase  in  se- 
curities outstanding  was  slight  because  of  the 
depressed  business  conditions  of  the  time.  The 
following  seven  years  witnessed  the  construc- 
tion of  some  25,000  miles  of  line,  and  an  in- 
crease in  securities  of  $4,591,111,723.  There 
is  little  doubt  but  that  in  the  earlier  period 
the  securities  issued  were  vastly  in  excess  of 
the  capital  invested  in  railroad  building.  Poor’s 
Manual,  the  best  unofficial  source  of  railway 
securities  for  this  country,  estimated  in  1900 
that  $1,850,000,000  of  the  stock  outstanding  in 

1899  represented  no  cash  paid  in.  It  is  con- 
tended by  railroad  men  that  heavy  reinvest- 
ment in  railroad  properties  from  earnings  in 
later  years  has  offset  the  policy  of  inflation 
pursued  to  1899,  but  inasmuch  as  this  net  in- 
creases in  railroad  capitalization  between 

1900  and  1907  amounted  to  $84,696  per  mile 
of  new  construction,  there  is  ground  for  ques- 
tioning the  truth  of  the  assertion. 

Capitalization  and  Cost  of  Reproduction. — 
The  relation  of  cost  of  reproduction  of  capital- 
ization is  more  difficult  to  ascertain.  The 
best  evidence  that  we  have  is  the  result  of  half 
a dozen  state  railroad  valuations  made  during 


132 


RAILROAD  CAPITALIZATION 


the  last  few  years. 


The  results  are  given  in 


Principles  of; 


Transportation,  Regulation 


the  following  table: 

OF. 

Physical  Value 

State 

Cost  of 
Reproduction 

Cost  of 
Reproduction 
less  Depreciation 

Capitalization 

Total 

Per  Mile 

Total 

Per  Mile 

Total 

Per  Mile 

Washington,  1905  

$194,057,240 

$64,343 

$175,797,025 

$58,288 

$16S,696,670 

$53,267 

South  Dakota,  1908  

106,494,503 

26,933 

91,695,132 

23,190 

138.850,297 

35,116 

Michigan,  1900  

Minnesota,  1907  : 

202,716,262 

25,946 

166,398,156 

21,298 

291,605,232 

37,323 

Estimate  A 

411,735,195 

54,201 

360,480,160 

47,454 

300,027,696 

39,496 

Wisconsin,  1909 

Texas,  1896  

296,803,322 

212,794,586 

41,811 

17,198 

240,718,711 

— 

33,910 

311,819,128 

420,031,677 

44,167 

31,910 

In  two  states  the  physical  value  and  cost  of 
reproduction  at  the  time  of  valuation  was  less 
than  the  outstanding  capitalization.  In  four 
the  capitalization  was  superior.  Omitting 
Texas,  where  the  estimates  were  in  the  main 
made  during  the  exceptional  years  of  1894- 
1896,  the  total  capitalization  of  the  railroads 
in  five  states  appears  to  have  been  $1,210,999,- 
023;  the  cost  of  reproduction  new,  $1,211,806,- 
522  and  the  physical  value  with  allowance  for 
depreciation,  $1,035,089,184. 

Capitalization  and  Earnings. — If,  finally,  we 
compare  the  earnings  of  American  railroads 
with  their  capitalization,  we  find  that  in  1909 
dividends  at  an  average  rate  of  6.53  per  cent 
were  paid  upon  64.01  per  cent  of  the  stock  and 
interest  at  3 per  cent  or  better  on  92.18  per 
cent  of  the  funded  debt.  During  the  last 
decade  carriers  have  paid  on  the  average  6 
per  cent  on  nearly  60  per  cent  of  their  stock, 
and  interest  at  3 per  cent  or  over  on  91  per 
cent  of  their  funded  debt.  Just  what  these 
figures  mean  is  hard  to  say,  in  view  of  the 
fact  that  only  about  80  per  cent  of  outstanding 
railway  securities  are  in  the  hands  of  the  pub- 
lic, the  rest  being  held  by  railroad  companies 
between  themselves.  It  may  lie  said,  how- 
ever, that  the  financial  condition  of  American 
railroads  has  steadily  improved  since  1897,  and 
that  in  1904  a valuation  made  by  the  Bureau 
of  the  Census  and  based  on  earnings  placed 
their  value  at  $52,600  a mile  at  a time  when 
the  capitalization  in  the  hands  of  the  public 
was  $52,099. 

The  conclusion  to  which  we  come  is,  there- 
fore, that  the  volume  of  railroad  securities  in 
the  United  States  corresponds  exactly  to  neith- 
er of  the  three  standards  mentioned — the  excess 
being  greatest  when  the  capitalization  is  com 
pared  with  cash  invested,  and  least  when  com- 
pared with  an  estimated  value  based  on  earn- 
ings. This  fact  is  one  reason  advanced  in  sup- 
port of  proposals  for  more  complete  railroad 
regulations. 

See  Corporation  Charters;  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission;  Interstate  Com- 
merce Legislation;  Publicity  of  Corporate 
Accounts;  Public  Service  Corporations; 
Railroad  Commissions,  State;  Railroad 
Management;  Transportation,  Economic 


References:  Interstate  Commerce  Commis- 
sion, Statistics  of  Railways  (1888  to  date),  In- 
tercorporate Relationships  of  Railways  in  the 
United  States  (1908);  Poor’s  Manual  (1868-9 
to  date,  esp.  1900 ) ; T.  L.  Greene,  Corporation 
Finance  (3d  ed.,  1901),  also  in  Political 
Science  Quarterly,  I (1891),  474-492;  A.  T. 
Hadley,  Railroad  Transportation  (1903),  eh. 
iii;  E.  R.  Johnson,  American  Railway  Trans- 
portation (2d  ed.,  1908),  ch.  vii;  W.  M.  Ac- 
worth,  Elements  of  Railway  Economics  (1905), 
ch.  ii;  W.  Z.  Ripley,  in  Quart.  Jour.  Econ.,  XV 
(1900),  106-137,  XXV  (1911),  185-215,  in 
Pol.  Sci.  Quart..,  XXII  (1907),  577-610,  XXVI, 
(1911),  98-121,  in  Railway  Age  Gazette,  XLIX, 
732-734,  778-782;  A.  W.  Spencer,  in  Journal 
Pol.  Econ.,  XIV  (1906),  542-552,  Bureau  of 
Railway  Economics,  Comparative  Statement  of 
Physical  Valuation  and  Capitalization  (1911)  ; 

S. O.Dunn,  in  Journal  Pol.  Econ.,X.VIl  (1909), 
189-205;  H.  C.  Adams,  in  Am.  Economic  Assoc. 
Quart.,  3d  Series,  XI  (1910),  184-195;  W.  H. 
Williams,  in  ibid,  196-238;  M.  Rollins,  Money 
and  Investments  (1907),  Convertible  Securities 
( 1909 ) ; J.  Moody,  Analyses  of  Railroad  In- 
vestments (1909);  C.  Snyder,  American  Rail- 
ways as  Investments  (1907);  F.  W.  Mundy, 
Earning  Power  of  Railroads  (1906),  11-41; 

T.  F.  Woodlock,  Anatomy  of  a Railroad 

Report  (1909);  A.  D.  Noyes,  in  Atlan- 
tic, XCVIII  (1906),  532-541;  J.  Singer, 

Die  amerilcanischen  Bahnen  (1909),  chs.  vi, 
vii,  viii;  J.  Swann,  An  Investor’s  Notes 
on  American  Railroads  (1886)  ; A.  v.  d. 
Leyen,  Finanz-und  Verkchrspolitik  der  Nord- 
amerikanischen  Eisenbahnen  (1895)  ; S.  F.  Van 
Oss,  American  Railroads  as  Investments 
(1893)  ; W.  J.  Stevens,  Investment  and  Specu- 
lation in  British  Railways  (1902),  1-77;  F. 
Lownhaupt,  Investment  Bonds  (1908);  T. 
W.  Mitchell  in  Quart.  Journal  Econ.,  XX 
(1906),  443-467;  A.  S.  Dewing,  in  ibid,  XXX 
(1911),  396-406;  S Daggett,  Railroad  Re- 
organization (1908);  H.  H.  Swann,  'Economic 
Aspects  of  Railroad  Receiverships  (1898)  ; 
E.  S.  Mead,  in  Acad,  of  Pol.  Sci.,  Annals,  XVII 
( 1901 ) ; C.  F.  and  H.  Adams,  Chapters  of 
Erie  (1871)  ; J.  P.  Davis,  Hist,  of  the  Union 
Pacific  Railroad  (1894). 

Stuart  Daggett. 


RAILROAD  COMMISSIONS,  STATE 


RAILROAD  COMMISSIONS,  STATE.  State 
railroad  commissions  in  their  modern  form  date 
from  the  seventies  and  eighties,  when  the  at- 
tempt at  stringent  legislative  control  of  the 
railroads  in  the  Middle  West,  due  to  the 
Granger  movement  (see),  proving  unsatisfac- 
tory, resort  was  had  to  hortatory  or  adminis- 
trative commissions.  The  commission  as  an 
authority  having  general  supervisory  powers 
over  railroads,  together  with  certain  special 
powers,  had  existed  long  prior  to  1870,  how- 
ever. Rhode  Island,  for  instance,  had  a com- 
mission as  early  as  1839.  All  but  four  of  the 
states  now  have  railroad  commissions.  The 
increase  both  in  the  total  number  and  in  the 
number  of  the  more  vigorous  type,  has  been 
very  rapid  in  the  past  few  years.  While  the 
net  increase  in  commissions  from  1890  to  1902 
was  only  from  28  to  30,  in  the  period  1902  to 
1908  it  was  from  30  to  40,  and  four  more 
states  established  commissions  between  1908 
and  1914.  Much  the  greater  number  of  the 
new  commissions  are  of  the  “mandatory”  type. 

State  commissions  consist  of  from  two  to 
five  members.  New  York  has  two  “public  serv- 
ice” commissions  of  five  members  each.  The 
favorite  number  of  members  is  three,  and  the 
single  commissioner  system,  at  one  time  com- 
mon, is  now  almost  obsolete.  In  1890  choice 
by  the  governor,  in  1902  and  1913  election  by 
the  people,  was  the  most  common  method  of 
obtaining  the  commissioners.  The  term  of  of- 
fice is  from  two  to  six  years,  with  a marked 
tendency  toward  the  longer  terms.  The  sal- 
aries of  the  commissioners  range  from  $1,000 
to  $15,000;  $2,000  to  $5,000  is  the  amount 
usually  paid.  As  a rule  no  qualification  of 
railroad  or  professional  experience  is  required 
for  these  positions,  though  recently  a slight 
tendency  away  from  this  condition  of  affairs 
is  traceable. 

The  powers  of  the  commissions  vary  greatly. 
Their  jurisdiction  is  of  minor  importance,  as 


it  is  limited  to  intrastate  commerce;  and  is 
threatened  with  even  further  limitation  by  the 
contra-action  of  the  federal  courts.  The  House 
of  Governors  at  their  meeting  of  September, 
1911,  took  extraordinary  measures  to  check  this 
tendency,  creating  a committee  of  their  own 
number  to  appear  before  the  Supreme  Court 
in  appeals  then  pending,  and  there  to  argue  for 
the  maintenance  of  state  powers.  Authority 
over  conditions  of  business  administration, 
such  as  the  requirement  of  uniform  systems  of 
accounting,  are  common ; and  almost  all  the 
commissions  have  important  powers  over  the 
physical  operations  and  maintenance  of  the 
roads.  The  rate  making  or  regulating  power 
is  most  important.  Prior  to  1871,  there  was 
no  commission  having  such  power;  in  1913 
more  than  three-fourths  of  them  had  it.  Such 
commissions  are  usually  known  as  “manda- 
tory” or  “strong”  commissions.  To  appreciate 
the  position  of  the  commissions  of  the  present 
time  several  tendencies  must  be  particularly 
observed.  These  are  the  tendency  to  increase 
the  commissions’  powers  over  rates;  to  make 
them  more  independent  of  the  judiciary;  to 
extend  their  authority  over  practically  all 
transportation  agencies;  and,  in  most  in- 
stances, to  give  them,  as  public  service  com- 
missions, power  over  public  service  utilities 
that  are  purely  local  in  character.  There  is  a 
growing  belief  that  the  increasing  powers  of 
these  bodies,  whatever  their  legal  definition 
shall  ultimately  prove  to  be,  will,  in  the  main, 
be  upheld  as  constitutional. 

The  title  of  less  than  half  of  these  bodies 
is  railroad  commission  or  board  of  railroad 
commissioners.  Most  of  them  are  public  serv- 
ice commissions;  a few  states  have  corpora- 
tion commissions.  The  states  with  public  serv- 
ice commissions  number  22.  Those  having  cor- 
poration commissions  are  four  in  number. 
The  following  table  shows  the  railroad  com- 
missions now  in  existence  (1914)  : 


Advisory 

Powers 

Mandatory 
Powers  over 
Railroads 

Public  Utilities 
Commissions 

Corporation 

Commissions 

No 

Commissions 

None 

Alabama 

Arkansas 

California 

Florida 

Iowa 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Nebraska 

Nevada 

North  Dakota 

South  Carolina 
South  Dakota 
Tennessee 

Texas 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

District  of 
Columbia 

Georgia 

Hawaii 

Idaho 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Kansas 

Maine 

Maryland 

Massachusetts 

Montana 

New  Hampshire 
New  Jersey 

New  York 

Ohio 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania 

Rhode  Island 
Vermont 

Washington 

West  Virginia 
Wisconsin 

A rizona 

North  Carolina 
Oklahoma 

Virginia 

Delaware 

New  Mexico 
rtah 

Wyoming 

134 


RAILROAD  ESTABLISHMENT  AND  MANAGEMENT 


The  following  table  shows  when  the  first 
commissioner,  commission  or  board  having  au- 
thority over  railroads  was  established  in  each 
state,  also  the  year  since  which  each  state 
now  having  such  an  authority  has  been  in 
continuous  possession  thereof.  It  does  not, 
however,  indicate  the  changes,  which  have  been 
many  and  often  important,  in  titles,  powers 
or  composition. 


State 

First 

Commission 

Continuously 

Since 

Alabama  - ... 

1881 

1881 

Arizona  ... 

1891-1895 

1909 

Arkansas  - __ 

1899 

1899 

California  

1876 

1876 

Colorado  

1885 

1885 

Connecticut 

Delaware  _ _ 

1853 

1853 

Florida  ..  . 

1887-1891 

1897 

Georgia 

1879 

1879 

Idaho  . 

1913 

1913 

Illinois  . 

1871 

1871 

Indiana  

1905 

1905 

Iowa . . 

1878 

1S78 

Kansas  . ..  

1883-1898 

1901 

Kentucky  

1880 

1880 

Louisiana  

1898 

1898 

Maine  - 

1858 

1858 

Maryland 

1910 

1910 

Massachusetts  ..  _ . 

1869 

1869 

Michigan  

1873 

1873 

Minnesota  

1871 

1871 

Mississippi  . 

18S4 

1884 

Missouri 

1875 

1875 

Montana  ...  ... 

1907 

1907 

Nebraska  . . 

1885-1901 

1907 

Nevada  _ _ 

1907 

1907 

New  Hampshire 

1884 

1884 

New  Jersey  ..  

1907 

1907 

New  York  

1855-1857 

1883 

North  Carolina 

1891 

1891 

North  Dakota  

1885 

1S89 

Ohio  . 

1867 

1S67 

Oklahoma  ..  

1909 

1907 

Oregon  ...  

1887-1898 

1907 

Pennsylvania  

1907 

1907 

Rhode  Island  ..  ... 

1839 

1872 

South  Carolina  

1878 

1878 

South  Dakota  . 

1885 

1889 

Tennessee  ... 

1883-1S84 

1897 

Texas  

TTtah  _ 

1891 

1891 

Vermont  

1877 

1877 

Virginia  

1877 

1877 

Washington ... 

1905 

1905 

West  Virginia 

1913 

1913 

Wisconsin  _. 
Wyoming  . . 

1874 

1874 

See  Accidents,  Railboad  and  Steamship; 
Freight,  Classification  of;  Differentials 
in  Railroad  Traffic;  Discrimination  in 
Railroad  Rates;  Express  Service,  Regula- 
tion of;  Interstate  Commerce  Commission; 
Long  and  Short  Haul;  Public  Service  Com- 
missions and  under  Railroad;  Railroads; 
Transportation. 

References:  Interstate  Commerce  Commis- 
sion, Railways  in  the  United  States  in  1902, 
Pt.  IV,  State  Regulation  of  Railways ; Now 
York  State  Library,  Yearbook  of  Legislation 
(annual),  F.  H.  Dixon,  in  Political  Science 
Quarterly,  XX,  Dec.,  1905;  State  R.  R.  Com- 
missions, Reports;  Poor’s  Railway  Manual 
(annual)  ; Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  544;  1911, 
556-58;  1912,  543-544;  1919,  570-573. 

Harold  M.  Bowman. 


RAILROAD  ESTABLISHMENT  AND  MAN- 
AGEMENT. Commercial  Considerations. — The 
beginning  of  American  railroads,  and  their 
remarkable  growth  in  mileage  were  due  almost 
entirely  to  commercial  reasons.  In  a few  cases 
political  considerations  had  weight,  and  in  the 
construction  of  the  first  transcontinental  rail- 
road military  reasons  were  potent;  but,  gen- 
erally speaking,  the  military  and  political  in- 
fluences affecting  the  transportation  agencies 
of  Europe  have  had  practically  no  play  in  the 
railroad  development  of  the  LTnited  States. 
The  growth  of  mileage  from  1835  to  1910  is 
seen  in  the  following  table  (the  term  “mileage” 
signifies  single-track  mileage)  : 


Mileage  in 

Year  Operation 

1835  1.09S 

1845  4,633 

1855  18,374 

1860  30,625 

1S70  52,922 

1880  93,262 

1890  167,191 

1900  198,964 

1910  249,992 


The  commercial  stimuli  in  railroad  building 
are:  (1)  profit  on  construction  contracts; 


(2)  profit  on  sale  of  bonds;  (3)  speculative 
value  of  capital  stock;  (4)  dividends  to  be 
earned  by  operation. 

The  promoters  of  a new  railroad,  when  sat- 
isfied that  its  construction  is  advisable,  have 
first  to  organize  and  incorporate  a company 
and  obtain  a charter  from  the  state.  If  backed 
by  an  existing  railroad  with  financial  resources, 
or  by  banking  interests,  the  necessary  funds 
may  be  had  without  difficulty.  If  an  entirely 
independent  project,  the  promoters  will  take 
steps  to  enlist  private  capital  by  inviting  sub- 
scription to  stock  issues,  and  by  the  sale  of 
bonds  with  or  without  stock  bonus. 

Stock  and  Bonds. — A railroad  is  usually 
bonded  for  an  amount  nearly  that  which  it 
would  probably  bring  at  a forced  sale.  The 
payment  of  the  interest  on  the  bonds  is  a first 
lien  on  the  property  after  the  payment  of 
operating  expenses.  The  remaining  surplus 
from  operation  is  then  available  for  dividends, 
first  on  the  preferred  and  next  on  the  common 
stock;  or  it  may  be  held  in  reserve  for  addi- 
tions and  betterments.  The  stockholders  man- 
age the  property  through  a board  of  directors 
elected  at  their  annual  meeting.  The  bond- 
holders have  no  voice  in  management  so  long 
as  interest  charges  are  paid  regularly.  If  de- 
faulted, the  bondholders  have  a receiver  ap- 
pointed, foreclose  their  mortgage,  or  reorgan- 
ize without  foreclosure.  In  that  event,  the  in- 
terests of  the  stockholders  may  be  seriously  re- 
duced or  wiped  out,  and  those  of  the  junior 
bond  issues  scaled  downward  in  amount  or  in 
interest  rate.  The  laws  of  some  states  pro- 
vide that  the  paid  in  capital  stock  must  not  be 
less  than  the  bonded  indebtedness,  but  the 
average  for  the  country  in  1910  was  56  per 
cent  funded  debt  and  44  per  cent  capital  stock. 
135 


RAILROAD  ESTABLISHMENT  AND  MANAGEMENT 


Construction. — Legal  and  financial  prelimi-  1 
naries  having  been  arranged,  the  next  step  is 
the  construction  organization.  Sometimes  the 
entire  work  is  done  by  company  forces;  more 
often  it  is  done  by  contractors.  In  either  case, 
the  chief  engineer  is  in  charge,  assisted  by  res- 
ident engineers  on  each  section.  Ordinarily 
there  are  two  forces,  one  at  headquarters  pre- 
paring plans  and  directions,  and  one  in  the 
field  prosecuting  the  work  according  to  the 
plans  provided.  When  completed,  the  road  is 
turned  over  to  the  operating  department  and 
the  road  is  then  ready  to  solicit  and  move 
freight  and  passengers. 

Executive  Organization. — The  major  depart- 
ments of  a railroad  organization  are:  (1) 
executive,  including  financial,  accounting,  and 
legal;  (2)  maintenance  of  way  and  structures: 
(3)  maintenance  of  locomotives  and  cars;  (4) 
solicitation  of  traffic;  (5)  operation — the 
movement  of  traffic. 

The  responsibility  for  the  management  of  a 
railroad  is  vested  in  the  board  of  directors  ( see 
Directors).  The  chairman  of  the  board  pre- 
sides at  its  meetings  but  his  authority  and 
importance  vary.  In  some  cases  his  position 
is  virtually  that  of  president  emeritus;  on 
other  railroads  he  wields  an  important  influ- 
ence in  shaping  the  policy  of  the  company. 
The  active  head  is  the  president.  He  repre- 
sents the  board  in  dealing  with  other  officers 
and  employees  and  the  public,  and  has  general 
supervision  and  direction  over  all  branches  of 
the  service.  His  active  participation  in  de- 
tails, and  the  number  of  vice-presidents  and 
other  officers  to  assist  him,  depend  upon  the 
size  of  the  road  and  the  volume  and  diversity 
of  its  traffic.  On  a very  small  line  the  presi- 
dent may  assume  also  the  functions  of  the 
general  manager  or  the  chief  engineer,  or  even 
of  the  superintendent.  On  a very  large  system 
he  can  do  little  more  than  outline  a policy  and 
exercise  the  most  general  supervision  over  the 
various  departments. 

Example  of  Division  Organization. — The  or- 
ganization of  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad  will 
illustrate  the  general  plan.  On  railroads  of 
smaller  mileage  the  organization  is  less  elab- 
orate, but  the  basic  structure  is  common  to  all. 

The  Pennsylvania  has  five  vice-presidents,  a 
secretary,  and  a general  counsel  reporting  di- 
rect to  the  president.  The  secretary  keeps  the 
corporate  records  and  is  assisted  by  a registrar 
of  stock  and  a transfer  clerk.  The  general 
counsel  has  general  charge  of  all  litigation  and 
other  legal  business  and  is  assisted  by  district 
counsels  and  a claim  agent,  the  latter  in  charge 
of  the  investigation  and  settlement  of  claims 
for  personal  injury. 

The  first  vice-president  supervises  and  di- 
rects the  purchasing,  real  estate,  and  pension 
departments.  The  purchasing  agent  is  in  di- 
rect charge  of  the  purchase  of  materials  and 
supplies  for  all  departments.  He  is  assisted 
by  a fuel  agent  and  a stationer.  The  real 


estate  agent  has  the  custody  of  all  deeds,  re- 
leases, plans  and  records  of  real  estate,  and 
has  charge  of  negotiations  relating  to  real  es- 
tate, water  rents,  taxes,  etc.  The  active  ad- 
ministration of  the  pension  department  is  vest- 
ed in  a committee  made  up  of  officials  of  sev- 
eral operating  departments. 

The  second  vice-president  supervises  the  ac- 
counting department  and  is  assisted  by  a comp- 
troller or  general  auditor  who  has  charge  of 
the  books  and  accounts  which  must  be  kept  in 
the  form  prescribed  by  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  (see  Uniformity  of  Railroad 
Accounts  ) . The  checking  and  regulation  of 
returns  from  agents,  other  employees  and 
other  railroads  are  in  immediate  charge  of  an 
auditor  of  merchandise  receipts,  an  auditor  of 
coal  receipts,  an  auditor  of  passenger  receipts, 
and  an  auditor  of  miscellaneous  receipts.  On 
a smaller  road  the  auditing  of  all  revenue 
would  be  in  charge  of  one  auditor.  There  is 
also  an  auditor  of  disbursements  whose  duties 
are  indicated  by  his  title. 

The  third  vice-president  has  charge  of  the 
organization  for  solicitation  of  traffic  and  of 
relations  with  connecting  and  competing  rail- 
roads and  steamship  companies.  The  traffic 
department  also  makes  rates.  It  has  two 
grand  divisions,  the  first  in  charge  of  a freight 
traffic  manager,  the  second  administered  by  a 
passenger  traffic  manager.  Under  the  former 
are  the  general  and  division  freight  agents, 
superintendents  of  fast  freight  lines,  and  the 
freight  claim  agent.  Under  the  latter  come 
the  general  and  division  passenger  agent  and  a 
general  baggage  agent.  On  other  railroads  it 
is  usual  for  the  freight  claim  agent  to  be  a 
part  of  the  accounting  department. 

The  fourth  vice-president  supervises  the 
treasury  department  and  has  general  over- 
sight of  the  financial  affairs  of  the  corpora- 
tions in  which  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad  has 
pecuniary  interest.  Under  his  direction  the 
treasurer  is  the  custodian  of  all  money  and 
securities,  and  keeps  the  financial  accounts. 
He  pays  the  vouchers  drawn  by  the  various 
departments  and  approved  by  the  comptroller, 
and  attends  to  the  payment  of  interest  on  fund- 
ed debt  and  dividends  on  stock.  He  is  assisted 
by  a cashier  and  a registrar  of  bonds. 

The  fifth  vice-president  has  supervision  and 
direction  of  the  operating  department  and  is 
assisted  by  a general  manager,  a chief  engi- 
neer, and  a chief  of  motive  power.  The  general 
manager  has  charge  of  all  operations  of  the 
transportation  and  maintenance  departments. 
The  chief  engineer  has  charge  of  engineering 
and  construction  work  (not  maintenance),  in- 
cluding the  preparation  of  plans  and  specifica- 
tion. As  a staff  officer  he  prescribes  standards 
for  the  guidance  of  the  line  officers  under  the 
general  manager.  Similarly,  the  chief  of  mo- 
tive power  is  a staff  officer  prescribing  stan- 
dards for  the  line  officers  of  the  motive  power 
and  car  departments.  The  general  manager  is 


136 


RAILROAD  ESTABLISHMENT  AND  MANAGEMENT 


assisted  by  a chief  engineer  of  maintenance  of 
way,  who  has  supervision  over  the  mainte- 
nance of  roadway,  track,  bridges  and  build- 
ings; a general  superintendent  of  motive  pow- 
er, with  supervision  over  the  construction  and 
maintenance  of  locomotives,  cars  and  machin- 
ery; a general  superintendent  of  transporta- 
tion, who  supervises  station,  train,  and  yard 
service,  and  distribution  of  equipment;  a su- 
perintendent of  telegraph,  in  charge  of  the 
telegraph  and  telephone  line  construction  and 
maintenance;  and  a general  superintendent  on 
each  operating  district.  The  general  superin- 
tendent and  the  division  superintendents  are 
responsible  for  the  execution  of  operations  un- 
der the  direction  of  the  chief  engineer  of  main- 
tenance of  way  for  matters  relating  to  main- 
tenance of  way  and  structures ; under  the  di- 
rection of  the  general  superintendent  of  motive 
power  for  matters  relating  to  maintenance  and 
care  of  equipment;  and  under  the  direction 
of  the  general  superintendent  of  transporta- 
tion in  matters  relating  to  transportation. 
They  regulate  the  employment,  discipline,  and 
wages  of  employees  of  the  operating  depart- 
ment, and  are  responsible  for  the  safe,  prompt, 
and  economical  movement  of  trains. 

Departmental  Organization. — The  Pennsyl- 
vania follows  the  so-called  divisional  plan  of 
organization  in  the  operating  department,  i.  e., 
the  unit  is  the  division  and  the  superintend- 
ent has  complete  jurisdiction  over  all  operating 
branches  on  his  division.  The  British  type  is 
known  as  the  departmental  organization,  the 
unit  being  the  department.  Each  department 
has  a head  with  a subordinate  official  on  each 
division  reporting  to  him  instead  of  to  the 
superintendent.  With  the  divisional  type  the 
superintendent  must  have  a broad  training  and 
an  understanding  of  technical  matters,  and  as 
well  possess  the  knowledge  and  experience  nec- 
essary to  handle  large  forces  of  men  in  the 
complex  work  of  operating  trains  and  termi- 
nals. The  advocates  of  the  departmental  plan 
believe  that  better  results  follow  specializing 
in  the  technical  branches  of  railroading,  with 
the  division  officials  in  charge  of  maintenance 
of  way,  structures,  and  equipment,  reporting 
direct  to  their  department  heads.  Under  this 
organization  the  superintendent  is  in  direct 
charge  of  train,  station  and  yard  service  only, 
and  has  no  jurisdiction  over  maintenance.  The 
majority  of  American  railroads  favor  the  divi- 
sional plan,  notably  the  Pennsylvania  and  Har- 
riman  lines.  The  New  York  Central  is  a 
good  example  of  the  departmental  type. 

Under  the  divisional  plan,  the  superintend- 
ent is  assisted  in  maintenance  of  way  and 
structures  by  a division  engineer,  track  super- 
visors, signal  supervisors,  and  a master  car- 
penter. In  equipment  maintenance  he  is  assist- 
ed by  a division  master  mechanic,  a master 
car  repairer,  a road  foreman  of  equipment,  en- 
gine house  foremen,  and  specialists  in  mechan- 
ical matters  such  as  air-brake  instructors,  trav- 


eling firemen,  etc.  In  transportation,  the  su- 
perintendent’s chief  assistant  is  the  train  mas- 
ter, who  regulates  train  and  yard  service,  and 
has  immediate  supervision  over  train  and  yard 
employees.  The  chief  train  dispatcher  has  im- 
mediate charge  of  the  transmission  of  train 
orders  and  attends  also  to  the  execution  of 
orders  relating  to  the  distribution  of  equip- 
ment. 

Cooperation. — There  is  close  cooperation  be- 
tween the  railroads  in  organizing  associations 
of  officers  for  mutual  benefit  ( see  Railroad 
Associations).  The  ranking  body  is  the 
American  Railway  Association  composed  of 
executive  and  operating  officials.  Through  the 
work  of  its  officers  and  committees,  and  in  dis- 
cussion at  its  semi-annual  meetings,  much  lias 
been  done  to  standardize  railroad  operation, 
notably  the  establishment  of  standard  time  and 
the  compilation  and  general  adoption  of  the 
standard  code  of  train  rules.  The  association 
regulates  relations  between  railroads  in  such 
matters  as  rates  for  hire  of  equipment,  de- 
touring trains,  etc.  In  the  maintenance  de- 
partments, the  American  Railway  Engineering 
Association  has  promulgated  a Manual  of  Rec- 
ommended, Practice,  and  the  Master  Car  Build- 
ers’ Association  has  a code  of  rules  governing 
the  interchange  and  repairs  of  cars  used  joint- 
ly. The  master  mechanics,  signal  engineers, 
general  foremen,  roadmasters,  and  many  other 
technical  associations  have  an  active  existence. 
In  other  departments  there  are  associations  of 
superintendents,  accounting  officers,  freight 
claim  agents,  telegraph  superintendents,  and 
many  others. 

Employees. — Civil  service  is  the  general  rule 
for  promotion  of  men  in  the  ranks,  and  in  the 
branches  of  the  service  which  are  strongly 
organized  the  principle  of  seniority  is  strict- 
ly adhered  to.  The  oldest  man  in  service  au- 
tomatically progresses  to  the  next  best  posi- 
tion when  it  is  vacated,  unless  there  is  posi- 
tive evidence  of  his  unfitness,  and  then  the 
burden  of  proof  in  refusing  promotion  is  on 
the  superintendent.  The  labor  unions  insist 
upon  this  principle  because  of  former  injustice 
through  favoritism.  The  strongest  union  is 
the  Brotherhood  of  Locomotive  Engineers,  num- 
bering 72,500.  Then  come  the  Order  of  Rail- 
way Conductors  (49,000)  ; Brotherhood  of 
Railroad  Trainmen  (136,000)  ; and  the  Broth- 
erhood of  Locomotive  Firemen  and  Enginemen 
(75,000).  Other  railroad  labor  unions  are  the 
Order  of  Railroad  Telegraphers,  Switchmen’3 
Union,  and  various  shop  crafts.  The  teleg- 
raphers, switchmen  and  shopmen  are  affili- 
ated with  the  American  Federation  of  Labor, 
but  the  four  train  service  brotherhoods  have 
held  aloof  from  such  an  alliance. 

See  Accidents,  Railroad  and  Steamship; 
Bill  of  Lading;  Differentials  in  Railroad 
Traffic  ; Discrimination  in  Railroad  Rates  ; 
Freight  Transportation,  Classification  of; 
Interstate  Commerce  Legislation;  Long  and 


137 


RAILROAD,  PANAMA— RAILROADS,  ELECTRIC 


Short  Haul;  Merger  of  Railroads;  Pooling 
in  Railroads;  Pullman  Cars,  Regulation 
of;  Rebates  in  Transportation;  and  under 
Railroad;  Railroads;  Traffic;  Transporta- 
tion. 

References:  Ray  Morris,  Railroad  Adminis- 
tration (1910);  M.  L.  Byers,  Economics  of 
Railway  Operation  (1906);  L.  G.  McPherson, 
Working  of  the  Railroads  (1900),  Transporta- 
tion in  Europe  (1910)  ; E.  R.  Johnson,  Ameri- 
can Railway  Transportation  (1910);  E.  R. 
Dewsnup,  Railway  Organization  and  Working 
(1906);  E.  R.  Johnson  and  G.  G.  Huebner, 
Railroad  Traffic  and  Rates  (1911);  F.  L. 
McVey,  Railroad  Transportation  (1910);  J. 
A.  Droege,  Freight  Terminals  and  Trains 
(1912);  J.  S.  Eaton,  Handbook  of  Rail- 
road Expenses  (1913)  ; U.  S.  Census,  Com- 
mercial Valuation  of  Railway  Operating 
Property,  Bulletin,  No.  21,  1905;  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission,  Monthly  Bulletin 
of  Accidents  in  the  U.  8.  (from  1909), 
Statistics  of  Railways  in  the  U.  8.  (1909), 
Annual  Reports  (from  1887)  ; Am.  Year  Book, 
1910,  535,  ibid,  1911,  549  et  seq.,  ibid,  1912, 
538  and  year  by  year;  the  following  weekly 
periodicals:  Railway  Age  Gazette;  Railway 
World;  Railway  and  Engineering  Review; 
Commercial  and  Financial  Chronicle. 

William  J.  Cunningham. 

RAILROAD,  PANAMA.  See  Panama  Rail- 
road. 

RAILROAD  RATES,  DISCRIMINATION  IN. 

See  Discrimination  in  Railroad  Rates. 

RAILROAD  TRAFFIC,  DIFFERENTIALS 

IN.  See  Differentials  in  Railroad  Traffic. 

RAILROADING.  A term  indicating  the  ef- 
fort in  a legislative  assembly  to  force  through 
the  enactment  of  a measure  into  law  ty  un- 
scrupulous means  and  without  time  for  rea- 
sonable investigation  or  debate.  O.  C.  H. 

RAILROADS,  ELECTRIC.  Serviceability  of 

Electricity. — A great  variety  of  practicable 
methods  present  themselves  for  use  in  electric 
railway  work,  and  all  of  them  are  in  success- 
ful use.  The  principles  of  current  supply  are 
essentially  the  same  as  those  which  have  be- 
come standard  in  electric  light  and  power  dis- 
tribution, namely,  the  generation  of  electrical 
energy  by  large,  three-phase,  high-voltage,  al- 
ternating dynamos  driven  by  steam  engines, 
steam  turbines,  gas  engines,  or  water  turbines; 
said  energy  being  delivered  to  distant  sub- 
stations and  there  transformed  for  use  as  di- 
rect current  in  the  motors  on  the  track.  There 
are,  however,  many  roads  on  which  alternating 
current  is  used  in  the  motors  without  conver- 
sion, although  phase  or  frequency  may  be 
changed,  or  the  pressure  be  lowered.  Great 
flexibility  exists  in  all  these  respects,  render- 


ing easy  the  adaptation  of  plant  to  any  set  of 
operating  conditions;  and  the  art  is  still  far 
from  having  reached  standardization  or  uni- 
formity. It  has,  nevertheless,  conquered  the 
entire  domain  of  street  railways,  is  used  ex- 
clusively on  numerous  interurhan  and  long 
main  lines,  and  is  rapidly  being  introduced  for 
the  city  terminals  of  the  leading  trunk  sys- 
tems. In  underground  and  subwater  trans- 
portation it  reigns  supreme,  as  well  as  on 
elevated  railroads,  giving  service  utterly  im- 
possible under  steam  conditions.  For  such 
electrical  transportation,  the  public  of  New 
York  City  now  pays  nearly  $80,000,000  annu- 
ally or  about  $16.00  per  capita. 

Transmission  of  Power. — Methods  of  con- 
necting the  car  in  motion  with  the  source  of 
current  supply  are  numerous.  The  overhead 
trolley  (see)  system  is  almost  universal.  The 
circuits  for  contact  are  carried  by  centre  poles, 
side  poles,  brackets,  arms,  etc.,  and  by  span 
wires  covering  one  or  two  tracks.  On  such  roads 
as  the  New  York,  New  Haven  and  Hartford,  the 
contact  wires  are  held  up  by  catenary  con- 
struction attached  to  frequent  steel  bridges. 
With  the  downward  or  under  running  con- 
tact, as  on  elevated  roads  and  in  subways,  and 
along  the  New  York  Central  or  other  long 
lines,  the  “picking  up”  device  is  a sliding  metal 
shoe  pressed  against  a third  rail,  usually  out- 
side the  track  rails;  and  this  third  rail  is 
sometimes  protected  by  a hood.  On  Manhattan 
Island,  many  miles  of  important  thorough- 
fares, such  as  Broadway,  have  a conduit  be- 
tween the  rails,  and  a bar  from  the  car  chassis 
passes  down  through  the  slot  in  such  a man- 
ner that  the  plow  carried  along  makes  sliding 
contact  with  metal  conductor  bars  therein. 

This  does  not  exhaust  the  range  of  feasibil- 
ity. Several  self-contained  cars  are  in  service 
equipped  with  storage  batteries,  and  in  com- 
petition with  these  are  “trackless  trolleys,”  in 
which  rails  are  dispensed  with,  current  being 
taken  from  overhead  wires  in  the  usual  way, 
but  with  double  contact  devices,  to  complete 
the  circuit. 

Motors. — With  regard  to  the  motors,  a vari- 
ety of  methods  is  seen.  For  heavy  main  line 
traffic,  the  locomotive  principle  still  applies, 
but  the  hauling  machine  is  sometimes  divided 
into  two  similar  units;  while  the  revolving 
parts  drive  directly  on  the  wheels.  As  a gen- 
eral thing,  electric  traction  depends,  however, 
on  the  principle  of  distributing  the  propelling 
power  throughout  the  train  of  cars,  in  several 
motors,  under  “multiple  unit”  control,  thus 
securing  better  starting  and  stopping,  and 
swifter  acceleration.  The  number  of  motors  to 
a locomotive,  a train,  or  a single  car,  varies 
with  the  work  to  be  done.  A street  car  usual- 
ly has  two  motors,  but  many  of  the  larger  in- 
terurban  cars  have  four,  although  these  often 
have  trailers  without  motors,  attached  to 
them.  Such  trail  cars  were  once  common  ob- 
' jects  in  city  streets,  but  the  tendency  has  been 


138 


RAILROADS,  ELECTRIC 


to  abandon  them  and  lengthen  the  powered 
unit  car  so  as  to  increase  passenger  capacity 
and  speed  up  the  running  schedule. 

Extension  of  the  System. — Most  remarkable 
in  electric  railway  work  has  been  the  swift 
expansion  of  the  interurban  trolley  system,  so 
that  whole  regions  are  networked,  and  one  can 
go  by  trolley  car  from  the  Atlantic  to  the 
Middle  West.  In  fact,  sleeping  cars,  dining 
cars,  etc.,  can  be  found  on  some  of  the  lines, 
which  operate  under  interstate  commerce  laws, 
and  differ  in  no  respect  except  motive  power 
from  the  steam  railroads,  with  which  they  fre- 
quently compete  although  in  many  instances 
they  serve  as  valuable  feeders.  The  rates  of  fare 
are  lower  and  cases  are  numerous  where  they 
have  absorbed  practically  nearly  all  the  short 
haul  passenger  traffic — as  between  St.  Paul 
and  Minneapolis,  Albany  and  Schenectady. 
So  far,  the  freight  traffic  is  in  an  undeveloped 
condition  on  these  lines,  but  they  have  already 
monopolised  the  milk  and  fruit  delivery  at 
many  points,  and  by  express  systems  and 


(4)  in  many  instances  the  city  receives  a share 
of  the  gross  receipts  in  return  for  the  use 
of  the  streets;  (5)  various  cities  impose  spe- 
cial taxes,  additional  to  or  in  lieu  of  those 
on  real  estate  or  personal  property,  such  as 
so  much  per  car,  or  per  mile  of  track,  or 
per  pole,  or  even  per  mile  of  wire;  (6)  num- 
erous cities  make  the  upkeep  of  street  paving 
along  the  route  a condition  of  the  franchise, 
either  from  curb  to  curb,  or  adjacent  merely 
to  the  tracks;  (7)  in  many  places  there  is 
a requirement  as  to  street  sprinkling,  either 
to  be  done  by  the  company  itself  or  on  a basis 
of  division,  the  city  sometimes  supplying  the 
water  free;  (8)  many  cities  exact  the  free 
travel  of  city  employees  in  uniform  such  as 
policemen  and  firemen,  and  in  various  cases, 
there  are  special  rates  of  fare  reduction  ex- 
acted for  workingmen  during  certain  hours, 
or  for  children  in  attending  the  public  schools. 

The  following  condensed  table  shows  the 
general  situation  in  1907  as  compared  with 
that  of  1902: 


Number  of  operating  and  lessor  companies 

Length  of  1st  train  track  ( miles)  

Total  length  of  single  track  (miles)  

Number  of  cars  

Passenger  cars  

Other  cars  

Passengers  ca  rried  

Total  car  mileage  

Gross  income  

Net  income  

Capital  stock  (par  value)  

llonds  (par  value)  

Total  employees  


1902 

1907 

Per  Cei 
Increa. 

977 

1,236 

25.2 

1G.G45.34 

25,547.19 

53.5 

22,576.99 

34,403.56 

52.4 

66,784 

83.641 

25.2 

60,290 

70,016 

16.1 

6,494 

13,625 

109.8 

5.836,615.296 

9,533,080.766 

63.3 

1.144,430,466 

1.617,731.300 

41.4 

$250,504,627 

$429,744,254 

71.6 

$20,596,977 

$40,340,286 

31.8 

$1,315,572,960 

$2,097,708,856 

59.5 

$922,709,139 

$1,677,063,240 

68.9 

140.769 

221,429 

57.3 

special  fares  have  built  up  a great  number  of 
prosperous  suburbs  in  rural  regions,  affecting 
profoundly  the  condition  of  the  farmer,  to 
thousands  of  whom  they  also  furnish  electric 
light  and  power  for  agricultural  implements, 
churning,  fodder  cutting,  grain  grinding,  etc. 

Fares. — In  the  cities,  a flat  rate  of  five  cent 
fare,  regardless  of  distance,  has  been  almost 
universal;  by  a widespread  system  of  trans- 
fers this  is  reduced  in  many  cities  to  not 
much  more  than  three  cents  per  ride  to  the 
company.  In  some  parts,  as  in  Massachusetts 
and  New  York,  owing  to  increased  cost  of 
operation,  consent  has  been  given  to  raising 
the  rate  to  six  cents. 

Joint  Public  and  Private  Ownership. — There 
are  very  few  roads  owned  by  municipalities, 
but  a practice  is  growing  up  of  joint  public 
and  private  ownership,  or  of  the  representa- 
tion of  the  city  in  the  directorate,  or  of  ulti- 
mate ownership  by  the  city  if  it  desires.  Such 
conditions  exist,  for  example,  in  New  York 
City,  Chicago  and  Philadelphia.  Chaos  prevails 
generally  as  to  the  granting  of  such  fran- 
chises: (1)  some  reserve  to  the  city  the 
right  to  purchase  the  property  at  the  expira- 
tion of  a limited  term;  (2)  some  franchises 
are  indeterminate;  (3)  some  are  perpetual; 

107 


Electrification  of  Steam  Roads. — The  conver- 
sion of  large  main  steam  railroad  systems  to 
electricity  involves  many  problems  besides  that 
of  cost  in  making  the  change,  and  many  ele- 
ments in  the  question  are  still  hotly  disputed, 
but  the  process  has  actually  begun,  and  the 
electrical  arguments  as  to  greater  flexibility, 
economy,  cleanliness,  etc.,  have  been  sustained 
wherever  the  test  has  been  made. 

Incidental  to  the  change  to  electricity  from 
steam  has  come  a new  problem  in  the  control 
of  these  utilities  by  governmental  authority. 
Where  there  are  interstate  trolley  lines,  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  has  inter- 
vened and  has  insisted  that  such  properties 
must  obey  its  rulings  as  to  systems  of  ac- 
counts and  other  features  of  actual  operation. 
But,  in  many  instances,  these  roads  are  al- 
ready under  the  supervision  of  two  or  per- 
haps three  state  public  service  commissions, 
none  of  which  has  standardized  its  control 
into  conformity  with  that  of  kindred  bodies. 
Hence  it  is  literally  impossible  for  the  man- 
agement of  such  a utility  to  comply  with  all 
the  requirements,  some  of  which  are  contra- 
dictory; and  one  process  of  solution  is  that 
of  terminating  any  such  system  at  a state 
line,  and  there  exchanging  traffic  with  another 


139 


RAILROADS,  ELEVATED— RAILROADS,  PHYSICAL  VALUATION  OF 


separate  member  of  tbe  same  system.  Such 
methods  work  against  improvement;  and  it  is 
obvious  that  tiie  ultilities  must  soon  be  re- 
lieved from  conflicting  requirements,  if  the 
public  is  to  be  fully  benefited  by  the  exist- 
ence of  the  service. 

In  the  early  days  when  each  little  road  car- 
ried relatively  few  passengers,  the  problems 
were  simple,  but  now  in  almost  every  instance 
a street  railway  system  operates  far  beyond 
its  original  city  limits,  has  control  of  spheres 
of  influence  outlying  its  suburban  area,  and 
carries  not  only  passengers,  but  fre  igbt,  ex- 
press and  mail ; so  that  the  sphere  of  govern- 
ment has  to  be  correspondingly  enlarged. 

See  INTERURBAN  LINES;  PUBLIC  SERVICE 
Commissions;  Public  Utilities;  Rapid  Tran- 
sit in  Cities;  Subways  and  Tunnels;  Trol- 
ley Lines;  and  under  Railroad;  Railroads. 

References:  U.  S.  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
Street  and  Electric  Railways,  Report,  1907, 
Special  Report,  1910;  New  York  and  Wis- 
consin Public  Service  Commissions,  Reports 
(1909-12);  Massachusetts  Highway  Commis- 
sion, Reports  (1909-12);  Electric  Railway 
Journal,  Files  (1910-12);  American  Electric 
Railway  Assn.,  Proceedings  (1911-12);  “Elec- 
tric Railway  Transportation”  in  Am.  Acad. 
Polit.  and  Soc.  Sci.,  Annals,  XXVII  (Jan., 
1911);  Board  of  Supervising  Engineers  Chi- 
cago Traction,  Reports  (1908-12)  ; Pittsburg 
Transportation  Problem,  City  Report,  1910. 

T.  COMMERFORD  MARTIN. 

RAILROADS,  ELEVATED.  The  first  ele- 
vated railroads  in  this  country  were  con- 
structed in  New  York  City  about  1878.  At  tbe 
present  time  (1913)  this  method  of  transpor- 
tation is  in  use  in  New  York,  Brooklyn,  Chi- 
cago, Boston,  Philadelphia,  Berlin,  Paris  and 
Liverpool.  All  of  these  roads  are  now  elec- 
trically operated,  although  many  of  them  were 
originally  built  for  operation  with  steam.  The 
cost  of  elevated  railroads  of  each  type  at  the 
present  time,  per  mile  of  double  track,  com- 
pare as  follows:  open  floor,  lowest  cost,  $300,- 
000;  average  cost,  $400,000;  solid  floor,  low- 
est cost,  $550,000;  average  cost,  $700,000. 

The  elevated  railroad  as  a method  of  rapid 
transit,  has  been  superseded  to  a considerable 
extent  in  popular  favor  by  the  subway.  Al- 
though considerable  improvement  has  been 
made  as  regards  the  architectural  appearance 
of  elevated  lines,  they  are  always  unsightly 
and  decrease  the  capacity  of  the  streets.  The 
introduction  of  solid  floors,  supporting  stone 
ballast  in  which  the  tracks  are  laid,  has  elim- 
inated to  a large  extent  the  objectionable  noise 
accompanying  this  type  of  rapid  transit. 
Nevertheless,  experience  has  shown  that  where- 
ever  elevated  roads  are  proposed  on  streets 
occupied  to  a considerable  extent  for  resi- 
dential purposes,  local  opposition  develops.  It 
is  the  opinion  of  expert  engineers,  however, 
that  the  elevated  road  is  a necessary  part  of 


any  well  developed  system  of  urban  transpor- 
tation, either  as  trunk  lines  leading  from  the 
residential  sections  to  the  down  town  business 
districts,  or,  more  especially,  as  feeders  to  a 
trunk  line  subway  tapping  tbe  business  section. 

The  great  cost  of  subway  lines — approximat- 
ing from  four  to  seven  times  as  much  as  ele- 
vated lines  of  a similar  trackage  capacity — 
precludes  tbe  construction  of  this  type  of  rapid 
transit  into  all  sections  of  a city.  With  the 
same  capital  investment,  it  is  possible  through 
tbe  use  of  elevated  lines,  in  whole  or  in  part, 
to  secure  a much  greater  measure  of  rapid 
transit.  This  is  the  basis  for  the  engineer’s 
preference  for  the  continued  use  of  this  type 
of  road.  In  addition,  experience  has  demon- 
strated that  in  every  case  the  streets  on  which 
elevated  lines  are  constructed  become  almost 
immediately  business  thoroughfares,  although 
theretofore  they  may  have  been  used  for  resi- 
dential purposes.  This  change  is  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  convergence  of  streams  of  travel 
makes  the  frontage  desirable  for  retail  stores. 

See  City  Planning;  Franchises,  Cor- 
poration; Municipal  Ownership;  Rail- 
roads, Street;  Rapid  Transit  in  Cities; 
Subways  and  Tunnels  for  City  Transit; 
Transit  in  Cities,  Problems  of. 

References:  American  Railway  Investments 
( annual ) ; B.  J.  Arnold,  Report  on  the  Loop 
Problem  in  Chicago  (1911),  Report  on  the 
Pittsburg  Transportation  Problem  (1910), 
Recommendations  and  General  Plans  for  a 
Comprehensive  Subway  System  for  the  City  of 
Chicago  (1911)  ; New  York  Pub.  Service  Com., 
New  Subways  for  New  York — the  Dual  Sys- 
tem of  Rapid  Transit  (1913);  A.  M.  Taylor, 
Report  of  the  Transit  Commission,  City  of 
Philadelphia  (1913). 

Thomas  Conway,  Jr. 

RAILROADS,  INTERURBAN.  See  Inteb- 

urban  Lines. 

RAILROADS,  MERGER  OF.  See  Merger 

of  Railroads. 

RAILROADS,  PACIFIC.  See  Pacific  Rail- 
roads. 

RAILROADS,  PHYSICAL  VALUATION  OF. 

An  inventory  by  expert  engineers  of  the  con- 
stituent physical  elements  of  a railroad.  Each 
separate  physical  form  of  railroad  property  is 
assigned  a value,  which  as  a rule  is  based  on 
its  cost  of  reproduction  and  the  length  of  its 
life,  or  in  other  words,  the  average  market 
value  less  depreciation.  These  property  ele- 
ments include  real  estate,  grading,  bridges, 
culverts,  stations,  terminals,  rails,  ties,  poles, 
locomotives,  cars,  and  many  other  items. 

Many  valuations  of  railroad  property  have 
been  made  but  not  all  of  them  with  the  same 
object  in  view.  Banking  houses  have  bad 
valuations  made  to  assist  them  in  effecting 


RAILROADS,  POOLING  IX— RAILROADS,  PUBLIC  AID  TO 


railroad  reorganizations.  Railroad  companies 
have  themselves  undertaken  valuations  and 
some  companies  have  valuations  now  under 
way,  being  dominated  in  their  action  by  the 
same  purpose  as  a merchant  who  takes  an 
inventory  of  his  stock  in  trade.  The  state 
of  Texas  made  a physical  valuation  of  the 
property  of  all  railroads  in  the  state  in  1893, 
and  has  continued  the  process  since  with  new 
railroads  as  they  are  built,  as  a part  of  its 
function  in  the  enforcement  of  the  stock  and 
bond  law  to  prevent  over-capitalization.  Mich- 
igan in  1900  and  Wisconsin  in  1903  made 
valuations  for  equalizing  taxation. 

But  the  widespread  public  demand  for  a 
general  valuation  of  railroads  is  based  on  more 
fundamental  considerations.  It  is  a part  of 
the  effort  to  solve  the  problem  of  reasonable 
rates.  The  reasonableness  of  no  individual 
rate  can  be  determined  by  reference  to  the 
value  of  the  property  of  the  railroad  charging 
the  rate,  but  the  reasonableness  of  an  entire 
schedule  of  rates  should  bear  some  relation, 
so  the  advocates  of  physical  valuation  insist, 
to  the  value  of  the  property  employed  in  trans- 
portation. Judicial  support  for  this  position 
is  commonly  drawn  from  a decision  of  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  United  States  in  1898 
(Smyth  vs.  Ames,  169  V.  S.  466)  in  which  the 
Court  declared  that  “the  basis  of  all  calcula- 
tions as  to  the  reasonableness  of  rates  . . . 

must  be  the  fair  value  of  the  property  being 
used  by  it  for  the  convenience  of  the  public.” 

It  was  with  this  purpose  in  mind  that  valu- 
ations were  made  by  the  respective  state  rail- 
road commissions  in  Minnesota  in  1907,  in 
South  Dakota  in  1908,  and  in  Washington  be- 
ginning soon  after  the  establishment  of  the 
Commission  in  1905. 

The  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  fre- 
quently urged  in  its  annual  reports  that 
adequate  provision  be  made  for  a physical  valu- 
ation of  all  interstate  railroads.  Such  valua- 
tion, it  was  said,  would  not  only  be  helpful  in 
the  determination  of  the  reasonableness  of 
rates,  but  would  make  possible  an  accurate 
statement  of  corporate  assets  on  the  railroad 
balance  sheet  and  would  aid  in  the  enforce- 
ment of  any  law  to  regulate  the  issue  of 
securities.  In  response  to  this  recommenda- 
tion the  House  of  Representatives  added  an 
amendment  to  the  measure  which,  in  June, 
1910,  became  law  as  the  Mann-Elkins  Act,  but 
it  was  later  eliminated  in  conference  between 
the  two  Houses.  This  amendment  directed  the 
Commission  to  ascertain  the  value  in  money 
of  all  railroad  property  in  the  United  States 
and  to  keep  the  valuation  up  to  date  by  peri- 
odical estimates  of  improvements. 

Continued  recommendations  of  the  Inter- 
state Commerce  Commission  finally  resulted  in 
the  passage  of  the  Adamson  Act  of  March  1, 
1913.  The  act  directs  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  to  investigate,  ascertain,  and  re- 
port the  value  of  every  piece  of  property 


owned  or  used  by  all  common  carriers  subject 
to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Act,  which  include 
railroad,  sleeping  car,  express,  steamboat,  pipe- 
line, telegraph,  and  telephone  companies.  As 
to  every  piece  of  property,  the  report  is  to 
show  in  detail  “the  original  cost  to  date,  the 
cost  of  reproduction  new,  and  the  cost  of  repro- 
duction less  depreciation.”  It  is  to  “state  in 
detail  and  separately  from  all  improvements 
the  original  cost  of  all  lands,  rights  of  way, 
and  terminals  owned  or  used  for  the  purposes 
of  a common  carrier,  and  ascertained  as  of  the 
time  of  dedication  to  public  use,  and  the  pres- 
ent value  of  the  same.”  In  ascertaining  orig- 
inal cost  to  date  the  Commission  is  instructed 
“to  investigate  and  report  upon  the  history  and 
organization  of  the  present  and  of  any  previous 
corporation  operating  such  property;  upon  any 
increases  or  decreases  of  stock,  bonds,  or  other 
securities  in  any  reorganization;  upon  moneys 
received  by  any  such  corporation  by  reason  of 
any  issues  of  stocks,  bonds,  or  other  securities ; 
upon  the  syndicating,  banking,  and  other  finan- 
cial arrangements  under  which  such  issues  were 
made  and  the  expense  thereof ; and  upon  the 
net  and  gross  earnings  of  such  corporations; 
and  shall  also  ascertain  and  report  in  such  de- 
tail as  may  be  determined  by  the  Commission 
upon  the  expenditure  of  all  moneys  and  the 
purposes  for  which  the  same  were  expended.” 

All  final  valuations  by  the  Commission  are 
to  be  accepted  as  prima  facie  evidence  of  the 
value  of  the  property  in  all  proceedings  under 
the  Interstate  Commerce  Act  and  in  all  judi- 
cial proceedings  brought  to  enjoin,  set  aside, 
annul,  or  suspend  any  order  of  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission. 

See  Interstate  Commerce  Commission-, 
Railroad  Capitalization-,  Railroad  Com- 
missions, State. 

References:  H.  C.  Adams,  W.  H.  Williams, 
and  J.  P.  Cotton,  Jr.,  in  Am.  Econ.  Assoc., 
Proceedings,  XI,  April,  1910;  W.  Z.  Ripley  in 
Pol.  Sci.  Quart.,  XXII  (1907),  577-610; 

Railroad  Commission  of  Washington,  Find- 
ing of  Facts  Relative  to  the  Valuation 
of  Railroads  (1909)  ; Railroad  and  Ware- 
house Commission  of  Minnesota,  Annual  Re- 
port, 1908.  Frank  Haigii  Dixon. 

RAILROADS,  POOLING  IN.  See  Poolino 
in  Railroads. 

RAILROADS,  PUBLIC  AID  TO.  The  need 
for  domestic  markets  and  for  political  coher- 
ence early  caused  a demand  for  aid  to  rail- 
ways in  the  United  States.  The  eagerness  of 
states  and  cities  for  trade  connections,  coupled 
with  a jealousy  of  the  power  of  the  Federal 
Government  and  a relatively  unimportant  in- 
terstate commerce,  explains  why  a large  part 
of  the  aid  given  came  from  state  and  local 
governments. 

Periods  and  Amounts  of  State  Aid. — The  aid 
granted  by  states  falls  into  well-defined  periods. 


141 


RAILROADS,  PUBLIC  AID  TO 


(1)  Beginning  in  1815,  the  development  of  the 
West  and  the  spread  of  cotton  culture  brought 
great  pressure  upon  legislatures  to  subsidize 
or  construct  transportation  facilities — soon  in- 
cluding railways — a pressure  which  reached 
its  climax  just  before  the  crisis  of  1837.  At 
first,  canals  rivalled  railways  and  retarded  aid 
to  them,  but  the  rapid  improvement  of  rail 
transportation  and  the  realization  of  the  limi- 
tations of  canals  overcame  this  resistance  about 
1835.  In  1827  came  the  first  considerable  state 
aid  to  railways,  when  Maryland  subscribed 


$500,000  to  the  Baltimore  and  Ohio.  Between 
that  year  and  1841,  this  state  issued  bonds 
to  railways  to  an  amount  over  $6,800,000.  At 
about  the  same  time  (1827),  Massachusetts 
appropriated  $10,000  to  ascertain  the  best 
route  westward  through  the  state  to  the  Hud- 
son. The  real  beginning  of  aid  in  Massachu- 
setts, however,  came  in  1836,  when  $1,000,000 
was  subscribed  to  the  Western  Railroad  (Wor- 
cester to  Albany)  ; and,  by  1841,  at  leasl 
$5,050,000  of  the  state’s  credit  had  been  ex- 
tended  to  railways.  Pennsylvania  made  her 


142 


RAILROADS,  PUBLIC  AID  TO 


first  appropriation  of  $800,000  for  the  Penn- 
sylvania Railroad  and  Canal  Co.  in  1828;  and 
New  York  took  up  the  policy  with  a grant  of 
$3,000,000  to  the  Erie  Railway.  By  1840, 
New  York  had  aided  railways  to  the  extent  of 
$4,450,000.  The  great  rush,  however,  came  be- 
tween 1836  and  1841 : then  Ohio,  Michigan, 
Indiana,  Illinois,  Georgia,  Tennessee,  Virginia, 
South  Carolina,  and  Louisiana,  all  granted  aid 
to  railways.  The  speculative  activity  preced- 
ing the  crisis  and  the  distribution  of  the  sur- 
plus federal  revenue  may  be  mentioned  as 
factors. 


(2)  In  1841,  a period  of  little  aid  began. 
The  crisis  was  followed  by  a long  depression, 
lasting  till  about  1850.  The  period  is  marked 
by  the  constitutional  prohibition  of  aid  to 
improvements  in  several  northern  states. 

(3)  1851-1861:  With  the  renewal  of  pros- 
perity, about  1850,  a new  period  of  state  aid 
began.  It  was  most  marked  in  the  South, 
where  such  states  as  Kentucky,  North  Caro- 
lina, and  Missouri  virtually  began  the  public 
aid  policy. 

(4)  1865-1870:  After  the  Civil  War  Ala- 
bama, Florida,  Arkansas,  and  Texas  had  their 


143 


RAILROADS,  PUBLIC  AID  TO 


144 


Longitude  100  ^ West  95  from  00  Greenwich^ 

Kailisoads  and  Canals  in  1880 


RAILROADS,  PUBLIC  AID  TO 


fling;  and  several  other  southern  states  re- 
sumed the  aid  policy.  By  far  the  largest 
grants  of  state  aid  were  made  in  the  South. 

With  the  early  seventies  the  aid  policy  may 
be  said  to  end.  By  1907,  all  but  five  states 
had  in  some  way  forbidden  state  participation 
in  internal  improvements. 

Altogether,  it  has  been  estimated  that  over 
$228,000,000  was  appropriated  or  expended  by 
states  for  the  purpose  of  aiding  railways.  This 
does  not  include  land  grants  made  by  states, 
which  were  of  considerable  importance  in  the 
cases  of  Texas — a state  which  retained  pos- 
session of  the  public  lands  within  its  bounds — 
Florida,  and  Minnesota.  Nor  does  it  include 
the  item  of  exemption  from  taxation  or  free 
surveys. 

Forms  and  Restrictions. — The  chief  forms  in 
which  aid  was  granted  by  states  were  land, 
stock  subscriptions,  and  loans  of  public  credit; 
and  under  the  last  head  either  the  bonds  of 
the  state  might  be  granted,  or  the  bonds  of 
the  railways  or  of  municipalities  for  railways 
might  be  guaranteed.  Stock  subscriptions  were 
more  common  in  the  South. 

The  provisions  made  in  the  grants  of  aid, 
by  way  of  limitations,  safeguards,  and  means 
of  repayment  differed  greatly.  Thus  some 
states,  such  as  Ohio,  provided  that  aid  should 
be  given  only  when  two-thirds  of  the  capital 
stock  or  of  the  estimated  cost  had  been  sub- 
scribed; others — North  Carolina,  for  example 
(1848-49) — specified  one  dollar  of  public 
funds  for  every  dollar  of  private  expenditure; 
still  others,  like  Georgia,  merely  provided  a 
maximum  amount  for  each  case.  Often  a 
maximum  per  mile  allowance  was  set,  as  in 
Tennessee.  As  to  provisions  for  repayment, 
sometimes  there  were  none;  in  other  cases,  the 
state  provided  for  a lien  on  the  road  or  parts 
thereof;  and  in  several  instances,  sinking  funds 
were  prescribed  (as  in  Tennessee,  1852).  Too 
often,  bonds  were  turned  over  to  the  railways 
before  any  real  work  was  begun  (e.  g.,  North 
Carolina)  ; but  sometimes  it  was  enacted  that 
aid  could  only  be  given  as  sections  of  varying 
length  were  completed.  It  is  generally  recog- 
nized that  the  usual  grants  inadequately  guard- 
ed the  interests  of  the  state;  and,  where  safe- 
guards were  attempted,  they  were  not  always 
enforced.  Ohio  and  -Massachusetts  were  among 
the  more  successful  states  in  this  regard. 

Federal  Aid. — The  Federal  Government  also 
gave  much  aid  to  railways.  Two  great  periods 
may  be  distinguished:  that  between  1825  and 
1850,  and  one  extending  from  1850  through 
1870.  Prior  to  1850,  aid  was  given  in  the 
shape  of  surveys  made  by  federal  engineers; 
remission  of  duties  on  railway  iron;  rights  of 
way  over  public  land;  and  proceeds  of  land 
sales  turned  over  to  the  states  for  railway 
purposes.  The  first  aid  was  a survey  made 
between  the  Kanawha  and  James  rivers  in  the 
years  1825-26.  In  1832  iron  for  railways  was 
placed  on  the  free  list,  where  it  remained  until 


1842.  The  first  grant  of  a right  of  way  came 
in  1835,  the  Tallahassee  Railroad  Co.  of  Flor- 
ida being  the  recipient.  In  1850,  began  the 
epoch  of  great  land  grants,  when  3,751,711 
acres  were  granted  for  the  Illinois  Central, 
Mobile  and  Chicago,  and  Mobile  and  Ohio 
railways.  After  this,  hardly  a session  of  Con- 
gress passed  without  some  grant  till  1871,  when 
the  last  one  was  made.  The  largest  donations 
were  made  to  the  Pacific  railways.  Alto- 
gether some  155,504,000  acres  were  given, 
though  the  amount  actually  received  by  rail- 
ways has  been  somewhat  less  on  account  of 
forfeitures.  Land-grant  acts  generally  pro- 
vided that  troops,  mails,  etc.,  should  be  trans- 
ported free  of  toll  or  other  charge;  but  such 
indirect  return  was  decided  against  by  the 
Supreme  Court  in  1876,  and  the  government 
merely  receives  reduced  rates  of  50  per  cent. 

In  the  case  of  the  Union  Pacific  and  Central 
Pacific  group,  Congress  granted  the  national 
credit,  loaning  30-year  6 per  cent  bonds  of  the 
United  States  to  the  amount  of  $16,000  per  mile 
through  level  country  and  as  much  as  $48,000 
per  mile  in  the  mountains.  This  meant  a total 
grant  of  $64,623,512.  After  much  litigation 
Congress,  by  1899,  was  able  to  secure  or  ar- 
range for  the  repayment  of  the  principal  and 
most  of  the  interest  on  these  loans. 

Local  Aid. — Probably  the  aid  given  by  the 
states  and  nation  has  been  exceeded  by  the 
donations  of  counties  and  municipalities.  No 
complete  information  exists,  but  the  census  of 
1870  showed  that  these  local  units  had  out- 
standing bonds  issued  in  aid  of  railways  to 
the  amount  of  $185,000,000,  and  many  had  been 
retired.  The  1871  report  of  the  Massachusetts 
railway  commission  exhibited  171  local  bond 
issues  made  betwen  1830  and  1870  which  aggre- 
gated $2,351,000.  An  investigation  in  Illinois 
in  1873  showed  that  the  bonds  and  money  aid 
voted  and  issued  to  railways  in  86  counties 
out  of  102  approximated  $16,087,000.  In  Ne- 
braska, between  1869  and  1892,  43  counties 
voted  subsidy  bonds  to  the  amount  of  $4,918, 
000.  Texas  local  units  began  to  issue  bonds 
in  order  to  subscribe  to  railways  in  1850; 
between  that  time  and  1876,  Texas  municipali- 
ties voted  $347,000  and  the  counties  over  $1,000, 
000;  but  in  1875  a clause  was  inserted  in  the 
constitution  which  prohibited  local  units  from 
lending  to  or  becoming  stockholders  in  such 
associations  or  corporations.  Baltimore  sub- 
scribed $3,500,000  to  the  Baltimore  and  Ohio. 
All  this  leaves  unmentioned  the  almost  in- 
numerable grants  of  rights  of  way,  terminal 
facilities,  etc.  Relatively  few  counties  and 
towns  exist  which  have  not  aided  a railway. 

Difficulties  of  the  Aid  System. — It  is  a diffi- 
cult matter  to  pass  judgment  upon  the  expe- 
diency of  the  policies  indicated  in  this  brief 
account.  Some  grants  appear  to  have  been 
wise;  others  were  obviously  foolish.  Looking 
from  the  long-time  standpoint  at  the  vast  mass 
of  aid  as  a whole,  one  can  not  but  doubt 


145 


RAILROADS,  PUBLIC  AID  TO 


146 


Railroads  in  1000 


RAILROADS,  PUBLIC  OWNERSHIP  OF 


whether  any  net  gain  accrues.  Aside  from 
•political  exigency,  the  urgency  and  extent  of 
which  can  hardly  be  measured,  it  is  doubtful 
if  the  nation  would  not  be  as  well  supplied 
with  railways  today  if  no  aid  had  been 
given,  and  in  the  long  run  it  can  make  little 
difference  whether  any  particular  town  or  state 
or  region  is  settled  now  or  ten  years  hence. 
When  to  these  negative  considerations  are 
added  the  clear  debits  of  waste  and  corruption, 
judgment  must  be  rather  unfavorable;  for, 
even  granting  that  it  has  been  essential  that 
the  land  be  settled  with  a rush  and  taxable 
values  raised  at  once,  the  clear  losses  have 
been  tremendous.  Construction  has  been  poor- 
ly planned  and  executed;  railways  have  been 
built  where  no  economic  conditions  warranted, 
and  two  lines  where  one  would  do;  hasty, 
cheap  construction  has  been  general,  necessi- 
tating reconstruction  almost  immediately. 
Great  areas  of  land,  including  forest  and  min- 
eral resources,  have  been  squandered.  Lax 
charters  have  been  granted.  Finally,  the  pol- 
icy has  been  the  occasion  for  the  most  disgust- 
ing political  corruption. 

Provisions  for  sinking-funds,  reductions  on 
government  transportation,  etc.,  generally 
proved  a disappointment  to  the  government; 
and,  at  the  same  time,  railway  stockholders 
found  that  the  lands  rarely  equalled  their 
estimated  value  and  were  often  misapplied. 

See  Government,  Theory  of;  Railroads, 
Public  Ownership  of. 

References:  L.  H.  Haney,  Congressional 
Hist,  of  Railways  (1908-10);  J.  B.  Sanborn, 
Cong.  Grants  of  Land  in  Aid  of  Railways 
(1899)  ; J.  W.  Million,  State  Aid  to  Railways 
in  Missouri  (1896);  H.  E.  Keith,  Internal 
Improvements  in  Michigan  (1900)  ; C.  S. 
Potts,  Railroad  Transportation  in  Texas 
(1900)  ; B.  H.  Meyer,  “Early  Railroad  Legisla- 
tion in  Wisconsin”  in  Wisconsin  State  Hist. 
Assoc.,  Collections,  XIV  (1898);  G.  S.  Callen- 
dar,  “Early  Transportation  and  Bank  Enter- 
prise of  States”  in  Quart.  Jour.  Econ.,  XVII 
(1902),  111-162;  W.  A.  Scott,  Repudiation  of 
State  Debts  ( 1893 ) . Lewis  B.  Haney. 

RAILROADS,  PUBLIC  OWNERSHIP  OF. 

The  public  ownership  of  steam  railways  has 
not  been  a live  issue  in  the  United  States,  and 
no  comprehensive  investigation  of  the  subject 
exists.  Down  to  the  present  day,  the  railway 
situation  has  been  so  dynamic  and  speculative, 
the  private  capitalist  so  active,  and  the  laissez- 
faire  philosophy  so  dominant,  that  this  policy 
could  hardly  thrive.  The  Federal  Government 
has  really  owned  no  railways,  and  there  has 
been  no  considerable  advocacy  of  such  owner- 
ship as  an  immediate  step  since  1850  when  the 
Pacific  lines  were  being  planned,  until  the 
determination  to  build  the  Alaska  railroad  was 
reached  in  1914.  Several  states  and  cities,  how- 
ever, have  owned  and  have  even  operated  rail- 
ways. 


State  Ownership.  Pennsylvania. — The  earli- 
est considerable  case  is  that  of  Pennsylvania, 
which  constructed  the  Philadelphia  and 
Columbia  and  the  Portage  railways.  Owing 
largely  to  the  competition  of  the  Erie  canal, 
these  roads  were  not  profitable  and  in  1857 
were  sold  to  the  Pennsylvania  railway  at  a 
loss. 

Georgia. — Perhaps  the  most  notable  case  is 
that  of  Georgia.  This  state,  between  1836  and 
1851,  built  the  Western  and  Atlantic  Railway 
(132  miles)  and  operated  it  until  1870.  Sev- 
eral schemes  of  administration,  both  elective 
and  appointive,  were  tried.  A board'  of  com- 
missioners was  unable  to  report  their  exact 
expenditures,  attributing  the  fact  to  poor  book- 
keeping; but,  on  the  whole,  the  road  was  not 
notably  ill-managed.  It  was  poorly  built, 
however,  with  the  result  that  for  a long  time 
its  small  earnings  were  turned  into  construc- 
tion. It  suffered,  too,  both  from  an  unbal- 
anced traffic  and  from  a lack  of  through  traffic. 
In  1857  the  state  was  paying  six  per  cent  on 
the  $6,000,000  which  it  had  cost,  while  the 
road  did  not  yield  the  treasury  over  one  per 
cent.  By  1866,  however,  it  brought  in  $600, 
000,  and,  in  1870,  $1,000,000  clear  revenue. 
Shortly  after  this,  a private  company  was 
formed  and  succeeded  in  persuading  the  legis- 
lature to  lease  the  road  for  a fixed  annual 
rental.  In  1890,  the  Nashville,  Cincinnati,  and 
St.  Louis  became  the  lessee  at  $420,000  per 
year.  The  history  of  this  experiment  shows 
that  public  construction  and  ownership  may 
lead  to  uneconomic  routes  and  methods  of 
construction;  there  was  some  extravagance  in 
the  salaries  and  wages;  freight  rates  were 
altered  rather  frequently  to  allay  popular 
clamor;  and,  in  at  least  one  case,  a private 
road  that  appeared  likely  to  divert  some 
traffic  was  denied  a charter.  But  the  Western 
and  Atlantic  docs  not  seem  to  have  been  much 
in  politics  nor  to  have  induced  abuse  of  patron- 
age. 

North  Carolina. — North  Carolina  also  tried 
public  ownership.  The  North  Carolina  Rail- 
road (223  miles)  was  constructed  between  1849 
and  1856.  Between  1859  and  1894,  when  it 
was  leased  to  the  Southern  Railway  Company, 
the  road  paid  thirty-nine  cash  dividends.  The 
lease  was  extended  in  1896  to  run  99  years, 
and  an  annual  rental  of  $286,000  is  now  re- 
ceived. The  state  owns  $3,000,000  of  the 
$4,000,000  capital  stock. 

Michigan. — Michigan  had  a brief  and  unprof- 
itable experience  with  public  construction  and 
ownership.  Having  purchased  the  rights  of 
the  Detroit  and  St.  Joseph  Railroad,  she  car- 
ried on  construction  at  an  expense  of  some 
$2,076,112,  to  sell  out  for  $2,000,000  in  1846. 

Indiana. — Indiana  built  a short  road  from 
Madison  to  Jennings  county  in  1839  and  it 
was  operated  by  the  state  till  1843. 

Illinois. — Between  1838  and  1847  Illinois 
tried  a similar  experiment  with  her  Northern 


147 


RAILROADS,  REGULATION  OF— RAILROADS,  STREET 


Cross  road;  but  found  it  a losing  venture  and 
sold  out  in  the  latter  year. 

Massachusetts. — From  1863  to  1887  the  com- 
monwealth of  Massachusetts  built  the  five  mile 
Hoosac  Tunnel,  together  with  about  forty  miles 
of  connecting  railroad.  Later  this  stretch  was 
sold  by  the  state  to  the  Boston  and  Maine 
Railroad  for  $5,000,000. 

Texas. — Texas  owns  and  operates  a short 
line  between  Palestine  and  Rusk.  It  is  ill-kept 
and  apparently  not  profitable. 

City  Ownership. — Several  cities  have  built 
and  owned  steam  roads  with  success.  Thus 
Cincinnati,  being  forbidden  by  an  Ohio  law 
to  aid  railways,  obtained  an  Ohio  charter  in 
1869,  raised  over  $18,000,000,  and  constructed 
the  Cincinnati  Southern  to  Chattanooga  by 
1880.  This  road  was  very  well  built  and  it 
has  paid  a good  revenue  to  the  city.  It  was 
early  leased  to  the  Cincinnati,  New  Orleans, 
and  Texas.  Between  1840  and  1853,  the  city 
of  Troy  owned  the  Schenectady  and  Troy 
Railway;  but  there  was  no  economic  excuse 
for  the  road  to  start  with,  its  directors  were 
inefficient,  and  it  was  sold  to  become  a part  of 
the  New  York  Central  system.  Another  in- 
stance is  that  of  the  town  of  North  Brook- 
field, Mass.,  which  between  1875  and  1877  con- 
structed and  leased  to  the  Boston  and  Albany 
a short  branch.  This  proved  a profitable  ven- 
ture, and,  like  the  Western  and  Atlantic  and 
the  Cincinnati  Southern,  suggests  that  public 
ownership  with  private  operation  may  be  con- 
sidered to  have  proved  practicable  in  the  past 
experiments  in  this  country. 

The  city  of  New  Orleans  has  constructed  and 
now  operates  a belt  railroad  to  connect  its 
lines  intersecting  on  the  east  side  of  the  river. 

Criticism. — Public  ownership  of  railways  is 
dominant  in  Europe.  The  argument  for  the 
policy  has  always  lain  in  the  fact  that  the 
railway  is  necessarily  a monopoly,  while  at  the 
same  time  its  service  is  vitally  essential  to 
the  well-being  of  society.  There  is  danger  that 
under  private  ownership  the  public  will  suffer; 
and  the  history  of  discrimination  between  per- 
sons and  localities,  political  corruption,  etc., 
indicates  the  nature  of  the  danger.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  railway  business  is  so  vast  and 
complicated,  involving  vast  capital  and  an 
army  of  employees,  and  the  problem  of  rate 
making  is  so  delicate,  that  public  ownership 
cannot  well  be  risked  unless  efficient  and  non- 
partisan management  is  assured.  America  be- 
gan with  private  ownership  and  the  difficulty 
of  acquiring  private  lines  would  now  be  enor- 
mous. Regulation  of  privately  owned  lines 
has  been  the  approved  policy  in  this  country. 
In  a rapidly  growing  nation  where  great  elas- 
ticity is  needed,  the  case  for  this  policy  is 
the  stronger.  As  the  difficulty  of  a regulation 
adequate  to  meet  the  growing  consciousness  of 
the  potentialities  and  duties  of  railway  trans- 
portation to  society  has  been  realized,  however, 
the  policy  has  been  more  seriously  questioned. 


Experiments  with  public  ownership  in  the 
United  States  throw  little  light.  A capital 
criticism  of  public  procedure  in  the  past  has 
been  that  it  is  apt  to  take  up  with  uneconomic 
routes;  this,  however,  would  be  less  and  less 
likely  to  be  a serious  difficulty  as  the  railway 
net  becomes  more  dense.  It  must  in  all  fair- 
ness be  observed  that  the  experiments  noted, 
have  generally  been  tried  with  relatively  un- 
profitable lines,  and  have  not  had  the  advan- 
tage of  the  more  recent  developments  in  ac- 
countancy and  administrative  efficiency  which 
could  be  presumed  to  play  a part  in  any 
serious  present-day  experiment. 

See  Government,  Theory  of;  Railroad 
Establishment  and  Management;  Rail- 
roads, Public  Aid  to. 

References:  U.  B.  Phillips,  “American  State 
Owned  Railroads”  in  Yale  Review,  1906;  F. 
W.  Powell,  “Two  Experiments  in  Public  Owner- 
ship” in  Quart.  Journal  of  Economics,  XXII 1 
(1908),  137-150;  M.  A.  Knapp,  in  Am.  Acad, 
of  Pol.  and  Soc.  Sci.,  Annals,  1902;  A.  Van 
Wagenen,  Government  Ownership  of  Railways 
(1910);  C.  S.  Vrooman,  American  Railway 
Problems  (1910)  ; Library  of  Congress,  List  of 
Books  Relating  to  Railroads  in  their  Relation 
to  the  Government  (1907). 

Loins  H.  Haney. 

RAILROADS,  REGULATION  OF.  From  the 
inception  of  the  railroad  system  in  the  United 
States  there  has  been  some  regulation.  Some 
of  the  original  charters  contained  maximum 
provisions  as  to  rates.  In  some  cases,  com- 
panies were  required  to  submit  reports,  par- 
ticularly if  the  state  had  a pecuniary  interest 
in  the  road;  under  the  police  power,  states  and 
local  governments  have  made  regulations  as  to 
speed,  stops,  protection  of  grade  crossings  of 
street  and  other  railroads.  Fundamental  regu- 
lation of  rates,  however,  did  not  begin  until 
the  seventies;  and  regulation  of  rolling  stock 
and  safety  appliances  and  the  hours  and  con- 
ditions of  labor  came  later.  At  present  regu- 
lation is  divided  among  the  Interstate  Com- 
merce Commission  and  a large  number  of 
state  railroad  and  public  utility  commissions. 
See  Accidents,  Railroad  and  Steamship; 
Discrimination  in  Railroad  Rates;  Freight 
Transportation,  Classification  of;  and  un- 
der Railroad;  Railroads.  A.  B.  H. 

RAILROADS,  STREET.  Horse  Cars.— Sur- 
face street  railway  lines  have  had  an  interest- 
ing history.  In  the  majority  of  cities  at 
the  present  time  these  roads  are  operated  by 
one  company,  controlling  the  entire  system. 
Originally  there  was  a large  number  of  sepa- 
rate companies,  each  of  which  built  a short 
stretch  of  line.  The  street  railroad  system 
had  its  beginning  before  the  Civil  War.  A 
light,  crude,  single  track  was  constructed  on 
one  or  more  streets,  and  horse  cars  were  oper- 
ated at  infrequent  intervals.  Fares,  ranging 


148 


RAILROADS,  STREET 


from  seven  to  ten  cents  for  a single  ride,  were 
charged. 

Other  Power. — As  the  cities  increased  in  area 
and  population,  and  the  demand  for  more  rapid 
service  ensued,  experiments  were  made  with 
other  forms  of  motive  power.  Steam  “dum- 
mies,” or  cars  operated  by  a steam  engine 
built  into  the  forward  end,  were  tried,  but 
aroused  considerable  opposition  because  they 
frightened  horses.  Another  system  extensively 
tried  and  still  used  in  some  places  was  the 
cable  road;  cars  were  drawn  by  a mechanical 
grip  affixed  to  the  bottom  of  the  car  which, 
when  it  was  desired  to  start  the  car,  gripped 
a cable  running  in  a slot  in  the  middle  of  the 
track.  The  car  thus  was  drawn  along  by  the 
cable,  which  was,  in  turn,  driven  by  engines 
in  power  houses  located  at  regular  intervals 
along  the  line.  This  system  of  propulsion  was 
unsatisfactory  because  it  was  impossible  to 
drive  cars  except  at  one  speed,  because  the 
cars  started  with  a violent  jerk,  because  it  was 
dangerous  and  also  because  the  cost  of  con- 
struction, up  keep  and  operation  was  extra- 
ordinarily heavy. 

Storage  batteries  have  been  repeatedly  tried, 
and  are  now  giving  satisfactory  service  on  lines 
with  light  traffic  in  New  York  City  and  else- 
where. 

Electric  Power. — The  introduction  of  elec- 
tricity as  motive  power  for  surface  street  rail- 
way lines  began  about  1890.  Within  a few 
years  the  older  methods  of  transportation  were 
practically  superseded,  although  at  the  present 
time  a few  horse  cars  are  still  operated  in  New 
York  City  and  other  places  (1914).  The  de- 
velopment of  electric  traction  since  that  time 
has  been  rapid.  The  earlier  cars,  which  were 
small,  were  soon  superseded  by  larger  and 
more  speedy  equipment.  The  industry  has 
passed  through  an  era  of  rapid  development, 
carrying  complex  financial  and  technical  prob- 
lems. 

Franchises. — In  addition  to  construction 
questions  most  of  the  street  railway  systems 
have  been  forced  to  meet  important  questions 
concerning  franchises.  In  many  of  the  western 
cities  this  class  of  corporation  is  granted  a 
limited  term  franchise,  running  for  a specified 
period,  ranging  usually  from  20  to  50  years. 
The  expiration  of  these  franchises  leads,  first, 
to  a period  of  doubt  and  uncertainty  during 
which  the  properties  of  the  corporations  fall 
into  disrepair  and  the  service  becomes  anti- 
quated; and,  finally,  to  an  adjustment  under 
which  a new  franchise  is  given  for  another 
period  of  years. 

Various  solutions  of  this  franchise  problem 
have  been  worked  out.  In  Chicago  an  excellent 
franchise  is  in  force,  by  which  the  city  re- 
ceives 55  per  cent  of  the  net  earnings  of  the 
corporation  after  a sum,  equivalent  to  five 
per  cent,  has  been  set  aside  to  pay  the  inter- 
est upon  the  actual  physical  value  of  the  prop- 
erty at  the  time  of  the  granting  of  the  fran- 


chise, together  with  such  increases  thereto  as 
may  be  approved  by  a Board  of  Supervising 
Engineers  created  to  administer,  in  the  inter- 
ests of  the  public,  the  railways  of  that  city. 
This  franchise  is,  in  a sense,  self-renewing,  for 
provisions  are  inserted  looking  towards  the 
automatic  readjustment  of  conditions  at  the 
expiration  of  the  period  of  years  for  which 
it  is  granted. 

A very  similar  solution  to  the  franchise  diffi- 
culty was  secured  in  Cleveland  in  1911,  al- 
though in  this  case  the  city  chose  to  lower  the 
rate  of  fare  by  progressive  stages  rather  than 
to  share  in  the  profits  of  the  company  upon  a 
fixed  rate  of  fare,  as  in  the  case  of  Chicago. 
Still  other  solutions  are  being  worked  out  or 
have  been  devised  in  the  ease  of  other  western 
cities.  The  state  of  Wisconsin  has  endeavored 
to  secure  the  advantages  of  a limited  term 
franchise  without  subjecting  the  people  to  the 
inevitable  disadvantages  which  arise  because 
of  the  uncertainty  and  confusion  attendant 
upon  the  renewal  of  franchises.  This  has  been 
done  through  the  use  of  an  “indeterminate  per- 
mit,” which,  in  effect,  gives  a corporation  a 
franchise  lasting  during  good  behavior. 

Taxation. — An  important  corollary  of  the 
franchise  question  is  taxation.  In  most  cities 
street  railway  companies  pay  taxes  upon  their 
physical  property  in  the  same  manner  as  pri- 
vate individuals  or  other  classes  of  corpora- 
tions. It  is  coming  to  be  recognized,  however, 
that  such  taxation,  where  the  companies  are 
under  strict  regulation  as  regards  service, 
fares,  and  earnings,  is  in  reality,  an  indirect 
method  of  taxation  upon  the  people  as  a whole, 
since  the  street  railway  company  must  include 
the  amount  of  the  tax  as  a portion  of  its  rate 
of  fare. 

Capitalization. — The  process  of  consolida- 
tion of  the  several  street  railway  lines  operat- 
ing within  a given  city,  into  one  system,  was, 
in  most  cases,  attended  by  the  injection  of  a 
large  amount  of  “water,”  or  capitalization  in 
excess  of  the  physical  value  of  the  property. 
This  over-capitalization  in  certain  cities,  such 
as  New  York,  reached  the  point  of  a national 
scandal.  Electric  railway  officials  were  called 
upon  by  their  stockholders  to  earn  dividends 
upon  this  enormous  capitalization.  The  result 
of  this  demand  was  that  it  was  necessary  for 
them  to  curtail  service  and  the  privileges,  such 
as  free  transfers,  etc.,  which  might  otherwise 
be  extended  to  the  patrons  of  the  road. 

The  evil  of  over-crowding  of  cars,  inadequate 
service,  the  failure  to  grant  transfers,  and 
similar  matters  contributed  more  than  any- 
thing else  to  the  movement  which  led  to  the 
establishment  of  the  public  service  commissions 
and  the  local  boards  of  rapid  transit.  These 
bodies  have  undertaken,  in  behalf  of  the  public, 
to  require  corporations  to  give  adequate  service 
and  proper  rates  of  fare.  In  doing  this  they 
have  worked  upon  the  principle  that  the  stock- 
holders are  entitled  only  to  a fair  rate  of 


149 


RAILROADS,  TAXATION  OF— RANDOLPH,  EDMUND  JENNINGS 


return  upon  the*  actual  value  of  the  property, 
regardless  of  its  capitalization.  The  law  creat- 
ing the  public  service  commission,  in  the  ma- 
jority of  cases,  prohibits  the  issue  of  securities 
except  for  money  or  property  of  equal  value, 
and  gives  to  the  commission  the  power  to  dis- 
approve security  issues,  where  this  principle 
is  not  observed,  as  well  as  the  right  to  approve 
or  disapprove  of  proposed  consolidations  or 
other  changes  in  corporate  relations. 

See  City  Planning;  Franchises,  Corpo- 
ration; Interurban  Lines;  Municipal  Gov- 
ernment, Functions  of;  Municipal  Owner- 
ship; Public  Service  Corporations. 

References:  “Electric  Railway  Transporta- 
tion” in  Am.  Acad,  of  Pol.  and  Soc.  Sci.,  A fi- 
nals (Jan.,  1911);  H.  F.  Parshall  and  H.  M. 
Hobart,  Electric  Railway  Engineering  (1908)  ; 
A.  B.  Herrick,  Practical  Electric  Railway 
Handbook  (1906);  J.  R.  Cravath,  Electric 
Railways  (1908)  ; B.  J.  Arnold,  Chicago 
Transportation  Problem  (Jan.,  1911);  A. 

E.  Pinanski,  Street  Railway  System  of  Met- 
ropolitan Boston  (1908)  ; A.  L.  Rosenberg- 
er,  Street  Railway  Law  (1894-1901),  Com- 
mercial and  Financial  Chronicle,  Semi-Annual 
Electric  Railway  Supplement,  Municipal  Fran- 
chises (1911)  ; Lee  Merriweather,  Street  Rail- 
ivay  Franchises  (1896);  Ford,  Bacon  and 
Davis,  Report  Philadelphia  P.  R.  T.  (March, 
1911)  ; A.  B.  Herrick  and  E.  C.  Boynton,  Am. 
Electric  Railway  Practice  (1906);  F.  W. 
Johnson,  Prevention  of  Accidents  (1910);  G. 

F.  Deiser  & F.  W.  Johnson,  Claims,  Fixing 
Their  Values  (1911)  ; T.  Conway,  Jr.,  Am. 
Acad,  of  Pol.  and  Soc.  Sci.,  Annals,  Sept., 
1904,  Jan.,  1911,  “Traffic  Problems  of  Interur- 
ban Electric  Railways”  in  Jounml  of  Account- 
ancy, VI,  VII  (1908—1909)  ; Am.  Railway  In- 
vestments (annual)  ; Electric  Railways  Journal 
(weekly);  Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  549;  ibid, 
1911,  563;  ibid,  1912,  548. 

Thomas  Conway,  Jr. 

RAILROADS,  TAXATION  OF.  See  Tax- 
ation of  Railroads. 

RAINES  LAW.  The  New  York  liquor  tax 
law  of  1896,  so  called  from  its  author,  Senator 
John  Raines,  the  important  provision  of  which 
prohibited  liquor  selling  on  Sunday  except  in 
hotels,  which  must  have  at  least  ten  bedrooms. 
It  resulted  in  turning  hundreds  of  saloons 
into  “Raines  law  hotels”  which  are  said  to 
have  become  houses  of  assignation  and  prosti- 
tution. O.  C.  H. 

RANDALL,  SAMUEL  JACKSON.  Samuel  J. 
Randall  (1828-1890)  was  born  at  Phila- 
delphia, October  10,  1828.  He  entered  busi- 
ness, but  his  tastes  drew  him  into  politics, 
and  for  four  years  he  was  a Whig  member 
of  the  city  council.  On  the  break-up  of  the 
Whig  party,  in  1856,  he  became  a Democrat, 
and  in  1858  was  elected  to  the  state  senate. 


On  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War  he  en- 
listed in  the  Union  army,  but  in  1862  was 
elected  to  Congress,  and  served  continuously 
in  the  House  from  1863  until  his  death. 
In  1874  he  was  made  a member  of  the  com- 
mittee on  rules,  and  in  1875  defeated  a Re- 
publican attempt  to  reenact  the  “Force  Bill” 
of  1871  by  unprecedented  pertinacity  in  filibus- 
tering, holding  the  floor  for  three  days.  On 
the  death  of  Michael  C.  Kerr,  in  1876,  he  was 
chosen  speaker,  filling  the  office  until  March, 
1881.  His  attitude  in  the  Hayes-Tilden  con- 
troversy was  largely  responsible  for  breaking 
down  the  Democratic  opposition  to  the  com- 
pletion of  the  count.  In  1880  he  was  an  un- 
successful candidate  for  the  Democratic  nomi- 
nation for  President.  Throughout  his  public 
career  he  was  a protectionist,  and  little  oppo- 
sition was  made  to  his  successive  elections.  In 
1884  and  1886  the  “Randall  Democrats”  joined 
the  Republicans  in  defeating  the  Morrison  bills 
for  horizontal  reduction  of  duties.  He  died 
at  Washington,  April  12,  1890.  See  Speaker 
of  the  House.  References:  M.  P.  Follett, 
Speaker  of  the  House  (1896)  ; W.  A.  Dunning, 
Reconstruction  (1906),  281,  237;  E.  E.  Sparks, 
National  Development  (1907),  129,  303. 

W.  MacD. 

RANDOLPH,  EDMUND  JENNINGS.  Ed- 
mund J.  Randolph  (1753-1813)  was  born  at 
Williamsburg,  Va.,  August  10,  1753.  He  was 
admitted  to  the  bar,  and  in  1775  was  for  a 
short  time  one  of  Washington’s  aides.  He  was 
a member  of  the  Virginia  constitutional  con- 
vention of  1776,  and  the  first  attorney  general 
of  the  state;  and  from  1779  to  1782  was  a 
member  of  Congress.  In  1786  he  succeeded 
Patrick  Henry  as  governor  of  Virginia,  at- 
tended the  Annapolis  convention,  and  was  a 
delegate  to  the  federal  convention  of  1787, 
where  he  submitted  what  is  known  as  the 
“Virginia  plan”  (see).  He  was  not  satisfied 
with  the  Constitution,  and  declined  to  sign 
it,  but  as  a member  of  the  Virginia  conven- 
tion worked  for  its  ratification.  In  1788  he  re- 
signed the  governorship  and  entered  the  assem- 
bly, where  he  was  on  a committee  to  codify 
the  state  laws.  In  September,  1789,  he  was 
appointed  Attorney  General  of  the  United 
States.  In  this  office  he  prepared  a report  on 
the  judicial  system,  appeared  in  the  case  of 
Chisholm  vs.  Georgia  (2  Dal.  419)  and  issued 
a pamphlet,  under  the  pseudonym  “Germani- 
cus,”  against  the  Democratic  clubs.  In  Jan- 
uary, 1794,  he  succeeded  Jefferson  as  Secre- 
tary of  State,  but  resigned  in  1795  as  the 
result  of  charges  of  bad  faith  in  the  nego- 
tiations with  France.  He  published  a Vindi- 
cation (1795)  of  his  course.  He  was  one  of 
the  counsel  for  Aaron  Burr  in  1807.  He  died 
in  Clarke  county,  Va.,  September  13,  1813. 
See  State,  Department  of.  References:  M.  D. 
Conway,  Omitted  Chapters  of  History  Disclosed 
in  the  Life  and  Papers  of  Edmund  Randolph 


150 


RANDOLPH,  JOHN— RATIFICATION  OF  TREATIES  BY  THE  UNITED  STATES 


(1888)  ; M.  Farrand,  Records  of  the  Federal 
Convention  (1911);  R.  Hildreth,  Hist,  of  the 
U.  S.  ( 1849-56 ) , III,  IV.  W.  MacD. 

RANDOLPH,  JOHN.  John  Randolph  was 
born  at  Cawsons,  Virginia,  June  2,  1773,  and 
died  in  Philadelphia,  June  24,  1833.  Left  an 
orphan  at  a tender  age,  young  Randolph’s 
education  was  committed  to  a stepfather,  St. 
George  Tucker,  who  took  the  greatest  inter- 
est in  the  boy.  He  was  s*mt  to  William  and 
Mary,  Princeton  and  Columbia  colleges  and  he 
“read  law”  in  Philadelphia  under  Edmund  Ran- 
dolph (see),  and  returned  to  Virginia  to  be- 
come a planter-politician  rather  than  a lawyer. 
He  began  his  career  at  Charlotte  Courthouse 
as  an  opponent  of  Patrick  Henry,  attracted 
state-wide  attention,  and  was  elected  to  Con- 
gress the  same  year,  1799.  In  1801  he  was 
chairman  of  the  committee  of  ways  and  means, 
which  position  he  held  until  he  broke  with 
Jefferson  in  1806.  From  1806  till  1815  he 
was  leader  of  the  so-called  “tertium  quids”  a 
small  party  of  independents.  Randolph  op- 
posed the  War  of  1812  and  became  a biUer 
enemy  of  the  southern  school  of  politicians 
headed  by  Calhoun  and  Clay  in  1816.  The 
tariff,  internal  improvements  and  broad  con- 
struction of  the  Constitution  he  always  ridi- 
culed. Randolph  was  a member  of  the  House 
or  Senate  at  irregular  intervals  between  1819 
and  1828  when  he  became  an  ardent  “Jackson 
man”  and  was  sent  as  minister  to  Russia  in 
1830,  only  to  return  two  years  later  a strong 
opponent  of  the  President  on  his  nullification 
policy.  See  Democratic-Republican  Party; 
Tertium  Quid;  Virginia.  References:  H. 
Adams,  John  Randolph  (1888)  ; H.  A.  Garland, 
Life  of  John  Randolph  (1850). 

W.  T.  D. 

RAPID  TRANSIT  IN  CITIES.  When  the 
population  of  our  large  cities  passes  a cer- 
tain point,  the  problem  of  street  car  trans- 
portation begins  to  assume  a serious  aspect. 
The  concentration  of  the  central  business  dis- 
trict within  a narrow  area,  and  in  many  cases 
the  engineering  faults  in  city  planning  (see), 
which  cannot  be  rectified  at  this  time,  cause 
extreme  traffic  congestion  at  certain  points, 
tending  to  paralyze  the  transportation  system. 
It  becomes  imperative  when  this  point  is 
reached,  that  rapid  transit  facilities  be  intro- 
duced. This  can  be  accomplished  either  by 
the  construction  of  elevated  or  subway  (see) 
lines,  or  a combination  of  elevated  and  sub- 
way lines.  The  problems  arising  out  of  traffic 
congestion  have  been  responsible,  to  a large 
extent,  for  the  creation  of  public  service  com- 
missions and  local  boards  of  rapid  transit  or 
supervising  engineers.  See  City  Planning  ; 
Franchises,  Corporation  ; Public  Service 
Commissions;  Railroads,  Elevated;  Rail- 
roads, Street;  Subways  and  Tunnels. 

T.  C. 


RATES.  See  Prices  and  Charges. 

RATES,  REGULATION  OF.  Control  or  de- 
termination of  rates  by  a governmental  agency, 
state  or  federal.  See  Differentials  in  Rail- 
road Traffic;  Discrimination  in  Railroad 
Rates;  Express  Service,  Regulation  of; 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission;  Inter- 
state Commerce  Decisions;  Long  and  Short 
Haul;  Pooling  in  Railroads;  Prices  and 
Charges  ; Pullman  Cars  ; Railroads,  Physic- 
al Valuation  of;  Rebates;  Traffic  Agree- 
ments. F.  H.  D. 

RATIFICATION  OF  CONSTITUTIONS.  See 

Constitution  Making;  Constitution  of  the 
United  States,  Amendments  to;  Federal 
Convention. 

RATIFICATION  OF  STATE  CONSTITU- 
TIONAL AMENDMENTS.  See  Constitu- 
tions, State,  Amendment  of. 

RATIFICATION  OF  TREATIES  BY  THE 
UNITED  STATES.  Constitutional  Provisions. 

— Under  the  Articles  of  Confederation  all  parts 
of  the  treaty  making  power  were  exercised 
by  Congress,  a vote  of  nine  out  of  thirteen 
states  being  necessary  for  confirmation.  The 
Federal  Constitution  declares  that  the  Presi- 
dent shall  have  power  “by  and  with  the  advice 
and  consent  of  the  Senate,  to  make  treaties, 
provided  two-thirds  of  the  Senate  present 
concur;”  and  that  “all  treaties  made,  or  which 
shall  be  made,  under  the  authority  of  the 
United  States,  shall  be  the  supreme  law  of 
the  land”  (Art.  II,  Sec.  ii,  2,  Art.  VI,  f 2). 
Under  these  articles,  the  President  has  clearly 
the  exclusive  right  to  negotiate  and  to  pro- 
pound treaties;  but  the  legislating  power  is  a 
two-thirds  vote  of  the  Senate. 

Senate  as  a Council. — President  Washington 
construed  the  clause  on  ratification  to  mean 
that:  (1)  he  might  and  ordinarily  would 
consult  the  Senate  while  negotiations  were  in 
progress;  (2)  the  decision  of  the  Senate  was 
to  be  made  in  a kind  of  council  session  while 
the  President  was  present;  (3)  he  could  bring 
in  during  the  discussion  any  member  of  his 
Cabinet  to  give  information  on  the  pending 
treaty.  None  of  these  methods  pleased  the 
Senate,  which  in  1789-1790  showed  unwilling- 
ness to  discuss  any  treaty  officially,  either  with 
the  President  or  with  the  head  of  the  depart- 
ment; and  the  President  ceased  his  efforts  to 
bring  about  this  confidential  relation.  A few 
times  since  then,  the  President  has  consulted 
the  Senate  in  advance;  Polk  ascertained  from 
the  Senate  in  1846  that  it  would  ratify  a 
treaty  for  settling  the  Oregon  boundary  on  the 
49th  parallel  (see  Northwestern  Boundary 
Controversy).  Unofficially  the  President 
through  friends  in  the  Senate  finds  out  whether 
a two-thirds  majority  is  at  hand  in  favor  of 
provisions  which  he  desires  to  insert  in  a 
151 


RAW  MATERIALS,  TAXATION  OF— RAWLE,  WILLIAM 


treaty.  Of  late  years  the  same  object  lias  been 
secured  by  making  prominent  Senators  mem- 
bers of  a commission  to  negotiate  a treaty. 
Tlius  the  envoys  sent  to  Paris  in  1898  to  nego- 
tiate the  treaty  of  peace  with  Spain,  included 
the  chairman  of  the  Senate  committee  of  for- 
eign relations  and  two  of  the  other  Senators, 
who  might  be  supposed  to  know  the  frame  of 
mind  of  their  fellows. 

Discussion  by  the  Senate. — The  regular 
method  for  dealing  with  a treaty  is  as  follows: 
The  President  sends  in  the  text  of  the  docu- 
ment, commonly  with,  or  followed  by  corres- 
pondence and  other  papers  bearing  upon  the 
treaty.  The  treaty  is  then  referred  to  the 
Senate  committee  on  foreign  relations,  which, 
if  it  deems  necessary,  makes  a call  upon  the 
President  for  additional  material ; such  docu- 
ments as  the  Senate  pleases  may  be  printed 
confidentially  for  the  use  of  Senators  or  as  a 
public  document.  The  committee  then  con- 
siders the  treaty  in  private  session  at  its  con- 
venience. It  may,  and  frequently  does,  invite 
the  Secretary  of  State,  or  other  officials  of  the 
Department  of  State  to  appear  and  explain 
the  provisions  of  the  treaty  to  the  committee; 
or  they  may  ask  for  such  an  opportunity  of 
explanation.  Public  hearings  are  sometimes 
held  by  the  committee,  particularly  in  the  case 
of  commercial  treaties. 

Most  treaties  are  reported  to  the  Senate 
after  a few  weeks  or  months,  whether  the 
committee  approves  them  or  not;  but  treaties 
may,  if  the  committee  feels  pretty  sure  that 
they  would  not  be  approved  by  the  Senate,  be 
held  indefinitely,  and  thus  perish.  The  Sen- 
ate may,  at  any  time,  by  vote,  call  for  a report 
from  the  committee,  though  that  is  unusual 
action.  The  chairman  of  the  Senate  committee 
on  foreign  affairs  is  a kind  of  parliamentary 
assistant  Secretary  of  State;  and  if  of  the 
same  party  as  the  Secretary,  is  in  close  con- 
fidential relations  with  him. 

Discussion  and  Vote.— The  Senate  almost  in- 
variably discusses  treaties  in  executive  session, 
all  officials  being  sworn  to  secrecy;  hut  some 
Senator  is  certain  to  communicate  the  proceed- 
ings to  a reporter,  and  frequently  confidential 
documents  leak  out  in  the  same  way.  Dis- 
cussion may  proceed  for  days  and  be  renewed 
from  time  to  time. 

Since  the  Senate  has  no  closure  (see),  an 
opponent  of  a treaty  may  talk  against  it 
indefinitely;  but  eventually  it  is  brought  to  a 
vote  by  recorded  yeas  and  nays.  If  two-tliirds 
of  the  members  present  vote  for  it,  it  is  then 
transmitted  to  the  President  that  he  may  com- 
plete the  ratification  and  proclaim  it.  If  the 
vote  is  adverse,  that  disposes  of  the  matter; 
as  treaties  are  practically  never  brought  up  in 
the  same  form  the  second  time. 

Amendment. — The  Constitution  seems  to 
have  been  framed  on  the  supposition  that  when 
the  treaty  had  once  left  the  President’s  hand, 
it  must  be  accepted  or  rejected  as  a whole; 


but  in  the  ratification  of  the  .Jay  Treaty  (see) 
in  1794,  the  Senate  introduced  an  amendment 
relating  to  the  West  India  trade;  that  amend- 
ment was  accepted  by  the  British  Government, 
and  as  the  two  powers  were  in  unison  as  to 
the  text  of  the  treaty,  it  was  not  thought 
necessary  to  refer  it  a second  time  to  the  Sen- 
ate. In  numerous  cases  since,  where  amend- 
ments have  been  made  by  the  Senate,  the  ac- 
ceptance by  the  foreign  government  of  the  text 
which  the  Senate  has  thus  approved  is  held 
to  settle  the  authentic  text  of  the  ratified 
treaty. 

Later  Action  of  the  President. — The  Presi- 
dent is  under  no  constitutional  obligation  to 
exchange  ratifications  of  a treaty  which  has 
been  approved  by  the  Senate ; it  does  not  be- 
come a law  of  the  land  until  it  has  been  thus 
sanctioned  by  a joint  formal  exchange  of  sig- 
natures, and  has  been  proclaimed  by  the  Presi- 
dent, it  then  becomes  a part  of  the  file  of  laws 
and  is  published  in  the  next  issue  of  the  fed- 
eral statutes. 

See  Annexations  to  the  United  States; 
Commercial  Policy  and  Relations  of  tiie 
United  States;  International  Law,  Sources 
of;  Jay  Treaty;  Law  of  the  Land;  Peace, 
Conclusion  of;  President,  Authority  and 
Influence  of;  Senate. 

References:  J.  W.  Foster,  Practice  of  Dip- 
lomacy (190G),  cli.  xiii;  C.  H.  Butler,  Treaty 
Making  Power  of  the  V.  S.  (1902);  S.  B. 
Crandall,  Treaty  Power  (1904);  Francis 
Wharton,  Commentaries  (1884),  §§  155-161, 
383,  505,  506;  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Laic 
(1906),  V,  §§  734-780;  M.  L.  Hinsdale,  Presi- 
dent’s Cabinet  (1911)  ; C.  C.  Kerr,  Origin  and 
Development  of  the  U.  S.  Senate  ( 1895 ) . 

Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

RAW  MATERIALS,  TAXATION  OF.  See 

Taxation  of  Raw  Materials. 

RAWLE,  WILLIAM.  William  Rawle  (1759- 
1836)  was  born  at  Philadelphia,  April  2S, 
1759.  His  family  were  loyalists,  and  re- 
moved to  New  York  when  the  British  evacuat- 
ed Philadelphia.  He  studied  law  at  the  Mid- 
dle Temple,  London,  and  on  his  return  to  the 
United  States,  in  1783,  settled  at  Philadelphia 
and  was  admitted  to  the  bar.  In  1791  he  was 
appointed  United  States  district  attorney,  and 
in  this  capacity  conducted  the  prosecution^ 
arising  out  of  the  Whiskey  Insurrection  of 
1794  and  1798.  He  was  also  counsel  for  the 
first  Bank  of  the  United  States.  In  1798  he 
was  elected  to  the  assembly.  During  the  lat- 
ter part  of  his  life  his  professional  duties,  and 
those  of  the  numerous  learned  societies  and  in- 
stitutions with  which  he  was  connected,  ab- 
sorbed most  of  his  time.  His  “View  of  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States”  (1825) 
was  held  in  repute  by  early  constitutional  writ- 
ers, but  is  no  longer  of  particular  importance. 
In  1830  he  was  associated  with  Thomas  I. 


152 


RE  ADJUSTER— REAL  ESTATE,  PUBLIC  OWNERSHIP  OF 


Wharton  and  Joel  Jones  in  revising  the  civil 
code  of  the  state.  He  died  at  Philadelphia, 
April  12,  1836.  Reference:  T.  I.  Wharton, 
Memoir  of  William  Rawle  (1840). 

W.  MacD. 

READJUSTER.  A party  in  Virginia  advo- 
cating repudiation  or  partial  repudiation  of 
the  state  debt — part  of  the  time  a coalition 
against  the  old  Democratic  regime.  Its  best- 
known  leader  was  William  Mahone,  Senator 
of  the  United  States.  A separate  party  or- 
ganization was  formed  in  1879.  For  a time 


(1881-1885)  it  was  in  control  of  the  govern- 
ment of  the  state.  See  Repudiation  of  Pub- 
lic Debt.  References:  Appleton’s  Annual  Cy- 
clopedia (1879  to  1886);  J.  E.  Cooke,  Vir- 
ginia (1903),  512.  A.  C.  McL. 

REAL  ESTATE.  An  expression  loosely 
used  to  denote  the  right  or  property 
which  one  has  in  lands  or  any  interests  in 
land  which  are  held  for  life  or  for  a greater 
estate.  The  term  is  often  inaccurately  used  to 
denote  the  land,  itself,  with  appurtenances. 

IT.  M.  B. 


REAL  ESTATE,  PUBLIC  OWNERSHIP  OF 


Just  as  the  control  of  a territory  sufficient 
for  national  life  underlies  the  existence  of  all 
states,  so  the  occupancy  of  particular  areas  of 
soil  is  necessary  for  all  governments.  Under 
the  theories  of  monarchy,  particularly  when 
founded  on  military  conquest,  land  has  com- 
monly been  treated  as  the  property  of  the 
sovereign,  to  be  by  him  granted  outright  or  on 
condition  of  certain  services  by  the  occupant. 
Hence,  in  England  real  estate,  the  property  of 
persons  dying  without  heirs,  goes  back  to  the 
Government,  and  that  rule  is  ordinarily  fol- 
lowed in  the  United  States. 

Further,  in  this  country,  the  original  land 
was  actually  in  the  possession  of  and  distrib- 
uted by  governments.  Almost  all  the  land 
titles  in  the  United  States  can  be  traced  back 
to  grants  by  the  Spanish,  French,  Mexican, 
Texan,  or  Hawaiian  Governments,  or  by  Great 
Britain,  one  of  the  English  colonies,  the  United 
States  or  a state.  Lands  necessary  for  gov- 
ernmental purposes  have  usually  been  reserved 
in  making  these  grants,  such  as  the  sites  of 
public  buildings  and  institutions.  Beyond 
that  it  has  been  the  policy  of  every  colony 
and  state  to  get  the  land  out  of  public  owner- 
ship into  private  hands,  so  that  at  the  present 
day  almost  no  land  out  of  its  original  grant 
is  held  by  any  state  in  the  Union  except  Texas 
and  Maine.  New  York  and  New  Hampshire, 
however,  have  recently  acquired  a few  small 
areas  for  state  forests. 

Federal  Real  Estate.— The  United  States  re- 
mains the  proprietor  of  considerable  areas  of 
land  within  the  states,  particularly  in  the 
Rocky  Mountain  and  Pacific  Coast  region.  Out 
of  this  land  some  permanent  reservations  have 
been  made  as  follows: 

(1)  The  government  forests,  which  on  June 
30,  1913,  included  187,008,793  acres. 

(2)  Indian  reservations;  the  land  in  these 
technically  belongs  to  the  Indians,  but  the 
United  States  from  time  to  time  has  reduced 
the  reservations,  setting  apart  certain  areas 
actually  or  nominally  at  a price  per  acre  to 
constitute  a fund  for  the  benefit  of  the  tribes. 


(3)  Reservations  for  government  posts  and 
forts.  The  present  policy  of  the  Government 
is  rapidly  to  reduce  these  posts.  Many  of  the 
sites  lying  within  cities  have  long  since  been 
sold  or  transferred.  Of  a similar  character 
are  the  arsenals,  armories,  ordnance  depots, 
navy  yards,  lighthouses,  and  public  buildings. 

(4)  Special  reserves  of  natural  scenery,  es- 
pecially the  Arkansas  Hot  Springs,  Yellow- 
stone Park,  Yosemite  Park,  Grand  Canon  of 
the  Colorado,  Glacier  Park,  and  three  reserva- 
tions of  big  trees  in  California. 

(5)  The  public  buildings  and  grounds  in 
Washington. 

State  Real  Estate. — Besides  the  small  reser- 
vations of  their  original  holdings  as  states, 
the  states  more  recently  admitted  have  great 
areas  of  school  land  and  lands  given  by  the 
United  States  for  other  purposes.  Thus,  the 
state  of  Washington  in  1889  received  2,700,000 
acres,  part  of  which  is  still  unsold;  and  the 
now  states  of  Arizona  and  New  Mexico  entered 
the  Union  in  1912  with  their  whole  grant  for 
school  and  other  purposes  intact.  In  addition 
the  states  have  purchased  land  from  time  to 
time  for  their  own  needs,  particularly  for  the 
following  purposes: 

(1)  State  forests,  of  which  the  Adirondack 
tract  in  New  York  of  about  800,000  acres  is 
the  only  notable  example. 

(2)  State  parks  and  reservations,  mostly 
to  commemorate  historic  events  or  to  preserve 
historic  relics,  as  the  Valley  Forge  Park  in 
Pennsylvania  and  the  Rufus  Putnam  house  at 
Rutland,  Mass.  In  several  states  picturesque 
areas  have  been  made  parks,  particularly  Mt. 
Wachusett  and  Mt.  Greylock  in  Massachu- 
setts, Mt.  Ranier  in  the  state  of  Wash- 
ington, and  the  Niagara  Falls  Park  in  New 
York. 

(3)  Sites  for  public  buildings.  In  the  older 
states  buildings  from  colonial  times  are  still 
in  use  or  new  ones  have  been  built  on  the  same 
land,  but  all  the  states  have  bought  and  are 
constantly  buying  land  for  enlargements,  trans- 
fers and  new  sites.  The  states  go  into  the 


153 


REAL  ESTATE  TAXES — REASONABLENESS  IN  RESTRAINT  OF  TRADE 


market  like  any  private  individual.  Frequent- 
ly tracts  of  land  are  given  them  as  an  induce- 
ment to  set  up  such  institutions  as  insane 
asylums  and  universities.  Failing  an  amicable 
purchase,  the  states  under  eminent  domain 
(see)  take  possession  of  any  land  required  for 
their  purposes,  the  compensation  to  be  fixed  by 
judicial  process.  The  public  usually  pays  con- 
siderably more  than  the  ordinary  market  price 
for  such  real  estate.  Upon  the  land  thus 
acquired  are  placed  state  public  buildings  and 
institutions  which  frequently  include  large 
farms.  There  is  a tendency  to  scatter  these  in- 
stitutions through  the  state,  even  some  state 
universities  being  split  up  into  sections  which 
are  located  at  different  places. 

The  states  also  own  the  beds  of  state  canals 
that  are  in  operation,  and  sometimes  discon- 
tinued canals,  and  a few  states,  especially 
North  Carolina  and  Georgia,  are  still  owners 
of  the  roadbed  of  pieces  of  railway  which  are 
leased  to  private  citizens. 

Municipal  and  Local  Real  Estate. — The  cit- 
ies and  other  local  governments  obtain  neces- 
sary real  estate  in  the  same  manner,  by  gift, 
purchase  or  condemnation,  but  they  own  much 
more  valuable  real  estate  than  the  state  gov- 
ernments. In  addition  to  the  usual  city  hall, 
there  are  fire  houses,  public  baths,  multitudes 
of  sehoolhouses,  water  works,  gas  works,  elec- 
tric light  and  power  works.  The  title  to  the 
streets  is  commonly  vested  in  the  local  govern- 
ment, sometimes  in  the  state,  though  in  con-  j 
siderable  parts  of  New  York  the  abutters  own 
the  streets  subject  to  their  use  for  public  pur- 
poses. 

The  cities  also  have  immensely  valuable  real 
estate  in  parks  and  boulevards.  Some  of  them 
are  strung  out  in  systems  scores  of  miles  in 
length  as  the  rings  of  parks  about  Chicago  and 
Kansas  City.  In  addition  to  the  large  parks, 
there  are  the  open  spots  often  made  by  tearing 
down  old  buildings  ( see  Parks  and  Boule- 
vards ) . 

Some  cities  own  water  fronts  which  enable 
them  to  build  public  docks,  which  in  New 
York  are  very  profitable  to  the  city.  Two 
cities,  Cincinnati  and  New  Orleans,  own  rail- 
roads. Many  cities  have  the  title  to  long  lines 
of  aqueduct,  in  a few  cases  taking  water  from 
outside  the  state. 

In  general,  public  real  estate  is  not  treated 
as  a corporation  would  treat  its  property. 
Some  cities  have  no  inventory  of  their  own 
real  estate.  There  is  more  or  less  jobbery  over 
the  purchase  of  real  estate  and  sometimes  val- 
uable tracts  of  city  property  not  in  immediate 
use  are  sold  on  very  disadvantageous  terms. 
Cities  in  many  foreign  countries  have  the  right 
to  lay  out  new  streets  and  take  over  the  whole 
of  every  parcel  of  real  estate  affected.  They 
then  fix  the  street  lines  and  sell  the  abutting 
property,  so  that  cities  like  Paris  and  Vienna 
have  been  transformed  without  any  expense 
to  the  public,  which  by  this  process  gets  the 


unearned  increment.  In  America  people  are 
very  unwilling  to  trust  the  municipalities  with 
such  responsibility,  and  propositions  to  give 
such  authority  to  city  governments  have  been 
repeatedly  voted  down;  though,  in  1913,  in 
two  states  the  authority  bad  been  granted. 

See  Conservation  ; Eminent  Domain  ; In- 
dian Reservations;  Land  Grants;  Public 
Buildings;  Public  Domain;  Public  Proper- 
ty; Public  Works,  National,  State  and  Mu- 
nicipal; and  under  Public  Lands. 

References:  A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Govt.  rev. 
ed.,  1910),  ch.  xviii;  E.  Washburn,  Am.  Law 
of  Real  Property  (6th  ed.,  1902)  ; T.  M. 
Cooley,  Constitutional  Limitations  (1903),  ch. 
xx;  C.  E.  Hay,  Ed.,  V.  »S'.  Military  Reserva- 
tions, National  Cemeteries  and  Military  Posts 
(1904).  Albert  Busiinell  Hart. 

REAL  ESTATE  TAXES.  See  Tax,  Land 
and  Real  Estate. 

REAL  UNION.  A real  union  arises  from 
the  indissoluble  combining  of  two  or  more 
states  under  the  same  monarch,  through  the 
deliberate  creation  of  a common  constitution 
for  external  purposes,  though  each  state  may 
retain  distinct  internal  laws  and  institutions. 
An  example  is  Austria-Hungary  (see).  See 
States,  Classification  of.  Reference:  J.  W. 
Garner,  Intro,  to  Pol.  Sci.  (1910),  139. 

B.  E.  H. 

REASONABLENESS  IN  RESTRAINT  OF 
TRADE.  Two  momentous  decisions  rendered 
by  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  in  June, 
1911,  gave  the  first  definitive  interpretation  of 
the  Sherman  Anti-Trust  Act  (see)  adopted  in 
1890.  In  the  agitation  against  trusts  this 
statute  was  passed  by  Congress  after  con- 
siderable debate.  It  applied  only  to  interstate 
commerce  over  which  state  laws  had  no  control, 
and  for  that  reason  was  necessary,  there  being 
no  common  law  of  the  United  States ; that  is  to 
say,  nothing  can  be  made  criminal  without  an 
act  of  Congress,  and  in  civil  matters  the  com- 
mon law  can  only  be  applied  by  federal  courts 
to  a contract  or  transaction  localized  in  any 
state,  and  then  they  must  apply  the  common 
law  of  that  state.  It  is  probable  that  the  Sher- 
man law  would  have  had  the  same  result,  and 
all  the  doubts  and  uncertainties  of  twenty 
years  have  been  escaped,  if  Congress  had  mere- 
ly said  that  they  meant  to  apply  the  principles 
of  the  common  law  to  interstate  commerce  af- 
fairs. 

The  act  transcended  the  common  law  on  its 
face  in  two  particulars.  First,  in  its  first  sec- 
tion it  forbade  every  contract,  combination  in 
the  form  of  a trust  or  otherwise,  or  conspiracy, 
in  restraint  of  trade  among  the  several  states 
or  with  foreign  nations.  The  common  law  did 
not  prohibit  contracts  in  restraint  of  trade 
when  not  intended  for  the  purpose  of  monopoly 
and  when  growing  out  of  a natural  and  law- 


154 


REASONABLENESS  IN  RESTRAINT  OF  TRADE 


ful  transaction ; as,  for  instance,  when  one 
tradesman  sold  out  his  business  and  goodwill 
to  a neighbor  and  agreed  not  to  set  up  a shop 
in  the  same  place  or  for  a certain  number  of 
years.  It  is  said  that  the  suggestion  of  in- 
serting the  word  “reasonable”  was  brought 
before  the  notice  of  Congress  and  rejected; 
and  that  fact  probably  led  to  the  earlier  more 
drastic  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the 
Trans-Missouri  Freight  Association  case  (166 
U.  S.  290),  and  the  Joint  Traffic  case  (171 
77.  S.  505),  wherein  a majority  of  the  Court 
held  that  they  could  not  look  into  the  reason 
of  the  matter,  and  were  obliged  to  follow  the 
strict  words  of  the  statute,  so  that  any  con- 
tract or  agreement,  however  natural  and  prop- 
er, was  denounced  by  the  statute  if  it  tended 
to  eliminate  or  did  eliminate  one  person  from 
the  trade  in  question.  This  led  to  a state 
of  affairs,  particularly  after  the  Northern 
Securities  case  (193  V.  8.  197)  (see),  which 
extended  the  same  doctrine  to  a combination 
effected  through  one  corporation,  wherein  no 
business  man  or  corporation  manager  could 
safely  make  any  agreement  with  a competitor, 
nor  could  he  consolidate,  nor  even,  possibly, 
form  a partnership,  certainly  not  a corporation 
of  such  competitors. 

The  second  point,  even  more  important,  in 
which  the  Sherman  Act  transcends  the  com- 
mon law  is  that  it  put  a mandate  upon  the 
government  of  the  United  States  to  proceed 
as  party  plaintiff,  either  criminally  or  civilly, 
against  any  obnoxious  combination  or  cor- 
poration that  might  be  thought  to  be  liable. 
The  common  law  on  monopoly  only  gave  the 
right  to  sue  to  a person  injured  by  the  monop- 
oly, giving  him  double  or  treble  damages  (The 
Great  Case  of  Monopolies,  7 Howell’s  State 
Trials  513),  and  this  remedy  is  authorized  in 
the  Sherman  Act.  But  the  statute  goes  fur- 
ther; besides  placing  the  duty  upon  the  gov- 
ernment through  its  district  attorneys  to  bring 
a bill  to  prevent  violations  of  the  law  and  to 
destroy  the  corporation  or  combination  (U.  S. 
Statutes  1890,  cli.  647,  sec.  4;  U.  S.  Comp.  Stat- 
utes 1901,  Tit.  LVI  B 3200),  it  provides  that 
any  property  owned  under  such  contract  or  by 
such  combination,  being  in  the  course  of  in- 
terstate transportation,  shall  be  seized  and  for- 
feited to  the  United  States  as  in  the  case  of 
property  imported  contrary  to  law. 

A further  provision  in  section  1,  as  has  been 
said,  declared  every  contract  or  combination  in 
restraint  of  interstate  trade  to  be  illegal,  and 
made  any  person  engaged  therein  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor  punishable  with  fine  and  impris- 
onment; section  2 provides  that  every  person 
who  shall  monopolize  or  attempt  to  monopolize, 
or  combine  or  conspire  with  any  other  person 
to  monopolize  any  part  of  interstate  trade 
shall  be  similarly  guilty.  What  new  thing  did 
section  2 add  to  section  1? 

This  great  statute  was  interpreted  in  many 
decisions  during  the  twenty  years  after  its 
108 


enactment  with  ever  increasing  stringency. 
The  Supreme  Court  started  in  the  Knight  Case 
(U.  S.  vs.  Knight  Company,  156  V.  S.  1),  with 
the  position  that  the  statute  did  not  cover 
ordinary  manufacture,  such  as  the  refining  of 
sugar,  although  the  sugar  was  sold  through- 
out the  United  States,  a decision  which  led 
many  people  to  look  upon  the  statute  as  a 
dead  letter;  the  court  finally  got  to  a point 
where  they  held  that  even  an  ordinary  bill 
for  goods  sold  could  not  be  collected  by  a com- 
bination or  corporation  obnoxious  to  the  stat- 
ute (Continental  Wall  Paper  Company  vs. 
Voight,  212  U.  S.  227). 

The  first  effect  of  the  Sherman  Law,  as  is 
often  the  case  with  ill  considered  legislation, 
was  to  compel  the  very  thing  which  it  sought 
to  prevent;  that  is  to  say,  where  before  its 
enactment  persons  or  corporations  could  make 
reasonable  trade  contracts  or  agreements,  after 
the  Sherman  law  they  could  not;  and  the  only 
method,  therefore,  was  to  consolidate  into  one 
corporation,  such  as  we  now  term  a trust 
(see).  Obviously  under  the  common  law  of 
conspiracy,  one  individual,  a person,  or  a cor- 
poration cannot  combine;  at  least  this  was 
supposed  to  be  so  until  the  Northern  Securi- 
ties case  (see)  where  the  court  decided  that 
they  could  look  through  the  screen  of  a cor- 
poration to  the  real  intention  of  the  transac- 
tion; and  could  declare  a combination  which 
restricted  competition,  even  though  under  cor- 
porate form,  to  be  covered  by  the  statute. 
Up  to  that  time,  therefore,  the  anti-trust  law 
was  a law  which  stimulated  the  formation  of 
“trusts.”  But  since  the  Northern  Securities 
case,  even  that  method  did  not  protect  them. 
It  was  then  believed  by  most  business  men 
that  every  contract  or  combination  that  was 
engaged  in  by  as  many  as  two  persons,  or  any 
corporation  where  more  than  two  pieces  of 
property  were  put  together,  was  a criminal 
conspiracy.  Business  was  checked.  Then 
came  the  Standard  Oil  and  Tobacco  cases, 
based  on  facts  not  essentially  dissimilar,  al- 
though in  the  Oil  case  it  was  the  New  Jersey 
charter  of  the  corporation  that  was  principally 
attacked  and  in  the  Tobacco  case  there  were 
many  agreements  between  constituent  com- 
panies. The  Court  held  that  the  Sherman  Act, 
having  been  written  by  lawyers,  must  be  pre- 
sumed to  be  written  in  the  language  of  the 
common  law;  that  is  to  say,  that  the  words 
“restraint  of  trade”  and  “monopoly”  were 
terms  of  art;  and  as  such  bore  with  them  all 
the  connotation  of  eight  centuries’  interpreta- 
tion of  those  words  under  the  common  law. 
This  sensible  and  almost  obvious  decision  was 
generally  misunderstood  by  the  newspapers, 
and  wilfully  by  certain  politicians,  who  stated 
that  the  Supreme  Court  had  legislated,  by 
interpolating  the  word  “reasonable”  before  the 
words  “restraint  of  trade”  in  section  of  the 
statute.  They  did  nothing  of  the  sort;  the 
reasonableness  of  a contract  is  only  one  of  the 


155 


REBATES  IN  TRANSPORTATION— REBELLION 


many  tests  which  the  common  law  applies  to 
matters  of  monopoly  and  restraint  of  trade. 
The  final  result,  therefore,  is  that  in  matters 
of  interstate  commerce,  where  the  federal 
courts  have  jurisdiction,  the  common  law  on 
these  matters  is  held  to  be  applied  by  the  Sher- 
man Act;  with  the  additions  mentioned — that 
property  may  be  seized ; and  that  the  govern- 
ment may  intervene  as  party  plaintiff  for  direct 
destruction  of  the  combination  or  corporation; 
besides  the  common  law  remedy  of  double  dam- 
ages to  the  persons  injured.  There  has  been, 
however,  agitation  to  amend  the  act  by  insist- 
ing on  its  strict  grammatical  form,  and  some 
statutes  have  been  passed  to  that  effect  in  the 
states  (Michigan,  Public  Acts  1905,  No.  329)  ; 
while,  at  the  behest  of  President  Wilson,  Con- 
gress undertook  in  1914  the  amendment  of  the 
Sherman  Act  to  reduce  as  much  as  possible 
the  area  of  its  “debatable  ground.” 

See  Corporation  Charters  ; Corporation, 
Public;  Interstate  Commerce;  Monopolies; 
Sherman  Anti-Trust  Act;  Trusts. 

References;  A.  W.  Walker,  Hist,  of  the 
Sherman  Law  (1910)  ; F.  J.  Stimson,  Popular 
Law  Making  (1910),  176-181;  E.  P.  Prentice, 
Federal  Power  over  Carriers  and  Corporations 
(1907).  F.  J.  Stimson. 

REBATES  IN  TRANSPORTATION.  A re- 
bate is  an  allowance  granted  to  a shipper  as 
a result  of  which  he  secures  the  transporta- 
tion of  his  goods  at  less  than  the  legal  rate. 
This  abatement  may  be  accomplished  by  such 
crude  devices  as  underbilling  the  weight  of 
freight,  false  classification  or  a return  in 
cash  of  a portion  of  the  freight  charges.  But 
these  more  obvious  methods  have  been  largely 
eliminated  in  recent  years  and  such  rebating 
as  exists  is  more  indirect  and  elusive.  Two  of 
the  most  serious  of  the  recent  forms  of  dis- 
crimination have  had  to  do  with  private  cars 
and  industrial  railroads.  Payments  to  large 
shippers  for  the  use  of  their  cars  and  pay- 
ments to  industrial  plants  for  the  use  of  their 
connecting  tracks  under  the  form  of  a divi- 
sion of  the  through  rate,  have  frequently  been 
excessive  and  have  amounted  to  rebates.  Still 
another  opportunity  in  rebating  has  existed 
in  the  ownership  by  railroads  of  coal  mines 
from  which  they  have  transported  their  pro- 
duct in  competition  with  independent  oper- 
ators. It  should  also  be  noted  that  the  grant- 
ing of  passes  except  to  certain  exempted 
classes  was  held  to  be  rebating. 

Under  the  original  Interstate  Commerce  Act 
it  was  difficult  to  secure  convictions  for  re- 
bating, partly  because  the  officer  or  agent  of 
the  carrier  was  alone  liable  to  conviction  and 
the  penalty  provided  was  imprisonment  as  well 
as  fine,  and  partly  because  under  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  courts,  no  conviction  for  rebating 
Was  possible  unless  it  could  be  proved  that  some 
competitive  shipper  had  paid  the  legal  rate. 
These  difficulties  were  removed  by  the  passage 


of  the  Elkins  Act  in  190.3,  largely  through  the 
effort  of  the  railroads  themselves,  which  made 
the  corporation  liable  as  well  as  the  individual, 
and  the  shipper  as  well  as  the  carrier, 
abolished  the  imprisonment  penalty  and  made 
every  departure  from  the  published  rate  a mis- 
demeanor. By  amendment  of  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Act  in  1906  the  imprisonment  pen- 
alty of  the  Elkins  Act  was  restored.  The 
commission  was  given  authority  over  all  serv- 
ices performed  by  private-car  lines  and  it  was 
provided  that  all  charges  for  special  facilities 
such  as  terminals,  storage  and  icing  should  be 
separately  published.  Likewise  the  commis- 
sion was  given  authority  to  determine  a proper 
switching  charge  or  the  proper  proportion  of 
a through  rate.  These  provisions,  together 
with  the  “commodities  clause”  amendment, 
which  forbids  carriers  to  transport  in  inter- 
state commerce,  except  for  their  own  use,  pro- 
ducts which  they  own,  are  material  aids 
toward  the  permanent  solution  of  the  rebate 
problem. 

The  commission  in  a recent  annual  report 
(1910)  declares  that  the  fight  against  dis- 
criminations is  by  no  means  won,  and  that 
the  practices  still  remaining  are  more  insidi- 
ous and  difficult  of  extirpation  than  open  re- 
bating because  hidden  in  contractual  arrange- 
ments between  shipper  and  carrier. 

See  Discrimination  in  Railroad  Rates  ; 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission;  Inter- 
state Commerce  Decisions;  Railroad  Com-, 
missions,  State. 

Reference:  Beale  and  Wyman,  Railroad 
Rate  Regulation  (1906),  chs.  xxix,  xxx,  869- 
899.  Frank  Haigh  Dixon. 

REBEL  BRIGADIERS.  An  epithet  of  con- 
tempt applied  by  the  radical  Republicans  in 
Congress  about  1874  to  Congressmen  from  the 
southern  states  because  a larger  portion  of  the 
Representatives  had  been  officers  in  the  Con- 
federate army.  O.  C.  H. 

REBELLION.  This  term,  nowhere  strictly 
defined  by  law,  applies  to  acts  and  prepara- 
tions for  destroying  the  existing  government 
of  state  or  nation.  It  is  separated  from  in- 
surrection rather  by  nature  than  by  extent. 
Thus  the  so  called  Shay’s  Rebellion  of  17S7 
in  Massachusetts  was  not  so  concerted  or  so 
long  and  deep-reaching  a movement  as  the  ■ 
Whiskey  Insurrection  of  1794  in  Pennsylvania. 
The  Dorr  Rebellion  (see)  of  1842  in  Rhode 
Island  is  one  of  the  few  historical  movements 
of  a determined  faction  to  destroy  a state 
government,  except  in  some  of  the  abnormal 
reconstructed  states  (see  Reconstruction). 

As  respects  the  national  government,  the 
term  rebellion  appears  in  the  Constitution 
only  in  the  clause  on  habeas  corpus;  but  trea- 
son is  defined  as  levying  war  against  the 
United  States  or  adhering  to  their  enemies; 
and  rebellion  against  the  United  States  is 


156 


RECALL 


always  treason,  though  lesser  forms  of  opposi- 
tion or  resistance  may  also  be  treason.  The 
power  of  the  President  to  call  out  militia  to 
surpress  insurrections  or  to  execute  the  laws 
of  the  Union,  together  with  his  position  as 
commander-in-chief,  gives  undoubted  authority, 
without  further  action  of  Congress,  to  resist 
rebellion  by  armed  force;  this  authority  has 
been  made  effective  by  acts  of  1792,  1795,  1807, 
and  1833,  prescribing  the  terms  and  manner 
in  which  force  may  thus  be  applied. 

The  critical  question  as  to  rebellion  is 
whether  it  existed  in  1861,  when  eleven  states 
of  the  Union  formally  and  solemnly  declared 
that  they  were  no  longer  parts  of  the  United 
States.  The  words  rebellion  and  rebel  in  which 
the  Revolutionary  patriots  rather  rejoiced 
were  offensive  to  the  South,  and  have  remained 
so  to  this  day.  Congress  in  various  statutes 
declared  the  war  to  be  a rebellion,  and  the 
name  appears  as  part  of  the  title  of  the  of- 
ficial series  of  Civil  War  Records.  Southern 
writers  prefer  the  term  “War  between  the 
States,”  adopted  by  Alexander  II.  Stephens  for 
his  book;  but  certainly  the  northern  states 
neither  in  theory  nor  in  fact  made  or  accepted 


war;  they  acted  solely  through  the  Federal 
Government  of  which  they  considered  them- 
selves constituent  and  unalterable  parts. 

Congress  not  only  called  the  war  rebellion 
b.ut  applied  to  it  the  penalties  of  rebellion  by 
two  confiscation  acts  in  1861  and  1862,  which 
resulted  in  the  condemnation  of  a considerable 
amount  of  private  property  belonging  to  so- 
called  rebels;  and  at  the  end  of  the  war  a 
prosecution  for  treason  was  entered  against 
Jefferson  Davis  substantially  on  the  ground 
that  he  was  a rebel. 

See  Coercion  of  States  ; Order,  Mainte- 
nance of;  Secession  Controversy;  State 
Sovereignty;  States  in  the  Union;  Treason. 

References:  W.  E.  Whiting,  War  Powers  of 
the  President  (1864)  ; J.  C.  Hurd,  Theory  of 
National  Existence  (1881);  W.  W.  Willough- 
by, Constitutional  Law  (1910)  ; “Federal  Aid 
in  Domestic  Disturbances”  in  Sen.  Docs.,  57 
Cong.,  2 Sess.,  No.  209  (1903);  A.  B.  Hart, 
Actual  Government  (rev.  ed.,  1908),  §§  55-57; 
bibliography  in  Channing,  Hart  and  Turner, 
Guide  to  Am.  Hist.  (1904),  §§  231-234;  A.  B. 
Hart,  Manual  (1908),  §§  140-141,  149,  156, 
157,  160.  Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 


Genesis  of  the  Recall. — The  recall  is  a process 
by  which  the  electors  may  discharge  a pub- 
lic officer  before  the  expiration  of  the  term 
for  which  he  was  elected.  Both  the  name, 
recall,  and  analogies  to  the  present-day  pro- 
cess were  familiar  in  the  days  of  the  American 
Revolution.  Thus,  because  Pennsylvania’s  del- 
egates to  the  Continental  Congress  (see)  re- 
fused to  sign  the  Declaration  of  Independence, 
they  were  “recalled,”  and  other  delegates  sent 
in  their  place.  By  the  Articles  of  Confedera- 
tion the  power  was  reserved  to  each  state  “to 
recall  its  delegates  (to  Congress)  or  any  of 
them  at  any  time.”  In  the  Federal  Conven- 
tion, Luther  Martin  protested  that  under  the 
proposed  Constitution,  however  serious  the 
Senators’  or  Representatives’  offenses,  “their 
states  cannot  recall  them,  nor  exercise  any 
control  over  them.” 

Present  Systems. — The  eighteenth  century 
recall  was  applied  by  representative  assemblies 
to  officers  whom  they  had  elected.  The 
twentieth  century  recall  transfers  this  power 
of  removal  to  the  individual  voter  in  the  bal- 
lot booth.  This  modern  recall  first  found  place 
in  American  law  in  an  amendment  to  the  Los 
Angeles  (see)  charter,  1903,  introducing  a 
process  of  removal  the  model  for  which  seems 
to  have  been  taken  from  the  cantonal  law 
long  in  force  in  Schaffhausen,  Switzerland. 
It  has  since  been  given  a place  in  the  new  or 
revised  charters  of  many  cities  of  the  Pacific 
Coast  states — particularly  in  cities  which  have 
adopted  government  by  commission  (see  Com- 


mission System  of  City  Government). 
Iowa,  1907,  made  it  applicable  to  all  cities 
of  25,000  or  over.  In  South  Dakota  city  of- 
ficers may  be  removed  by  the  recall,  and  in  in- 
dividual city  charters  it  has  been  introduced 
in  states  as  unlike  as  Massachusetts  and 
Florida.  In  Boston  there  is  a limited  power 
of  recall ; the  mayor  is  elected  for  a term  of 
four  years,  but  at  the  state  election  one  month 
before  the  expiration  of  the  second  year,  there 
must  go  on  to  the  ballot  the  question : “Shall 
there  be  an  election  of  mayor  at  the  next  mu- 
nicipal election?”  If  a majority  of  the  city’s 
voters,  registered  for  that  election  vote  yes, 
any  number  of  candidates,  at  the  ensuing  elec- 
tion may  compete  with  the  incumbent  for  his 
office.  By  a vote  of  nearly  two  to  one,  the 
voters  of  Oregon,  1908,  made  every  public  of- 
ficer of  the  state,  including,  thus,  judges  of 
every  grade,  “subject  to  recall  by  the  legal 
voters  of  the  state  or  of  the  election  district 
from  which  he  is  elected.”  Equally  sweeping 
recall  amendments  have  been  adopted  in  Cali- 
fornia (1911),  Colorado  (1912),  and  Nevada 
(1912)  ; and  in  1912  the  voters  of  the  new 
state  of  Arizona  removed  from  the  recall  pro- 
vision in  the  original  constitution  adopted  in 
1911  the  clause  excepting  elective  judicial  of- 
ficers from  the  operation  of  the  recall.  Idaho 
(1912),  Washington  (1912),  and  Michigan 
(1913),  have  ratified  amendments  applying  the 
recall  to  all  elective  state  officers  with  the  ex- 
ception of  judicial  officers.  In  1912  the  voters 
of  Arkansas  and  Louisiana  rejected  recall 


RECALL 


amendments,  and  constitutional  conventions  in 
New  Hampshire  and  Ohio  refused  to  submit 
them  to  the  people. 

As  applied,  for  example,  to  a mayor,  the 
Oregan  recall  process  is  as  follows.  Recall 
petitions  must  be  filed,  bearing  the  signatures 
of  25  per  cent  of  the  number  of  electors  who 
voted  in  the  preceding  election  of  mayor.  Un- 
less the  mayor  resigns  upon  the  filing  of  such 
a petition,  his  name,  together  with  that  of  any 
candidate  duly  nominated,  goes  upon  the  ballot 
for  the  special  election.  The  ballot  contains 
in  not  more  than  200  words  the  reasons  al- 
leged why  the  present  mayor  should  not  con- 
tinue in  office,  and  the  same  amount  of  space 
is  available  for  him  to  justify  his  course  in 
office.  If  some  other  candidate  receives  the 
highest  number  of  votes,  he  is  declared  elected 
for  the  unexpired  term ; the  discredited  mayor 
is  deemed  removed  from  office  upon  the  quali- 
fication of  his  successor. 

Arguments,  For  and  Against. — Advocates  of 
the  recall  insist  that  it  affords  the  only  de- 
pendable method  of  enforcing  upon  public  of- 
ficials their  responsibility  to  the  people  and 
of  preventing  grievous  harm  to  the  public  serv 
ice  by  the  continuance  in  office  of  men  be- 
lieved to  be  thoroughly  incompetent  or  cor- 
rupt. Opponents  of  the  recall,  on  the  other 
hand,  insist  that  neither  signing  a recall  peti- 
tion nor  casting  a ballot  in  a recall  election  is 
likely  to  represent  an  informed  and  unpreju- 
diced judgment  on  the  part  of  the  voters  as 
to  the  merits  of  the  case,  and  that  the  con- 
sciousness that  he  may  at  any  time  be  haled 
before  such  a court  is  less  likely  to  impel  an 
officer  to  zealous  public  service  than  to  a 
sycophantic  cultivation  of  the  voters’  favor. 
It  is  also  objected  that  the  recall  would  enable 
small  minorities  to  multiply  elections,  thus 
causing  needless  expense  and  unsteadiness  of 
administration.  After  the  period  of  novelty 
is  passed,  however,  the  recall  is  likely  to  be 
invoked  only  in  case  of  substantial  charges; 
its  chief  value  may  prove  to  be  as  a preventive 
or  deterrent  of  faithless  service. 

The  severest  criticism  of  the  recall  has  been 
directed  against  its  application  to  judges. 
They  may  be  thus  removed  in  Arizona,  Cali- 
fornia, Colorado,  Nevada,  and  Oregon. 

The  first  instance  of  the  removal  of  a judge 
from  office  by  the  recall  in  the  United  States 
was  the  defeat  of  C.  L.  Weller,  a police  judge 
of  San  Francisco,  at  the  election  held  April  22, 
1013.  The  principal  objection  urged  against 
him  was  that  in  fixing  an  average  amount  of 
bail  in  cases  of  attacks  of  girls  less  than  one- 
fourth  of  the  average  amount  fixed  in  grand 
larceny  cases,  he  showed  a failure  to  under- 
stand the  demands  of  humanity  as  against  the 
rights  of  property  ( Equity , Vol.  XV,  p.  183, 
July,  1913).  The  first  petition  circulated  for 
the  removal  of  a judge  (1911)  alleged  that  irt 
presiding  over  the  case  of  Oregon  vs.  Roy  Mc- 
Clallen  the  judge,  “demonstrated  his  gross  in- 


competency  and  unfairness  by  giving  to  the 
jury  . . . unfair  and  erroneous  instructions 

as  to  law,  intended  to  bias  the  jury  and  cause 
an  acquittal,”  . . . which  contributed  to 

and  brought  about  the  defeat  of  the  ends 
of  justice. 

So  serious  a menace  did  President  Taft  con- 
sider the  recall  of  judges  that  on  that  ground 
he  vetoed  the  bill  for  the  admission  of  New 
Mexico  (see)  and  Arizona  (see)  ; in  the  act 
finally  passed  it  was  provided  that  Arizona’s 
admission  should  be  conditioned  upon  her  vot- 
ers’ ratifying  and  adopting  an  amendment  to 
her  draft  constitution,  expressly  excepting 
members  of  the  judiciary  from  the  public  of- 
ficers subject  to  recall.  President  Taft  in- 
sisted that  the  process  of  removing  judges 
should  afford  “opportunities  for  judicial  hear- 
ing and  defense  before  an  impartial  tribunal.” 
He  characterized  the  recall  as  “destructive 
of  the  independence  of  the  judiciary,”  likely  to 
subject  “the  rights  of  the  individual  to  the 
possible  tyranny  of  a popular  majority,”  and 
“injurious  to  the  cause  of  free  government,” 
a system  “ingeniously  devised  to  subject  judges 
to  momentary  gusts  of  popular  passion.” 

Recall  of  Judicial  Decisions. — In  the  cam- 
paign of  1912  Mr.  Roosevelt  proposed  a plan 
for  the  recall,  not  of  judges,  but  of  judicial 
decisions,  a plan  whereby  the  people  should 
have  the  right  to  recall  the  decision  itself  and 
authoritatively  to  ratify  or  stamp  with  dis- 
approval the  constitutional  principle  underly- 
ing the  decision.  In  a speech  before  the  Ohio 
constitutional  convention,  Feb.  21,  1912,  he 
said: 

If  any  considerable  number  of  people  feel  that 
a decision  is  in  defiance  of  justice,  they  should 
be  given  the  right  by  petition  to  bring  before 
the  voters  at  some  subsequent  election,  special 
or  otherwise,  as  might  be  decided,  and  after  the 
fullest  opportunity  for  deliberation  and  debate, 
the  question  whether  or  not  the  judge’s  inter- 
pretation of  the  Constitution  is  to  be  sustained. 

Colorado  is  the  only  state  which  has  adopted 
the  recall  of  judicial  decisions.  An  amendment 
to  the  state  constitution,  restricting  the  right 
to  declare  laws  unconstitutional  to  the  supreme 
court,  and  providing  a more  direct  process  by 
which  nullified  statutes  may  be  constitutional- 
ized, so  to  say,  was  submitted  under  the  initia- 
tive and  adopted  by  the  people  in  1912.  This 
amendment  virtually  authorizes  the  people  by 
the  use  of  the  referendum  to  order  the  enforce- 
ment of  a statute  which  has  been  enacted  by 
the  legislature  and  approved  by  the  governor 
but  vetoed  by  the  supreme  court. 

Advisory  Recall  of  Federal  Officers. — The 
legislature  of  Arizona  in  1912  provided  for 
the  extension  of  the  recall  to  United  States 
Senators,  Representatives  in  Congress,  and 
judges.  Holding  office  under  the  provisions  of 
the  Federal  Constitution,  these  officials  are  not 
directly  amenable  to  recall  in  a state  election. 
The  “advisory”  recall  for  which  the  statute 
establishes  the  machinery  can  be  enforced  by 


158 


RECEIVER— RECIPROCITY 


no  legal  process  but  depends  for  its  effect  on 
the  force  of  public  opinion.  In  the  case  of  the 
Federal  judge,  the  people  are  permitted  to  ad- 
vise his  resignation  and  at  the  same  time  to 
recommend  to  the  President  their  choice  for 
the  appointment;  whether  the  advice  is  taken 
depends  wholly  on  the  judge  and  the  Presi- 
dent. Against  Senators  and  Representatives, 
the  advisory  recall  is  a much  more  effective 
weapon.  Candidates  for  these  offices,  who  are 
nominated  in  direct  primaries,  are  given  the  op- 
tion of  pledging  or  not  pledging  themselves  to 
obey  an  advisory  vote  of  recall ; few  care  to 
risk  prejudicing  their  chances  for  nomination 
by  witholding  the  pledge. 

See  INITIATIVE;  LEGISLATION,  DIRECT;  REF- 
ERENDUM. 

References:  U.  S.  Sen.  Doc.,  61  Cong.,  2 Sess. 
(1910),  603;  President  Taft,  Veto  Message, 
August  15,  1911 ; C.  A.  Beard  and  B.  E.  Shultz, 
Documents  on  Initiative,  Referendum  and  Re- 
call (1912)  ; W.  B.  Munroe,  Initiative,  Referen- 
dum, and  Recall  (1912);  E.  P.  Oberholtzen, 
Referendum,  Initiative  and  Recall  in  America 
( 1912 ) ; E.  Pomeroy,  “The  Recall”  in 
Arena,  XXXVI  (1906),  45-6;  J.  Bourne,  “In- 
itiative, Referendum  and  Recall”  in  Atlantic 
Monthly,  CVIII  (1911),  122-130;  S.  W.  Mc- 
Call, “Representative  against  Direct  Govern- 
ment” in  ibid,  454—466 ; B.  J.  Hendrick,  “Re- 
call in  Seattle”  in  McClure’s  Magazine, 
XXXVII  (1911),  647-663;  Am.  Year  Book, 
1911,  184,  ibid,  1912,  64-67 ; Lists  of  recalls  in 
A.  L.  Lowell,  Public  Opinion  and  Popular  Gov- 
ernment (1913),  App.  G.  H.  Haynes. 

RECEIVER.  A person  (sometimes  a cor- 
poration) appointed  by  a court  of  equity  to 
take  charge  of  and  manage  property,  pending 
litigation,  for  the  benefit  of  the  litigant  own- 
ers, stockholders  or  creditors,  as  they  may 
prove  themselves  entitled.  In  criminal  law, 
one  who  receives  stolen  goods  from  thieves  and 
conceals  them.  H.  M.  B. 

RECIPROCITY.  Reciprocity  refers  to  tariff 
agreements  between  nations  whereby  certain 
commercial  privileges  of  mutual  advantage  are 
granted.  Such  agreements  have  been  made 
with  increasing  frequency  since  the  breaking 
down  of  the  mediaeval  policies  of  national 
commercial  isolation.  Countries  which  were 
not  prepared  for  the  more  liberal  policy  of 
free  trade,  were  yet  stimulated  by  the  accept- 
ance of  the  reasoning  of  Adam  Smith  (1776) 
and  of  laissez-faire  doctrines  which  made  head- 
way early  in  the  nineteenth  century;  and 
found  it  advantageous  to  modify  the  severity 
of  protectionism  by  special  agreements  with 
other  countries.  This  may  be  done  either  by 
a commercial  treaty  or  by  legislation. 

The  term,  reciprocity,  is  loosely  used  in  cur- 
rent discussion,  being  applied  to  any  kind  of 
arrangement  whereby  some  special  benefit  is 
supposed  to  be  gained  for  a nation’s  trade  in 


return  for  a relaxation  of  its  own  tariff  policy. 
It  may  include  agreements  affecting  com- 
petitive as  well  as  non-competitive  products. 
It  does  not  necessarily  mean  the  admission  of 
goods  free  of  duty  or  at  low  rates,  nor  does 
it  necessarily  involve  the  disturbance  of  a 
protective  system.  For  example,  a country 
exporting  agricultural  products  and  possess- 
ing undeveloped  manufacturing  industries 
which  require  protection,  may  make  an  agree- 
ment of  reciprocity  with  another  nation  which 
can  supply  raw  material  needed  in  manu- 
factures, to  the  effect  that  it  will  admit  the 
raw  materials  at  favored  rates  provided  that 
the  foreign  nation  will  be  hospitable  to  the 
exported  agricultural  products. 

The  United  States  has  entered  into  reciproc- 
ity treaties  with  Canada  (1854-1866)  and 
with  Hawaii  (1876-1900).  Several  other 
treaties  have  been  negotiated,  as  with  Mexico 
(1883)  and  Spain  (1884),  but  have  failed  to 
secure  ratification  by  the  Senate.  Because  of 
these  failures  and  a desire  to  promote  the  es- 
tablishment of  a Pan  American  commercial 
union,  warmly  advocated  by  Secretary  Blaine, 
a change  in  the  method  of  making  agreements 
was  adopted  by  the  McKinley  tariff  (see)  law 
of  1890.  Power  was  given  to  the  President 
to  make  concessions  in  tariff  duties,  upon  satis- 
faction that  certain  privileges  were  granted  to 
the  exports  of  the  United  States.  Under  this 
authority  a number  of  commercial  agreements 
were  made  with  Latin-American  countries  and 
also  with  Germany  and  Austria-Hungary. 

In  the  tariff  legislation  of  1894  reciprocity 
fared  ill.  It  became  involved  in  the  question 
of  sugar  duties,  and  there  was  also  lack  of 
support  from  many  tariff  reformers  who  be- 
lieved that  reciprocity  treaties  which  implied 
the  alternative  of  retaliation,  stood  in  the  way 
of  genuine  reform.  The  result  was  the  prac- 
tical abandonment  of  reciprocity.  The  Ding- 
ley  tariff  (see)  of  1897  reintroduced  the  princi- 
ple but  made  the  agreements  operative  by 
treaties  executed  by  the  Senate  instead  of  by 
executive  proclamation  as  in  1890.  Although 
treaties  were  subsequently  negotiated,  the  privi- 
leges were  used  as  a club  to  hold  over  other 
protectionist  countries  rather  than  as  an  in- 
strument to  bind  a group  of  countries  into 
closer  commercial  union.  In  1909  reciprocity 
as  a special  detail  of  tariff  legislation  was 
dropped.  In  1911  an  effort  was  made  to  ar- 
range a reciprocity  treaty  with  Canada,  hut 
failed  through  opposition  in  that  country. 

See  British  North  America,  Diplomatic 
Relations  With;  Tariff  Policy  of  the 
United  States  ; Tariff  Reform. 

References:  J.  L.  Laughlin  and  H.  P.  Willis, 
Reciprocity  (1903),  bibliography,  treaties  and 
legislation;  Library  of  Congress,  List  of  Ref- 
erences on  Reciprocity  ( 1902 ) ; F.  E.  Haynes, 
“Reciprocity  Treaty  with  Canada  of  1854”  in 
Am.  Econ.  Assoc.,  Publications,  VII  (1892), 
Davis  R.  Dewey. 


No.  6. 
159 


RECIPROCITY  POLICY 


RECIPROCITY  POLICY.  Prior  to  1815.— 

From  1789  to  1815,  tlie  policy  of  the  United 
States,  like  that  of  other  countries,  was  to 
favor  domestic  shipping  by  imposing  higher 
duties  upon  goods  imported  in  foreign  ships 
than  upon  goods  carried  in  American  vessels, 
and  by  subjecting  foreign  ships  to  heavier 
tonnage  taxes  than  American  vessels. 

Shipping  Reciprocity  of  1815. — The  policy  of 
discriminating  duties  and  tonnage  taxes  was 
modified  by  act  of  Congress  in  1815,  whereby 
the  United  States  offered  to  remove  its  dis- 
crimination as  regards  direct  trade  with  such 
foreign  nations  as  would  cease  to  discriminate 
against  American  shipping  and  goods. 

Indirect  Trade. — In  1828,  the  United  States 
adopted  the  policy  of  full  reciprocal  trade  re- 
lations as  regards  the  indirect  as  well  as  the 
direct  foreign  trade.  Up  to  that  time,  the 
trade  between  the  United  States  and  any  other 
particular  country  was  open  only  to  the  ship- 
ping of  the  two  countries. 

Canadian  Treaty,  1854-1866. — The  United 
States  entered  into  a treaty  with  Great  Britain 
in  1854  greatly  reducing  the  tariff  restrictions 
upon  the  trade  between  the  United  States  and 
Canada.  The  economic  effects  of  the  treaty 
were  largely  nullified  by  the  outbreak  of  the 
Civil  War  in  1861  which  tended  to  decrease 
our  exports  to  Canada  and  to  increase  our 
imports  therefrom.  The  treaty  was  denounced 
by  the  United  States  in  1866,  and  was  termi- 
nated the  next  year,  partly  because  exports  to 
Canada  had  not  increased  during  the  treaty’s 
life,  but  more  because  of  the  resentment  of  the 
people  of  the  United  States  against  Canada 
for  having  sympathized  with  the  southern 
states  during  the  Civil  War.  Another  reason 
why  the  treaty  was  abrogated  was  the  strong 
and  rising  sentiment  in  the  United  States  in 
favor  of  restrictive  protective  tariffs. 

Hawaiian  Treaties. — The  United  States  en- 
tered into  a reciprocity  treaty  with  Hawaii  in 
1876  which  provided  for  practically  free  trade 
between  the  United  States  and  the  islands. 
This  treaty  was  renewed  in  1887 ; and  three 
years  later  the  islands  were  annexed  to  the 
United  States.  The  purpose  of  the  two  treaties 
with  Hawaii  was  partly  economic  and  partly 
political. 

McKinley  Tariff  of  1890.— Section  three  of 
the  McKinley  Tariff  Act  of  1890  placed  sugar, 
molasses,  coffee  and  hides  upon  the  free  list, 
but  gave  the  President  the  authority  to  impose 
stipulated  duties  upon  these  articles  when 
imported  from  any  country  which  placed  dis- 
criminating duties  upon  American  products. 
Under  this  law,  executive  agreements  were 
made  with  Germany,  Austria-Hungary,  four 
Central  American  States,  Cuba,  and  with  Great 
Britain  as  regards  her  possessions  in  the  West 
Indies.  The  effect  of  the  agreements  was 
slight  because  most  of  them  had  been  in  force 
barely  two  years  when  they  were  all  termi- 
nated by  the  Wilson  Tariff  Act  of  1894. 


Dingley  Tariff  of  1897.— Sections  three  and 
four  of  the  Tariff  Act  of  1897  provided  for 
reciprocity  arrangements  with  foreign  coun- 
tries. By  the  first  part  of  section  three  the 
President  was  authorized  to  negotiate  recipro- 
cal agreements  providing,  in  the  case  of  coun- 
tries making  compensatory  concessions,  for  the 
reduction  of  our  tariffs  upon  argols,  crude  tar- 
tar, wine  lees,  brandies,  spirits,  champagne, 
and  sparkling  wines,  vermouth,  paintings,  and 
statuary.  The  second  part  of  this  section  au- 
thorized the  President  to  negotiate  for  trade 
concessions  by  offering  to  place  upon  our  free 
list,  coffee,  tea,  tana  beans,  and  vanilla  beans. 
Section  four  gave  the  President  power  to  ne- 
gotiate reciprocity  treaties  and  he  was  author- 
ized to  make  a reduction  of  20  per  cent  in  the 
regular  tariff  duties  to  secure  concessions  by 
other  countries. 

The  President  entered  into  agreements  of 
limited  scope,  under  section  three,  with  Ger- 
many, France,  Italy,  Portugal  and  Switzerland. 
Section  four  proved  ineffective.  The  President 
negotiated  eleven  treaties  and  sent  them  to  the 
Senate,  where  all  action  was  blocked  by  those 
opposed  to  any  reduction  in  the  tariff. 

Cuban  Treaty,  1903. — -By  treaty  concluded 
with  Cuba,  in  1903,  the  United  States  agreed 
to  take  20  per  cent  off  the  duty  on  all  dutiable 
goods  from  Cuba,  and  Cuba  consented  to  admit 
a long  list  of  enumerated  articles  at  reductions 
of  25  to  40  per  cent,  and  all  other  dutiable 
articles  at  20  per  cent  off  her  tariff  rates. 
Both  countries  made  these  concessions  pref- 
erential— i.  e.,  not  to  be  granted  to  any  other 
nation  without  a similar  equivalent.  The  trade 
with  Cuba  has  increased  rapidly  since  the 
treaty  became  effective. 

Maximum  and  Minimum  Provisions  of  the 
Payne- Aldrich  Act  of  1909. — The  tariff  law  of 
1909  provided  that  25  per  cent  ad  valorem 
should  be  added  to  the  rates,  March  31,  1910, 
on  dutiable  goods  from  each  country  not  pre- 
viously declared  by  the  President  to  be  treat- 
ing our  imports  fairly.  The  President  was  for- 
tunately able,  as  the  result  of  vigorous  negot- 
iating, to  proclaim  within  the  time  limits,  that 
all  countries  were  dealing  fairly  with  Ameri- 
can goods. 

Proposed  Canadian  Reciprocity  of  1911. — The 

most  important  reciprocity  arrangement  ever 
proposed  by  the  United  States  was  offered  to 
Canada  in  1911,  by  an  agreement  to  be 
carried  into  effect  by  legislative  action  of 
both  countries.  It  was  submitted  by  Presi- 
dent Taft  to  Congress  at  the  close  of  Jan- 
uary, 1911.  It  was  adopted  by  the  House 
of  Representatives,  but  the  Senate  failed 
to  act  before  the  close  of  the  session, 
March  4.  Accordingly,  the  President  called 
Congress  in  special  session  in  April,  1911, 
and  the  agreement  was  finally  passed  by  Con- 
gress and  approved  by  the  President,  July  26. 
The  Liberal  ministry  in  Canada  favored  the 
measure  but  the  Opposition  made  it  an  issue, 


160 


RECLAMATION  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS— RECOGNITION 


and  in  the  resulting  general  elections  the 
ministry  was  defeated  and  the  plan  was  there- 
by set  aside. 

See  Canada;  Commerce,  American,  Move- 
ment of;  Great  Britain,  Diplomatic  Rela- 
tions with;  Tariff  Policy  of  the  United 
States. 

References:  G.  G.  Huebner,  “Tariff  Pro- 
visions for  Promotion  of  Foreign  Trade  of  the 
United  States”  in  Am.  Acad,  of  Pol.  and  Soc. 
Science,  Annals,  XXIX  (May,  1907),  498-514; 
“Reciprocity  with  Canada”  in  Sen.  Doc.,  51 
Cong.,  3 Sess.,  No.  862  (1889);  W.  H.  Taft, 
“Reciprocity  with  Canada”  in  Journal  of  Pol. 
Econ.,  XIX  (July,  1911),  513-526;  H.  P.  Willis, 
“International  Aspects  of  Reciprocity”  in  ibid, 
527-541;  F.  W.  Taussig,  “Reciprocity  with 
Canada”  in  ibid,  542-549;  E.  V.  Robinson,  “Re- 
ciprocity and  the  Farmer”  in  ibid,  550-566;  G. 
C.  White,  “The  Proposed  Agreement  as  Viewed 
by  the  Farmer”  in  ibid,  567-573. 

Emory  R.  Johnson. 

RECLAMATION  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  For 

the  reclamation  of  swamp  or  overflowed  lands 
all  such  lands  were  granted  to  the  states  with- 
in which  they  lay,  1849-50,  and  the  proceeds 
were  to  be  used  for  the  building  of  levees  and 
drains.  Some  64,700,000  acres  had  been  pat- 
ented before  1912,  but  little  has  been  done 
by  the  states.  For  the  reclamation  of  desert 
land  the  act  of  1894  granted  1,000,000  acres  j 
to  each  state  that  would  irrigate,  reclaim,  and  1 
cause  to  be  occupied  the  same.  The  terms  were  ( 
later  extended  to  the  territories,  and  further 
grants  have  been  made.  To  June  30,  1912,  7,- 
301,036  acres  had  been  applied  for,  3,- 
291,231  segregated,  and  473,999  patented  to 
the  states.  National  reclamation  of  desert 
land  dates  from  the  act  of  June  17, 
1902.  All  moneys  received  from  the  sale 
of  lands  in  certain  of  the  western  states 
and  territories,  except  the  five  per  cent  fund, 
are  set  apart  as  a reclamation  fund.  Lands 
susceptible  of  irrigation  may  be  withdrawn 
from  public  entry  by  the  Secretary  of  the  In- 
terior. They  then  may  be  entered  only  under 
the  homestead  law,  without  commutation,  and 
the  maximum  area  may  be  reduced  to  an 
acreage  suitable  for  the  support  of  a family. 
Units  may  be  as  small  as  ten  acres,  but  in 
most  cases  they  are  from  forty  to  eighty.  Pat- 
ents issue  after  the  usual  homestead  proof  and 
the  irrigation  of  at  least  one-half  the  tract. 
The  charge  for  the  water  rights  on  all  land  in 
the  project  is  based  on  the  cost  and  charge  for 
operation  and  maintenance  of  the  works.  Prior 
to  June  30,  1912,  28  primary  projects  had 
been  undertaken,  and  $72,234,486  net  invested. 
From  present  works  1,143,000  acres  can  be  irri- 
gated, and  3,100,000  are  within  the  projects 
under  way.  In  1910  Congress  advanced 
$20,000,000  for  this  fund. 

See  Agriculture,  Relation  of  Government 
to;  Conservation;  Irrigation. 


References:  General  Land  Office,  Laws  and 
Regulations  Relating  to  the  Reclamation  of 
Arid  Lands  by  the  U.  S.  (1912)  ; National 
Conservation  Commission,  Report,  II  (1909), 
85;  C.  R.  Van  Hise,  Conservation  of  Natural 
Resources  (1910),  185-207;  Director  of  the 
Reclamation  Service,  Reports. 

Payson  J.  Treat. 

RECLAMATION  SERVICE.  The  Reclama- 
tion Service  was  established  by  act  of  Con- 
gress approved  June  17,  1902,  for  the  purpose 
of  constructing  irrigation  works  for  the  recla- 
mation of  arid  lands.  It  is  organized  as  a 
bureau  in  the  Department  of  the  Interior  (see 
Interior,  Department  of)  and  is  supported  by 
the  receipts  from  the  sale  of  public  lands  in 
the  sixteen  western  states.  The  total  amount 
allotted  for  the  reclamation  fund  from  1902 
to  December  31,  1910,  was  $59,257,000.  Dur- 
ing that  period  34  projects  were  undertaken  in 
16  states  (see  Public  Lands).  From  time  to 
time  as  funds  have  become  available  and  as 
the  preliminary  investigations  of  the  several 
projects  have  shown  their  feasibility  and  prac- 
ticability, the  construction  of  projects  has  been 
authorized  and  allotments  have  been  made  in 
order  to  provide  the  funds  necessary  to  carry 
on  the  work.  In  1910-11,  a special  loan  was 
authorized,  in  order  to  provide  for  the  com- 
pletion of  works  then  in  progress,  beyond  the 
funds  available  from  the  sale  of  lands.  See 
Conservation;  Irrigation;  Public  Lands. 
References:  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  Jn- 
nual  Reports-,  Director  of  the  Reclamation 
Service,  Annual  Reports.  A.  N.  H. 

RECOGNITION.  The  rules  of  the  national 

House  of  Representatives  provide  (Rule  XIV, 
sec.  2)  “When  two  or  more  Members  rise  at 
once,  the  Speaker  shall  name  the  Member  who 
is  first  to  speak.”  In  early  days  the  speaker 
recognized  the  member  first  arising,  and  there 
was  also  an  appeal  from  his  decision;  but  as 
business  became  more  complicated  and  as  it 
became  necessary  to  follow  an  order  of  busi- 
ness, “recognitions,  instead  of  pertaining  to  the 
individual  Member,  necessarily  came  to  pertain 
to  the  bill  or  other  business  which  would  be 
before  the  House  under  the  rule  regulating  the 
order  of  business”  (Hinds,  Manual,  Sec.  737). 
In  1879  the  committee  on  rules  declared  that 
in  the  nature  of  the  case  discretion  must  be 
lodged  in  the  presiding  officer,  and  in  1881  the 
speaker  declined  to  allow  an  appeal,  a practice 
which  still  continues.  The  speaker’s  power  is 
not  entirely  arbitrary;  for  under  the  rules  of 
the  House  he  must  recognize  certain  members 
under  certain  circumstances.  For  example, 
“When  the  order  of  business  brings  before  the 
House  a certain  bill  he  must  first  recognize,  for 
motions  for  its  disposition,  the  Member  who 
represents  the  committee  which  has  reported  it” 
(ibid,  738).  The  speaker  is'  guided  by  his 
list”  of  those  who  have  expressed  their  desire 


RECOGNITION  OF  CONFEDERATE  STATES— RECOGNITION  OF  NEW  STATES 


to  speak ; but  lie  is  not  bound  by  it.  In  gen- 
eral debate,  the  cbair  commonly  alternates  be- 
tween those  favoring  and  those  opposing  the 
measure  under  consideration.  When  a person 
is  recognized,  the  speaker  calls  him,  not  by 
name,  but  as  “the  gentlemen  from  — — — ” 
giving  the  name  of  the  state.  The  power  of 
recognition  is  one  of  the  sources  of  the  speak- 
er’s great  power  and  authority.  See  Rules 
of  Congress;  Rules  of  Legislative  Bodies; 
Speaker.  References:  A.  C.  Hinds,  House 
Manual  (1909),  index;  M.  P.  Follett,  Speaker 
of  the  House  of  Rep.  (1896).  A.  C.  McL. 

RECOGNITION  OF  CONFEDERATE 
STATES  OF  AMERICA.  See  Confederate 
States,  Recognition  of. 

RECOGNITION  OF  NEW  STATES.  The 

admission  of  new  states  to  the  so-called  family 
of  nations  depends  upon  the  action  of  the 
states  already  members  of  the  international 
family.  A state  may  have  a de  facto  existence 
and  may  enter  into  certain  relations  with  the 
states  which  are  members  of  the  family  of 
nations,  without  receiving  the  recognition 
which  is  necessary  in  order  that  the  state  may 
have  full  international  standing.  G.  G.  Wil- 
son says: 

The  basis  of  this  family  of  nations  or  inter- 
national circle,  which  admits  other  states  to  mem- 
bership, is  historical,  resting  on  the  policy  of 
the  older  European  states.  These  states,  through 
the  relatious  into  which  they  were  brought  by 
reason  of  proximity  and  intercourse,  developed 
among  themselves  a system  of  action  in  their 
mutual  dealings;  and  international  law,  in  its 
beginning,  proposed  to  set  forth  what  this  law 
was  and  should  be.  This  family  of  states  could 
not  permit  new  accessions  to  its  membership, 
unless  these  new  states  were  properly  constituted 
to  assume  the  mutual  relationships,  and  as  to 
the  proper  qualifications  for  admission  in  each 
case  the  states  already  within  the  family  claim 
and  exercise  the  right  to  judge. 

Other  states  were  from  time  to  time  and  in 
various  ways  recognized  as  members  of  the 
family  of  nations.  The  family  was  at  first 
European,  and  its  law  European.  Gradually  the 
group  admitted  new  members;  these  new  mem- 
bers acknowledged  the  existing  law  as  binding. 

Recognition  Is  Political. — The  recognition  of 
a new  state  by  a state  or  by  states  already 
members  of  the  family  of  nations  is  a political 
act  and  not  dependent  upon  the  area,  popula- 
tion, age,  power,  or  other  attributes  of  the 
state  recognized.  The  United  States  was  the 
first  non-European  state  admitted  to  the  fam- 
ily of  nations.  Other  American  states  were 
gradually  admitted.  In  1856  the  five  great 
powers  recognized  that  the  Turkish  Empire 
was  entitled  to  “the  participation  in  the  ad- 
vantage of  European  public  law  and  concert.” 
Japan,  a de  facto  state  for  many  years,  had 
only  a qualified  international  status  and  Amer- 
ican and  European  subjects  within  Japanese 
territory  enjoyed  extraterritoriality  and  other 
special  privileges.  In  1894  the  United  States 
made  a treaty  with  Japan  which  with  those  of 
other  powers,  was  to  become  operative  in  1899 


and  to  continue  12  years.  This  treaty  recog- 
nized the  full  international  status  of  Japan. 

The  Japanese  ministry  in  1899  said: 

The  revision  of  the  treaties,  in  the  sense  of  plac- 
ing on  a footing  of  equality  the  intercourse  of 
this  country  with  foreign  states,  was  the  basis  of 
the  great  liberal  policy  adopted  at  the  time  of 
the  restoration,  and  that  such  a course  conduces 
to  enhance  the  prestige  of  the  Empire  and  to  pro- 
mote the  prosperity  of  the  people  is  a proposition 
not  requiring  demonstration. 

The  United  States  courts  hold  that  when  the 
political  branch  of  the  Government  has  recog- 
nized a state  all  other  departments  are  bound 
thereby  (Jones,  Admr.  vs.  United  States,  137 
V . S.  202  [1890]). 

Formal  and  Informal  Recognition. — The 
method  of  recognition  may  vary  according  to 
circumstances.  If  the  recognition  is  of  a state 
which  has  had  a considerable  period  of  de 
facto  existence  it  is  usually  by  a formal  act 
such  as  the  grant  of  equal  rights  by  treaty  or 
the  admission  to  full  privileges  of  the  inter- 
national family  by  a group  of  states.  If  recog- 
nition is  of  a political  unity  whose  de  facto 
status  is  uncertain,  as  of  a newly  organized 
political  unity  which  has  not  existed  for  a suffi- 
ciently long  period  to  make  its  continuance 
assured,  less  formal  methods  are  usually  em- 
ployed. An  official  salute  of  the  flag  which 
has  been  raised  by  the  new  aspirant  for  state- 
hood, the  grant  of  an  exequatur  to  a consul  or 
the  official  reception  of  a diplomatic  agent  rep- 
resenting the  political  unity  may  be  sufficient. 
The  minister  plenipotentiary  of  the  recently 
established  Republic  of  Panama  in  presenting 
his  letter  of  credence  to  the  President  of  the 
United  States  on  November  13,  1903,  said: 

Mr.  President : In  according  to  the  minister 
plenipotentiary  of  the  Republic  of  Panama  the 
honor  of  presenting  to  you  his  letters  of  credence, 
you  admit  into  the  family  of  nations  the  weakest 
and  the  last-born  of  the  republics  of  the  New 
World. 

The  President,  after  mentioning  the  attitude 
which  the  United  States  had  assumed  in  recog- 
nizing other  South  American  states  said : 

And  it  is  equally  fitting  that  the  United  States 
should,  now  as  then,  be  the  first  to  stretch  out 
the  hand  of  fellowship  and  to  observe  toward  the 
new-born  state  the  rules  of  equal  intercourse  that 
regulate  the  relations  of  sovereignties  toward  one 
another. 

Date. — In  cases  where  the  new  state  has 
broken  off  from  an  established  state  and  is  rec- 
ognized by  other  states,  it  is  customary  to  date 
the  beginning  of  the  new  state  from  the  time 
when  it  declared  its  independence  of  the  parent 
state.  The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States 
has  said  of  the  independence  of  the  United 
States,  that  it 

originated  from  and  commenced  with  the  declara- 
tion of  Congress,  on  the  4th  of  July,  1776  and  that 
no  other  period  can  be  fixed  on  for  its  commence- 
ment. and  that  all  laws  made  bv  the  legislature  of 
the  several  states,  after  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, were  the  laws  of  sovereign  and  inde- 
pendent governments  (Ware  vs.  Hylton,  3 Dallas , 
199). 


RECONSTRUCTION 


Previous  Obligations. — When  a state  is 
formed  by  the  voluntary  union  of  states  already 
recognized  as  members  of  the  family  of  na- 
tions, recognition  of  the  new  state  is  usually 
accorded  as  a matter  of  course  and  prior  inter- 
national obligations  of  the  parts  of  the  new 
state  are  for  the  most  part  taken  over  by  the 
new  state. 

When  states  are  formed  by  the  dissolution  of 
an  established  state,  the  new  states  are  gen- 
erally recognized  at  once.  The  obligations  rest- 
ing on  the  state  from  which  the  new  states  are 
formed  are  usually  assumed  under  agreement 
by  the  new  states  if  the  parts  of  the  prior  state 
have  not  acted  separately  in  international  ne- 
gotiations before  their  dissolution  (as  in  the 
ease  of  Sweden  and  Norway  before  their 
division  in  1905). 

Recognition  of  a belligerent  community  or 
of  a political  unity  which  is  in  opposition 
to  the  state  of  which  it  has  formed  a part  may 
be  premature  and  may  be  regarded  as  an  un- 
friendly act  by  the  established  state. 

No  Withdrawal. — Recognition  once  granted 
cannot  be  withdrawn  and  the  recognized  state 
can  claim  the  rights  to  which  it  would  be  en- 
titled under  international  law.  Sometimes 
recognition  is  granted  under  condition  that  the 
recognized  party  fulfil  specified  obligations  or 
observe  certain  conditions.  The  recognition 
may  not  be  withdrawn  because  the  recognized 
state  has  failed  to  meet  the  obligations  or  con- 
ditions, but  other  measures  may  be  taken,  even 
war  measures,  to  compel  fulfilment. 

Parent  State.- — On  recognition  of  a new  state 
the  recognizing  state  is  bound  to  accord  to  the 
state  which  it  has  recognized  the  rights  to 
which  a state  is  entitled  under  international 
law.  If  the  new  state  is  formed  by  separation 
from  an  established  state  the  parent  state  is 
relieved  of  liability  for  the  acts  of  the  recog- 
nized state;  and  the  recognized  state  may  be 
under  obligations  to  assume  certain  liabilities 
which  formerly  rested  upon  the  established 
states,  e.  g.,  certain  obligations  resting  upon 
the  territory  now  within  the  limits  of  a recog- 
nized state.  Other  states  are  bound  to  respect 
the  consequences  of  the  recognition  so  far  as 
these  affect  the  relations  between  the  recogniz- 
ing and  recognized  states.  Recognition  by  one 
state  does  not,  however,  involve  another  state 
in  obligation  to  accord  recognition.  A parent 
state  would  have  little  ground  to  regard  as 
unfriendly  a recognition  by  any  one  state,  after 


recognition  had  been  accorded  by  a large  num- 
ber of  other  states. 

The  policy  of  the  United  States  in  regard  to 
recognition  has  varied  according  to  circum- 
stances. Sometimes  recognition  has  been  early, 
as  in  the  case  of  Panama  in  1903.  Some  states 
were  very  slow  in  recognizing  the  existence  of 
the  United  States  of  America. 

Relations  Short  of  Recognition. — The  recog- 
nition of  a change  in  the  form  of  government 
or  of  other  political  changes  may  require 
state  action  even  though  no  new  state  may  be 
established.  A monarchy  may  change  to  a re- 
public or  other  governmental  changes  may 
occur  which  while  working  no  change  in  inter- 
national responsibilities  and  liabilities  may 
raise  questions  as  to  what  party  in  a state  is 
legally  responsible  for  state  action  and  it  may 
be  necessary  for  foreign  states  to  decide  with 
which  government  they  will  transact  interna- 
tional business.  Thus,  while  the  continuity 
of  the  state  may  be  admitted,  there  may  be 
doubt  as  to  the  person  properly  entitled  to 
represent  the  state.  American  instructions  to 
diplomatic  officers  have  often  been  to  the  fol- 
lowing effect;  “As  soon  as  you  are  satisfied 
that  the  new  government  is  in  possession  of  the 
executive  forces  of  the  nation  and  administer- 
ing the  public  affairs  with  due  regard  for  the 
obligations  of  international  law  and  treaties, 
you  will  enter  into  full  relations  with  it.”  It 
may  be  and  often  is  necessary  to  enter  into  re- 
lations with  the  de  facto  government  without 
in  any  way  affirming  or  denying  its  right  to  be. 
This  often  happens  when  a state  has  many 
interests  in  another  state  where  conditions  are 
disturbed.  The  subject  of  recognition  has  re- 
ceived much  attention  in  American  diplomatic 
negotiations;  and  was  brought  to  public  no- 
tice by  the  non-recognition  by  the  United 
States  of  a government  set  up  in  Mexico  by 
revolution  ( see  Mexico,  Diplomatic  Rela- 
tions with). 

See  Belligerency;  Diplomacy  and  Diplo- 
matic Usage  ; International  Law,  Influence 
of  the  United  States  on  ; Protectorates,  In- 
ternational. 

References:  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law 
(1906),  I,  72-254;  W.  E.  Hall,  Int.  Law 
(1909),  82  et  seq.;  G.  G.  Wilson,  Int.  Law 
(1910),  24-30;  F.  L.  Paxson,  The  Independ- 
ence of  South  American  Republics  (1903); 
bibliography  in  A.  B.  Hart,  Manual  (1908), 
§ 182.  George  G.  Wilson. 


RECONSTRUCTION 


The  Problem,  1862-1870. — The  governmental 
problem  of  reconstruction  arose  from  the  neces- 
sity of  establishing  civil  governments  and  re- 
storing suspended  federal  relations  in  the  states 
which  seceded  in  1861  and  were  conquered. 
The  easiest  method  would  have  been  to  main- 


tain military  control,  until  the  disorganization 
caused  by  war  was  at  an  end,  and  to  restore 
full  self-government  only  so  soon  as  the  in- 
habitants appeared  ready  to  act  with  complete 
loyalty.  But  any  such  policy  was  impossible, 
since  it  involved  ignoring  the  existence  of  the 


163 


RECONSTRUCTION 


southern  states  as  “states,”  which  would  have 
been  inconsistent  with  the  avowed  purpose  of 
the  war.  Lincoln’s  inaugural  address  laid 
down  the  doctrine  that  secession  as  a legal 
act  was  null  and  void ; and  Congress,  in  July, 
1861,  not  only  reiterated  this  theory,  but  de- 
clared that  the  object  of  the  war  was  to  restore 
the  Union  with  all  the  rights  of  the  states  un- 
impaired. All  the  official  acts  of  the  United 
States  government  from  Lincoln’s  proclama- 
tion of  April  15,  1861,  to  the  decision  of  the 
Supreme  Court  in  the  Prize  Cases  (see),  in- 
cluding the  confiscation  acts  and  other  laws 
of  Congress,  assumed  to  deal  with  rebellious 
individuals  within  certain  states  and  ignored 
the  states  as  such.  The  whole  war  was  fought 
on  the  avowed  theory  that,  legally,  nothing 
had  been  done  which  in  any  way  took  the  Con- 
federal States  out  of  the  Union.  They  were 
prevented  from  occupying  their  proper  fed- 
eral relations  only  by  the  rebellion  of  their 
inhabitants  (see  Secession  Controversy). 
It  was  an  inevitable  corollary  that  recon- 
struction must  somehow  bear  a federal  char- 
acter. In  the  effort  to  discover  such  a process, 
great  diversity  of  opinion  developed,  owing  to 
the  absence  of  anything  in  the  Constitution  it- 
self which  threw  light  upon  the  problem  of  re- 
storing the  suspended  functions  of  a state. 
The  only  clause  which  seemed  to  contemplate 
possible  federal  intrevention  was  “The  United 
States  shall  guarantee  to  every  state  in  this 
union  a republican  form  of  government”  (Art. 
IV,  Sec.  iv) . This  might  be  interpreted  to  war- 
rant intervention  against  usurpation  or  revo- 
lution, and  hence  upon  this  slender  basis  of 
constitutional  authority,  the  actual  process  of 
reconstruction  purported  to  rest. 

Constitutional  Theories. — The  principal  the- 
ories advanced  to  serve  as  bases  for  recon- 
struction were  as  follows.  (1)  The  self-recon- 
struction theory.  This  was  held  by  Lincoln 
and  his  successor  Johnson,  and  was  a direct 
outgrowth  of  the  theory  of  the  legal  nullity 
of  secession.  If  the  states  were  unaffected 
legally  by  secession,  they  might  resume  their 
normal  functions  in  the  Union  as  soon  as 
their  loyal  inhabitants  were  able,  under  fed- 
eral protection,  to  control  their  governments. 
Lincoln  accordingly  held  that  the  duty  of 
affording  this  protection  to  loyal  men  in  the 
South  rested  with  the  executive  and  was  an 
outgrowth  both  of  his  power  as  commander-in- 
chief  and  of  his  power  to  pardon.  (2)  The 
theory  of  forfeited  rights.  This  was  the  theory 
ultimately  adopted  by  Congress  and  by  the 
Supreme  Court.  It  held  that  the  states  did  not, 
through  the  rebellion  of  their  inhabitants,  cease 
to  be  states  in  the  LTnion,  but  forfeited  their 
rights  as  states.  It  belonged,  accordingly,  to 
the  Federal  Government,  to  prescribe  by  law 
the  terms  and  the  method  of  their  reinstate- 
ment. This  theory  was  ingeniously  contrived 
to  leave  a semblance  of  federalism  but  to  place 
all  final  power  in  the  hands  of  the  legislative 


department.  (3)  The  theory  of  state  suicide. 
This  theory  was  brought  forward  by  Senator 
Sumner  (see  Sumner,  Charles)  during  the 
war.  It  maintained  that  the  states,  by  taking 
the  unconstitutional  step  of  seceding  had  com- 
mitted suicide  and  were  simply  territories  at 
the  disposal  of  the  Federal  Government.  In 
later  restatements  of  his  theory,  Sumner  made 
it  appear  similar  to  the  preceding  one. 
(4)  The  “conquered  provinces”  theory.  Tliad- 
deus  Stevens  (see)  proclaimed  that  the  south- 
ern states  had  rebelled  in  fact,  whatever  the 
theoretical  impossibility  of  secession  might 
be,  and  that  they  were  actually  conquered  as 
rebels  and  retained  no  constitutional  rights 
whatsoever.  The  territory  of  the  South  was 
conquered  soil  open  to  any  treatment  which 
commended  itself  to  the  victorious  United 
States.  Constitutional  rights  of  individuals 
and  of  states  ceased  to  mean  anything  when 
they  were  in  full  revolt.  This  theory  described 
the  facts  exactly  and  would  have  given  a free 
hand  to  the  Federal  Government,  but  it  was  far 
too  radical  to  gain  general  acceptance  and  was 
practically  discarded  by  its  author  for  the 
theory  of  forfeited  rights.  It  is  to  be  observed 
that  the  last  three  theories  agreed  in  regard- 
ing reconstruction  as  a subject  for  legislative 
determination  and  differed  accordingly  from 
the  first  theory,  which  left  all  to  the  discre- 
tion of  the  executive  and  the  action  of  loyal 
individuals. 

Presidential  Reconstruction  under  Lincoln, 
1862-1865. — The  first  theory  was  put  into  op- 
eration early  in  the  war.  Immediately  after 
the  secession  of  Virginia,  the  inhabitants  of 
the  western  counties  met  in  convention,  repu- 
diated the  action  of  the  Confederates  and  as- 
sumed to  reestablish  a loyal  state  government. 
The  governor,  legislature  and  members  of 
Congress  chosen  by  this  reorganized  “Virginia” 
were  recognized  by  the  President  and  by  Con- 
gress. In  1862  this  government  gave  the  con- 
sent of  “Virginia”  to  the  erection  of  West  Vir- 
ginia (see)  as  a separate  state  and,  even  when 
thus  reduced  to  a few  counties,  the  loyal 
“Virginia”  continued  to  be  recognized  by  Lin- 
coln as  the  legal  state  government.  This  ac- 
tion served  as  a model  for  Lincoln’s  later 
policy.  In  1862  he  appointed  military  gover- 
nors in  Louisiana,  Arkansas  and  Tennessee  and 
encouraged  the  loyalists  in  those  states  to 
begin  civil  government.  In  December,  1863, 
he  went  further  by  issuing  an  amnesty  procla- 
mation intended  to  pave  the  way  for  recon- 
struction by  providing  a test  of  “loyalty.”  All 
persons  except  the  higher  officials  in  the  Con- 
federacy, or  those  who  had  left  the  United 
States  service  to  aid  the  rebellion  or  who  had 
treated  colored  troops  otherwise  than  as  pris- 
oners of  war,  might,  on  taking  an  oath  of  al- 
legiance, receive  full  pardon.  The  oath 
included  a pledge  to  support  all  laws  and 
proclamations  affecting  slavery  hitherto  is- 
sued. Lincoln  further  announced  that  when  a 


164 


RECONSTRUCTION 


number  equal  to  one-tenth  of  the  qualified 
voters  of  I860  had  taken  the  oath,  they  might 
reconstitute  a state  government  which  would  he 
recognized  by  the  executive  as  the  true  govern- 
ment of  the  state. 

Although  Lincoln  included  in  the  proclama- 
tion a reminder  that  he  did  not  pretend  to  in- 
terfere with  the  right  of  Congress  to  admit 
or  reject  Senators  and  Representatives,  he 
soon  showed  that  he  did  not  intend  to  permit 
any  interference  with  the  plan  of  reconstruc- 
tion thus  established.  In  the  session  of  18C4 
Congress  passed  a bill  overriding  the  Am- 
nesty Proclamation  (see)  in  several  respects, 
chiefly  through  requiring  a more  stringent 
oath,  a majority  of  “loyal”  men  before  the  be- 
ginning of  reconstruction  and  the  consent  of 
Congress  before  the  state  government  could  be 
recognized.  This  measure  was  killed  by  Lin- 
coln through  a pocket  veto.  He  explained  that 
he  was  unwilling  to  overthrow  civil  govern- 
ments already  begun  or  to  render  the  process 
of  restoration  more  difficult  by  confining  it  to 
one  method.  Under  the  terms  of  the  Am- 
nesty Proclamation  three  southern  states  car- 
ried through  a process  of  reconstruction  and 
“ten  per  cent”  governments  were  set  up  in 
Arkansas,  Louisiana  and  Tennessee,  much  to 
the  discontent  of  Congress,  which  by  a joint 
resolution  of  February  8,  1865,  prevented  elec- 
toral votes  from  any  of  them  from  being 
counted  in  the  presidential  election  then  pend- 
ing. 

Presidential  Reconstruction  under  Johnson, 
1865-1866. — After  Lincoln’s  assassination,  the 
process  of  reconstruction  under  executive  pro- 
tection was  carried  through  by  President 
Johnson.  On  May  29,  1865,  he  replaced  Lin- 
coln’s Amnesty  Proclamation  by  a new  one 
excluding  more  classes  of  individuals  from  the 
privilege  of  taking  the  amnesty  oath,  but  au- 
thorizing such  to  apply  directly  to  the  Presi- 
dent himself.  Johnson  did  not  reissue  the 
reconstruction  clauses  of  the  earlier  procla- 
mation but  continued  Lincoln’s  policy  of  ap- 
pointing governors  and  hastening  reorganiza- 
tion in  the  southern  states  by  the  loyalists. 
By  the  autumn  of  1865  every  one  of  the  se- 
ceded states  was  reconstructed  except  Texas 
which  followed  in  1866.  Virginia  still  re- 
mained under  its  voluntary  reconstruction  of 
1861;  Tennessee,  Arkansas  and  Louisiana  were 
under  Lincoln’s  “ten  per  cent”  governments, 
and  the  remaining  states  were  under  the  “John- 
son governments.”  Each  state  abolished  slav- 
ery, revised  its  constitution  and  set  up  a state 
government.  Each  chose  Senators  and  Repre- 
sentatives. So  far  as  the  action  of  Lincoln 
and  Johnson  could  bring  it  about  the  states 
of  the  South  were  ready  to  resume  their  sus- 
pended constitutional  functions. 

The  theory  on  which  the  war  had  been  begun 
was  now  carried  to  its  logical  conclusion. 
An  insurrection  of  individuals  had  been  sup- 
pressed and  loyal  persons  had  been  assisted 


in  setting  up  governments.  It  is  to  be  ob- 
served, however,  that  neither  Lincoln  nor  John- 
son strictly  followed  out  the  theory.  It  was 
not  until  April  2,  1866,  that  Johnson  issued  a 
proclamation  declaring  the  war  at  an  end 
in  ten  states,  adding  Texas  on  August  30. 
Even  then  troops  were  not  wholly  withdrawn 
nor  martial  law  formally  terminated.  Fed- 
eral courts  began  to  hold  sessions  (see)  but  in 
certain  districts  only.  The  Freedmen’s  Bureau, 
established  in  March,  1865,  continued  to  exer- 
cise powers  of  military  control  over  freedmen, 
refugees  and  abandoned  lands.  Clearly  the 
authority  of  the  new  governments  was  not 
complete.  They  were  deemed  able,  however, 
to  exercise  constitutional  powers  in  one  import- ' 
ant  respect  for  it  was  through  the  ratification 
by  these  “presidential”  state  governments,  of 
the  Thirteenth  Amendment  (see)  abolishing 
slavery,  that  it  became  part  of  the  Constitu- 
tion on  December  18,  1865. 

This  action  showed  that  the  southern  vot- 
ers accepted  the  chief  result  of  the  war  but 
their  attempts  in  1865  and  1866  to  legislate 
for  the  freedmen  indicated  that  anything  be- 
yond the  termination  of  mere  chattel  slavery 
was  not  in  their  minds.  In  nearly  every  state 
a special  code  applicable  to  negroes  gave  them 
a subordinate  civil  status,  subjected  them  to 
restrictions  in  business  and  in  contracts,  and 
provided  a system  of  penalties  for  vagrancy 
and  minor  offences,  which,  taken  with  appren- 
tice laws,  seemed  to  establish  compulsory  labor 
as  their  normal  condition.  Considered  as  a gov- 
ernmental process  the  “self-reconstruction” 
plan  was  certainly  hasty  and  wanting  in  firm- 
ness of  control.  Whether  in  spite  of  its  draw- 
backs it  might  have  worked  satisfactorily,  can- 
not be  proved  owing  to  the  fact  that  it  was 
scarcely  completed  before  it  was  superseded 
by  another  and  a wholly  different  scheme. 

Fourteenth  Amendment,  the  Congressional 
Compromise,  1866. — The  Thirty-ninth  Congress 
which  met  in  December,  1865,  found  the  results 
of  the  Lincoln- Johnson  theory  before  it  and  at 
first  was  inclined  to  accept  them  provided 
certain  safeguards  could  be  secured.  In  order 
to  control  the  situation  each  house  excluded 
all  members  elected  from  the  seceded  states 
and  refused  to  admit  them  until  Congress 
should,  by  law,  declare  the  states  entitled  to 
Representation.  To  protect  the  freedmen  from 
the  operation  of  the  vagrancy  and  apprentice 
laws  and  to  prevent  “disloyal”  action  on  the 
part  of  the  former  Confederates  two  important 
acts  were  passed  over  the  veto  of  the  indignant 
Johnson  and  a fourteenth  constitutional 
amendment  was  offered.  A Civil  Rights  Act 
(see),  April  9,  1866,  declared  that  civil  equali- 
ty was  a result  of  the  Thirteenth  Amendment; 
and  a second  Freedmen’s  Bureau  Act,  July 
16,  1866,  empowered  that  organization  to  pro- 
tect freedmen  from  all  unjust  discrimination. 

The  proposed  amendment  contained  four 
clauses.  The  first  protected  all  citizens  of 


165 


RECONSTRUCTION 


the  United  States  from  discrimination  at  the 
hands  of  the  states ; the  second  provided  for 
the  reduction  of  the  representation  in  Con- 
gress of  any  state  which  disfranchised  any 
of  its  citizens  except  for  rebellion  or  crime; 
the  third  excluded  from  office  any  who  had 
left  the  service  of  the  United  States  or  any 
state  to  serve  the  Confederacy ; and  the  fourth 
safeguarded  the  United  States  debt  from  re- 
pudiation while  prohibiting  the  payment  of 
any  debt  incurred  in  aid  of  the  rebellion.  Be- 
fore the  end  of  the  session,  the  “ten  per  cent” 
government  of  Tennessee  ratified  the  amend- 
ment and  was  immediately  declared  entitled 
to  be  represented  in  Congress.  This  showed 
that  Congress  was  ready  to  recognize  the 
“’presidential”  governments  on  condition  of 
their  ratifying  the  Amendment,  but  this  plan 
encountered  the  violent  opposition  of  Presi- 
dent Johnson,  who  resented  seeing  his  policy 
blocked.  In  the  autumn  of  1866  and  the 
winter  of  1867  nearly  all  the  northern  states 
ratified  the  amendment  but  the  southern 
states  refused  to  imitate  Tennessee,  and,  with- 
out their  cooperation,  the  necessary  three- 
fourths  of  the  states  could  not  be  obtained. 
When  Congress  met  for  its  second  session  it 
was  seen  that  the  plan  of  exacting  safe- 
guards was  a failure  (see  Fourteenth 
Amendment)  . 

Congressional  Reconstruction  Acts,  1867. — 

In  the  year  1867,  the  majority  in  Congress 
threw  entirely  aside  all  that  had  been  accom- 
plished and  entered  upon  a wholly  new  method 
of  reconstruction.  This  embodied  in  full  the 
“forfeited-rights”  theory,  and  revolutionized 
the  constitutional  law  of  the  United  States. 
In  two  statutes  of  March  2 and  March  23, 
each  passed  over  the  unavailing  veto  of  Presi- 
dent Johnson,  the  following  program  was  laid 
down.  After  a preamble  asserting  that  no 
legal  governments  existed  in  the  “rebel  states,” 
nor  adequate  protection  for  life  and  property, 
the  first  act  divided  the  states  into  five  military 
districts,  authorized  the  establishment  of  mil- 
itary government,  and  declared  that  in  order 
to  be  restored  to  representation  in  Congress, 
eacli  state  must  frame  a constitution  by  a con- 
vention elected  by  all  male  citizens  twenty-one 
years  old,  not  disqualified  for  participation  in 
rebellion;  this  constitution  must  be  ratified  by 
an  election  in  which  a majority  of  the  voters 
should  take  part  and  must  further  be  approved 
by  Congress ; the  state  legislature  must  ratify 
the  Fourteenth  Amendment,  and  the  Amend- 
ment must  become  part  of  the  Constitution. 
The  second  act  provided  the  machinery  for 
carrying  through  the  process.  The  military 
commanders  were  directed  to  enroll  a new 
electorate  employing  a stringent  oath  which 
would  exclude  practically  all  Confederates, 
to  hold  elections,  summon  the  convention,  and 
conduct  the  final  vote  on  ratification.  The 
existing  “Johnson”  state  governments  were  de- 
clared provisional  only  and  subject  in  all  re- 


spects to  the  military  authority.  A third  act 
of  July  19,  1867,  reinforced  this  last  provision 
by  specifically  giving  the  commanding  gener- 
als power  to  remove  or  suspend  officials  of  the 
so-called  “provisional  governments”  and  to  fill 
vacancies  by  appointing  loyal  individuals  or 
by  detailing  members  of  the  army. 

These  laws  if  enacted  at  the  end  of  the 
war  would  have  seemed  severe,  perhaps,  but 
logical  and  practical.  Coming  as  they  did 
after  two  years  of  peace,  and  imposing 
despotic  military  authority  upon  communi- 
ties which  had  had  civil  government  for  periods 
varying  from  nine  months  to  three  years, 
they  seemed  excessively  harsh.  The  legal 
and  constitutional  inconsistencies  involved 
were  almost  beyond  reconciliation  with  any 
coherent  principles  of  constitutional  inter- 
pretation. The  governments  of  the  so-called 
“rebel  states,”  now  declared  illegal  and  pro- 
visional, had  been  competent  to  ratify  the 
Thirteenth  Amendment  in  1865  and  had  been 
expressly  invited  to  ratify  the  Fourteenth 
Amendment  in  1866.  One  of  them,  that  of 
Tennessee,  differing  in  no  respect  from  the 
other  “ten  per  cent”  states,  had  actually  been 
admitted  to  representation  in  Congress.  The 
war  had  been  recognized  by  both  Congress  and 
the  President  as  having  ended  in  1866;  and 
nothing  in  the  Constitution  could  be  discov- 
ered authorizing  the  suspension  of  the  writ 
of  habeas  corpus  except  in  cases  of  “rebellion 
or  invasion.”  The  authority  by  which  Congress 
assumed  to  create  a wholly  new  electorate  and 
prescribe  the  contents  of  the  required  consti- 
tutions could  only  be  derived  from  the  guar- 
antee of  a republican  form  of  government  (see 
Republican  Form  of  Government)  by  violent 
distortion  of  language.  But  it  is  clear  that 
the  anomalies  and  apparent  usurpations  of 
the  reconstruction  measures  would  not  have 
appeared  had  they  been  put  in  operation  two 
years  earlier.  It  was  the  lapse  of  time  and 
the  action  of  Lincoln  and  Johnson  which  led 
to  the  logical  and  constitutional  difficulties 
of  the  congressional  reconstruction  acts. 

Process  of  Congressional  Reconstruction, 
1867-1868. — The  actual  process  of  reconstruc- 
tion was  not  completed  until  July,  1870.  All 
of  the  southern  states  except  Tennessee  were 
accordingly  subjected  to  despotic  military 
government  for  longer  or  shorter  periods. 
State  and  municipal  officials  were  appointed, 
removed  and  suspended  by  the  military  au- 
thorities. State  laws  were  overridden,  sus- 
pended, modified  or  actually  superseded  by 
military  orders.  The  state  judiciary  was 
checked  and  made  subject  to  military  control. 
Taxes  were  collected  under  military  authority 
for  the  support  of  “state”  officials  who  re- 
ceived their  power  from  the  military  com- 
mander. To  reconcile  the  conditions  of  south- 
ern government  with  any  constitutional  theory 
under  this  regime  is  an  almost  hopeless  task. 
Practically  the  government  by  the  federal  gen- 


166 


RECONSTRUCTION 


erals  seems  to  have  been  just  and  efficient;  but 
the  fact  that  it  was  superimposed  on  actually 
existing  civil  governments  made  it  appear  to 
the  South  as  simple  tyranny. 

The  registration  of  electors,  the  vote  on  the 
question  of  calling  a convention,  and  the  elec- 
tion of  delegates  were  carried  through  in  1867 
in  most  of  the  states;  and  the  constitutional 
conventions  were  in  session  during  the  winter 
of  1867-1868.  The  new  electorate  contained 
all  adult  male  negroes  and  such  whites  as 
were  not  expressly  excluded  by  the  reconstruc- 
tion acts  or  by  the  oath  required  by  the  regis- 
tration boards.  The  “loyal”  voters  thus  es- 
tablished were  the  most  ignorant  members  of 
the  community,  and  those  least  qualified  by 
training  for  leadership.  But,  since  the  con- 
gressional scheme  demanded  that  a “loyal” 
majority  be  found  in  every  state  in  order  to 
safeguard  the  results  of  the  war,  it  was  neces- 
sary, if  reconstruction  was  not  to  be  indefi- 
nitely prolonged,  to  use  the  freedmen  to  create 
such  a majority.  Moreover,  there  was  a gen- 
eral feeling  that  only  through  the  possession 
of  the  ballot  could  the  late  slaves  protect  their 
rights  against  their  former  masters.  The  un- 
fortunate result  was  the  immediate  alignment 
of  society  in  the  South  into  two  parties,  divid- 
ed on  race  and  class  lines.  Governmental  ques- 
tions became  wholly  subordinated  to  political 
considerations,  and  the  process  of  reconstruc- 
tion under  the  congressional  plan  was  an  un- 
remitting and  mercilessly  partisan  contest  from 
beginning  to  end.  “Loyalty”  became  identified 
with  adherence  to  the  congressional  scheme 
and  to  the  Republican  party  which  controlled 
Congress.  “Disloyalty”  consisted  in  any  op- 
position to  negro  suffrage  or  to  the  control  of 
the  community  by  the  new  “loyal”  organiza- 
tion. 

Restoration  of  the  First  States,  1868. — In 
1867  and  1868  the  new  program  was  carried 
through  with  partial  success.  In  spite  of 
every  effort  on  the  part  of  the  southern  whites, 
constitutions  embodying  negro  suffrage  and 
disfranchisement  of  Confederates  were  drafted, 
submitted  to  popular  vote  and  adopted  in  six 
states.  Congress  modified  the  requirement 
that  a majority  of  the  registered  electorate 
must  participate  in  the  vote  on  ratification,  by 
an  act  of  March  11,  1868,  which  was  not 
passed,  however,  until  in  Alabama  the  con- 
stitution was  apparently  defeated  through  the 
operation  of  the  original  proviso,  less  than 
half  of  the  registered  voters  having  cast  bal- 
lots. Apparently  out  of  anxiety  to  allow 
these  states  to  participate  in  the  coming  pres- 
idential election,  the  majority  in  Congress  now 
abandoned  another  requirement  laid  down  in 
the  first  Reconstruction  Act  and,  instead  of 
waiting  until  the  Fourteenth  Amendment  was 
part  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  accepted  the 
ratification  of  the  amendment  by  the  state 
legislatures  as  sufficient.  An  act  of  June  22, 
1 868,  declared  Arkansas  admitted  to  repre- 


sentation, and  another  of  June  25,  admitted 
not  only  North  and  South  Carolina,  Louisiana, 
Georgia  and  Florida  to  representation,  but  also 
Alabama,  whose  constitution  had  been  voted 
on  by  less  than  the  required  majority.  A so- 
called  “fundamental  condition”  was  imposed 
upon  each  of  these  states,  that  its  constitution 
should  never  be  amended  so  as  to  disfranchise 
any  of  its  citizens  who  were  then  entitled  to 
vote.  Georgia  was  also  required  to  alter  cer- 
tain parts  of  its  constitution. 

In  the  remaining  three  states  the  process 
came  to  a halt.  In  Texas  the  convention  ad- 
journed without  completing  a constitution;  in 
Virginia  the  draft  was  completed  and  the  con- 
vention adjourned;  but  there  were  no  funds 
to  defray  the  expense  of  the  vote  on  ratifica- 
tion; in  Mississippi  the  opposition  or  “Con- 
servative” party  brought  about  the  outright 
rejection  of  the  constitution  at  the  polls.  The 
Fourteenth  Amendment,  however,  secured  the 
necessary  number  of  votes  and  was  proclaimed 
on  July  20,  1868.  Military  government  ceased 
in  all  but  three  of  the  southern  states  and 
the  new  governments  were  left  in  full  control. 

Fifteenth  Amendment  and  the  Last  States, 
1869-1870. — The  final  stages  of  reconstruction 
were  affected  in  two  ways  by  the  election  of 
1868.  In  the  first  place  General  Grant,  elected 
President  by  the  Republican  party,  was  able  to 
exercise  an  influence  over  Congress  such  as  had 
been  lacking  since  the  days  of  Lincoln;  more- 
over, Grant  himself  was  inclined  to  moderation 
in  the  treatment  of  the  South.  In  the  second 
place  the  bitter  struggle  which  raged  in  every 
southern  state  between  whites  and  blacks,  the 
operations  of  the  Ku  Klux  Klan,  and  the  sud- 
den and  violent  overturning  of  Republican 
majorities  in  Georgia  and  Louisiana,  led 
the  radicals  in  Congress  to  devise  additional 
means  for  protecting  the  right  of  the  freed- 
men to  vote.  In  the  session  of  1869,  a new 
constitutional  amendment  was  passed  and 
submitted  to  the  states  to  the  effect  that  the 
right  of  citizens  of  the  United  States  to  vote 
should  not  be  denied  or  abridged  on  account 
of  race,  color  or  previous  condition  of  servi- 
tude. Then  the  three  remaining  states  were 
dealt  with.  First  an  act  of  February  18,  1869, 
purged  their  provisional  governments  by  caus- 
ing the  exaction  of  the  so-called  “iron-clad” 
oath  of  July  2,  1862.  Then  by  an  act  of  April 
10,  1869,  President  Grant  was  authorized  to 
provide  for  the  resubmission  of  the  Missis- 
sippi constitution  and  the  submission  of  the 
Virginia  and  Texas  constitutions  in  whole  or 
in  part  at  his  discretion.  The  purpose  of  this 
act  was  to  allow  the  disfranchising  clauses  of 
the  proposed  Virginia  and  Mississippi  con- 
stitutions to  be  voted  on  separately,  a policy 
strongly  advocated  by  the  President.  These 
states  were  also  called  upon  to  ratify  the  new 
proposed  Fifteenth  Amendment  (see). 

The  plan  worked  smoothly;  each  state  ac- 
cepted its  constitution,  Virginia  and  Missis- 


167 


RECONSTRUCTION 


sippi  rejecting  the  disfranchising  clauses;  and 
Congress,  by  acts  of  January  26,  February  23, 
and  March  30,  1870,  declared  Virginia,  Missis- 
sippi and  Texas,  respectively,  readmitted  to 
representation.  Two  more  “fundamental  con- 
ditions” were  imposed,  however,  upon  these 
states.  The  constitutions  were  never  to  be  al- 
tered so  as  to  deprive  citizens  of  the  United 
States  of  the  right  to  hold  office  or  enjoy 
school  privileges  on  account  of  race  or  color. 
The  Fifteenth  Amendment,  helped  to  its  rati- 
fication by  these  measures,  became  part  of  the 
Constitution  on  March  30,  and  the  process  of 
reconstruction  seemed  to  be  complete. 

The  Third  Reconstruction  of  Georgia,  1868- 
1870. — The  last  act  in  the  process  proved  to  be 
nothing  less  than  a third  reconstruction  of  the 
single  state  of  Georgia,  whose  “loyalty”  ap- 
peared dubious.  The  Georgia  legislature,  in 
1868,  after  the  state  had  been  declared  re- 
stored, refused  to  ratify  the  Fifteenth  Amend- 
ment and  ejected  all  its  negro  members  on 
the  ground  that,  while  the  new  constitution 
gave  all  men  the  ballot,  it  did  not  guarantee 
them  the  right  to  hold  office.  In  the  session 
of  Congress  beginning  December,  1868,  the 
Georgia  Senators  were  denied  admission  and 
the  radical  members  of  Congress  urged  a new 
interposition.  In  the  next  year  an  act  of 
December  22,  1869,  authorized  the  purging  of 
the  Georgia  legislature  by  an  oath  substan- 
tially the  same  as  that  of  the  first  Reconstruc- 
tion Act,  or  by  an  oath  to  the  effect  that  the 
testator  had  been  relieved  of  disability  by  an 
act  of  Congress.  The  exclusion  of  negroes  from 
office-holding  was  prohibited  and  the  governor 
of  the  state  was  authorized  to  call  upon  the 
United  States  military  forces  for  assistance. 
Georgia  was  also  required  to  ratify  the  Fif- 
teenth Amendment. 

The  result  of  this  act  was  to  impose  military 
control  upon  the  state  for  the  third  time. 
The  Governor  promptly  called  for  military  aid 
and  General  Terry  assumed  charge  of  the 
purging  of  the  legislature.  The  outcome  of 
the  process  was  the  unseating  of  enough  “dis- 
loyal” conservatives  and  the  seating  of  enough 
negro  radicals  to  give  the  state  a “loyal” 
government,  which  promptly  ratified  the  Four- 
teenth and  Fifteenth  Amendments.  An  act 
of  July  15,  1879,  finally  restored  Georgia  to 
representation  with  no  further  impediments. 
In  this  last  affair  the  legal  status  of  Georgia 
and  the  constitutional  basis  for  the  reversal 
of  its  action  by  Congress  are  in  hopeless  self- 
contradiction.  Only  by  the  widest  possible 
extension  of  the  meaning  of  the  “guarantee 
of  republican  government”  could  the  third  im- 
position of  military  government  be  justified. 
The  action  of  the  Senate  in  admitting  as  Sen- 
ators the  persons  chosen  by  the  original  legis- 
lature in  1868  marks  the  crowning  inconsis- 
tency. With  this  final  restoration  of  Georgia 
the  process  of  reconstruction  may  be  consid- 
ered as  complete. 


Supreme  Court  and  Reconstruction,  1866- 
1872. — The  third  branch  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment remains  to  be  considered.  The  Supreme 
Court  under  the  headship  of  Chief  Justice 
Chase  (see),  had  the  undoubted  right  to  de- 
clare the  true  interpretation  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, and  the  course  of  reconstruction  offered 
numerous  opportunities  for  test  cases  to  be 
brought  before  it.  But  from  1865  to  1869  a 
consistently  cautious  policy  controlled  every 
decision  of  the  court.  The  justices  had  no  wish 
nor  intention  to  become  involved  in  the  bitter 
struggle.  Whatever  their  private  views  might 
be,  they  saw  clearly  that  the  crisis  was  such 
as  to  be  beyond  merely  legal  adjudication.  In 
1867  two  decisions  regarding  test  oaths,  ex 
parte  Garland  (42  Ala.  559)  and  Cummings 
vs.  Missouri  (4  Wall.  277),  declared  a law  of 
Missouri  and  part  of  a law  of  Congress  in- 
valid as  ex  post  facto.  In  another  case,  ex 
parte  Milligan,  which  involved  an  appeal  from 
a capital  sentence  by  court  martial  in  the  state 
of  Indiana,  the  court  held  that  the  suspension 
of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  and  of  jury  trial 
was  unconstitutional  in  states  where  the  ordi- 
nary civil  courts  were  open.  Encouraged  by 
these  decisions  the  governor  of  Mississippi 
asked  for  an  injunction  to  restrain  the  Presi- 
dent from  carrying  out  the  reconstruction  acts; 
but  the  court  declined  to  interfere.  A second 
attempt,  made  by  the  governor  -of  Georgia 
against  Stanton,  the  Secretary  of  War,  was 
also  unsuccessful ; for  the  court  would  not 
undertake  to  enjoin  the  chief  officers  of  the 
executive  department  in  political  matters. 

The  next  year,  however,  a test  case  came 
squarely  before  the  court.  McCardle,  a Mis- 
sissippi editor  who  came  into  conflict  with 
the  military  government  in  his  state,  sued  for 
a writ  of  habeas  corpus  and  was  able,  under 
an  act  of  1867,  to  bring  his  case  before  the  Su- 
preme Court.  If  the  court  held  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  Milligan  case  it  could  not  avoid  a de- 
cision against  the  reconstruction  acts.  Con- 
gress now  interposed,  and  by  a statute  of 
March  27,  1868,  relieved  the  Supreme  Court  of 
jurisdiction  in  such  cases;  and  the  justices 
made  haste  to  drop  the  dangerous  subject. 
When  the  process  was  substantially  completed, 
the  court  was  ready  to  act.  In  the  ease  of 
Texas  vs.  White  the  Supreme  Court  upheld  the 
right  of  the  “Johnson  government”  of  Texas  to 
bring  suit.  The  state  of  Texas,  it  said,  had  not 
ceased  to  exist,  since  the  Constitution  provided 
for  “an  indestructible  union  of  indestructible 
states”  (see)  ; the  “Johnson  government”  had 
been  legally  established  under  the  military 
authority  of  the  President  and  hence  was  able 
to  bring  suit.  Three  years  later  in  1872  in 
White  vs.  Hart,  the  Court  expressly  refused  to 
inquire  into  the  validity  of  the  Georgia  con- 
stitution of  1868  on  the  ground  that  this  was 
a matter  in  which  the  judiciary  was  clearly 
bound  to  follow  the  action  of  the  political 
departments  of  the  government.  On  each  of 


168 


RECORDER  OF  DEEDS— REDEMPTION  OF  CURRENCY 


these  opinions  Chase  took  occasion  to  expound 
the  doctrine  of  forfeited  rights  as  the  true  ex- 
planation of  the  status  of  the  seceded  states. 
With  the  ratification  by  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  action  of  Congress  the  final  step  was  taken 
to  complete  the  process  of  reconstruction. 

See  Democratic  Party;  Johnson,  Andrew; 
Negro  Suffrage;  Republican  Party. 

References:  J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  the  V.  S., 
V,  VI  (1904-6)  ; W.  A.  Dunning,  Reconstruc- 
tion, Political  and  Economic  ( 1907 ) , Essays 
on  the  Civil  War  and  Reconstruction  (1898)  ; 
J.  W.  Burgess,  Reconstruction  and  the  Con- 
stitution (1902);  J.  G.  Blaine,  Twenty  Years 
of  Congress  (1884-1886)  ; E.  McPherson, 
Political  History  of  the  United  States  during 
Reconstruction  (1875);  W.  L.  Fleming,  Docu- 
mentary History  of  Reconstruction  (1906- 
1907),  Civil  War  and  Reconstruction  in  Ala- 
bama (1905)  ; C.  H.  McCarthy,  Lincoln’s  Plan 
of  Reconstruction  (1901);  H.  G.  Flack,  “The 
Adoption  of  the  Fourteenth  Amendment”  in 
Johns  Hopkins  Univ.  Studies  (1908);  J.  M. 
Mathews,  “Legislative  and  Judicial  History  of 
the  Fifteenth  Amendment”  in  ibid  (1909)  ; H. 
J.  Eekenrode,  “Virginia  during  Reconstruction” 
in  ibid  ( 1901 ) ; J.  W.  Garner,  Reconstruction 
of  Mississippi  ( 1901 ) ; J.  W.  Fertig,  Secession 
and  Reconstruction  of  Tennessee  (1898)  ; E.  C. 
Woolley,  Reconstruction  of  Georgia  (1901)  ; J. 
S.  Reynolds,  Reconstruction  in  South  Carolina 
(1905)  ; J.  G.  D.  Hamilton,  Reconstruction  in 
North  Carolina  (1906). 

Theodore  Clarke  Smith. 

RECORDER  OF  DEEDS.  In  all  of  the 

American  states,  documents  affecting  title  to 
real  estate  must  be  recorded  in  a public  office 
to  be  valid  against  an  innocent  third  party. 
In  about  half  of  the  states  these  records  are 
in  charge  of  an  elective  county  official,  known 
as  the  register  or  recorder  of  deeds;  in  other 
states  such  documents  are  recorded  by  the 
county  clerks  or  county  auditors,  except  in 
Connecticut  and  Rhode  Island,  where  the  town 
clerks  act  as  recorders. 

This  system  of  public  land  records  was  early 
established  in  the  New  England  colonies;  and 
before  the  Revolution  had  been  extended  to 
all  the  seaboard  colonies.  These  public  records 
are  now  the  recognized  basis  for  determining 
titles  to  land  in  the  United  States.  The  docu- 
ments recorded  include  warranty  and  quit 
claim  deeds  of  sale,  mortgages  and  satisfaction 
of  mortgages,  notices  of  heirs,  easements  and 
other  instruments,  varying  to  some  extent  in 
different  states.  Some  documents  affecting 
title  to  land  are,  however,  not  filed  in  the  local 
record  office — such  as  United  States  patents, 
tax  liens,  judgments  and  legacies. 

Several  states  have  now  supplemented  this 
system  of  land  records  by  providing  for  an 
official  registration  of  land  titles,  under  what 
is  known  as  the  “Torrens  System.” 

See  Land  Records;  Torrens  System. 


References:  J.  H.  Brewster,  Conveyance  of 
Estates  (1904),  ch.  xxix;  B.  R.  Webb,  Record 
of  Title  (1907),  17-20.  J.  A.  F. 

RED  CROSS  CONVENTIONS.  The  first  in- 
ternational Red  Cross  movement,  for  the  amel- 
ioration of  the  condition  of  sick  and  wounded 
in  warfare  on  land,  was  the  Geneva  Conven- 
tion of  1864,  the  work  of  an  international  con- 
ference called  by  the  Swiss  government.  It 
may  be  regarded  as  an  international  statute 
giving  definite  status  to  officially  recognized 
volunteer  aid  societies,  which  supplement  med- 
ical service  of  armies  in  time  of  war,  or  render 
assistance  after  great  disasters  in  time  of 
peace.  Although  originally  signed  and  ratified 
by  only  ten  powers,  it  has  since  received  the 
adherence  of  thirty-four  others.  The  United 
States,  although  represented  by  delegates  at 
Geneva  in  1864,  did  not  adhere  to  the  conven- 
tion until  1882. 

Another  convention  was  signed  at  Geneva  in 
1868  to  revise  and  extend  the  original  pro- 
visions as  to  maritime  warfare,  but  was  never 
ratified  by  the  United  States  and  is  not  in 
force  as  a treaty.  The  Senate,  in  1882,  in- 
cluded its  provisions  with  the  convention  of 
1864  and  advised  and  consented  to  their  rati- 
fication as  additional  articles. 

The  first  Geneva  convention  was  revised  and 
made  more  effective  and  elaborate  in  1906  by 
a Geneva  conference  of  representatives  of  thir- 
ty-seven powers,  inspired  by  the  first  Peace 
Conference  of  1899.  This  International  Red 
Cross  Convention  was  the  basis  of  the  work 
of  the  second  Peace  Conference  (1907)  in  seek- 
ing further  adaptations  to  naval  warfare.  It 
received  the  adherence  of  the  United  States  by 
advice  of  the  Senate  on  December  19,  1906, 
and  was  ratified  by  the  President  on  January 
2 and  proclaimed  August  3,  1907. 

Once  every  five  years,  representatives  of  the 
various  powers  signatory  to  the  Geneva  treaty 
meet  in  international  conference  for  discus- 
sion of  policies.  Such  conferences  met  at  Vi- 
enna (1897),  St.  Petersburgh  (1902),  London 
(1907),  and  Washington  (1912). 

See  Hague  Conferences;  Neutrality, 
Principles  of  ; Non-Combatant. 

Reference:  W.  M.  Malloy,  Treaties  and  Con- 
ventions (1910),  II,  1903-1924,  2183-2204. 

J.  M.  Callahan. 

RED  TAPE.  A term,  of  English  eighteenth 
century  origin,  indicating  formality  and  ob- 
struction common  in  official  circles.  Its  origin 
is  traced  to  the  use  of  red  tape  by  officials  for 
tying  up  documents.  O.  C.  H. 

REDEMPTION  OF  CURRENCY.  Since  the 
redemption  of  specie  payments  in  1879,  treas- 
ury notes  are  redeemed  by  the  treasury  upon 
presentation.  Prior  to  1893  the  volume  of  re- 
demptions was  not  large,  not  exceeding  $10,- 
000,000,  in  any  one  year.  In  1893,  owing  to 


169 


REDEMPT10NER— REFERENDUM 


lack  of  confidence  in  government  credit  and  the 
need  of  gold  to  settle  trade  balances,  the 
amount  ran  up  to  $102,000,000  and  in  1896,  to 
$159,000,000.  With  the  enactment  of  the  gold 
standard  act  in  1900,  the  redemptions  have 
fallen  to  lower  figures. 

The  redemption  of  bank  notes  is  also  car- 
ried on  through  the  office  of  the  treasurer  at 
Washington.  Notes  are  returned  either  be- 
cause they  are  unfit  for  circulation,  or  because 
of  a desire  to  exchange  for  money  with  legal 
tender  quality.  On  account  of  this  latter  con- 
sideration, the  redemption  of  bank  notes  is 
far  more  active  than  that  of  treasury  notes. 

In  1910  such  redemptions  amounted  to  $503,- 
000,000,  or  five-seventeenths  of  the  total  cir- 
culation. See  Currency;  Gold  Reserve; 
Treasury  Notes.  Reference:  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury,  Annual  Reports,  1910,  157-159. 

D.  R.  D. 

REDEMPTIONER.  A term  applied  to  per- 
sons who  made  agreements  with  masters  of 
vessels  or  the  owners  to  bring  them  across  the 
ocean  and  to  dispose  of  their  services  for  a 
term  of  years  to  any  one  who  would  recoup 
the  passage  money.  Both  English  and  colonial 
laws  allowed  this  form  of  bondage,  and  as  late 
as  1800  redemptioners  were  held  on  board  ship 
in  the  harbor  of  Philadelphia  waiting  a pur- 
chaser. George  Washington  at  one  time  con- 
templated importing  a ship-load  of  redemp- 
tioners. See  Indentures  and  Indented  Serv- 
ants. References:  J.  C.  Ballagh,  “White  Servi- 
tude in  Virginia”  in  Johns  Hopkins  University, 
Studies,  XIII,  Nos.  6-7  (1895)  ; E.  I.  McCor- 
mac,  “White  Servitude  in  Maryland”  in  ibid, 
XXII,  Nos.  3-4  (1904)  ; K.  F.  Geiser,  “Redemp- 
tioners in  Pennsylvania”  in  Yale  Review,  Suppl. 

X,  No.  2 (1901);  John  Harrower,  “Diary”  in 
Am.  Hist.  Review,  VI  (1900),  65-107. 

A.  B.  H. 

REED,  THOMAS  BRACKETT.  Thomas  B. 
Reed  (1839-1902)  was  born  at  Portland,  Me. 
October  18,  1839.  In  1864  he  was  appointed 
assistant  paymaster  in  the  United  States  Navy. 
He  entered  the  Maine  legislature  in  1868,  was 
chosen  state  senator  in  1870,  and  from  1870 
to  1872  was  attorney  general  of  the  state. 
From  1874  to  1877  he  was  city  solicitor  of 
Portland.  In  1877  he  was  elected  to  Congress 
as  a Republican,  and  served  continuously  in 
the  House  until  1899.  In  1889-90,  and  again 
from  1895  to  1899,  he  was  Speaker,  and  from 
1891  to  1895  the  leader  of  his  party,  during 
those  years  in  a minority,  in  the  House.  Him- 
self a master  of  parliamentary  law,  his  method 
of  “counting  a quorum,”  by  including  members 
actually  present  though  not  answering  to  their 
names,  evoked  a storm  of  criticism  which 
brought  about  the  adoption  of  new  rules. 
His  rigid  administration  of  these  rules  won 
for  him  the  title  of  “Czar.”  In  1896  he  was  a 
prominent  but  unsuccessful  candidate  for  the 

170 


Republican  nomination  for  President.  In  1899 
he  retired  from  politics,  and  practiced  law  in 
New  York  until  his  death,  at  Washington, 
December  7,  1902.  He  published  Rules  of  Par- 
liamentary Procedure  (1898).  See  Congres- 
sional Government;  Tariff  Policy  of  the 
United  States.  References:  M.  F.  Follett, 
Speaker  of  the  House  (1896)  ; Appleton’s  An- 
nual Cyclopaedia  (1878-99)  ; D.  R.  Dewey, 
National  Problems  (1907);  II.  B.  Fuller, 
Speaker  of  the  House  (1909),  ch.  viii. 

W.  MacD. 

REFLECTION.  See  Presidential  Elec- 
tions; Terms  of  Public  Officers. 

REFEREE  BOARD  OF  CONSULTING 
SCIENTIFIC  EXPERTS.  The  official  name  of 
the  commission  appointed  by  President  Roose- 
velt June  30,  1906,  to  pass  upon  expert  ques- 
tions arising  out  of  the  Pure  Food  and  Drugs 
Act  of  June  30,  1906.  See  Remsen  Board. 

A.  B.  II. 

REFEREE  IN  BANKRUPTCY.  A title 
given  by  the  National  Bankruptcy  Act  of  the 
year  1898,  to  the  officer  to  whom  is  referred 
by  the  district  court  bankruptcy  estates  for 
administration.  Under  a former  act  the  referee 
was  termed  a register  in  bankruptcy,  which 
name  is  now  obsolete.  He  is  appointed  by 
the  district  judge  for  the  term  of  two  years. 
After  the  reference  he  has  full  power  to  admin- 
ister the  estate.  He  has  no  jurisdiction  to 
confirm  a composition  or  grant  a discharge  to 
the  bankrupt.  His  duties  are  mostly  judicial 
but  also  ministerial,  and  all  his  orders  are 
subject  to  review  by  the  judge  on  appeal. 
See  Bankruptcy.  S.  C.  E. 

REFERENDUM.  By  the  referendum,  the 
legislative  acts  of  a representative  assembly 
are  submitted  to  the  people  for  enactment  or 
rejection  by  popular  vote.  In  1780  the  new 
Massachusetts  constitution  was  thus  ratified, 
and  since  1825  few  state  constitutions  or 
amendments  thereto  have  gone  into  effect  with- 
out the  ratification  of  the  voters.  A second 
type  of  referendum  was  introduced  in  several 
states  by  amendments  to  their  constitutions 
requiring  that  acts  passed  by  the  legislature 
relating  to  specific  subjects  (e.  g.,  the  sale  of 
school  lands,  or  the  incurring  of  state  debt) 
must  be  submitted  to  popular  vote.  A later 
practice  whereby,  in  the  absence  of  such  consti- 
tutional authorization,  legislatures  attempted 
to  refer  to  the  people  miscellaneous  perplexing 
question,  was  checked  by  court  decisions  deny- 
ing the  power  of  representative  legislatures  to 
delegate  law-making  power.  In  1898,  South 
Dakota  (see)  set  the  first  example  of  adopting 
the  optional  or  facultative  referendum.  In 
turn,  Oregon  (see)  (1902),  Nevada  (1905), 
Montana  (1906),  Oklahoma  (1907),  Maine 
(1908),  Missouri  (1908),  Arkansas  (1910), 


REFORM  IN  GOVERNMENT— REFORM  MOVEMENTS,  POLITICAL 


Colorado  (1910),  Arizona  (1911,  in  the  origi- 
nal constitution),  California  (1911),  Idaho 
(1912),  Nebraska  (1912),  Ohio  (1912),  Wash- 
ington (1912),  Michigan  (1913),  and,  in  a lim- 
ited form,  Massachusetts  (1913),  provided  for 
the  referendum. 

Attempts  have  been  made  to  annul  the 
Oregon  amendment,  but  the  courts  have  ruled 
that  this  procedure  “does  not  abolish  or  de- 
stroy the  representative  form  of  government, 
or  substitute  another  in  its  place.  The  rep- 
resentative character  of  the  government  still 
remains.”  In  the  ten  years,  1902  to  1912,  Ore- 
gon voters  passed  upon  25  proposed  statutes, 
16  of  these  were  referred  to  them  by  the  leg- 
islative assembly;  of  these,  5 were  ratified  and 
11  rejected.  Nine  were  acts  which  had  been 
passed  by  the  legislative  assembly,  and  were 
brought  before  the  people  by  petition;  of  these 
4 were  ratified  and  5 were  rejected.  From 
1898  to  1912,  in  all  the  other  states,  only  34 
statutes,  enacted  by  the  legislatures,  were 
brought  before  the  people  by  referendum  pe- 
tition. Of  these,  17  were  ratified  and  17  were 
rejected. 

See  Initiative;  Legislation,  Direct;  Ore- 
gon; Recall. 

References:  “Referendum  in  Operation” 

in  Quarterly  Review,  CCXIV  (1911),  509-538; 
E.  P.  Oberholtzer,  Referendum,  Initiative  and 
Recall  in  Am.  (1912)  ; C.  A.  Beard,  Readings 
in  Am.  Gov.  and  Polit.  (1911),  413-431;  C.  A. 
Beard  and  B.  E.  Shultz,  Documents  on  Initia- 
tive, Referendum  and  Recall  (1912)  ; ,J. 

Bourne,  Jr.,  Popular  vs.  Delegated  Gov.  (1910), 
a speech  delivered  in  U.  S.  Senate  May  5, 
1910,  Speech,  Feb.  27,  1911,  printed  as  separate 
pamphlet  (1911);  M.  A.  Schaffner,  “The  In- 
itiative and  Referendum”  in  Wisconsin  Li- 
brary Commission,  Comparative  Legislation 
Bulletin,  No.  11  (1907);  E.  E.  Slosson,  “The 
Referendum  in  Action”  in  Independent,  XLIX 
(1910),  734-740;  G.  H.  Haynes,  “People’s 
Rule  in  Oregon”  in  Pol.  Sci.  Quar.,  XXVI 
(1911),  32-62,  “People’s  Rule  on  Trial”  in 
Pol.  Sci.  Quar.,  XXVIII  (1913),  18-33;  W.  B. 
Munro,  Initiative,  Referendum  and  Recall 
(1912);  F.  A.  Cleveland,  Organised  Democ- 
racy (1913),  Pt.  IV;  A.  L.  Lowell,  Popular 
Opinion  and  Popular  Government  (1913),  with 
appendix  of  instances;  Am.  Year  Book,  1910, 
and  year  by  year. 

George  H.  Haynes. 

REFORM  IN  GOVERNMENT.  See  under 
Executive;  Judicial;  Legislative. 

REFORM  MOVEMENTS,  POLITICAL.  Ma- 
chinery of  Government. — Movements  for  re- 
form may  be  called  political  for  either  of  two 
reasons,  first,  because  they  propose  changes  in 
the  Constitution,  in  legislation  or  in  admin- 
istration of  the  government,  or,  second,  be- 
cause they  become  issues  in  the  party  struggle. 
A governmental  reform  may  become  a partisan 
109 


issue  and  so  illustrate  both  qualities  of  the 
typical  political  movement.  The  difference  be- 
tween a governmental  reform  that  is  effected 
without  becoming  a partisan  issue  and  one 
that  is  secured  through  party  effort,  is  shown 
by  the  diverse  history  of  the  constitutional 
changes  in  the  election  of  the  President  and 
those  affecting  the  choice  of  Senators.  The 
original  method  of  electing  a President  by  an 
electoral  college  was  rendered  impracticable 
through  the  rise  of  political  parties  which 
gradually  appropriated  that  privilege  for  the 
people.  This  change,  though  of  profound  sig- 
nificance, was  in  no  sense  a partisan  issue  or 
a party  measure,  but  grew  inevitably  out  of 
the  nature  of  political  parties.  A hun- 
dred years  later,  the  growth  of  certain  par- 
tisan abuses  led  to  agitation  for  a similar 
transference  of  the  right  to  elect  United  States 
Senators  from  the  state  legislature  to  the 
people  and  became  a matter  of  political  dis- 
cussion and  party  agitation.  The  direct  elec- 
tion of  Senators  was  secured  in  states  where 
the  people’s  choice,  expressed  in  a primary  elec- 
tion, was  considered  binding  by  the  legislature. 
In  the  same  line  of  democratic  reform  through 
political  agitation  are  the  movements  for  the 
referendum  (see),  popular  initiative  (see)  and 
the  recall  (see),  all  of  which  tend  to  secure  to 
the  people  more  effective  control  of  the  govern- 
ment. Reform  of  the  civil  service  (see)  also, 
while  non-partisan  in  its  methods,  strives  to 
lessen  party  abuses  by  removing  one  great 
source  of  party  power  in  city,  state  and 
nation.  These  proposed  reforms  are  all  direct- 
ed against  evils  that  have  arisen  in  connection 
with  the  present  party  system,  and  consequent- 
ly are  all  purely  political  in  their  nature. 

Reforms  as  Party  Issues. — No  attempt  will 
here  be  made  to  enumerate  the  many  political 
reforms  that  now  claim  public  attention.  A 
few  only  are  selected  as  illustrations  of  several 
classes  of  movements,  all  having  political  sig- 
nificance. The  question  of  woman  suffrage 
(see)  is  not  a party  matter.  Its  object  is  a 
change  in  the  composition  of  the  electorate, 
but  the  proposed  extension  has  not  yet  become 
a party  issue.  The  struggle  against  in- 
temperance began  as  a purely  social  effort, 
but  it  could  not  be  kept  out  of  poli- 
tics. In  no  country  has  an  active  temper- 
ance propaganda  been  long  maintained  with- 
out recourse  to  some  sort  of  political  ac- 
tion (see  Prohibition  Party,  Liquor  Legis- 
lation). The  child-labor  (see)  movement  may 
be  described  as  of  an  industrial,  educational 
and  social  nature,  since  its  promoters  seek  to 
effect  a change  in  industry,  to  extend  oppor- 
tunities for  education  and  to  save  the  child  to 
the  family  and  to  society.  But  these  objects 
pursued  without  any  effort  to  enact  and  en- 
force laws  would  command  little  attention. 
The  present  movement  is  backed  by  a non- 
partisan league,  but  it  seeks  to  gain  party 
support  for  its  legislation. 


171 


REFORM  SCHOOLS— REFORMATORIES 


The  coming  of  the  capitalistic  age  in  indus- 
try has  given  rise  to  continual  conllict  between 
wage-earners  and  capitalists.  The  two  parties 
to  the  controversy  have  become  more  and  more 
thoroughly  organized  and  their  struggle  has 
large  political  as  well  as  economic  importance, 
while  some  of  the  reform  movements  generated 
thereby  are  social,  some  industrial  and  some 
political.  Profit  sharing  and  cooperation  are 
advocated  for  the  relief  of  industrial  condi- 
tions; compulsory  arbitration  (see)  is  urged 
for  political  reasons.  But  the  wage-earners 
represent  only  one  section  of  the  citizenship 
whose  grievances  arise  from  organized  capital. 
The  farmers  have  suffered  at  the  hands  of  rail- 
way monopoly,  and  as  a result  arose  the 
Grange  (see)  organization  and  the  Farmers’ 
Alliance  (see).  Granger  laws  of  importance 
(see  Granger  Cases)  were  enacted  in  several 
states,  followed  by  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Act  (see  Interstate  Commerce  and  Cases). 
Thus  were  political  results  obtained  from  an 
industrial  movement.  With  increasing  insis- 
tence the  evils  attacked  by  the  Grangers  are 
becoming  the  object  of  political  controversy 
and  reform  efforts. 

That  a given  reform  may  be  furthered  either 
by  nonpartisan  or  partisan  methods  is  shown 
in  the  case  of  proposed  changes  in  tax  legisla- 
tion. The  “single  tax  on  land  values”  is  in 
England  a party  measure,  while  in  America 
it  is  advanced  only  by  a non-partisan  organiza- 
tion (see  Tax,  Single). 

Socialism. — One  movement  remains  to  be 
considered  because  of  its  significance  and  its 
comprehensive  character.  Socialism  (see)  is 
the  only  system  that  offers  a complete  substitu- 
tion for  the  present  industrial,  economic  and 
political  organization  of  society.  It  would 
break  down  present  distinctions  of  all  kinds 
and  would  reorganize  society  in  such  a way 
as  to  render  all  other  political  reforms  un- 
necessary. Socialists  are  fond  of  describing 
their  scheme  as  the  democratization  of  indus- 
try, and  every  political  movement  toward  de- 
mocracy they  claim  as  their  own,  teaching 
meanwhile  that  all  will  be  futile  unless  or- 
ganized society  removes  from  private  hands 
the  ownership  and  control  of  the  instruments 
of  production.  So  successful  has  become  the 
socialistic  propaganda  that  it  has  produced  a 
new  classification  of  reform  movements.  The 
public  school  system  is  described  as  socialis- 
tic ; likewise  the  postal  service,  the  government 
telegraph,  the  government  ownership  of  rail- 
ways, mines,  forests;  the  city  ownership  of 
street  car  systems,  the  public  water  and  light 
supplies;  state  banking,  state  insurance  and 
old  age  pensions,  are  each  and  all  pronounced 
socialistic,  as  is  the  policy  of  protection,  while 
free  trade  is  condemned  as  anti-socialistic. 
The  Henry  George  (see  Single  Tax)  move- 
ment is  often  called  socialistic,  when  in  reality 
it  proposes  to  adopt  some  only  of  the  specific 
reforms  of  socialism  for  the  avowed  purpose 


of  forestalling  the  setting  up  of  a socialistic 
state.  Many  other  reformers  favor  one  or  an- 
other of  the  socialist’s  propositions  without 
accepting  his  underlying  theory  of  government. 
Throughout  the  world  socialists  have  adopted 
the  political  party  as  a means  of  spreading 
their  faith,  and  they  frankly  appeal  for  politi- 
cal support  in  their  effort  to  supplant  the  pres- 
ent political  regime. 

See  Corrupt  Practices  Acts;  Independent 
Movements  in  Politics;  Municipal  Voters 
League;  Nominating  Systems;  Non-Par- 
tisan Political  Organizations;  Publicity; 
Third  Parties. 

References:  H.  George,  Progress  and  Poverty 
( 1897 ) ; R.  T.  Ely,  Socialism  and  Social  Re- 
form (1894),  especially  Pt.  IV;  G.  Smith, 
Questions  of  the  Day  (1893),  Essays  I and 
VIII ; J.  Bryce,  “Hindrances  to  Good  Citizen- 
ship” in  Yale  Lectures,  1909,  107-123;  Jane 
Addarns,  Democracy  and  Social  Ethics  ( 1902 ) , 
ch.  vii ; R.  C.  Brooks,  Corruption  in  Am.  Poli- 
tics (1910),  287-290;  T.  Roosevelt,  “Reform 
through  Social  Work”  in  his  American  Ideals 
(1897),  343-359.  Jesse  Macy. 

REFORM  SCHOOLS.  See  Schools,  Indus- 
trial. 

REFORMATORIES.  Definition. — In  this  ar- 
ticle, the  term  “reformatories”  will  be  applied 
to  state  reformatory  prisons  for  young  men 
above  the  age  of  16  years.  In  this  class  are 
included  such  institutions  as  those  at  Elmira, 
New  York,  Concord,  Massachusetts,  Rahway, 
New  Jersey,  Huntingdon,  Pennsylvania,  Mans- 
field, Ohio,  and  Jefferson  City,  Indiana. 

While  the  laws  governing  state  reformatories 
differ  in  detail  in  the  different  states,  most  of 
them  follow  certain  general  lines.  They  usual- 
ly provide  for  the  admission  of  young  men 
between  the  ages  of  16  and  25  convicted  for 
the  first  time  of  a felony.  Prisoners  are 
committed  on  indeterminate  or  indefinite  sen- 
tences, usually  with  a minimum  and  maximum 
limit.  In  a number  of  states,  provision  is 
made  for  the  transfer  of  incorrigibles  from 
juvenile  reformatories  to  the  State  reforma- 
tory and  from  the  reformatory  to  the  state 
prison,  without  a new  trial. 

Plant. — The  architecture  of  the  state  re- 
formatory is  similar  to  that  of  ordinary  state 
prisons,  except  that  the  cells  are  usually  lar- 
ger and  better  lighted  and  there  is  provision 
for  school  rooms  and  lecture  rooms,  and  often 
for  gymnasium  and  athletic  fields. 

Grades  and  Marks. — In  most  state  reforma- 
tories, the  prisoners  are  divided  into  grades 
indicated  by  diversified  uniforms.  Prisoners 
usually  enter  the  second  grade  and  are  pro 
moted  or  demoted  according  to  their  record. 
Prisoners  are  placed  in  the  third  grade  for 
serious  violations  of  the  rules  but  can  usually 
regain  the  second  grade  after  a brief  period 
of  a clear  record. 


172 


REFORMATORIES 


In  most  of  the  reformatories  there  is  an 
elaborate  system  of  marks.  The  prisoner  is 
marked  upon  his  conduct,  his  school  work,  and 
bis  industrial  work.  He  is  liable  to  lose  marks 
for  lack  of  neatness  in  his  clothing,  cell  or 
school  books,  for  talking,  being  out  of  line, 
interfering  with  other  inmates,  waste  of  food 
or  material,  injury  to  property,  etc.,  etc.  In 
some  reformatories  as  high  as  fifty  different 
items  may  be  noted,  any  one  of  which  may 
affect  the  question  of  the  length  of  time  before 
which  the  prisoner  may  regain  his  liberty. 

Time  of  Parole. — In  most  state  reforma- 
tories, the  time  of  parole  is  determined  by  the 
governing  board  of  the  prison  and  in  every 
rightly  organized  reformatory  the  effort  is  to 
produce  such  a character  as  will  lead  the  au- 
thorities to  believe  that  the  prisoner,  if  re- 
leased, will  lead  an  upright  and  orderly  life. 
It  is  the  duty  of  the  governing  board  with 
the  assistance  of  the  superintendent  and  other 
officers  of  the  reformatory  to  discover  when 
the  prisoner  has  attained  this  character.  This 
question  is  determined  not  simply  by  the  writ- 
ten record,  showing  the  marks  gained  by  the 
prisoner  but  also  by  the  judgment  of  the 
officers  as  to  the  genuineness  and  fixity  of  the 
right  purpose  of  the  prisoner.  A bad  man, 
unchanged  in  his  character,  may  make  a per- 
fectly clean  record  while  in  prison.  An  experi- 
enced and  fair-minded  officer  who  is  in  daily 
contact  with  the  prisoners  can  usually,  in  the 
course  of  months,  form  a just  opinion  as  to 
the  actual  disposition  and  purposes  of  the 
prisoner. 

Essentials  of  Reformation:  Diagnosis. — The 
essentials  for  the  reformation  of  first  offenders 
may  be  outlined  as  follows:  (1)  There  must 
be  a thorough  diagnosis  involving  the  study  of 
the  entire  man.  It  will  include  a thorough 
physical  and  medical  examination  by  a com- 
petent physician,  a psychological  examination 
by  a qualified  psychiatrist,  who  may  be  the 
same  physician,  a study  and  full  record  of  the 
history  of  the  prisoner,  including  his  heredity, 
his  home  conditions,  his  education,  his  pre- 
vious associations,  his  religious  affiliations  and 
training,  his  industrial  training  and  experi- 
ence, his  moral  preceptions,  disposition  and 
real  character,  his  court  record,  institutional 
record,  and  his  criminal  experience. 

Officials. — (2)  In  order  that  the  personal  in- 
fluence and  judgment  of  the  officers  may  be 
brought  to  bear  individually  upon  every  pris- 
oner, many  believe  that  each  reformatory 
ought  to  be  limited  to  500  or  600  inmates. 
The  assistant  superintendent  who  is  the  dis- 
ciplinary officer  must  be  able  to  secure  not 
only  obedience  but  the  respect  and  confidence 
of  the  inmates  both  by  the  fairness  of  his  de- 
cisions and  the  spirit  in  which  he  administers 
discipline.  The  superintendent  of  schools  must 
be  able  to  discover  the  intellectual  capabilities 
and  possibilities  of  his  pupils,  to  awaken  their 
ambition.  He  must  be  able  to  awaken  a new 


realization  of  the  value  of  knowledge  and  to 
inspire  a genuine  desire  for  learning.  The 
curriculum  must  be  adapted  to  the  actual 
needs  of  the  pupils  with  a view  to  their  effi- 
ciency and  success  in  the  outside  world.  The 
chaplains  or  moral  instructors  must  be  not 
only  men  of  genuine  religious  spirit  but  men 
who  can  present  the  truth  in  living  form,  can 
awaken  spirituality  in  sluggish  souls,  and  can 
recognize  in  unexpected  places  aspiration  and 
craving  for  better  things.  The  power  of  re- 
ligion as  a reformatory  agency  can  not  be  ig- 
nored by  anyone  who  hopes  to  accomplish  this 
difficult  task.  The  religious  work  of  the  re- 
formatories should  be  done  by  chosen  men  for 
that  purpose.  Great  good  may  be  accomplished 
by  occasional  visits,  but  the  every  day  work 
must  be  done  by  those  who  are  directly  re- 
sponsible for  it.  The  physical  director  must 
study  and  know  the  physical  needs  of  the  men. 
He  must  not  only  know  the  science  of  physical 
development  but  he  must  know  how  to  develop 
character  through  training,  team  work,  fair 
umpiring  and  sportsmanship  on  the  athletic 
field.  Military  drill  may  play  an  efficient  part 
in  the  physical  and  moral  training  of  students, 
but  it  is  now  generally  agreed  that  it  should 
hold  a secondary  place  and  should  not  be  the 
controlling  impulse  of  the  reformatory. 

Every  officer  in  the  prison  should  be  selected 
with  special  reference  to  his  ability  to  con- 
tribute to  the  work  of  establishing  right  char- 
acter. They  should  be  clean,  intelligent,  whole- 
some men,  inspired  with  an  earnest  purpose 
to  follow  the  lead  of  the  superintendent  in  his 
endeavors. 

Industrial  Training. — (3)  Industrial  occu- 
pation and  training  are  recognized  as  an  essen- 
tial part  of  reformatory  discipline.  It  is  gen- 
erally agreed  that  it  is  proper  for  prisoners 
to  earn  their  own  support  as  far  as  practicable, 
but  that  the  securing  of  a revenue  from  the 
labor  of  the  prisoners  should  be  secondary  to 
the  general  purpose  of  reformation  and  should 
not  be  allowed  to  interfere  with  the  necessary 
work  of  the  school  of  letters  or  vocational 
training.  As  a rule  it  is  found  that  vocational 
training  can  not  be  adequately  secured  in  con- 
nection with  the  ordinary  domestic  work,  farm- 
ing and  industrial  work  of  the  institution  but 
that  it  is  necessary  in  each  of  these  depart- 
ments to  introduce  specific  manual  and  voca- 
tional training.  A few  boys  may  learn  to  be 
bakers,  tailors,  stationary  engineers  or  horti- 
culturists in  the  work  of  the  institutions,  but 
the  rank  and  file  must  learn  by  special  train- 
ing or  not  at  all.  This  is  especially  true  be- 
cause, through  the  opposition  of  labor  organi- 
zation, the  field  of  prison  industries  is  greatly 
restricted. 

Supervision  under  Parole. — The  most  criti- 
cal part  of  the  work  of  the  reformatories  is  the 
treatment  of  the  inmate  during  the  parole  pe- 
riod after  his  release  from  the  prison.  The 
reformatories  employ  one  or  more  parole  agents 


173 


REFORMATORIES,  JUVENILE— REGISTER  OF  WILLS 


whose  duties  are  to  study  the  qualifications 
and  bent  of  the  prisoner  before  his  release,  to 
assist  him  if  necessary  in  obtaining  employ- 
ment, which  must  invariably  be  secured  in 
advance;  to  get  into  touch  with  the  employer 
and  enlist  his  cooperation  in  helping  the 
young  man  to  maintain  his  purpose  of  right 
living;  to  visit  and  correspond,  encourage, 
stimulate  and  to  return  him  to  the  institution, 
if  necessary  and  to  help  him  to  get  a fresh 
start.  The  parole  agent  is  to  be  wise  and 
sympathetic  but  is  to  keep  in  the  mind  of 
the  prisoner  the  fact  that  if  he  cannot  control 
himself,  he  will  have  to  be  restrained. 

Defective  Delinquency. — The  work  of  the 
state  reformatories  has  been  greatly  hindered 
by  the  presence  in  them  of  a considerable 
number  of  subnormal  men.  Recent  study  of 
inmates  of  the  reformatory  at  Elmira,  New 
York  and  Rahway,  New  Jersey,  indicate  that 
from  twenty  per  cent  to  thirty-three  per  cent 
of  the  prisoners  in  state  reformatories  really 
belong  to  the  feeble-minded  class,  and  are  not 
amenable  to  reformatory  treatment.  These 
young  men  are  usually  classed  as  “defective 
delinquents”  and  it  is  coming  to  be  generally 
agreed  that  it  is  a waste  of  effort  to  apply  to 
them  the  discipline  and  training  of  a reforma- 
tory; but  that  they  should  be  transferred  to 
an  institution  for  the  feeble-minded  and  should 
be  segregated  in  order  to  prevent  the  exer- 
cising of  their  criminal  impulses. 

A bill  was  introduced  in  the  legislature  of 
the  state  of  New  York  in  the  year  1912  for 
the  establishment  of  an  institution  for  “de- 
fective delinquents”  and  it  is  probable  that 
such  an  institution  will  be  established  in  the 
near  future.  The  state  has  already  in  custody 
in  its  state  reformatory  and  its  institution  for 
juvenile  delinquents  a sufficient  number  of  boys 
and  young  men  of  this  class  to  fill  a good  sized 
institution. 

See  Criminal,  Reformation  of  ; Crime,  Sta- 
tistics of;  Penitentiaries. 

References:  American  Year  Book,  1910,  and 
year  by  year;  C.  R.  Henderson,  Penal  and  Re- 
formatory Institutions  (1910),  Preventive 
Agencies  and  Methods  (1910);  H.  M.  Boies, 
Science  of  Penology  ( 1901 ) ; S.  J.  Barrows,  Re- 
formatory System  in  the  United  States  (1900)  ; 
Ohio  State  Reformatory,  Mansfield,  Annual  Re- 
ports (1905  to  date);  Z.  R.  Brockway,  Fifty 
Years  of  Prison  Service  (1912)  ; F.  H.  Wines, 
Punishment  and  Reformation  (1910);  United 
States  Bureau  of  the  Census,  Prisoners  and 
Juvenile  Delinquents  in  Institutions  (1904); 
Arthur  Train,  Prisoner  at  the  Bar  (1906); 
American  Prison  Association  (formerly  Na- 
tional Prison  Association),  Reports  (1870  to 
date).  Hastings  IT.  Hart. 

REFORMATORIES,  JUVENILE.  Juvenile 
reformatories  have  been  established  in  all  of 
the  states  of  the  Union  except  Arkansas,  Idaho, 
Mississippi,  Nevada,  New  Mexico,  North  Caro- 


lina, South  Carolina  and  Wyoming.  There 
are  separate  schools  for  delinquent  girls 
in  twenty-two  states.  There  are  separate 
schools  for  delinquent  colored  boys  in  Vir- 
ginia and  Alabama.  In  nearly  all  industrial 
schools  for  boys  the  trustees  hold  guardianship 
with  the  right  to  release  boys  on  parole.  See 
Children,  Dependent,  Public  Care  of; 
Court,  Juvenile;  Reformatories;  Schools, 
Industrial.  H.  H.  H. 

REFUGEES.  See  Alien;  Asylum,  Inter- 
national; Expulsion. 

REGENTS’  EXAMINATIONS.  State-wide 
examinations  are  each  year  held  under  the  di- 
rection of  the  Regents  of  the  University  of  the 
State  of  New  York  for  testing  various  kinds 
and  grades  of  individual  and  professional  pro- 
ficiency. Beginning  in  1865,  their  scope  has 
greatly  widened;  and  in  1910  included:  pre- 
liminary or  elementary  examinations  (254,332 
papers  reported),  academic  or  high  school  ex- 
aminations in  January  and  June  (330,910  pa- 
pers), professional  (medical,  dental,  nurse, 
etc.),  training  class,  training  school,  state 
certificate,  Cornell  scholarship,  etc.  A total 
of  681,216  different  papers  was  reported  in 
1910,  and  46,216  credentials  issued.  Academic 
credentials  are  accepted  for  admission  by  a 
large  number  of  colleges.  See  Education,  Re- 
cent Tendencies  in;  Education,  State  Su- 
perintendents of;  Schools,  Public,  System 
and  Problems;  State  Examiners.  Refer- 
ences: N.  Y.  State  Edu.  Dept.,  Seventh  An- 
nual Report,  1911.  K.  C.  B. 

REGISTER  OF  DEEDS.  See  Recorder  of 

Deeds. 

REGISTER  OF  THE  TREASURY.  Under 
the  organic  law  of  1789,  creating  the  Treasury 
Department,  provision  was  made  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  a register  whose  duties  were  to 
keep  an  account  of  all  receipts  and  expendi- 
tures of  public  moneys  and  of  all  debts  due  to 
and  from  the  government.  To  this  officer  was 
entrusted  the  preservation  of  all  vouchers. 
Since  1894  his  duties  are  more  specifically 
concerned  with  the  interest-bearing  debt  and 
certain  duties  incident  to  the  redemption  of 
United  States  currency  prior  to  its  final  de- 
struction. He  signs  and  registers  all  United 
States  bonds.  In  his  reports,  published  in  the 
annual  Finance  Reports  of  the  Treasury  De- 
partment, may  be>found  much  valuable  histor- 
ical material  relating  to  the  government  loans. 
Of  special  note  is  that  made  of  1896.  See 
Debt,  Public,  Administration  of.  Reference: 
U.  S.  Treasury  Dept.,  Finance  Reports,  1896, 
584-672.  D.  R.  D. 

REGISTER  OF  WILLS.  The  register  of 
wills  is  usually  the  probate  judge.  Each  coun- 
ty has  some  officer,  sometimes  called  the  reg- 


174 


REGISTRATION  OF  MAIL— RELIGIOUS  LIBERTY 


ister  of  wills,  whose  duties  are  to  probate 
wills,  grant  letters  testamentary,  letters  of  ad- 
ministration and  guardianships,  settlement  of 
estates  of  decedents  and  minors.  Their  ac- 
tions, however,  are  usually  reviewable  in  the 
circuit  courts.  In  some  states,  the  probate 
judge  and  the  county  recorder  each  keep  rec- 
ords of  wills.  See  Court  of  Probate.  Ref- 
erence: Constitutions  of  the  states. 

T.  N.  H. 

REGISTRATION  OF  MAIL.  The  registra- 
tion of  mail  with  a view  to  insuring  greater 
certainty  in  respect  to  its  delivery  and  the 
insurance  against  loss  in  ease  of  its  non-deliv- 
ery up  to  $25.00  was  first  authorized  by  Con- 
gress in  1855.  The  benefits  of  this  service  are 
obtained  by  paying  a fee  of  ten  cents  in  addi- 
tion to  regular  postage  which  is  paid  by' affix- 
ing ordinary  stamps  to  that  amount.  The  sys- 
tem consists  in  giving  to  the  sender  a receipt 
for  the  letter  or  package  mailed,  in  registering 
the  latter  at  each  point  of  its  journey,  and  in 
obtaining  and  forwarding  to  the  sender  a re- 
ceipt from  the  addressee  acknowledging  its  re- 
ceipt if  so  requested.  This  latter  feature  is 
of  great  importance  since,  apart  from  the  in- 
creased security  obtained,  the  sender  is  fur- 
nished with  proof  that  the  communication  has 
been  received,  and  the  date  of  the  receipt,  that 
is  often  of  value  to  him  in  legal  proceedings 
and  business  negotiations  generally.  That  this 
service  is  found  to  be  desirable  is  shown  by  the 
fact  that  in  the  year  ending  June  30,  1910, 
42,053,574  letters  and  other  packages  were  reg- 
istered as  against  but  18,422,649  registered  in 
1900.  See  Postal  System  of  the  United 
States.  References:  U.  S.  Postmaster  Gener- 
al, Annual  Reports;  Official  Postal  Guide  (an- 
nual). W.  F.  W. 

REGISTRATION  OF  VOTERS.  See 

Voters,  Registration  of. 

REGISTRY  OF  SHIPPING.  Congress,  Sep- 
tember 1,  1789,  provided  rules  for  registering 
for  the  foreign  trade  vessels  built  in  the  Unit- 
ed States,  and  also  foreign-built  ships  that 
were  owned  by  American  citizens  on  May  1, 
1789;  for  enrolling  for  the  coasting  trade  both 
of  these  classes  of  vessels  of  20  or  more  tons 
register;  and  for  licensing  vessels  from  5 to 
20  tons  register.  An  act  of  Congress,  passed 
in  1817,  excluded  foreign  vessels  from  the 
coasting  trade.  The  law  of  1817  is  still  in 
firce,  and  applies  also  to  the  trade  between 
the  United  States  and  Alaska,  Hawaii  and 
Porto  Rico;  but  not  to  our  trade  with  the 
Philippines  ( see  Coasting  Trade). 

The  measurement  of  vessels  and  their  regis- 
try or  enrollment  is  the  work  of  the  Surveyors 
of  the  Ports  and  of  the  Bureau  of  Navigation 
of  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor  ( see 
Navigation  ) . The  gross  register  tonnage  of 
a vessel  is  the  number  of  cubic  feet  of  the 


ship’s  closed-in  capacity  divided  by  100.  The 
net  register  tonnage  is  the  number  of  cubic  feet 
of  the  vessel’s  cargo  and  passenger  capacity 
divided  by  100.  In  addition  vessels  may  be  un- 
officially classed  by  displacement — that  is,  by 
the  number  of  tons  of  water  displaced  by  the 
hull  when  loaded.  See  Coasting  Trade;  Nav- 
igation, Regulation  of;  Quarantine;  Ship- 
ping, Regulation  of.  References:  U.  S.  Com- 
missioner of  Corporations,  Report  on  Trans- 
portation by  Water  in  the  United  States 
(1909),  117-119;  E.  R.  Johnson,  Ocean  and 
Inland  Water  Transportation  (1906),  chs.  i, 
xv;  W.  F.  Johnson,  Century  of  Expansion 
(1903),  ch.  iii;  bibliography  in  A.  B.  Hart, 
Manual  (1908),  § 181.  E.  R.  J. 

REGULARITY  IN  POLITICS.  Two  sets  of 
delegates  from  a county  or  district  sometimes 
appear  in  a state  convention,  representing  sep- 
arate factions  of  the  party.  The  committee 
on  credentials  supported  by  the  convention  de- 
termines which  faction  shall  be  recognized  as 
“regular”  and  its  delegates  seated.  In  like 
manner,  when  party  divisions  send  more  than 
one  set  of  delegates  to  a national  convention, 
the  question  of  “regularity”  is  settled  by  the 
convention  as  the  court  of  final  appeal  and  one 
faction  becomes  the  recipient  of  all  party  fa- 
vors to  the  exclusion  of  the  others.  Regularity 
in  individual  political  action  is  urged  upon  all 
their  members  by  party  managers  in  the  in- 
terest of  party  uniformity  and  power.  The 
very  use  of  the  word  indicates  significantly 
the  position  occupied  by  the  organized  party 
and  its  leaders  in  a popular  state,  and  sug- 
gests the  subordination  of  the  individual  to 
the  organization — one  of  the  most  significant 
facts  in  American  political  history.  See  In- 
dependent Movements  in  Politics;  Loyalty 
to  Party;  Voting,  Independent.  References: 
R.  H.  Fuller,  Government  by  the  People 
(1908),  67,  68,  190;  M.  Ostrogorski,  Democ- 
racy and  the  Party  System  (1910),  index  title 
“Regularity.”  J.  M. 

REGULATORS.  Term  applied  to  the  North 
Carolina  insurgents,  back  country  people,  about 
1768-1771,  who  revolted  against  the  rule  of 
Governor  Tryon  because  of  “excessive  taxes, 
dishonest  sheriffs,  and  extortionate  fees.”  The 
term  was  also  applied  in  South  Carolina  as 
early  as  1766  to  the  members  of  an  association 
called  the  “Regulation,”  the  purpose  of  which 
was  to  administer  justice  in  the  absence  of 
courts.  See  Insurrections,  History  of. 

O.  C.  H. 

REICHSTAG.  See  Germany,  Federal  Diet 
of. 

RELIGIOUS  LIBERTY.  Freedom  and 
Equality. — The  right  to  worship  according  to 
the  dictates  of  conscience  was  one  of  the  rights 
asserted  in  some  of  the  earliest  state  constitu- 


175 


REMOVAL  OF  CAUSES 


tions  and  in  some  form  recognized  in  all  of 
them  as  it  is  also  recognized  in  the  First 
Amendment  to  the  Federal  Constitution.  But 
the  principle  of  religious  liberty  is  broader 
than  that  of  mere  religious  tolerance.  In  the 
first  place  government  within  its  proper  scope 
is  concerned  only  with  the  actions  and  inten- 
tions of  its  members  and  not  with  their  mo- 
tives or  beliefs,  and  religious  freedom  is  only 
a portion  of  that  freedom  of  thinking  and 
speaking  which  each  person  is  entitled  to  enjoy 
without  interference  so  long  as  the  course  of 
civil  conduct  prescribed  by  law  is  observed 
(see  Freedom  of  Speech  and  of  the  Press). 
In  the  second  place,  the  general  principle  of 
equality  of  all  persons  before  the  law  excludes 
discriminations  on  account  of  religious  belief, 
with  the  result  that  religious  tests  should  not 
be  made  the  basis  of  political  rights  or  for 
determining  qualifications  for  office  or  in  gen- 
eral for  the  possession,  exercise,  or  protection 
of  civil  rights. 

Recognition  of  the  Existence  of  Religious 
Beliefs. — Government  may,  however,  with  pro- 
priety take  cognizance  of  the  fact  that  a great 
majority  of  the  people  subject  to  its  laws  have 
some  form  of  religious  belief,  and  that  the 
Christian  religion  in  its  various  phases  is  the 
prevalent  religious  system  of  the  people  of 
this  country.  Therefore,  it  has  been  considered 
not  improper  to  open  legislative  sessions  and 
the  sessions  of  constitutional  conventions  with 
prayer  in  accordance  with  the  Christian  belief, 
without  regard  to  any  recognized  distinction 
as  to  sect,  and  to  issue  executive  proclamations 
for  thanksgiving  to  the  Deity  and  for  supplica- 
tion for  divine  interference  in  cases  of  im- 
pending calamity.  Since  there  is  no  method  by 
which  the  constitutionality  or  validity  of  such 
proceedings  can  be  tested,  these  matters  must 
be  determined  by  usage  in  the  exercise  of  a 
sound  discretion.  In  taking  cognizance  of  the 
general  existence  of  religious  beliefs  it  is 
proper  to  require  of  witnesses  that  they  take 
a solemn  oath  in  a form  likely  to  be  most 
effectual  for  those  entertaining  the  Christian 
belief  as  to  moral  duty  and  future  punishment, 
but  as  the  object  of  the  oath  is  to  secure  the 
speaking  of  the  truth  any  form  may  be  adopted 
which  is  most  likely  to  be  effectual  in  the 
particular  case  and  the  testimony  of  a witness 
is  not  to  be  excluded  because  of  his  conscien- 
tious objection  to  any  particular  form  of  oath 
nor  on  account  of  his  peculiar  religious  belief 
or  his  want  of  belief  as  to  future  spiritual 
punishment.  Enforced  observance  of  the 
Christian  Sabbath  may  be  required  to  such 
extent  as  to  prevent  a course  of  conduct  gen- 
erally shocking  to  the  sentiments  of  the  people, 
and  in  order  that  the  peace  of  the  community 
and  the  reasonable  enjoyment  of  the  privileges 
of  religious  worship  may  be  secured.  Blas- 
phemy against  the  Christian  religion  may  for 
like  reasons  be  made  punishable.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  religious  liberty  of  the  individual 


is  not  interfered  with  by  requiring  that  he 
comply  with  the  rules  of  civil  conduct  pre- 
scribed by  law  although  they  may  be  contrary 
to  his  peculiar  religious  beliefs,  for  there  is 
no  exemption  from  the  obligations  of  law  on 
account  of  a belief,  however  conscientious,  that 
such  obligations  are  unjustifiable  or  unwar- 
ranted. 

Taxation. — It  would  clearly  be  an  interfer- 
ence witli  religious  freedom  to  impose  pecuni- 
ary burdens  on  account  of  any  particular  be- 
lief or  want  of  belief,  or  exact  any  contribu- 
tions for  the  support  of  any  form  of  religious 
service.  Therefore  public  money  can  not  prop- 
erly be  devoted  to  the  support  of  churches 
or  of  schools  founded  or  designed  for  the  pur- 
pose of  giving  religious  instruction  in  accord- 
ance witli  the  beliefs  of  any  particular  sect. 
But  exemption  of  property  from  taxation  on 
the  ground  that  it  is  devoted  to  religious  pur- 
poses has  not  been  found  objectionable,  the 
theory  generally  adopted  being  that  some  dis- 
cretion may  be  exercised  as  to  the  subjects 
of  taxation  and  if  there  is  no  unreasonable 
classification  or  discrimination  no  constitution- 
al right  is  violated. 

Bible  in  the  Schools. — The  support  of  educa- 
tion being  considered  a matter  with  which  gov- 
ernment may  concern  itself  and  for  which 
public  money  may  be  appropriated  it  is  gener- 
ally held  that  in  making  provision  for  public 
education  the  prevailing  belief  of  the  people 
in  the  Christian  religion  without  recognition 
of  any  particular  sect  may  be  taken  into  ac- 
count, and  that  the  reading  of  the  Bible  in 
the  public  schools,  even  though  in  the  form  of 
a religious  observance,  participation  in  such 
exercises  by  the  pupils  not  being  required,  is 
not  unlawful.  If  the  right  to  enjoy  school 
privileges  is  not  denied  on  account  of  religious 
belief  and  no  observance  of  forms  is  insisted 
upon  which  in  any  way  interferes  with  freedom 
of  conscience,  no  question  can  arise  which  calls 
for  the  interposition  of  the  courts. 

See  Freedom  of  Speech  and  of  the  Press; 
Qualifications  for  Office. 

References:  T.  M.  Cooley,  Constitutional 
Limitations  (7th  ed.,  1903),  659-677;  H.  C. 
Black,  American  Constitutional  Law  (3d  ed., 
1910),  527-535;  as  to  religious  toleration  in 
the  colonies,  see  J.  Story,  Commentaries  on 
the  Constitution  (4th  ed.,  1891),  §§  50-143; 
and  as  to  religious  tests  for  office,  ibid,  §§ 
1843-1849.  Emlin  McClain. 

REMOVAL  OF  CAUSES.  The  original  ju- 
risdiction of  the  federal  courts  authorized  by 
the  Constitution  (Art.  Ill,  Sec.  ii)  and  pro- 
vided for  by  law  may  be  exercised  either  by 
the  trial  of  cases  originally  instituted  in  such 
courts  or  removed  to  such  courts  from  the  state 
courts  in  which  they  are  originally  instituted, 
the  grounds  of  removal  being  such  as  would 
have  warranted  the  exercise  of  jurisdiction  by 
the  federal  court  had  the  case  been  originally 


176 


REMOVAL  OF  DEPOSITS— REMOVAL  OF  PUBLIC  OFFICIALS 


brought  in  such  court  or  authorized  by  law 
to  be  there  brought.  The  application  for  re- 
moval is  made  to  the  state  court  in  which 
the  suit  is  pending  with  a statement  of  the 
grounds  therefor.  After  the  application  is 
made  in  due  form  and  at  the  proper  time, 
the  federal  court  to  which  removal  is  sought 
may  entertain  original  jurisdiction  of  the  case 
and  proceed  as  though  it  had  been  originally 
instituted  in  such  court;  but  if  the  method  or 
grounds  for  removal  are  not  sufficient,  the 
federal  court  may  remand  the  case  to  the  state 
court  for  further  proceedings.  An  appeal  from 
a state  court  of  last  resort  to  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  determina- 
tion of  some  question  arising  under  the  Con- 
stitution, laws  or  treaties  of  the  United  States 
is  not  a removal  of  the  cause  to  the  federal 
court  but  an  application  to  the  Supreme  Court 
calling  for  the  exercise  of  its  appellate  jurisdic- 
tion. See  Court,  Appellate;  Courts,  Feder- 
al. References:  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Constitu- 
tional Law  (1910),  I,  124,  II,  994;  T.  M. 
Cooley,  Principles  of  Constitutional  Law  (3d 
ed.,  1898),  139-145;  Kentucky  vs.  Powers,  201 
U.  S.  1.  E.  McC. 

REMOVAL  OF  DEPOSITS.  According  to 
the  charter  of  the  Second  United  States  Bank 
( see  Bank  of  the  United  States,  Second), 
in  1816,  government  funds  were  to  be  deposit- 
ed with  the  bank  unless  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  should  otherwise  direct,  in  which  case 
that  official  should  lay  before  Congress  the 
reasons  for  such  action.  No  question  as  to  the 
advantage  of  making  deposits  with  the  bank 
arose  until  1832,  when  President  Jackson  was 
making  his  attack  upon  that  institution.  He 
then  raised  a doubt  as  to  the  safety  of  the 
funds  of  the  government.  Investigation  made 
by  a congressional  committee  and  by  a treas- 
ury official  gave  no  support  to  this  suspicion, 
but  Jackson  was  not  reassured. 

A delay  in  the  settlement  of  a payment  due 
from  France  to  the  United  States  through  the 
agency  of  the  bank,  and  the  bank’s  effort  to 
postpone  the  immediate  payment  of  a govern- 
ment debt,  to  be  made  from  government  funds 
held  on  deposit,  convinced  the  President  that  the 
bank  had  misappropriated  government  money. 
He  therefore  determined  to  remove  the  deposits 


into  the  custody  of  other  institutions.  Techni- 
cally this  could  be  ordered  only  by  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury.  Two  secretaries  in  suc- 
cession, McLane  and  Duane,  objected  to  this 
procedure,  and  the  latter  even  refused  to  resign 
in  order  to  give  way  to  an  official  who  would 
fulfill  Jackson’s  wish.  Duane  was  removed  and 
Taney  appointed.  Before  this  was  accom- 
plished, Jackson,  by  executive  order,  had  named 
the  date  for  the  removal  of  the  deposits;  and 
in  an  elaborate  Paper  Read  to  the  Cabinet,  ac- 
cepted full  responsibility  for  the  act,  on  the 
ground  that  under  the  Constitution  he  was 
accountable  for  the  performance  of  duty  by 
the  heads  of  departments.  In  opposition  to 
this  view  was  the  vigorous  contention  that  the 
Treasury  Department  was  an  executive  depart- 
ment, with  distinct  duties  of  its  own  fixed 
by  statute;  and  that  Congress  had  designedly 
given  it  independent  powers  in  order  to  keep 
asunder  the  purse  and  the  sword.  It  was 
also  argued  that  no  money  could  be  withdrawn 
from  the  Treasury  except  under  authority  of 
appropriations  made  by  law,  and  that  the  re- 
moval of  deposits  without  congressional  au- 
thority contravened  that  law. 

As  a matter  of  fact,  Taney  did  not  transfer 
to  the  state  banks  the  balance  already  with  the 
United  States  Bank.  Such  balance  was  used 
i.i  meeting  current  expenditures,  and  new  de- 
posits were  made  with  the  new  depositories. 
Moreover,  it  could  be  shown  that  the  secreta- 
ries had  always  possessed  the  power  of  trans- 
ferring public  funds  by  drafts,  and  that  a 
transfer  was  not  a warrant,  the  payment  of 
which  was  obviously  controlled  under  the  ap- 
propriation clause  of  the  Constitution. 

In  accordance  with  law,  Taney  presented  to 
Congress  (December  3,  1833)  the  reason  for 
the  removal  of  the  deposits.  It  was  based 
chiefly  on  the  ground  of  expediency:  the  bank’s 
charter  expired  in  1836,  and  he  held  it  wise 
to  anticipate  the  closing  days  of  the  bank’s 
operations  in  making  proper  arrangements  for 
the  care  of  public  funds. 

See  Bank  of  United  States,  First;  De- 
posit of  Public  Funds;  Jackson,  Andrew. 

References:  W.  G.  Sumner,  Jackson  (1895), 
296-321 ; D.  R.  Dewey,  Financial  Hist,  of  the 
United  States  (1903),  197,  bibliography. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 


REMOVAL  OF  PUBLIC  OFFICIALS 


General.— The  removal  of  public  officials  is 
the  term  used  to  designate  the  act  of  de- 
priving any  person  of  a government  position 
which  is  of  sufficient  importance  to  be  consid- 
ered an  office.  If  the  term  of  office  is  indefi- 
nite, removal  may  occur  at  any  time ; if  the 
term  is  definite,  it  must  take  place  before  the 
expiration  of  the  term  to  constitute  removal; 


and  it  may  arise  from  the  abolition  of  the 
office.  According  to  law,  no  incumbent  has  an 
absolute  right  to  an  office ; he  has  only  the  right 
to  see  that  his  removal  is  legal.  The  national 
government  has  decided  that  the  right  to  re- 
move an  official  is  an  executive  power  that  is 
not  an  incident  of  the  appointive  power  and 
has  decided  that  removals  may  be  made  with- 


177 


REMOVAL  OF  PUBLIC  OFFICIALS 


out  express  provision  of  law.  The  opposite  is 
the  case  in  most  of  the  states,  for  the  state 
and  local  executives  do  not  possess  any  power 
of  removal  unless  the  law  expressly  confers 
that  power,  or  unless  the  power  of  removal  is 
definitely  recognized  by  the  courts  of  that  state 
as  an  incident  of  the  power  of  appointment. 
Where  offices  have  been  created  by  the  state 
constitution,  it  is  held  that  the  incumbent 
can  be  removed  only  by  impeachment  or  ad- 
dress to  the  legislature,  if  one  of  those  means 
of  removal  is  provided.  If  the  position  is  cre- 
ated by  statute,  the  power  to  remove  must  be 
granted  expressly,  if  the  term  of  the  incumbent 
is  prescribed.  When  the  term  is  for  good  be- 
havior, removal  is  necessarily  only  for  cause, 
but  if  the  term  is  otherwise  of  indefinite  ex- 
tent, the  incumbent  may  be  removed  by  the 
selection  of  his  successor.  That  arbitrary  re- 
movals have  been  one  of  the  most  important 
causes  of  misgovernment  is  amply  proved  by 
the  spoils  system  (see).  On  the  other  hand, 
inability  to  remove  officials  who  are  either 
incompetent  or  out  of  harmony  with  the  ad- 
ministration of  which  they  are  a part  has  been 
almost  as  serious  a defect  in  the  governments 
of  our  states  and  many  of  our  cities,  in  which 
the  decentralized  administrative  organization 
lias  tended  to  produce  inefficiency.  In  contrast 
with  this  administrative  inefficiency  in  the 
states,  is  the  power  possessed  by  the  President 
of  the  United  States  (Art.  II,  Sec.  ii)  not 
only  to  appoint,  with  the  consent  of  the  Sen- 
ate, all  of  his  subordinates,  and  through  them 
of  lesser  officials,  but  to  remove  any  official 
under  his  supervision.  This  power  has  devel- 
oped a national  administrative  organization 
that  responds  promptly  and  perfectly  to  the 
will  of  the  President  (see). 

Removal  of  Elected  Officials. — As  the  people 
are  able,  presumably,  to  protect  their  interests 
and  enforce  their  wishes,  in  the  case  of  elected 
officials,  by  frequent  elections,  they  have  relied 
almost  solely  on  impeachment  (see)  to  secure 
the  removal  of  an  elected  official  whose  actions 
are  objectionable.  Any  official  may  be  removed 
also  for  a crime  punishable  through  the  courts 
by  imprisonment.  A more  recent  method  that 
may  be  applied  to  elected  officials  is  the  recall 
(see).  Elected  officials  may  be  removed  in  ex- 
ceptional cases  by  other  officials  or  by  some 
governmental  body.  Judges  are  removable  in 
nearly  one-half  of  the  states  without  resort 
to  impeachment.  They  may  be  removed  by 
the  governor  and  legislature  or  by  the  legisla- 
ture alone,  the  cause  always  being  given.  In 
Michigan  the  governor  may  remove  his  col- 
leagues for  misconduct  or  neglect  of  duty; 
while  the  legislature  of  some  other  states  has 
power  of  removing  elected  state  administrative 
officials  for  cause,  by  joint  resolution.  In 
times  past,  elected  city  officials  have  been  re- 
movable by  the  state  governors  or  legislatures. 
Some  states  permit  state  interference  at  pres- 
ent. The  governor  of  New  York  may  remove 


the  presidents  of  the  boroughs  of  greater  New 
York.  The  mayor  of  an  Ohio  city  was  removed 
(1910)  by  the  governor  of  that  state  for  failure 
to  preserve  order.  Sheriffs  are  more  frequent- 
ly subject  to  this  supervision,  being  more  di- 
rectly the  subordinates  of  the  governor.  In 
six  states  other  county  officers  may  be  removed 
by  the  governor  for  cause.  In  two  states  the 
county  board  may  remove  elected  officials  for 
cause.  However,  in  spite  of  the  dependence  of 
the  state  upon  local  officials  for  the  enforce- 
ment of  state  laws  and  the  administration  of 
state  as  well  as  local  business,  New  York 
and  Michigan  are  the  only  states  where  most 
local  elected  officers,  as  well  as  all  “state  of- 
ficers” may  be  removed  by  the  governor,  al- 
though the  centralization  of  administration  in 
the  most  progressive  states  is  increasing  the 
power  of  supervision,  including  removal,  which 
the  governor  has  over  local  officials. 

Removal  of  Appointive  Officers. — The  power 
of  removing  appointive  state  and  rural  local 
officials  has  been  very  limited.  In  only  five 
states  has  the  governor  absolute  power  to  re- 
move his  appointees,  although  he  may  remove 
them  in  twenty-two  others  for  cause.  In  cities 
there  has  been  a much  more  marked  movement 
to  grant  mayors  full  and  exclusive  power  to 
remove  appointed  officers,  usually  for  cause; 
but  in  the  larger  cities  of  New  York  state  and 
a very  few  other  states,  this  power  is  absolute. 
The  President,  Vice-President,  national  judges 
and  other  national  civil  officers  are  removable 
by  impeachment  (see)  by  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives and  conviction  (two-thirds  vote)  in 
the  Senate  (Art.  I,  Sec.  ii,  jf  5,  Sec.  iii,  jj  6; 
Art.  II,  Sec.  iv).  All  civil  officers  appointed 
by  the  President  and  Senate  are  removable  by 
the  President  alone.  All  officers  appointed  by 
the  President’s  subordinates  are  removable  at 
will  by  the  President  or  by  his  subordinates 
who  may  have  appointed  them,  and  even  offi- 
cials in  the  classified  service  are  removable  by 
the  President  or  his  secretaries,  for  cause,  other 
than  political  or  religious,  and  after  a hearing. 
The  system,  as  already  noted,  leaves  the  Presi- 
dent effective  control  over  all  national  adminis- 
trative officers,  thus  enabling  him  to  carry  into 
effect  a definite  consecutive  policy. 

History  of  Removals  (National). — When  the 
subject  of  appointments  was  taken  up  in  the 
Constitutional  Convention  of  1787  nothing  was 
said  about  the  removal  of  administrative  of- 
ficers, and  the  proposal  to  permit  the  President 
to  remove  national  judges,  on  application  from 
the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives,  re- 
ceived the  vote  of  only  one  state.  In  organiz- 
ing the  executive  departments  in  Congress 
(1789)  the  question  of  removal  of  adminis- 
trative officials  was  considered.  Although  the 
Constitution  does  not  mention  the  subject  of 
removal  except  by  impeachment,  the  House  de- 
cided promptly  that  impeachment  was  intended 
only  as  a supplementary  method  of  removal. 
It  was  further,  and  by  a substantial  majority, 


178 


REMOVAL  OF  PUBLIC  OFFICIALS 


agreed  that  the  power  of  removal,  being  a dis- 
tinctly executive  power  and  not  simply  an  in- 
cident of  appointment,  was  vested  in  the  Presi- 
dent alone.  The  Senate  concurred  in  this  res- 
olution that  the  Senate  need  not  be  consulted 
in  removals,  but  the  vote  of  Vice-President 
Adams  was  necessary  to  break  the  tie.  Three 
quarters  of  a century  later,  in  its  attempt  to 
carry  through  its  reconstruction  policy  which 
President  Johnson  opposed.  Congress  passed 
(1867)  a tenure-of-office  act  requiring  the  ap- 
proval of  the  Senate  before  removals  could  be 
made.  This  law,  modified  in  1869,  when  Gen- 
eral Grant  became  President,  was  repealed  in 
1S86  after  a prolonged  controversy  between 
President  Cleveland  and  the  Senate. 

The  Process. — Commissions  of  American  of- 
ficials ai'e  usually  made  only  for  a definite 
term,  but  the  term  may  be  indefinite  in  that 
the  incumbent  holds  his  position  during  good 
behavior  or  during  the  pleasure  of  the  ap- 
pointing power.  Removals  from  office  may  be 
treated  as  summary  or  for  cause.  (1)  Sum- 
mary removal  may  be  used  when  the  term 
is  at  the  pleasure  of  the  appointive  power  and 
the  chief  executive.  Summary  removal  may  be 
made  also  simply  by  the  appointment  of  a suc- 
cessor, even  if  the  incumbent  holds  office  for  a 
definite  term,  if  the  removal  power  is  plenary 
and  no  statement  of  causes  is  required.  Prac- 
tically the  whole  power  of  removal  of  the 
President,  except  for  officials  in  the  classified 
service,  is  summary.  (2)  Removals  for  cause 
involve  probably  a smaller  number  of  offices 
than  those  that  are  subject  to  summary  remov- 
al, but  there  is  considerable  difference  in  the 
causes  and  the  processes.  In  general,  there  is 
no  power  of  suspension,  if  cause  is  required  for 
removal,  unless  that  is  granted  expressly  by 
law.  Removal  for  cause  is  treated  as  a ju- 
dicial process  and  is  supposed  in  all  cases  to 
be  held  according  to  the  forms  of  law.  Cases 
of  removal  are  rarely  tried  before  a court  of 
law  and  the  removed  official  may  not  appeal 
to  the  courts  for  redress  except  in  a few  states. 
In  a few  cases  officials  may  be  removed,  as  in 
Boston  and  Philadelphia,  without  a hearing, 
a statement  of  causes  being  presented  to  the 
council.  Regularly,  however,  the  statement  of 
causes  must  be  filed,  a copy  being  sent  to  the 
official.  After  a number  of  days  specified  by 
law,  the  official  has  opportunity  to  present 
reasons  for  his  retention,  usually  before  the 
confirming  body,  which  hears  the  charges  of 
the  executive  and  the  reply  of  the  official.  The 
decision  is  not  necessarily  proof  that  the  char- 
ges are  true  or  that  they  warrant  removal. 
The  causes  which  are  most  commonly  given  as 
sufficient  ground  for  removal  are  incompetence, 
physical  or  mental  disability,  official  or  per- 
sonal misconduct,  corruption  and  neglect  of 
duty.  In  the  case  of  offices  like  those  under 
the  national  Civil  Service  Commission  (see), 
the  filing  of  charges  that  cannot  be  substantia- 
ted proves  to  be  a serious  offence,  for  the 


cause  must  be  genuine  to  secure  removal.  In 
many  more  instances,  the  survival  of  the  spirit 
which  created  and  perpetuated  the  spoils  sys- 
tem frequently  makes  the  proffered  charge  a 
mere  excuse  for  some  partisan  change.  When 
the  law  demands  a reasonable  charge  and  a 
fair  trial,  removal  on  other  charges  and  with- 
out a proper  hearing  shows  a lack  of  public 
interest  and  desire  for  good  government.  For- 
tunately such  removals  are  becoming  less  fre- 
quent. 

The  Future.— There  are  two  recent  move- 
ments which  affect  vitally  the  power  of  re- 
moval. One  is  the  demand  that  chief  execu- 
tives shall  be  made  responsible  for  their  sub- 
ordinates and  able  to  control  them;  the  second, 
that  removals  for  purely  partisan  reasons  shall 
not  destroy  the  efficiency  of  the  civil  service. 
These  are  a recognition  of  the  fact  that  govern- 
mental efficiency  requires  concentration  of  ad- 
ministrative power  and  responsibility.  (1) 
Public  sentiment  has  gradually  been  securing 
the  enactment  into  law  of  this  demand  for 
greater  administrative  centralization  in  our 
states  and  cities.  A generation  ago,  the  at- 
tempt was  made,  by  restricting  the  power  of 
removal,  to  prevent  the  continued  demoraliza- 
tion of  the  civil  service  through  arbitrary, 
partisan  removals;  today,  the  desire  is  to 
separate  political  positions  from  those  of  a 
clerical  (i.  e.,  purely  administrative)  character, 
giving  the  governor  and  mayor  fuller  control 
over  their  political  subordinates,  in  removals 
as  well  as  appointment,  and  relieving  the  cler- 
ical force  from  the  danger  of  arbitrary,  parti- 
san changes  with  each  change  of  chief  execu- 
tive. As  yet,  the  discrimination  between  politi- 
cal and  clerical  positions  is  by  no  means  com- 
plete or  perfect,  even  in  the  national  civil 
service,  but  the  great  changes  of  the  last 
generation  promise  even  greater  discrimination 
and  more  perfect  administrative  organization 
in  the  future.  (2)  Even  slower  has  been  the 
change  toward  giving  governors  and  mayors 
responsible  control  of  their  political  subordi- 
nates, through  the  right  of  removal.  The  rea- 
son for  this  is  the  public  fear  that  the  power 
of  removal  will  be  abused,  because  the  right 
of  removal  may  be  an  excuse  for  the  distribu- 
tion of  spoils.  Public  spirited  and  far  sighted 
Presidents,  governors  and  mayors,  anxious  to 
make  their  work  effective,  have  been  wielding 
the  power  of  removal,  so  far  as  it  has  been 
entrusted  to  them,  for  the  mutual  benefit  of 
their  administrations  and  the  public.  Grad- 
ually public  sentiment  is  demanding  that  other 
executives  shall  use  the  power  of  removal  in 
the  same  way.  In  time  the  public  sentiment 
of  the  voters  and  the  public  spirit  of  the 
executives  will  correct  and  remove  most  abuses 
that  have  accompanied  the  power  of  removal. 
When  that  time  comes,  the  last  objection  hav- 
ing been  taken  away,  arbitrary  restrictions 
over  the  chief  executive’s  full  power  to  remove 
his  political  subordinates  will  disappear. 


179 


REMSEN  BOARD— RENT 


See  Civil  Service  Commission;  Civil  Serv- 
ice, Eederal;  Civil  Service,  State;  Merit 
System;  Recall;  Tenure  of  Office;  Terms 
of  Public  Officers. 

References:  D.  B.  Eaton,  “Removals  from 
Office”  in  Cyclop,  of  Pol.  Sci.  (J.  J.  Laylor, 
Ed.,  1890),  III,  565-569;  J.  H.  Finley  and  J. 
F.  Sanderson,  Eds.,  Am.  Executive  (1908), 
29-43,  93-104;  A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government 
as  Applied  under  Am.  Conditions  (1903),  §§ 
71,  94,  125,  131-133;  C.  R.  Fish,  “Removals 
of  Officials  by  Presidents  of  the  U.  S.”  in  Am. 
Hist.  Assoc.  Report,  1899,  I,  67-86,  Civil 
Service  and  the  Patronage  (1905);  J.  P. 
Cutton,  “Restrictions  on  Power  of  Re- 
moval” in  Nat.  Civil  Service  Reform  League, 
Proceedings,  1904,  132-140;  D.  K.  Watson, 
Constitution  of  V.  S.  (1910),  II,  973-987; 
F.  J.  Goodnow,  Comparative  Administrative 
Law  (1893),  I,  62-70;  T.  H.  Benton,  Abridg- 
ments of  the  Debates  of  Congress  (1856),  I, 
85-90;  G.  Cleveland,  Presidential  Problems 
(1904),  1-76;  U.  S.  Civil  Service  Commission, 
Annual  Reports  (1882  to  date)  ; Laylor,  Ed., 
Cyclopedia  of  Polit.  Sei.  (1890). 

R.  L.  Ashley. 

REMSEN  BOARD.  Under  the  Pure  Food 
and  Drugs  Act  of  June  30,  1906,  the  Bureau  of 
Chemistry  was  to  make  examination  of  all  sus- 
pected articles  to  see  whether  they  were  adul- 
terated or  misbranded.  That  board  held  that 
benzoate  of  soda  was  injurious  to  the  human 
body,  and  therefore  that  any  article  of  food 
which  contained  this  preservative  could  not  be 
sold.  As  there  was  a difference  of  opinion 
among  scientific  men  upon  this  question,  Pres- 
ident Roosevelt  designated  an  informal  board 
under  the  chairmanship  of  President  Remsen 
of  Johns  Hopkins  University,  and  that  board 
reported  (1910)  that  benzoate  of  soda  in  mod- 
erate quantities  was  harmless;  and  the  Secre- 
taries of  Agriculture,  the  Treasury,  and  Com- 
merce and  Labor  were  charged  in  making  rules 
for  the  enforcement  of  that  act,  not  to  require 
the  exclusion  of  such  products.  See  Health, 
Public,  Regulation  of;  Pure  Food.  Refer- 
ence: Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  401-406;  1911, 
616-619.  A.  B.  H. 

RENT.  Theory  of. — In  classical  economics 
rent  is  defined  as  that  part  of  the  product  of 
the  soil  which  the  landowner  can  claim  as 
payment  for  the  use  of  its  original  and  in- 
destructible properties.  By  this  definition  are 
excluded  from  rent  payments  for  the  use  of 
improvements  fixed  in  the  soil,  even  though 
permanent,  and  payments  for  natural  elements 
of  fertility  destroyed  through  cropping.  The 
former  are  treated  as  interest  on  capital;  the 
latter  are  sometimes  classified  with  the  royal- 
ties from  mines,  although  usually  ignored. 

In  classical  theory  rent,  thus  defined,  pre- 
sents a number  of  peculiar  characteristics,  of 
which  the  most  important  are  that  it  corre- 


sponds to  no  sacrifice  on  the  part  of  its  owner, 
and  that  it  does  not  “enter  into  price”  i.  e., 
serve  as  a price-making  element  in  the  business 
calculations  controlling  production,  and  hence 
prices.  To  illustrate  these  characteristics,  the 
classical  economists  had  recourse  to  a pseudo- 
historical  discussion  of  the  origin  and  prog- 
ress of  rent  in  a new  country.  Assuming  free 
competition,  the  products  of  agriculture  will 
sell  at  prices  covering  wages  and  interest 
alone,  so  long  as  the  demand  for  such  products 
can  be  met  by  a superficial  tillage  of  the  best 
land.  With  increase  in  the  demand  for  agri- 
cultural products,  recourse  must  be  had  to 
lands  less  fertile  or  less  favorably  situated, 
or  to  a more  intensive  tillage  of  lands  al- 
ready under  cultivation.  In  either  case  an 
increase  in  cost  is  involved.  The  price  of  ag- 
ricultural products  must  now  be  sufficient  to 
cover  wages  and  interest  outlays  connected 
with  that  part  of  the  supply  produced  under 
the  most  unfavorable  conditions;  hence  it  will 
be  more  than  sufficient  to  cover  such  outlays 
connected  with  the  other  parts  of  the  supply. 
A surplus  thus  emerges,  which  becomes  the 
rent  of  the  land.  With  every  increase  in  popu- 
lation, lands  not  hitherto  cultivated  are  put 
under  cultivation,  and  powers  in  the  better 
lands  not  hitherto  utilized  are  drawn  upon 
through  more  intensive  cultivation,  with  at- 
tendant rise  in  prices  and  increase  in  rent. 

It  is  the  cost  of  production  on  the  most 
inferior  lands  used  (“marginal  lands”)  or  in 
connection  with  the  most  inferior  powers  of 
the  better  lands  utilized  (“marginal  powers”) 
that  determines  the  price  of  agricultural  prod- 
ucts. These  lands  and  powers  yield  no  rent, 
hence  rent  plays  no  part  in  fixing  price.  A 
corollary  of  the  doctrine  is  that  taxes  levied 
upon  rent  can  not  be  shifted  to  the  consumer 
of  agricultural  products  through  a rise  of 
prices,  since  these  are  fixed  on  the  marginal  or 
no-rent  lands,  which  can  not  be  affected  by  the 
tax. 

In  the  later  development  of  economic  theory 
(see),  the  principles  governing  rent  have  been 
applied  to  other  forms  of  income.  On  the 
assumption  that  the  essential  characteristic 
of  rent  is  the  fact  that  it  is  an  income  with 
no  corresponding  sacrifice,  Senior  assimilated 
to  it  monopoly  gains  of  all  kinds,  as  well  ns 
many  forms  of  income  commonly  treated  as 
competitive  wages  and  profits.  Assuming  that 
the  essential  characteristic  of  rent  is  that  it 
is  price  determined,  not  price  determining, 
Francis  Walker  assimilated  entrepreneur’s 
profits  to  rents.  Alfred  Marshall  assimilates 
to  rent  incomes  from  capital  in  relatively  im- 
perishable forms.  For  short  periods,  the  rent 
(or  quasi-rent)  of  a building  rises  or  falls  with 
the  demand  for  the  use  of  the  building,  and 
so  is  price-determined,  although,  in  the  long 
run,  buildings  must  earn  normal  returns  on 
their  cost,  and  hence  these  returns  have  a 
price  determining  quality. 


180 


REPEATERS— REPORTS  OF  COMMITTEES 


A far  more  radical  departure  from  the  class- 
ical doctrine  appears  in  the  theory  of  dis- 
tribution of  the  Austrian  and  American  mar- 
ginal utility  school.  Among  economists  of 
this  school  the  rent  formula  is  given  a general 
application,  with  the  result  that  the  distinction 
between  income  from  land  and  income  from 
other  sources  disappears.  Employing  the  meth- 
od of  reasoning  devised  by  the  classical  rent 
theorists,  Clark  shows  that  there  is  a part  of 
the  supply  of  commodities  which  pays  no  wa- 
ges, and  another  part  which  pays  no  interest, 
accordingly  it  would  be  as  reasonable  to  hold 
that  neither  wages  nor  interest  determine  price 
as  that  land  rent  does  not.  Wieser  and  Fetter, 
approaching  the  problem  from  a slightly  differ- 
ent angle,  point  out  that  value  flows  from 
the  finished  product  to  the  means  of  produc- 
tion; hence  not  only  is  rent  price  determined, 
but  wages  and  interest  are  price  determined 
in  the  same  sense. 

Nor  does  the  marginal  utility  school  accept 
the  view  that  rent  can  be  differentiated  from 
other  incomes  on  the  ground  that  it  corre- 
sponds with  no  personal  sacrifice  on  the  part 
of  its  recipient,  while  other  incomes  do.  It  is 
pointed  out  that  only  a part  of  wages  and 
interest  can  be  definitely  connected  with  per- 
sonal sacrifice;  hence  these  incomes  can  not 
in  their  entirety  be  differentiated  from  rent. 

Instead  of  discarding  the  term  rent,  ad- 
herents of  the  marginal  utility  school  attempt 
to  redefine  it.  Clark  employs  it  to  designate 
a fund  of  income  remaining  as  a residuum 
after  other  shares  in  distribution  have  been 
subtracted;  thus  either  wages  or  interest  may 
be  treated  as  a “rent,”  according  to  the  point 
of  view.  Fetter  employs  the  term  to  desig- 
nate the  share  in  the  value  product  assign- 
able to  a concrete  productive  agent;  the  same 
share,  when  reduced  to  a percentage  of  the 
value  of  the  productive  agent,  becomes  inter- 
est. Rent  and  interest,  therefore,  are  the  same 
income,  expressed  in  different  terms.  This 
usage  corresponds  closely  with  that  employed 
by  business  men. 

The  classical  distinction  between  rent  and 
other  forms  of  income  from  property  is  re- 
tained by  a large  number  of  economists,  who 
find  in  it  a useful  basis  for  reforms  in  taxation. 
These  economists,  as  a rule,  extend  the  con- 
ception so  as  to  include  the  gains  of  perma- 
nent monopoly,  whether  based  on  land  owner- 
ship or  not. 

See  Capital  and  Capitalization  ; Cost, 
Economic;  Tax,  Single;  Taxation,  Prin- 
ciples of;  Unearned  Increment. 

References:  D.  Ricardo,  Principles  of  Pol. 
Economy  (Gonner,  Ed.,  1891),  ch.  ii;  A. 
Marshall,  Principles  of  Economics  (5th  ed., 
1907),  Bk.  VI,  ch.  ix;  F.  A.  Fetter,  Principles 
of  Economics  (1905),  ch.  x;  J.  B.  Clark,  Dis- 
tribution of  Wealth  (1899),  chs.  xiii,  xxiii; 
F.  Wieser,  Natural  Value  (1893),  Bk.  Ill, 
Pt.  ii.  Alvin  S.  Johnson. 


REPEATERS.  Electors  who  register  their 
votes  at  several  different  polling  places  at  the 
same  election  or  who  vote  at  more  than  one 
place.  0.  C.  H. 

REPORTS  OF  COMMITTEES.  The  consti- 
tutions of  a few  of  the  American  states  re- 
quire that  every  bill  shall  be  referred  to  a 
committee  and  reported  back  to  the  house 
within  a certain  time.  The  rules  of  most  of 
the  legislatures  require  all  bills  to  be  so  re- 
ferred though  they  do  not  generally  require  re- 
ports to  be  made  on  everything  referred.  In 
practice,  bills  are  rarely  passed  without  having 
been  referred  to  and  reported  upon  by  a com- 
mittee except  occasionally  during  the  last  days 
of  the  session  (see  Committee  System).  In 
American  legislative  bodies,  the  action  of  a 
committee  may  take  any  one  of  the  following 
forms : ( 1 ) it  may  make  a favorable  re- 

port with  the  recommendation  that  the  bill 
referred  to  it  be  passed;  (2)  it  may  amend 
the  bill  and  recommend  that  it  be  passed 
as  amended;  (3)  it  may  report  adversely  with 
a recommendation  that  the  bill  be  not  passed; 
(4)  it  may  delay  action  and  report  so  late  in 
the  session  as  to  prevent  consideration  of  the 
report;  and  (5)  it  may  “pigeon  hole”  the 
bill,  that  is,  make  no  report  at  all.  The  rules 
of  the  national  House  of  Representatives  re- 
quire that  all  reports,  with  certain  exceptions, 
together  with  the  views  of  the  minority,  shall 
be  delivered  to  the  clerk  to  he  printed  and 
referred  to  the  proper  calendar  under  the  di- 
rection of  the  speaker,  provided  that  bills  re- 
ported adversely  shall  be  laid  on  the  table, 
unless  the  committee  reporting  it  shall  at  the 
time,  or  any  member  within  three  days  there- 
after, request  its  reference  to  the  calendar, 
when  it  shall  be  so  referred  (see  Calendar  of 
Legislative  Bodies  ) . 

To  prevent  the  alleged  abuse  arising  from 
the  practice  of  “smothering”  bills  by  the  com- 
mittees to  which  they  have  been  referred,  the 
national  House  of  Representatives,  in  1911, 
established  a “calendar  of  motions  to  discharge 
committees”  and  provided  that  any  member 
might  present  to  the  clerk  a motion  in  writing 
to  discharge  a committee  from  further  con- 
sideration of  any  public  bill  or  joint  resolu- 
tion which  may  have  been  referred  to  sucli 
committee  fifteen  days  prior  thereto  (Rule 
XXXIV).  Committee  reports  may  usually  be 
called  only  at  certain  times,  determined  by 
their  place  on  the  calendar.  In  most  legisla- 
tive bodies,  certain  committee  reports,  on  ac- 
count of  their  importance,  are  always  privi- 
leged, that  is,  they  may  be  presented  at  any 
time.  Thus  the  rules  of  the  national  House  of 
Representatives  provided  that  the  committee  on 
rules,  the  committee  on  elections,  the  committee 
on  ways  and  means,  the  committee  on  appro- 
priations and  a number  of  others  shall  have 
leave  to  report  measures  to  the  House  at  any 
time. 


181 


REPORTS  OF  DEBATES  AND  PROCEEDINGS— REPORTS  OF  JUDICIAL  CASES 


The  duty  of  preparing  the  report  usually 
devolves  upon  one  of  the  members,  most  fre- 
quently the  chairman,  by  whom  it  is  generally 
presented  to  the  house.  When  a report  has 
been  presented  to  the  House  the  committee  has 
discharged  its  function  and  it  is  thereupon 
dissolved  and  can  act  no  more  without  new 
authority.  A practice  has  grown  up  in  Amer- 
ican legislative  bodies,  though  it  is  unknown 
to  the  procedure  of  the  British  Parliament, 
of  allowing  those  members  of  a committee  who 
refuse  to  concur  in  the  report,  to  present  to 
the  house  their  views  through  what  is  com- 
monly known  as  the  minority  report.  As 
stated  above,  the  rules  of  the  national  House 
of  Representatives  allow  this  to  be  done 
and  require  that  the  views  of  the  minority 
shall  be  printed  as  a part  of  the  report. 

See  Calendar;  Committee  System;  Con- 
gress; Minority  Report;  Rules  of  Con- 
gress; Rules  of  Legislative  Bodies;  Speak- 
er; State  Legislature. 

References:  M.  P.  Follett,  The  Speaker  of 
the  House  of  Representatives  (1002),  ch.  ix; 
L.  S.  Cushing,  Law  and  Practice  of  Legislative 
Assemblies  (1907),  Pt.  VII,  ch.  viii;  A.  C. 
Hinds,  Parliamentary  Precedents  of  the  House 
of  Representatives  (1899),  ch.  x,  Digest  and 
Manual  of  Rules  of  House  of  Representatives 
(1908),  551,  672;  L.  G.  Monachie,  Congression- 
al Committees  (1898),  172-190;  P.  S.  Reinsch, 
Am.  Legislatures  and  Legislative  Methods 
(1907),  ch.  v.  James  W.  Garner. 

REPORTS  OF  DEBATES  AND  PROCEED- 
INGS. See  Congressional  Records;  Publi- 
cations, Governmental. 

REPORTS  OF  HEADS  OF  DEPARTMENTS 
AND  SUBORDINATES.  Annual  reports  are 
submitted  by  the  head  of  each  department  to 
the  President  and  by  him  are  transmitted  to 
Congress  and  are  printed  as  documents.  The 
report  of  each  secretary  is  accompanied  by  re- 
ports made  to  him  by  chiefs  of  the  divisions 
into  which  the  department  is  subdivided.  The 
report  of  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  is  in 
two  parts;  of  the  second  part,  containing  mat- 
ters of  particular  interest  to  farmers,  500,000 
copies  are  printed.  Either  house  of  Congress, 
by  resolution,  may  call  on  the  heads  of  depart- 
ments for  reports  on  special  subjects,  which 
reports  are  addressed  to  the  presiding  officer 
of  the  House  making  the  call.  When  com- 
mittees of  Congress  refer  bills  to  the  depart- 
ments for  examination  and  report,  the  reports 
are  addressed  to  the  chairman  of  the  commit- 
tee. See  Departments  by  name.  Reference: 
Stat.  at  Large,  XXIII  (1895)  ; also  statutes 
creating  the  executive  departments.  C.  M. 

REPORTS  OF  JUDICIAL  CASES.  The 

force  that  is  given  in  England  and  the  United 
States  to  judicial  precedents  and  the  fact  that 
the  greater  part  of  the  laws  that  determine 


the  private  rights  of  persons  and  property  are 
the  product  of,  and  are  to  be  found  embodied 
in,  the  decisions  of  the  courts,  make  it  im- 
perative that  these  cases  should  be  reported 
and  published  and  made  accessible  to  all.  This 
applies  only  to  courts  of  record  and  especial- 
ly to  the  highest  courts  of  each  jurisdiction. 
Thus  in  each  state  a series  of  judicial  reports 
have  been  issued.  In  earlier  years  it  was  cus- 
tomary to  designate  these  volumes  by  the 
names  of  their  several  reporters.  For  some 
years  now,  however,  the  volumes  have  been 
numbered,  these  numbers  running  back  to  the 
first  volume  issued.  In  general,  however,  the 
practice  is  still  to  cite  the  earlier  volumes 
by  the  names  of  the  reporters  originally  given 
them.  Similarly  the  decisions  of  the  federal 
courts  have  been  issued  in  serial  volumes.  The 
most  important  of  these  series  is,  of  course, 
that  containing  the  reports  of  cases  decided  in 
the  Supreme  Court.  These,  like  those  of  the 
states,  were  for  many  years  designated  by  the 
names  of  their  reporters.  These  names,  their 
abbreviations,  and  periods  covered,  are  as  fol- 
lows : 


Reporters 

Abbreviations 

No.  of 
Vols. 

Period 

Covered 

Dallas  

Dali. 

4 

1790-1800 

(’ranch 

Cr. 

9 

.1801-1815 

Wheaton 

Wh.  or  Wheat. 

12 

1816-1827 

Peters  

Pet. 

16 

1828-1842 

Howard  - 

How. 

24 

1843-1860 

Black  

r>lack 

2 

1861-1862 

Wallace  

Wall. 

23 

1S63-1S74 

Since  1874  the  volumes  have  been  numbered, 
beginning  with  volume  91,  and  designated 
as  United  States  Reports,  the  abbreviation  for 
citation  being  simply  “U.  S.,”  e.  g.,  “Murdock 
vs.  Ward,  178  U.  S.  139.”  Various  editions  of 
these  Supreme  Court  reports  have  been  issued, 
but  besides  the  regular,  or  as  it  is  sometimes 
called  the  official  set,  the  best  known  edition  is 
that  entitled  the  Lawyers’  Edition  (abbrevia- 
tion, L.  ed.)  containing  in  each  volume  foul- 
volumes  of  the  single  volume  set.  For  some 
time  now,  four  volumes  of  the  single  volume 
set  have  been  issued  each  year,  which  means, 
of  course,  that  each  volume  of  the  Lawyers 
Edition  now  covers  one  year — that  is,  not  one 
calendar  year,  but  one  term  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  extending  from  the  fall  of  one  year  to 
the  early  summer  of  the  next.  At  present 
(1911)  this  series  embraces  fifty-four  volumes. 
This  set  also  includes  abbreviations  and  notes 
analyzing  all  cases,  state  and  federal,  which 
have  cited  the  various  cases  reported.  An 
accompanying  digest,  in  six  volumes,  summar- 
izes in  alphabetical  arrangement,  the  principles 
determined  in  the  volumes  1-206  of  the  U.  S. 
Reports.  The  same  company  which  issues  the 
Lawyers’  Edition  has  also  issued  the  current 
decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  semimonth- 
ly advance  sheets.  Since  1882,  also,  another 
firm  has  published  the  current  decisions  of  the 
court  in  a semimonthly  publication  known  as 


182 


REPRESENTATION,  MINORITY— REPRESENTATION,  THEORY  OF 


the  Supreme  Court  Reporter,  this  Reporter  be- 
ing bound  up  each  year  into  volumes. 

The  cases  decided  in  the  inferior  federal 
courts  during  the  period  1789-1880  have  been 
published  by  a commercial  firm  in  a set  of 
thirty  volumes.  Since  then  they  have  been 
currently  reported  in  a weekly  serial  known 
as  the  Federal  Reporter,  which,  in  bound  form, 
already  numbers  about  two  hundred  volumes. 
There  have  also  been  issued  official  reports  of 
the  decisions  of  these  inferior  federal  courts. 

The  firm  which  issues  the  Supreme  Court 
Reporter  and  the  Federal  Reporter  has  also 
for  some  years  reported,  in  current  advance 
sheets,  later  bound  into  volumes,  the  decisions 
of  all  the  higher  courts  of  the  states.  The 
names  of  these  Reporters,  the  dates  of  their 
establishment,  and  the  states  covered  by  each, 
are  as  follows:  Northeastern  Reporter,  estab- 
lished 1885,  Massachusetts,  New  York,  Ohio. 
Indiana,  and  Illinois;  Northwestern  Reporter, 
established  1879,  Michigan,  Wisconsin,  Minne- 
sota, Iowa,  Nebraska,  North  Dakota,  and  South 
Dakota ; Pacific  Reporter,  established  1883, 
California,  Oregon,  Kansas,  Colorado,  Nevada, 
Montana,  Wyoming,  Washington,  Idaho,  Ari- 
zona, Utah,  New  Mexico,  and  Oklahoma;  At- 
lantic Reporter,  established  1885,  Maine,  New 
Hampshire,  Vermont,  Rhode  Island,  Connecti- 
cut, New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Delaware  and 
Maryland;  Southwestern  Reporter,  established 

1886,  Kentucky,  Tennessee,  Arkansas,  Missouri 
and  Texas;  So-utheastern  Reporter,  established 

1887,  Virginia,  West  Virginia,  North  Carolina 
South  Carolina  and  Georgia;  Southern  Report- 
er, established  1887,  Florida,  Alabama,  Missis- 
sippi, and  Louisiana.  Summarizing  alphabeti- 
cally the  principles  stated  in  the  thousands  of 
cases  decided  in  the  state  courts  since  the  dates 
of  their  first  establishment  there  has  been  pub- 
lished a Century  Digest  in  a series  of  huge 
volumes  covering  the  period  from  1658  to  1896. 
Supplementing  this  there  is  what  has  been  de- 
nominated the  Decennial  Digest  covering  the 
years  1897  to  1906,  since  which  latter  date 
there  have  been  issued  Annual  Digests. 

In  addition  to  the  reports  of  federal  deci- 
sions which  have  been  mentioned  there  are 
issued  reports  of  the  United  States  Courts  of 
claims  (since  1863)  and  also  volumes  of  ad- 
ministrative decisions,  as,  for  example,  of  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Comission  (since  1887), 
of  the  Commissioner  of  Public  Lands  (since 
(1881),  Patent  Decisions  (since  1869),  and 
Pensions  Decisions  (since  1866).  Volumes  of 
the  Advisory  Opinions  of  the  Attorney  General 
of  the  United  States  have  been  issued  from 
time  to  time.  These  volumes  now  number 
about  thirty. 

A final  word  should  be  said  regarding  the 
form  in  which  cases  are  reported.  In  addition 
to  the  prevailing  and  dissenting  opinions  of  the 
courts,  the  facts  of  the  case,  when  not  ade- 
quately stated  in  the  opinions  themselves,  are 
summarized.  This  of  course  is  essential,  for 


these  facts  determine  the  scope  and  character 
as  precedents  of  the  propositions  of  law  stated 
in  the  opinion  (see  Cases,  Significance  of,  in 
Constitutional  Law).  Each  case  is  also 
prefaced  by  a summary  of  the  points  decided, 
which  is  known  as  the  syllabus.  This  syllabus 
is  sometimes  prepared  by  the  judge,  and  some- 
times by  the  reporter.  In  either  case,  however, 
the  propositions  for  which  the  case  stands  as  a 
precedent  are  to  be  determined  by  an  examina- 
tion of  the  opinions  themselves  taken  in  con- 
nection with  the  facts  as  stated.  In  many  in- 
stances, abstracts  of  the  briefs  of  counsel  are 
given. 

The  opinions  of  the  higher  English  courts 
are  of  persuasive  force  in  the  United  States 
both  with  reference  to  questions  of  common  law 
and  of  the  interpretation  of  substantially  sim- 
ilar statutes.  The  reports  of  these  cases  have 
been  issued  in  various  series,  the  names  and 
character  of  which  it  is  not  necessary  here  to 
describe.  It  may  be  mentioned,  however,  that 
there  is  now  in  course  of  publication  a ver- 
batim reprint  of  the  most  important  reports 
prior  to  1865.  Of  this  reprint  series,  seventy- 
one  volumes  containing  decisions  of  the  House 
of  Lords,  Privy  Council,  Chancery,  Rolls  Court 
and  Vice-Chancellors  have  appeared,  together 
with  some  forty  volumes  of  the  cases  decided 
in  the  King’s  Bench  and  Queen’s  Bench. 

See  Cases,  Significance  of,  in  Constitu- 
tional Law;  Courts,  Federal;  State  Judi- 
ciary. 

References:  J.  W.  Wallace,  The  Reporters, 
Chronologically  Arranged  (3d  ed.,  1855);  S. 
E.  Baldwin,  The  Am.  Judiciary  (1905);  E. 
Wambaugh,  The  Study  of  Cases  (2d  ed.,  1894), 
C.  C.  Soul6,  Lawyers’  Reference  Manual 
(1883).  W.  W.  Willoughby. 

REPRESENTATION,  MINORITY.  See 

Minority  Representation. 

REPRESENTATION,  PROPORTIONAL. 

See  Proportional  Representation. 

REPRESENTATION,  THEORY  OF.  The 

modern  theory  of  representation  is  based  upon 
the  doctrine  that  society  is  composed  of  free 
and  equal  individuals,  and  that  all  representa- 
tives should  be  chosen  in  districts  embracing 
an  equal  number  of  inhabitants  or,  in  some 
cases,  voters.  This  theory  has  generally  sup- 
planted the  older  notion  of  class  representa- 
tion (see  Representative  Government). 
While  this  doctrine  of  equality  involves 
a generous  estimate  of  the  moral  worth 
of  every  individual  and  thus  finds  its 
ethical  justification,  it  overlooks  the  fact  that 
modern  society  is  socially  stratified,  and  that 
a great  deal  of  legislation  is  designed  for  the 
benefit  and  protection  of  particular  groups  and 
classes.  It  has  not  been  carried,  however,  to 
its  logical  conclusion  in  any  modern  legisla- 
tive assembly.  In  England,  the  principle  of 


183 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT 


equal  electoral  districts  is  only  rouglilv  ap- 
plied in  the  House  of  Commons;  the  principle 
of  periodic  reapportionment  is  not  accepted; 
and  the  House  of  Commons  is  checked  by  the 
House  of  Lords.  The  principle  of  substantial- 
ly equal  districts  is  recognized  in  the  House 
of  Representatives  of  the  United  States;  but 
here  the  numerical  element  is  controlled  by 
the  Senate  representing  states  in  their  cor- 
porate capacity.  In  the  formation  of  state 
legislatures  the  principle  is  enunciated  in  one- 
third  of  the  state  constitutions;  but  in  every 
state  concessions  are  made,  either  in  one  or 
both  houses  of  the  legislature,  to  county,  city, 
and  other  local  lines  thus  marring  the  sym- 
metry of  apportionment.  In  some  states,  par- 
ticularly in  New  England,  the  concessions  to 
local  units  of  government  are  so  great  as  to 
establish  practically  a system  of  rotten  bor- 
oughs; and  in  other  states  discriminations  are 
made  against  urban  inhabitants  to  the  ad- 
vantage of  rural  districts. 

Although  the  inequality  in  electoral  districts 
is  generally  criticised  by  the  political  parties 
which  suffer  from  the  discriminations,  the 
doctrine  of  equal  electoral  districts  does  not 
occupy  a position  of  prominence  in  contempor- 
ary political  literature.  Moreover,  the  degree 
to  which  the  doctrine  of  equality  is  applied 
will  not  depend  so  much  upon  theoretical  jus- 
tification as  upon  the  tenacity  with  which  lo- 
calities adhere  to  their  special  advantages  in 
this  regard,  and  the  nice  play  of  political  in- 
terests in  their  contest  for  supremacy. 

Coupled  with  equal  election  districts  is  the 
question  of  how  far  the  representative  is  to 
be  regarded  as  a mere  agent  of  his  constitu- 
ents and  how  far  he  is  free  to  make  his  own 
determinations  in  the  legislature.  Some  writ- 
ers accept  Burke’s  theory  that  the  representa- 
tive is  chosen  by  a constituency,  but  acts  in 
the  name  of  the  whole  nation.  This  theory 
of  course  overlooks  the  fact  that  in  practice 
the  representative  is  usually  considering  meas- 
ures which  involve  group  and  class  interests 
rather  than  the  whole  nation.  But  it  undoubt- 
edly has  an  element  of  value,  though,  if  strict- 
ly applied,  it  would  not  only  release  the  rep- 
resentatives from  obligations  to  their  constit- 
uents, but  would  lift  them  from  that  close 
contact  with  practical  life  which  is  so  neces- 
sary for  the  sound  adjustment  of  legislation 
to  concrete  social  conditions.  In  the  United 
States  and  in  France,  particularly,  the  op- 
posite principle  that  the  representative  is 
bound  to  look  after  the  interests  of  his  dis- 
trict is  carried  to  an  extreme  which  has  a 
decidedly  bad  effect  upon  the  character  of  leg- 
islatures. It  has  a tendency  to  transform  the 
representative  into  an  agent  of  the  most  ac- 
tive ’group  or  groups  among  his  constituents, 
and  to  consume  his  time  and  energy  in 
log-rolling  (see)  and  other  legislative  enter- 
prises looking  to  the  benefit  of  his  particular 
district.  This  problem  of  securing  a proper 


dependence  of  the  representative  upon  the  will 
of  his  constituents  and  at  the  same  time  pre- 
venting his  transformation  into  a local  politi- 
cian of  a very  petty  type,  constitutes  one  of 
the  most  serious  questions  of  modern  repre- 
sentative government.  The  two  reforms  which 
promise  most  are  the  propositions  to  remove  all 
patronage  (see)  from  the  hands  of  the 
representative  and  to  make  it  impossible  for 
the  individual  representative  to  introduce 
measures  carrying  a charge  upon  the  public 
treasury. 

See  Popular  Government;  Representative 
Government. 

References:  J.  W.  Garner,  Intro  to  Pol.  Sci. 
(1910),  458;  J.  S.  Mill,  Considerations  on  Rep- 
resentative Government  (1875);  W.  Stubbs, 
Constitutional  History  of  England  (1897),  II; 
Id.  J.  Ford,  The  Cast  of  Our  National  Govern- 
ment (1911).  Charles  A.  Beard. 

REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT.  His- 
torical Origins.— Representative  government 
differs  from  pure  democracy.  It  implies  a leg- 
islative assembly  composed  of  agents  selected 
by,  and  acting  in  the  name  of,  groups  of  vot- 
ers, inhabitants,  classes,  or  communities.  Pure 
democracy,  on  the  other  hand,  means  a legis- 
lative assembly  composed  of  all  the  qualified 
electors  within  a given  political  community. 
It  is  in  the  origination  and  development  of 
representative  government  that  the  western, 
or  so-called  Teutonic,  nations  differ  from  an- 
cient and  oriental  nations.  The  latter  do  not 
seem  to  have  had  any  conception  of  a possi- 
bility of  agency  in  the  development  of  their 
legislative  assemblies.  Historians  of  the  Teu- 
tonic school  have  ascribed  the  origin  of  rep- 
resentative government  to  the  peculiar  politi- 
cal genius  of  the  Germanic  race;  and  have 
sought  it  far  back  in  the  records  of  that  peo- 
ple. This  theory  rests,  however,  upon  a very 
slender  foundation.  It  was  claimed  by  Stubbs 
and  scholars  of  less  learning  that  the  early 
Anglo-Saxon  assemblies  were  representative  in 
character,  being  composed  of  delegates  from 
each  township  within  the  county  or  hundred. 
Later  investigations  show,  however,  that  there 
is  not  one  single  authentic  document  to  sup- 
port this  view.  On  the  contrary,  the  use  of  the 
representative  agent  from  the  townships  seems 
rather  to  be  connected  with  the  inquisitio  as 
used  by  the  Norman  kings  for  fiscal  and  inquis- 
itorial purposes;  and  thus  is  directly  connected 
with  an  ancient  Roman  process.  Nevertheless 
the  use  of  the  representative  or  agency  idea 
on  a large  scale  for  provincial  and  national 
assemblies  was  limited  in  its  origin  to  western 
nations;  but  it  was  by  no  means  confined  to 
those  that  were  most  purely  Teutonic  in  compo- 
sition. Indeed,  one  of  the  first  representative 
assemblies  on  an  important  scale  was  called  in 
Aragon  in  the  year  1162.  During  the  two 
centuries  which  followed,  representative  as- 
semblies sprang  up  all  over  western  Europe 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT 


and  even  in  Russia.  In  1213  King  John  of 
England  called  four  discreet  men  from  each 
county  to  speak  with  him  concerning  the  busi- 
ness of  his  kingdom.  And  in  1265  Simon  de 
Montfort  called  a Parliament  consisting  of 
representatives  from  the  counties  and  several 
of  the  cities  and  boroughs  in  England.  These 
early  assemblies  differed  among  themselves 
widely  in  the  degree  of  representation  afforded 
to  communities  and  classes;  for  it  was  a long 
time  before  the  doctrine  developed  that  rep- 
resentative government  implied  equal  elec- 
toral districts  and  a widely  extended  suffrage. 
Moreover,  in  the  beginning,  these  representa- 
tive assemblies  had  a more  or  less  precarious 
existence;  for  they  were  called  and  used  by 
monarchs  at  their  pleasure,  and  were  employed 
largely  for  the  purpose  of  voting  taxes.  The 
composition  of  these  assemblies,  and  the  towns 
and  districts  represented,  were  determined  at 
the  pleasure  of  the  monarch  who  called  them. 
And  it  was  only  in  England  that  the  Parlia- 
ment, embodying  the  representative  element, 
had  an  unbroken  development  from  its  origin 
in  the  thirteenth  century  to  the  present, 
and  even  this  English  Parliament  threatened 
to  disappear  several  times  owing  to  the  un- 
willingness of  the  kings  to  incur  the  danger 
of  a collision  with  a more  or  less  restive  body. 
Out  of  its  power  over  the  purse  the  repre- 
sentative body  finally  secured  a practical  sov- 
ereignty in  England.  On  the  continent,  how- 
ever, representative  institutions  which  had 
sprung  up  in  the  middle  ages  perished  every- 
where except  some  local  assemblies.  It  was 
not  until  after  the  French  Revolution  and  the 
democratic  upheaval  which  followed,  that  par- 
liaments were  reestablished  on  a new  footing 
in  the  European  nations. 

Transition  from  Class  to  Individual  Repre- 
sentation.— In  examining  the  nature  of  repre- 
sentative institutions,  one  is  struck  with  the 
great  variety  of  forms  and  practices.  Gen- 
erally speaking,  representative  assemblies,  in 
their  origin,  were  composed  of  the  three  great 
classes,  clergy,  nobility  and  third  estate.  This 
class  division  was  sharply  maintained  in 
France  until  the  Revolution.  In  England, 
however,  the  representatives  from  the  boroughs 
and  those  chosen  by  the  landed  gentry  of  the 
counties,  were  welded  together  in  one  body — 
the  House  of  Commons;  while  the  representa- 
tives of  the  clergy,  with  the  exception  of  the 
high  dignitaries  who  joined  the  lay  barons 
in  the  House  of  Lords,  formed  a separate  con- 
vocation of  their  own.  With  the  French  Revo- 
lution, the  idea  of  the  representation  of  classes 
and  communities  was  more  or  less  supplanted 
by  the  doctrine  of  representation  of  individuals. 
In  progressive  societies  older  communalism  was 
supplanted  bv  individualism;  and  as  a natural 
consequence  pure  representative  government 
came  to  imply  the  representation  of  equal  num- 
bers of  individuals.  The  notion  of  represent- 
ing communities  as  opposed  to  equal  numbers 


of  inhabitants  was  adopted  in  the  American 
colonies  where  representative  government  was 
early  instituted  and  vigorously  developed. 
With  the  extension  of  the  suffrage  early  in 
the  nineteenth  century  a movement  was 
set  on  foot  for  the  establishment  of  equal  elec- 
toral districts,  but  it  has  by  no  means  carried 
the  day  in  the  United  States  or,  in  fact,  in  any 
other  country  (see  Representation,  Theory 
of)  . 

Decline  in  Representative  Government.- — A 

generation  ago  it  seemed  that  representative 
government,  implying  a widely  extended  suf- 
frage and  the  distribution  of  representatives 
with  reference  to  population,  was  so  firmly 
established  as  to  be  beyond  question ; but  an 
examination  of  recent  political  literature 
shows  no  little  uncertainty  as  to  the  perfec- 
tion and  finality  of  that  system.  In  France, 
the  representation  of  classes  has  been  seriously 
proposed  by  publicists  and  by  advocates  in 
the  parliament.  In  Switzerland,  the  initiative 
(see)  and  referendum  (see)  have  been  widely 
adopted;  and  in  England,  owing  to  the  group- 
ings in  the  House  of  Commons  and  the  dis- 
proportionate amount  of  influence  enjoyed  by 
the  minority  holding  the  balance  of  power,  the 
referendum  on  matters  of  national  importance 
has  been  advocated  by  some  of  the  most  con- 
servative statesmen.  In  the  United  States, 
nothing  has  been  more  remarkable  than  the 
decline  of  representative  assemblies  in  popular 
esteem.  The  history  of  state  constitution- 
making is  the  record  of  growing  limitations 
imposed  upon  legislatures  owing  to  the  lack 
of  public  confidence  in  their  wisdom  and  com- 
mon honesty.  In  the  first  state  constitutions 
the  legislature  was  supreme.  Today  the  leg- 
islatures everywhere  are  hampered  by  prolix 
restrictions;  the  governor  enjoys  the  veto  pow- 
er in  every  state  except  one,  North  Carolina; 
it  is  the  executive  rather  than  the  legislative 
branch  that  now  excites  popular  confidence  and 
enthusiasm;  and  almost  one-third  of  the  com- 
monwealths have  supplemented  their  repre- 
sentative systems  with  the  initiative  and  ref- 
erendum in  some  form.  Official  revelations  of 
legislative  corruption  became  so  common  in 
the  first  of  the  twentieth  century  as  to  ex- 
cite little  public  interest.  The  general  esti- 
mate of  state  legislatures  is  probably  lower 
than  it  should  be,  and  the  amount  of  honest 
and  disinterested  legislative  service  is  by  no 
means  appreciated.  Nevertheless  the  extent  of 
influence  enjoyed  by  large  corporations  in  leg- 
islative assemblies  and  the  vice  of  log-rolling, 
coupled  with  the  constant  necessity  which 
every  representative  is  under  to  nurse  his  dis- 
trict, have  so  reduced  legislative  assemblies 
in  popular  esteem  as  cause  those  who  are  work- 
ing for  improvement  in  American  legislative 
conditions  to  rely  for  relief  rather  upon  the 
governor  or  upon  some  system  which  secures 
to  the  people  power  of  initiative  (see)  and 
referendum  (see),  or  both. 


185 


REPRESENTATIVES,  ELECTION  OF— REPRESENTATIVES  IN  CONGRESS 


See  Democracy,  History  of;  Popular  Gov- 
ernment; Legislation,  Direct;  Representa- 
tion, Theory  of. 

References:  W.  Stubbs,  Constitutional  Hist, 
of  England  (1897),  II;  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Gov- 
ernment and  Politics  (1910),  cli.  v;  J.  R.  Com- 
mons, Proportional  Representation  (2d  ed., 
1907)  ; J.  W.  Garner,  Intro,  to  Pol.  Sci. 
(1910),  ch.  xiv.  Charles  A.  Beard. 

REPRESENTATIVES,  ELECTION  OF. 

Candidates  for  election  to  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives (see)  are  nominated  by  conventions 
(see)  or  direct  primaries  (see  Primary,  Di- 
rect). Choice  by  conventions,  composed  of 
delegates  from  the  local  units  in  the  congres- 
sional district,  used  to  be  the  universal  cus- 
tom; but  in  most  parts  of  the  country,  espe- 
cially in  the  southern  and  western  states,  it 
has  now  been  replaced  by  the  direct  primary, 
this  being  a preliminary  election  within  each 
party  for  the  purpose  of  which  candidates 
have  their  names  put  upon  the  ballot  by  pe- 
tition or  payment  of  a nominal  sum.  The 
regular  elections  are  held  in  even  years.  There 
is  no  national  suffrage,  except  in  the  limited 
supervision  granted  to  Congress  by  the  Four- 
teenth and  Fifteenth  Amendments  (see).  Un- 
der the  Constitution  the  voters  are  those  who, 
in  each  state,  have  the  right  to  vote  for  the 
more  numerous  branch  of  the  state  legislature. 
Although  Congress  may  alter  or  entirely  over- 
ride the  regulations  made  by  state  legislatures 
as  to  the  times,  places  and  manner  of  holding 
the  elections,  this  power  was  not  exercised  till 
1842.  The  Apportionment  Act  of  that  year 
provided  that  members  should  be  elected  by 
districts  instead  of  by  general  ticket  (see  Ap- 
portionment; District  System).  These 
districts,  which  are  marked  out  by  the  state 
legislatures  after  each  reapportionment  of 
members,  must  now  consist  of  contiguous  and 
compact  territory  and  contain  as  nearly  as 
feasible  an  equal  number  of  inhabitants — re- 
quirements which  are  not  usually  obeyed  to  the 
letter  (see  Gerrymander).  In  1871  Congress 
introduced  vote  by  ballot  and  in  1872  fixed  the 
Tuesday  after  the  first  Monday  in  November 
as  election  day,  later  allowing  certain  states 
to  continue  holding  their  elections  at  an  ear- 
lier date.  The  national  authority  was  greatly 
extended  in  the  case  of  the  “force  bills”  (see) 
of  1871-72  which,  mainly  intended  to  protect 
negro  voters  in  the  South,  permitted  the  pres- 
ence of  federal  supervisors  at  the  polls  and 
the  use  of  federal  troops-  for  their  support; 
but  they  were  soon  weakened  by  amendment 
and  judicial  decision  and  repealed  altogether 
in  1894.  In  1910  and  1911  two  important 
acts  were  passed  for  the  purpose  of  eliminat- 
ing corruption.  The  first  requires  all  organiza- 
tions, like  the  national  committees,  which  try 
to  influence  the  congressional  elections  in  two 
or  more  states  to  file  itemized  accounts  of  all 
contributions  received  or  promised.  The  sec- 


ond requires  all  candidates  to  file  before  the 
primaries  and  elections  a statement  of  all  ex- 
penses incurred  and  all  promises  and  pledges 
made.  No  sum  larger  than  $5,000,  or  ten  cents 
for  each  voter  in  the  district  may  be  spent; 
and  no  candidate  “is  permitted  to  promise  any 
influence  or  support  to  any  person  for  the 
purpose  of  securing  the  support  of  such  per- 
son” (see  Corrupt  Practices  Act).  The 
House  is  sole  judge  of  the  election  and  qualifi- 
cations of  its  members  (Cont.  Art.  I,  Sec.  V, 
HI).  In  practice  (as  in  the  case  of  Brigham 
II.  Roberts  who  was  excluded  on  the  charge  of 
polygamy),  it  has  added  to  the  qualifications 
laid  down  in  the  Constitution — that  a member 
shall  be  twenty-five  years  of  age,  seven  years 
a citizen,  an  inhabitant  of  the  state  in  which 
he  is  elected  and  not  a federal  office-holder. 
The  custom  which  requires  a member  to  reside 
in  the  district  which  he  represents  has,  of 
course,  no  legal  sanction  and  would  not  be  en- 
forced by  the  House  (see  Qualifications  for 
Office).  The  procedure  in  contested  elections 
is  regulated  by  a statute  which  the  House,  in 
view  of  its  constitutional  power,  may  at  any 
time  set  aside.  Elections  (see  Elections,  Con- 
tested) are  seldom  contested,  not  because 
grounds  are  wanting,  but  because  the  cases 
are  usually  decided  by  partisan  vote  and 
the  decisions  reached  only  fifteen  or  twen- 
ty months  after  the  election.  When  vacancies 
occur — through  expulsion  (see),  resignation 
(see),  death  or  other  cause — the  governor  of 
the  state  concerned  may  call  a special  election 
or  hold  the  choice  of  the  new  Representative 
over  till  the  next  regular  election. 

See  Congress;  Election  System  in  the 
United  States;  Elections,  Federal  Control 
of;  House  of  Representatives;  Suffrage. 

References:  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Government 
and  Politics  (1910),  231-239;  J.  Bryce,  The 
Am.  Commonwealth  (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  126- 
130,  191-200 ; A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government 
(1909),  221-225;  P.  S.  Reinsch,  Am.  Legisla- 
tures and  Legislative  Methods  (1907),  6-17, 
215.  Charles  A.  Beard. 

REPRESENTATIVES  IN  CONGRESS. 
Training. — Law-making,  like  other  occupa- 
tions, requires  experience;  and  this  is  partic- 
ularly true  in  the  House  of  Representatives 
where  the  complicated  machinery  bewilders 
the  uninitiated  and  destroys  the  usefulness  of 
new  members  during  a great  part  of  their  first 
term.  Yet  until  very  recently  half  the  mem- 
bers lost  their  seats  at  each  election.  There 
are  several  reasons  for  this.  The  most  obvious 
is  the  survival,  in  corrupt  form,  of  the  old 
doctrine  of  rotation,  of  the  belief  that  almost 
any  man  may  be  a competent  law-maker  with- 
out training  and  that  good  places  should  be 
passed  around  as  rewards  for  faithful  party 
service.  Nevertheless,  reelection  is  growing 
much  commoner.  Thus  while  only  fifty-three 
per  cent  of  the  members  in  the  Forty-second 


186 


REPRESENTATIVES  IN  CONGRESS 


Congress  (1871)  had  sat  before  (their  average 
term  being  four  years),  the  percentage  in  the 
Sixty-second  was  seventy,  with  an  average  term 
of  nearly  eight  years.  The  comparison  is  still 
more  striking  in  respect  of  those  who  have 
served  five  terms  or  more:  six  per  cent  in  the 
Forty-second  Congress,  twenty-two  in  the  Sixty- 
second.  The  constituencies,  or  rather  the  party 
organizations  which  manipulate  them,  are  com- 
ing to  see  that  it  is  profitable  to  keep  the  same 
members  at  Washington.  They  want  legisla- 
tive favors,  government  patronage,  appropria- 
tions for  local  improvements ; and  as  the  House 
promotes  to  places  of  power  and  leadership 
those  who  have  proved  themselves  by  long  serv- 
ice, the  idea  of  short  terms  is  passing  away. 
This  naturally  means  an  increase  of  efficiency. 
It  should  be  noted  that  most  of  the  members 
have  acquired  some  experience  in  the  business 
of  government  before  coming  to  Congress. 
Three  quarters  of  them  (62d  Cong.)  have  sat 
in  state  legislatures  or  held  executive  or  ju- 
dicial office.  The  proportion  was  almost  pre- 
cisely the  same  in  the  Forty-second  Congress, 
the  only  difference  being  this:  that  whereas 
in  the  latter  case  more  than  half  the  members 
had  served  in  state  legislatures,  today  little 
more  than  a third  have  done  so.  In  the  matter 
of  education  it  is  difficult  to  get  accurate  data, 
as  the  autobiographies  which  appear  in  the 
Congressional  Directory  are  sometimes  obscure 
on  this  point.  Of  the  391  members  in  the 
Sixty-second  Congress  something  like  a score 
seem  never  to  have  had  a regular  schooling. 
Nearly  two-thirds  proceeded  to  some  sort  of 
higher  education  in  professional  schools  or 
colleges,  though  the  colleges  were  in  not  a few 
cases  little  better  than  high  schools.  The  aver- 
age age  is  just  under  fifty  years.  Most  of  the 
members  may  be  classified  as  professional  poli- 
ticians, though  they  all  have  or  had  other  oc- 
cupations. Two-thirds  are  lawyers,  as  has 
been  the  case  for  many  years  past  (sixty-three 
per  cent  in  the  Fiftieth  Congress).  Sixty -three 
members  may  be  counted  as  capitalists,  twenty- 
four  as  agriculturists,  eighteen  as  journalists 
(as  compared  with  sixty-three,  twenty-three 
and  thirteen  in  the  previous  Congress).  There 
are  two  men  of  the  laboring  class.  Only  eleven 
are  foreign  born.  Under  the  Constitution  fed- 
eral office-holders,  civil  and  military,  are  de- 
barred from  the  House  (Art.  I,  Sec.  vi,  H 2). 

Capacity. — It  is  probably  true  that  the 
House  of  Representatives,  in  the  average  ca- 
pacity and  intelligence  of  its  members,  com- 
pares not  unfavorably  with  other  great  as- 
semblies. Since  nearly  all  have  made  their 
own  way  in  the  world,  without  the  advantages 
of  inherited  wealth,  they  are  usually  shrewd, 
energetic  and  forceful.  But  men  of  light  and 
leading  who  have  large  views  and  high  ideals 
and  who  can  inspire  the  rank  and  file  with 
better  ambitions  than  log-rolling  and  parlia- 
mentary strategy  seldom  appear  and,  when 
they  do,  are  likely  to  be  drawn  off  to  the 
110 


Senate  where  unusual  ability  and  independence 
find  more  scope.  Men  of  distinction  seldom 
care  to  enter  the  House.  They  prefer  to  make 
their  mark  as  managers  of  railroads  or  other 
great  corporations,  leaders  of  the  bar,  en- 
gineers, writers;  or  to  enter  public  life  as  the 
holders  of  executive  office  of  some  kind.  The 
fact  is  that  in  spite  of  the  rapid  increase  of  na- 
tional authority  since  the  Civil  War  the  House 
has  not  advanced  in  the  public  estimation.  As 
Mr.  Bryce  says,  the  burden  of  proof  that  he 
is  not  a jobber  rests  with  the  member  himself. 
Suspicion  is  created  by  the  very  circumstances 
of  his  position;  for  the  public  cannot  watch 
his  conduct  in  the  privacy  of  the  committee- 
room  at  whose  doors  the  powerful  lobby  is  al- 
ways knocking,  or  entertain  much  respect  for 
the  corrupt  process  of  log-rolling  or  the  lack 
of  sincerity  so  often  apparent  in  speeches  and 
votes.  Nor  does  the  House  offer  much  in 
the  way  of  a career  for  the  ambitious.  The 
Representative  is  enslaved  not  only  by  the 
rules  of  procedure,  but  also  by  his  constituency. 
The  popular  custom  which  requires  him  to  be 
a resident  of  his  district  fits  in  naturally 
with  the  subservience  which  is  expected  of  him. 
even  to  the  point  of  forming  his  judgments  in 
conformity  with  the  will  of  his  constituents. 
The  House  does  not  lead,  it  follows  public 
opinion,  and  follows  very  cautiously.  Even  for 
the  man  who  is  ready  to  endure  these  galling 
restrictions  on  his  independence,  there  is  lit- 
tle promise  for  the  future.  His  reelection  is 
doubtful.  The  chance  of  his  climbing  to  the 
Senate  is  small.  Certainly  Presidents  are  not 
chosen  from  the  House;  nor  are  the  heads  of 
departments,  only  one  member  of  President 
Taft’s  Cabinet  in  1911  having  sat  in  the  House. 

These  are  some  of  the  facts  which  explain  the 
dearth  of  great  men.  They  are  forcibly  ex- 
pressed by  an  eminent  critic  of  our  institu- 
tions, M.  Ostrogorski,  in  Democracy  and  Po- 
litical Parties,  II,  544. 

The  standard  of  the  Representatives  and  their 
political  manners  have  undoubtedly  deteriorated, 
The  men  who  find  their  way  into  the  assembly 
are  those  who  have  succeeded  in  “getting  the 
delegates,”  or  in  ingratiating  themselves  with 
the  machine  or  with  the  boss.  All  their  habits 
and  their  political  methods  have,  consequently, 
been  formed  by  the  practice  of  the  petty 
expedients,  of  the  paltry  combinations  and 
compromises  on  individuals  and  interests,  of  the 
“deals.”  which  are  the  life-breath  of  the  primaries 
and  conventions.  The  custom  which  confines  the 
choice  of  candidates  to  local  residents  helps  to 
narrow  the  political  intelligence  and  to  lower  the 
morality  of  the  people’s  representatives.  And 
these  men  enter  Congress  as  the  slaves  of  the 
machine  and  the  boss,  of  sordid  parochial  consid- 
erations, or  of  powerful  private  interests,  indus- 
trial or  financial,  which  are  so  often  in  league 
with  the  machine. 

See  Congress;  House  of  Representatives; 
Legislature  and  Legislative  Reform. 

References:  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Government 
and  Politics  (1910),  X,  ch.  xiv;  J.  Bryce,  Am. 
Commonwealth  (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  129-131,  147- 
151,  201-203;  Congressional  Directory  (each 
Congress ) . Charles  A.  Beard. 


187 


REPRIEVE— REPUBLICAN  FORM  OF  GOVERNMENT 


REPRIEVE.  The  chief  executive  to  whom 
is  granted  the  pardoning  power  may  withdraw 
or  withhold  punishment  for  a time  after  con- 
viction and  sentence,  and  this  is  a reprieve. 
It  is  temporary  in  its  character  and  the  sen- 
tence may  be  executed  without  further  order 
of  the  court  when  the  time  of  the  reprieve  has 
expired.  The  court  also  may  grant  a reprieve 
in  a capital  case  for  a ground  recognized  by 
law,  such  as  that  a woman  sentenced  to  death 
is  quick  with  child  or  that  a prisoner  has  be- 
come insane.  See  Amnesty;  Pardon. 

E.  McC. 

REPRISAL.  See  Marque  and  Reprisal. 

REPUBLIC.  A republic  may  be  defined  as  a 
state  in  which  the  sovereign  power  rests  in 
the  people  as  a whole  but  is  exercised  by  rep- 
resentatives chosen  by  a popular  vote.  Hist- 
ory, however,  furnishes  examples  of  an  in- 
finite variety  of  states  to  which  the  term 
republic  has  been  applied,  and,  in  the  strict- 
est technical  sense  there  were  monarchic,  aris- 
tocratic, and  democratic  republics.  It  is 
therefore  very  important  in  defining  any  spe- 
cies of  government  to  distinguish  between  form 
and  nature  or  character.  Madison  in  the  Fed- 
eralist says  “The  two  points  of  difference  be- 
tween a democracy  and  a republic,  are,  first, 
the  delegation  of  the  government,  in  the  lat- 
ter to  a number  of  citizens  elected  by  the  rest; 
secondly  the  greater  number  of  citizens,  and 
the  greater  sphere  of  country  over  which  the 
latter  may  be  extended.”  John  Adams  however 
thinks  this  distinction  cannot  be  justified; 
while  Jefferson  held  that  “the  first  principle 
of  republicanism  is  that  the  lex  majoris  part- 
is is  the  fundamental  law  of  every  society  of 
individuals  of  equal  rights;  to  consider  the 
will  of  society  as  enounced  by  the  majority  of 
a single  vote,  as  sacred  as  if  unanimous.” 

The  Federal  Constitution  provides  that  “The 
United  States  shall  guarantee  to  every  state  in 
this  Union  a republican  form  of  government” 
but  it  does  not  define  the  term  republican 
(Art.  IV.,  Sec.  iv).  But  it  must  mean  in  the 
United  States  today  what  it  meant  in  the 
preexisting  states  when  the  Constitution  was 
framed  in  1787,  and  it  is  evident  that  the 
states  admitted  since  then  are  republican  in 
form.  It  follows  then  that  a republic  in  the 
modern  sense  is  a government  which  derives  all 
its  powers  directly  or  indirectly  from  the  great 
body  of  the  people,  i.  e.,  the  majority,  and  is 
administered  by  persons  holding  their  office 
for  a limited  period.  It  rests  upon  “equality 
which  is  the  soul  of  republics;”  not  that 
equality  which  rebels  against  superiority  of 
fortune  and  merit  but  upon  a political  equality 
which  implies  civil  liberty. 

The  definition  here  given  would  exclude 
many  of  the  ancient,  and  some  of  the  modern 
historical  republics  from  the  category  of  true 
republics.  Sparta,  Athens  and  Rome  were 


called  republics,  but  their  limited  franchise 
gave  them  an  aristocratic  character.  Venice 
was  styled  a republic  though  absolute  power 
was  exercised  by  a small  body  of  hereditary 
nobles.  Poland  was  a mixture  of  aristocracy 
and  monarchy  in  their  worst  forms,  though  it 
was  dignified  by  the  same  appellation;  and  the 
republic  of  Mexico  under  Diaz  was  virtually 
an  absolute  monarchy,  while  many  of  the 
South  American  republics  are  such  only  in 
name. 

See  Republican  Form  of  Government; 
States,  Classification  of. 

References:  J.  K.  Bluntschli,  Theory  of  the 
State  (6th  ed.,  trans.  1885),  ch.  xxii;  H.  S. 
Maine,  Popular  Government  (1886);  W.  W. 
Willoughby,  The  Constitutional  Laws  of  the 

V.  S.  (1910),  I,  151-156;  F.  H.  Giddings, 
Democracy  and  Empire  (1900),  251-290;  J. 

W.  Garner,  Intro,  to  Pol.  Sci.  (1910),  126, 

169-176.  Karl  F.  Geiser. 

REPUBLICAN  FORM  OF  GOVERNMENT. 

The  definition  of  a republican  form  of  govern- 
ment is  constitutionally  important  for  the 
reason  that  the  Federal  Government  is  obligat- 
ed to  guarantee  governments  of  this  character 
to  the  states  (Const.  Art.  IV,  Sec.  iv).  This 
guarantee  -works  both  ways.  Upon  the  one 
hand  it  obligates  the  states  to  maintain  gov- 
ernments republican  in  form,  and  permits  the 
Federal  Government  to  interfere  in  case  they 
fail  to  do  so;  and,  upon  the  other  hand,  it 
obligates  the  Federal  Government  to  lend  its 
aid  to  the  states,  when  requested,  for  the  main- 
tenance of  republican  institutions.  The  Con- 
stitution does  not  define,  and  the  courts  have 
not  attempted  to  give  an  exact  and  compre- 
hensive definition  to  a republican  form  of  gov- 
ernment. The  definition  given  by  Judge  Cooley 
in  his  Principles  of  Constitutional  Law  has, 
however,  been  generally  recognized  as  a sub- 
stantially accurate  one.  “By  a republican 
form  of  government”  he  says  “is  understood  a 
government  by  representatives  chosen  by  the 
people;  and  it  contrasts  on  the  one  side  with 
a democracy,  in  which  the  people  or  community 
as  one  organized  whole  wield  the  sovereign 
powers  of  government,  and,  on  the  other  side, 
with  the  rule  of  one  man,  as  king,  emperor, 
czar,  or  sultan,  or  with  that  of  one  class  of 
men,  as  an  aristocracy.”  A strict  adherence  to 
this  definition  makes  constitutionally  question- 
able the  validity  of  direct  legislation  (see) 
laws  in  the  states  as  tending  to  establish  a 
democratic,  as  distinguished  from  a republican, 
form  of  government;  and,  indeed,  in  certain 
cases  the  state  courts  have  so  held.  In  Luther 
vs.  Burden  (7  Hoioard  1)  it  was  held  by  the 
Supreme  Court  that  the  general  question  as  to 
the  de  jure  character  of  a state  government  is 
one  the  determination  of  which  by  the  political 
departments  of  the  government  is  binding  upon 
the  courts,  and  in  the  Pacific  Telephone  Case 
cited  below,  the  court  likewise  held  that  the 


188 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


question  whether  the  referendum  and  initiative 
are  consistent  with  a republican  form  of  gov- 
ernment is  one  for  determination  by  the  politi- 
cal branches  of  the  government. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  constitutional 
guarantee  is  simply  that  the  state  governments 
shall  be  republican  in  form.  Whether  or  not, 
under  such  governments,  the  popular  will  is, 
in  actual  result,  obeyed,  is  thus  irrelevant.  It 
may  also  be  added  that  the  sphere  of  the  activ- 
ities and  consent  of  the  government,  whether 
limited  to  police  functions  or  socialistically 
extended,  is  equally  without  significance  in  de- 


termining its  republican  or  non-republican 
form. 

See  Legislation,  Direct;  Political  Ques- 
tions; Popular  Government  ; Representa- 
tive Government. 

References:  J.  W.  Garner,  Introduction  to 
Political  Science  (1910),  175  et  seq.;  Fed- 
eralist, Nos.  10,  14,  39;  W.  W.  Willoughby, 
The  Nature  of  the  State  (1896)  ; T.  M.  Cooley, 
Principles  of  Constitutional  Law  (3d  ed., 
1898),  ch.  xi;  Pacific  State  Teleph.  and  Teleg. 
Co.  vs.  Oregon  ([1912]  32  U.  S.  224). 

W.  W.  Willoughby. 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


The  Formative  Period. — The  present  Re- 
publican party  in  America  had  its  origin  in 
the  years  1854  and  1856.  It  was  organized  for 
the  purpose,  primarily,  of  resisting  the  ex- 
tension of  slavery.  The  event  in  American 
history  that  immediately  led  to  its  appearing 
in  the  field  of  politics,  was  the  repeal,  in 
1854,  of  the  Missouri  Compromise  of  1820 
( see  Compromise  of  1820),  or  the  part  of  that 
famous  compromise  restricting  slavery  in  the 
Louisiana  Purchase  above  the  historic  parallel 
of  36°  30'.  For  thirty-four  years  the  Mis- 
souri restriction  had  stood  and  after  the  set- 
tlement by  the  Compromises  of  1850  (see)  of 
the  violent  controversies  over  slavery  resulting 
from  the  Mexican  cessions  of  1848,  it  was  sup- 
posed that  the  status  of  every  foot  of  Amer- 
ican soil  as  to  slavery  was  determined,  and  the 
people  of  the  North  were  ready  to  settle  down 
in  general  acceptance  of  these  compromises  in 
the  hope  of  having  peace  on  the  subject  of 
slavery. 

Their  anticipated  repose  was  rudely  dis- 
turbed by  the  repealing  act  of  1854,  known  as 
the  Kansas-Nebraska  Act  (see)  which,  judged 
by  its  results,  is  one  of  the  most  important 
acts  in  American  legislative  history.  The 
great  majority  of  the  northern  people  felt 
that  an  old  landmark  had  been  disregarded, 
that  an  anti-slavery  barrier  had  been  struck 
down,  while  the  more  ardent  anti-slavery  spir- 
its asserted  that  a “sacred  compact”  of  a 
former  generation  had  been  disregarded  by  an 
aggressive  slave  power  that  intended  to  rule 
the  republic.  The  act  made  the  restriction  of 
slavery  the  dominant  issue  in  American  pol- 
itics, while  the  popular  protest  with  which  it 
was  met  caused  a notable  break-up  of  parties. 
It  divided  the  Democratic  party  (see),  all  but 
annihilated  the  Whig  party  (see),  and  led  the 
more  radical  leaders  of  the  Free  Soil  (see) 
party  to  merge  their  forces  with  others  into 
one  body  whose  dominant  purpose  should  be 
to  restore  the  Missouri  restriction,  to  keep 
slavery  within  the  bounds  in  which  it  then 
was,  and  to  resist  its  further  extension  into 


the  territories.  Men  of  all  parties  were  called 
upon  to  unite  for  this  cause,  and  this  call 
brought  the  Republican  party  into  being. 

Constituent  Elements. — There  were,  as  has 
been  indicated,  three  constituent  elements  of 
the  new  party:  (1)  the  Free  Soilers  (see); 

(2)  the  Anti-Nebraska  Democrats  (see)  ; 

(3)  the  Anti-Nebraska  Whigs,  comprising  the 
great  majority  of  northern  Whigs  and  much 
the  largest  element  of  the  new  party.  The  Re- 
publican party,  therefore,  represents  a new 
party,  a union  of  these  elements,  who  were 
called  upon  to  sink  all  previous  differences  on 
the  historic-economic  issues — banks,  tariffs,  in- 
ternal improvements,  executive  veto,  constitu- 
tional construction,  etc.,  that  had  been  dividing 
Whigs  and  Democrats  since  Jackson’s  day 
(1828-1832),  and  to  unite  in  resistance  to 
legalizing  slavery  by  national  power  in  ter- 
ritory that  had  long  been  free. 

Early  Leaders. — Into  the  new  party,  there- 
fore, came  Democrats  led  by  such  men  as 
Lyman  Trumbull  and  John  M.  Palmer,  of 
Illinois,  Oliver  P.  Morton,  of  Indiana,  George 
S.  Boutwell  and  N.  P.  Banks,  of  Massachu- 
setts, the  Blairs  of  Maryland  and  Missouri, 
Preston  King,  William  Cullen  Bryant,  of  New 
York,  and  Hannibal  Hamlin,  of  Maine;  and 
Whigs  led  by  men  like  Schuyler  Colfax  and  Col. 
Henry  S.  Lane  of  Indiana,  James  W.  Grimes,  of 
Iowa,  Abraham  Lincoln,  of  Illinois,  Jacob  M. 
Howard  and  Zachariah  Chandler,  of  Michigan, 
Tom  Corwin,  Ben  Wade  and  John  Sherman,  of 
Ohio,  Thaddeus  Stevens  of  Pennsylvania,  Wil- 
liam H.  Seward,  Edwin  D.  Morgan  and  Horace 
Greeley,  of  New  York,  and  George  Ashmun,  of 
Massachusetts — together  with  Free  Soilers  un- 
der the  leadership  of  Charles  Sumner,  Henry 
Wilson,  Owen  P.  Lovejoy,  John  G.  Palfrey, 
Charles  Francis  Adams,  Horace  Mann,  Edward 
Wade,  George  W.  Julian,  David  Wilmot,  Sal- 
mon P.  Chase  and  Joshua  R.  Giddings.  The 
anti-slavery  life  and  purpose  of  the  new  party 
was  also  promoted  and  sustained  by  the  teach- 
ers, the  preachers,  the  prophets,  the  poets,  the 
philosophers,  the  literary  guides — by  the  writ- 


189 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


ings  and  public  speeches  of  men  and  women 
like  Henry  Ward  Beecher,  James  Russell  Low- 
ell, George  William  Curtis,  Emerson,  Long- 
fellow, Whittier,  Holmes,  Harriet  Beecher 
Stowe,  Julia  Ward  Howe,  and  by  the  pro- 
gressive religious  and  literary  journals  like 
the  National  Era,  the  New  York  Independent 
and,  later,  by  the  columns  of  the  Atlantic 
Monthly.  These  leaders  and  their  constitu- 
encies thus  came  together  from  various 
sources,  representing  varied  dispositions  and 
opinions,  some  radical,  some  conservative,  some 
prompted  by  moral  motives,  some  by  political, 
their  only  common  bond  and  tenet  of  faith 
being,  “No  further  extension  of  slavery.”  The 
political  abolitionists  and  reformers  gave  the 
party  its  idealism  and  its  aggressive  radical 
impulse;  the  Whigs  brought  to  it  able  leader- 
ship and  the  spirit  of  broad  constitutional  con- 
struction; while  the  Anti-Nebraska  Democrats 
and  Free  Soilers  brought  the  standards  and 
maxims  of  Jacksonian  and  Jeffersonian  democ- 
racy— firm  loyalty  to  the  Union,  adherence 
to  the  legitimate  rights  of  the  states,  and  a 
growing  popular  devotion  to  the  principle  of 
equal  rights  to  all  men  under  the  law. 

Early  History. — The  new  party  came  into 
being  from  spontaneous  movements  in  various 
parts  of  the  country.  The  West  was  the  more 
fertile  field  for  a “progressive”  movement.  It 
was  less  bound  by  party  machinery  and  conser- 
vative interests  and  custom.  There  were  va- 
rious meetings  in  the  spring  and  summer  of 
1854  in  different  parts  of  the  country  a notable 
one  in  Ripon,  Wisconsin,  led  by  A.  E.  Bovay, 
who  corresponded  with  Horace  Greeley  urging 
a new  party  and  the  name  Republican ; but 
the  most  notable  meeting  and  the  one  whose 
anniversary  is  celebrated  as  the  beginning  of 
the  party,  was  that  held  “under  the  oaks”  at 
Jackson,  Michigan,  July  6,  1854.  This  was  a 
state-wide  representative  massJmeeting,  act- 
ing as  a state  convention,  assembled  in  re- 
sponse to  a call  signed  by  several  thousand 
citizens  of  Michigan  inviting  the  cooperation  of 
all  who  were  opposed  to  the  extension  of  slav- 
ery. The  meeting  was  held  in  an  oak  grove 
on  the  outskirts  of  Jackson.  The  chairman 
of  the  committee  on  resolutions,  Jacob  M.  How- 
ard, wrote  and  reported  a platform  of  consid- 
erable length  which  was  unanimously  adopted. 
It  denounced  slavery  as  “a  relic  of  barbarism,” 
as  “a  great  moral,  social,  and  political  evil,” 
and  asserted  that  it  was  the  purpose  of  the 
fathers  of  the  Republic  to  prevent  the  spread 
of  slavery  and  that  it  was  now  the  duty  of 
Congress  to  carry  out  this  purpose  by  re- 
storing the  Missouri  restriction.  The  conven- 
tion also  resolved  that,  “postponing  and  sus- 
pending all  differences  with  regard  to  political 
economy  or  administrative  policy,  we  will  co- 
operate  and  be  known  as  Republicans  until 
after  the  contest  be  determined.”  It  was  also 
earnestly  recommended  that  there  be  called  “a 
general  convention  of  the  free  states  and  such 


of  the  slave-holding  states  as  may  desire  to 
be  there  represented,  with  a view  to  the  adopt- 
ion of  other  more  extended  and  effectual  meas- 
ures in  resistance  to  the  encroachments  of  slav- 
ery.” 

The  Republican  Name. — The  name  Republi- 
can was  very  popular  and  had  been  so  from 
the  earliest  associations  of  American  politics. 
It  was  the  name  that  Jefferson  preferred  for 
the  party  that  he  founded,  and  the  Democratic 
party  had  only  in  recent  years  dropped  the 
honored  affix  “Republican”  from  its  name. 
Indeed,  within  a decade  of  the  time  of  which 
we  speak  Democratic  orators  frequently  re- 
ferred to  their  party  as  “Republican.”  Silas 
Wright  called  himself  a “Republican”  in  1846. 
It  seemed  now,  as  if  their  own  name  was  being 
stolen  and  the  Democrats  so  much  disliked 
the  assumption  of  the  name  by  their  new  op- 
ponents that  they  refused  to  recognize  the 
right  of  possession  in  the  new  party,  and  they 
dubbed  its  adherents  with  the  opprobrious 
epithets,  “Black  Republicans,”  “Abolitionist 
Republicans,”  and  “Negro  Worshippers.”  But 
the  new  Republicans,  contended  that  the  name 
was  especially  fitting  and  proper  for  them, 
since  they  were  to  call  upon  the  nation  to 
walk  again  in  the  path  of  their  Republican 
fathers  who  had  so  persistently  and  success- 
fully striven  to  prevent  the  extension  of  slav- 
ery to  western  territory  by  the  famous  ordi- 
nances of  1784  and  1787. 

Growth  of  the  New  Party. — So  popular  was 
the  cause  for  which  the  new  party  stood,  that 
in  the  first  year  of  its  existence  it  carried 
a popular  majority  in  about  half  the  states 
and  elected  a number  of  United  States  Senat- 
ors by  combinations  in  several  states;  a Con- 
gress was  elected  whose  plurality,  though  com- 
posed of  diverse  elements — Republicans,  Anti- 
Nebraska  Democrats,  Anti-Slavery  Whigs  and 
“Know  Nothings”  (see)  elected  the  first  Re- 
publican Speaker,  Nathaniel  P.  Banks,  of 
Massachusetts,  and  the  Democrats  were  un- 
able to  regain  control  of  the  House  and  elect 
another  Speaker  for  a period  of  twenty  years. 

First  Organization  and  Conventions. — In  the 
history  of  parties  the  organization  has  gener- 
ally proceeded  not  from  the  federal  center 
but  from  the  local  communities  and  precincts 
to  the  nation  at  large.  It  was  so  with  the 
Republican  party.  The  state  and  local  organi- 
zations were  first  effected,  and  became  the 
basis  for  the  call  of  the  first  “general  con- 
vention,” or  interstate  convention,  which  had 
been  recommended  by  Michigan.  The  call  was 
issued  January  17,  1856,  by  the  chairman  of 
nine  Republican  state  committees,  for  a con- 
vention to  meet  at  Pittsburg  February  22,  1856 
— following  a custom  of  new  parties  in  clios- 
ing  notable  national  anniversaries  for  their 
conventions.  This  was  not  a nominating  con- 
vention nor  a convention  of  regular  delegates 
selected  by  constituent  assemblies  in  the  states. 
It  was  a mass  convention  for  conference  and 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


organization,  made  up  of  men  who  favored  a 
new  national  anti-slavery  party  and  who  came 
as  volunteers  to  the  service.  Delegates  were 
present  from  twenty-three  states.  Francis  P. 
Blair,  an  old  Democrat  and  an  intimate  friend 
of  Andrew  Jackson,  was  made  permanent  presi- 
dent. Henry  J.  Raymond,  editor  of  the  New 
York  Times,  wrote  me  address  adopted  by  the 
convention  demanding  the  repeal  of  all  laws 
“which  allow  the  introduction  of  slavery  into 
territory  once  consecrated  to  freedom;”  propos- 
ing “the  immediate  admission  of  Kansas  as  a 
free  state,”  and  denouncing  the  present  pro- 
slavery Democratic  administration.  George  W. 
Julian,  of  Indiana,  acted  as  chairman  of  the 
committee  on  organization  and  reported  a plan 
of  action  through  which  the  new  party  took 
life,  providing  for  the  appointment  of  a na- 
tional executive  committee,  the  holding  of  a 
national  convention  in  Philadelphia  on  the 
17th  of  June — the  anniversary  of  the  battle 
of  Bunker  Hill — to  nominate  candidates  for 
President  and  Vice-President,  and  for  the  more 
complete  organization  of  the  party  in  counties 
and  districts  throughout  the  states. 

First  National  Nominating  Convention. — In 
the  convention  at  Philadelphia  John  C.  Fre- 
mont (see),  the  “Pathfinder,”  a military  and 
romantic  explorer,  who  was  without  civil  or 
political  experience,  was  nominated  for  Presi- 
dent, and  William  L.  Dayton  of  New  Jersey 
for  Vice-President.  The  party  declared  it  to 
be  “both  the  right  and  duty  of  Congress  to 
prohibit  in  the  territorities  those  twin  relics 
of  barbarism,  polygamy  and  slavery.”  In  the 
fall  elections  of  1856  Fremont  carried  all  the 
free  states  except  New  York,  Pennsylvania, 
Indiana  and  Illinois,  receiving  a popular  vote 
of  1,341,264,  and  an  electoral  vote  of  113  as 
against  174  for  Buchanan,  his  Democratic  op- 
ponent. 

Democratic  Schism:  Leadership  of  Lincoln. — 

In  1857  by  the  Dred  Scott  (see)  opinion,  the 
Supreme  Court  affirmed  that  Congress  had  no 
constitutional  power  to  prohibit  slavery  in 
the  territories.  This  outlawed  the  Republican 
program,  and,  if  assented  to,  the  new  party 
had  no  ground  to  stand  upon,  no  reason  for 
being.  The  Republicans  denounced  this  de- 
cision and  gave  it  to  be  understood  that  they 
would  seek  its  reversal,  and  Lincoln,  the  cou- 
rageous and  prescient  Republican  leader  rising 
in  the  West,  representing  the  Republicans  of 
Illinois  and  contesting  before  the  voters  for 
Douglas’s  seat  in  the  Senate,  voiced  a popular 
and  positive  opposition  to  judicial  interference 
in  politics  and  to  the  consequent  nullification  of 
an  anti-slavery  policy  which  the  nation  might 
choose  to  adopt.  Lincoln,  in  accepting  his 
party  nomination  for  the  senatorship,  set 
forth  his  sage  diagnosis  of  the  political  situ- 
ation: that  the  Union,  like  a house  divided 
against  itself,  cannot  endure  permanently  half 
slave  and  half  free;  while  he  did  not  expect 
the  house  to  fall  or  the  Union  to  be  dis- 


solved, he  did  expect  that  it  would  cease  to 
be  divided.  “It  will  become  all  one  thing  or 
all  the  other.  Either  the  opponents  of  slavery 
will  arrest  the  further  spread  of  it  and  place 
it  where  the  public  mind  shall  rest  in  the  be- 
lief that  it  is  in  the  course  of  ultimate  ex- 
tinction; or  its  advocates  will  push  it  forward 
till  it  shall  be  alike  lawful  in  all  the  states, 
old  as  well  as  new.  North  as  well  as  South” 
(June  17,  1858).  The  early  history  of  the 
Republican  party  cannot  be  understood  with- 
out some  appreciation  of  the  great  weight  at- 
taching to  this  speech  and  to  the  controversy 
that  followed  its  utterance.  Lincoln  sought 
to  lead  the  people  to  see  that  the  nation  was 
standing  at  the  parting  of  the  ways.  A little 
later  in  the  year,  Seward  voiced  the  same 
opinion  of  the  crisis  in  his  celebrated  “Irre- 
pressible Conflict”  (see)  speech,  at  Rochester, 
October  25,  1858 — a speech  which  attracted 
greater  attention  and  aroused  greater  oppo- 
sition than  did  Lincoln’s. 

In  the  same  year  the  Republicans  gained  by 
a Democratic  schism.  Douglas  led  an  insur- 
gent Democratic  revolt  against  Buchanan’s 
policy  of  bringing  Kansas  into  the  Union  as  a 
slave  state  under  a constitution  not  fairly 
submitted  to  the  voters  of  Kansas  and  known 
to  be  contrary  to  her  people’s  will  ( see  Anti- 
Lecompton  Democrats).  During  Lincoln’s 
contest  with  Douglas  for  the  Senate  (1858) 
eastern  Republicans,  Greeley  and  Seward 
among  them,  urged  the  party  in  Illinois  to 
withdraw  opposition  to  Douglas’  return  to  the 
Senate  on  the  ground  that  Douglas  might  be 
the  best  instrument  for  opposing  the  Demo- 
cratic administration  and  the  slave  power, 
though  it  had  been  clearly  demonstrated  that 
Douglas  had  no  real  purpose  to  oppose 
either  slavery  or  slavery  extension,  since 
he  did  “not  care  whether  slavery  was  voted 
up  or  voted  down.”  Lincoln  held  the  party 
in  the  West  true  to  its  course  and  its 
principles,  saving  it  from  disaster  if  not  from 
dissolution  by  urging  the  people  to  elect  to 
power  men  who  did  care  about  the  right  or 
wrong  of  slavery,  and  by  clearly  defining  and 
presenting  to  the  people  the  fundamental  issue 
as  between  those  who  thought  that  slavery 
was  right  and  ought  to  be  extended  and  those 
who  thought  it  wrong  and  ought  to  be  re- 
stricted. Lincoln  was  as  much  opposed  to  the 
vain  and  evasive  policy  of  Douglas  as  he  was 
to  the  defiant  and  aggressive  policy  of  Jeffer- 
son Davis  and  Buchanan,  and  in  the  famous 
Lincoln-Douglas  debates  of  1858  he  forced 
Douglas  to  the  declaration  of  his  “Freeport 
doctrine”  or  his  doctrine  of  “unfriendly  legis- 
lation” in  which  Douglas  asserted  the  power 
of  a territory,  prior  to  forming  a state  con- 
stitution, to  bar  slavery  by  unfriendly  police 
regulations — notwithstanding  the  Dred  Scott 
decision.  This  alienated  the  South,  added  to 
the  breach  in  the  Democratic  party,  and  paved 
the  way  to  Republican  victory  in  1860. 


191 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


The  Election  of  1860. — In  1860  the  Republi- 
cans faced  a divided  opposition  and  with  the 
assurance  of  victory  thus  given  the  caution 
and  conservatism  of  the  party  came  to  the 
front.  Compared  with  Seward  and  Chase,  who 
had  been  in  the  forefront  of  the  anti-slavery 
battle  for  a decade,  Lincoln  was  looked  upon 
as  safe  and  conservative.  He  was  compar- 
atively unknown  and  on  the  plea  of  “availa- 
bility” the  more  distinguished  party  leaders 
were  set  aside,  and  Lincoln  was  nominated. 
The  party  declared  for  the  principles  of  the 
Declaration  of  Independence — the  equality  of 
all  men  before  the  law  in  their  right  to  life, 
liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness;  for  the 
rights  of  the  states  and  the  union  of  the 
states,  and  they  denounced  Democratic  threats 
of  disunion.  Among  the  rights  of  the  states 
they  asserted  the  right  of  each  “to  order  and 
control  its  own  domestic  institutions  in  its 
own  way,”  and  they  denounced  “the  lawless 
invasion  by  armed  force  of  the  soil  of  any 
State  or  Territory,”  referring  to  John  Brown’s 
raid,  which  had  been  a source  of  blame  and 
embarrassment  to  the  party  and  which  its 
leaders  wished  thus  officially  to  disclaim.  The 
party  declared  the  “normal  condition  of  the 
Territories  is  that  of  freedom,”  and  that  as 
“our  Republican  fathers”  maintained  that 
status  for  the  early  territories,  so  it  was  the 
duty  of  Congress  to  maintain  it  now  against 
all  attempts  at  violation.  The  platform  went 
farther  and  denied  “the  authority  of  Congress, 
of  a Territorial  legislature  or  of  any  individ- 
uals, to  give  legal  existence  to  slavery  in  any 
Territory  of  the  United  States.”  The  party 
again  declared  for  the  admission  of  Kansas  as 
a free  state,  and,  largely  because  of  the  pre- 
ponderance of  its  Whig  element  and  the  in- 
fluence of  Horace  Greeley  in  his  powerful 
New  York  Weekly  Tribune,  it  declared  for  a 
homestead  policy,  river  and  harbor  improve- 
ments, a land  subsidy  to  a Pacific  railway,  and 
for  such  an  adjustment  of  import  duties  as 
would  “encourage  the  development  of  the  in- 
dustries of  the  whole  country.”  It  was  in  this 
mild  declaration  the  party  first  committed  it- 
self to  the  policy  of  protection. 

During  the  Civil  War. — With  Lincoln’s  elec- 
tion the  secession  movement  began,  and  before 
his  inauguration  southern  Senators  and  Rep- 
resentatives had  resigned  their  seats  in  Con- 
gress, the  southern  Confederacy  had  been 
formed,  and  the  country  was  facing  the  crisis 
of  a dismembered  union  and  civil  war. 

By  the  time  of  Lincoln’s  inauguration  all 
efforts  to  save  the  Union  by  compromise  had 
ended.  With  the  beginning  of  war  the  para- 
mount issue  confronting  Lincoln  and  the  Re- 
publican party  had  changed.  In  1860  that 
issue  had  been  the  restriction  of  slavery:  it 
was  now  the  restriction  of  secession  and  the 
saving  of  the  Union.  Lincoln  sought  to  lead 
his  party  on  a conservative  course.  He  official- 
ly declared  in  his  first  inaugural  that  he  had 


“no  purpose,  directly  or  indirectly  to  interfere 
with  the  institution  of  slavery  where  it  exists;” 
lie  believed  that  he  “had  no  lawful  right  to 
do  so”  and  he  had  “no  inclination  to  do  so.” 
Congress  voiced  the  same  conservative  dispo- 
sition 5”  the  notable  Crittenden  Resolution 
(see  Crittenden,  John  J.)  defining  the 
purpose  of  the  war,  July  21,  1861.  This  was 
to  maintain  the  Constitution,  save  the  Union, 
and  enforce  the  laws  and  was  not  to  make 
conquest  of  the  states  nor  to  disturb  their 
“domestic  institutions.”  The  people  were  to 
be  called  upon  to  fight  and  pay,  not  in  a war 
for  abolition,  but  solely  for  the  Union.  On 
that  plain  issue  all  opposing  voices  seemed 
stilled,  and  the  North  presented  the  appear- 
ance of  a political  unity.  It  was  clearly  not 
the  purpose,  of  the  great  body  of  the  Republi- 
can party  at  the  opening  of  the  war  to  over- 
throw slavery,  and  it  was  the  party  intention 
as  it  was  that  of  Lincoln  to  respect  the  Con- 
stitution in  all  things  and  to  consider  it 
binding  the  same  in  war  as  in  peace. 

The  political  unity  that  seemed  to  prevail 
in  the  national  patriotic  uprising  that  followed 
the  fall  of  Sumter  was  not  of  long  duration, 
Lincoln  and  his  supporters  would  have  wel- 
comed the  union  of  the  North  in  support  of 
the  war  on  a “no-party”  basis,  but  the  vigor- 
ous use  of  the  war  powers  and  advances  toward 
emancipation  startled  the  old  school,  strict 
constructionists  and  those  who  detested  aboli- 
tionism, and  there  was  early  manifest  a ten- 
dency toward  a division  of  the  country  into 
two  contending  party  groups — a division  that 
was  marked  within  the  Republican  party  it- 
self and  that  indicated  conflicting  tendencies 
and  dispositions  toward  slavery  and  the  Con- 
stitution. (1)  The  Radicals— the  stout  anti- 
slavery men  on  the  one  hand,  like  Chase  in 
the  Cabinet,  Stevens,  Julian,  and  Lovejoy  in 
the  House,  Sumner,  Wilson,  Wade  and  others 
in  the  Senate,  who  wished  on  all  occasions  to 
strike  at  slavery,  not  only  as  a means  of  sub- 
duing the  Confederacy  but  as  an  end  most 
desirable  in  itself;  who  held  that  the  old 
Union  had  been  reduced  to  ruins,  that  the  de- 
struction of  slavery  was  a precondition  to 
the  restoration  of  a new  Union,  and  that  to 
restore  the  Union  with  slavery  would  only 
leave  in  the  body  politic  the  cause  and  seeds 
of  civil  strife  and  rebellion.  These  radicals 
were  always  loyal  and  ardent  Union  men,  but 
they  were  anxious  to  see  to  it  that  after  the 
Union  was  restored  by  war  the  “foot  of  a 
slave  should  never  again  tread  the  soil  of 
the  Republic.”  To  achieve  this  end  they  were 
ready,  if  necessary,  to  construe  the  Consti- 
tution most  broadly,  or  to  act  independentlv 
of  its  restrictions  by  the  assumption  of  what- 
ever war  powers  seemed  to  them  necessary. 
(2)  The  other  wing  was  made  up  of  the  Con- 
servatives. These  were  unionists  who  were  not 
particularly  anti-slavery  in  their  feelings  and 
interests.  They  heartily  disliked  abolitionism 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


and  ultra  measures;  tliey  were  afraid  that 
attacks  on  slavery  would  reopen  political 
strife,  divide  the  North,  alienate  the  border 
slave  states  {see)  still  in  danger  of  seceding, 
and  detach  other  support  that  was  needed  for 
the  Union  cause.  They  were  inclined  to  apply 
all  the  constitutional  restraints  as  recognized 
in  times  of  peace  and  would  support  the  war 
only  if  it  were  constitutionally  conducted. 

Between  these  two  policies  and  contending 
forces  Lincoln  had  to  steer  his  course.  It  was 
in  this  and  in  his  readiness  to  advance  only 
as  fast  as  public  opinion  would  sustain  him 
that  he  achieved  his  great  success.  Lincoln 
kept  before  him  the  integrity  of  the  Union  as 
the  “primary  object  of  the  war,”  and  while  he 
was  ready  to  employ  “all  indispensable  means” 
to  that  end  he  thought  he  ought  not  to  be  in 
haste  to  determine  that  “radical  and  extreme 
measures  were  indispensable,”  as  these  might 
“reach  the  loyal  as  well  as  the  disloyal.”  He 
would  await  the  control  of  events.  This 
brought  upon  him  criticism  from  the  radical 
anti-slavery  wing  of  the  party,  a citieism  ex- 
pressed with  great  force  in  Greeley’s  famous 
open  letter  in  the  Tribune,  “The  Prayer  of 
Twenty  Millions,”  in  which  the  great  editor 
brought  the  charge  that  the  President  was  too 
much  under  the  influence  of  “fossil  politicians 
from  the  border  states”  and  was  showing  “too 
much  deference  to  rebel  slavery.”  Lincoln’s 
classic  reply  defined  his  policy  toward  slavery 
in  his  party  leadership  in  the  war  for  the 
tfnion.  He  would  save  the  Union  the  quickest 
way  possible  under  the  Constitution.  What  he 
did  or  refrained  from  doing  about  slavery  was 
prompted  by  that  motive.  If  he  could  save  the 
Union  by  freeing  all  the  slaves  he  would  do 
that;  if  he  could  save  the  Union  by  leaving 
all  in  bondage  he  would  do  that;  if  he  could 
save  the  Union  by  freeing  some  and  leaving 
others  in  bondage  he  would  do  that. 

This  was  the  Union-saving  policy  of  the  Re- 
publican party.  Lincoln,  like  the  party,  was 
naturally  anti-slavery.  He  and  his  party 
recognized  that  the  LTnion  must  be  preserved 
and  all  “indispensable  means”  to  that  end 
must  be  employed. 

The  events  of  but  little  more  than  a year 
brought  Lincoln  and  his  party  to  the  convic- 
tion that  the  true  war  policy  was  to  destroy 
slavery  as  a means  of  saving  the  Union,  but 
every  advanced  step  taken  to  interfere  with 
slavery  or  to  strain  the  Constitution  caused 
reaction  and  political  opposition.  Bv  the  fall 
of  1862  the  Constitutional  Union  Democrats 
were  in  the  field  contesting  the  congressional 
elections  with  the  Republicans.  They  attacked 
the  administration  on  account  of  its  “uncon- 
stitutional and  abolition  tendencies.”  They 
charged  it  with  administrative  corruption,  and 
held  it  responsible  for  military  failures.  They 
objected  to  confiscation,  arbitrary  arrests,  the 
increase  of  taxes,  the  draft,  emancipation — 
these  and  almost  every  other  measure  that 


had  been  adopted  for  the  prosecution  of  the 
war  were  denounced  as  “unconstitutional.” 
They  charged  that  a lawful  war  for  the  Union 
had  been  turned  into  an  unlawful  war  for  the 
negro.  In  the  spirit  of  legalism  they  insisted 
upon  the  forms  of  the  law;  they  would  have 
only  the  “Constitution  as  it  is  and  the  Union 
as  it  was,”  and,  aroused  especially  by  the 
growth  of  executive  power,  the  suspension  of 
habeas  corpus  and  arbitrary  imprisonments, 
they  sought  to  excite  in  the  minds  of  the  peo- 
ple a fear  that  the  war,  waged  ostensibly  for 
the  suppression  of  the  rebellion  at  the  South 
was  being  used  for  the  suppression  of  free 
institutions  at  the  North.  This  opposition  of 
the  Constitutional  Union  Democrats  was  so 
strong  and  the  reaction  so  positive  that  the 
Republicans  almost  lost  control  of  the  House 
in  the  elections  of  1862.  New  York,  Penn- 
sylvania, and  some  of  the  middle  western 
states  came  into  the  control  of  the  “Peace 
Democrats”  (see  Anti-War  Democrats)  and 
the  administration  was  saved  chiefly  by  the 
support  of  New  England  and  the  border 
states. 

But  Lincoln  and  his  party  did  not  retrace 
their  steps.  They  continued  their  anti-slav- 
ery policy  in  the  conduct  of  the  war,  and  in 
1863-1864  Lincoln  urged  upon  Congress  the 
policy  of  making  emancipation  a finality,  by 
a constitutional  amendment,  abolishing  slav- 
ery forever  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
United  States.  The  Republican  party  in  its 
national  convention  of  1864  declared  for  this 
policy,  denouncing  slavery  as  “the  cause  and 
strength  of  this  rebellion;”  they  asserted  that 
“justice  and  national  safety  demand  its  utter 
and  complete  extirpation  from  the  soil  of  the 
Republic,”  and  they  deemed  it  neither  safe  nor 
fruitful  to  “negotiate  with  rebels  with  arms 
in  their  hands.”  They,  therefore,  in  the  cam- 
paign of  1864  presented  to  the  country  as  the 
vital  issue  of  the  hour  the  vigorous  prose- 
cution of  the  war  as  the  only  means  of  saving 
the  Union.  For  the  sake  of  rallying  all  ele- 
ments to  the  support  of  the  Union  and  the 
war,  the  party  was  ready  to  abandon  its  name, 
and  the  Republicans  called  themselves  in  1864 
the  “National  Union  Party”  (see  Union 
Party  ) and  to  emphasize  still  further  their 
non-sectional  and  national-union  spirit,  the 
party  refused  Vice-President  Hamlin  a re- 
nomination and  took  up,  in  his  stead,  Andrew 
Johnson  of  Tennessee — a mistake  that  caused 
the  party,  if  not  the  country,  bitter  regret  in 
the  years  immediately  following. 

It  has  been  claimed  that  the  Republican 
party  in  this  campaign  was  a different  party 
from  the  one  that  elected  Lincoln  in  1860. 
True,  it  held  a different  name;  it  appealed  to 
the  country  on  a different  issue;  it  had  a dif- 
ferent constituent  membership,  as  many  Doug- 
las and  Breckinridge  Democrats — “War  Demo- 
crats” (seel,  as  they  were  called,  like  Dix  and 
Stanton  and  Butler  and  Logan — had  come  into 


193 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


it.  But  this  merely  meant  that  the  Repub- 
licans in  1804,  were  recognizing  the  paramount 
issue  of  the  hour  and  were  appealing  to  the 
support  of  all  Union  men  regardless  of  party. 
The  party  of  Lincoln  in  1864  was  the  Republi- 
can party.  Their  opponents  recognized  this 
and  called  them  Republicans,  while  calling 
themselves  “Constitutional  LTnionists.”  The 
parties  were  accomodating  themselves  to  the 
situation,  each  changing  with  the  times,  and 
while  there  are  marked  historical  differences 
in  personnel  and  purpose  in  the  Republican 
party  at  this  stage  of  its  life  over  that  of 
1860,  the  changes  were  those  prompted  by 
the  temporary  problems  confronting  the  party. 
They  were  not  organic,  and  the  historical  con- 
tinuity in  the  life  of  the  party  was  unbroken. 

With  the  decisive  reelection  of  Lincoln  in 
1864,  the  success  of  the  war  was  assured. 
Under  its  policy  of  liberal  construction  of  the 
Constitution  during  the  period  of  war,  the 
Republican  party  became  responsible  for,  and 
should  be  credited  with,  other  policies  and  acts 
of  legislation — the  legal  tender  currency  ( see 
Legal  Tender;  Paper  Money)  ; the  great  war 
revenue  measures;  the  national  banking  sys- 
tem (see  Banks  and  Banking  Acts,  Nation- 
al) ; the  homestead  ( see  Public  Lands)  poli- 
cy; the  establishment  of  an  Agricultural  De- 
partment (see)  and,  by  land  donations,  of  agri- 
cultural colleges  (see  Morrell  Grant)  in  the 
states;  government  subsidy  to  the  Pacific  Rail- 
way and  the  beginning  of  that  great  project; 
and  the  successful  settlement  of  foreign  compli- 
cations that  prevented  the  interference  of  for- 
eign powers. 

With  the  conclusion  of  the  war  the  Republi- 
can party  gained  the  prestige  that  follows 
success.  It  had  killed  secession,  crushed  the 
rebellion,  destroyed  slavery,  and  saved  the 
Lhiion.  The  party  was  quick  to  assume  to 
itself  the  credit  for  these  notable  results  of 
the  war  and  it  had  now  to  address  itself  to 
making  them  permanent  in  the  law  and  policies 
of  the  future  This  was  its  problem  in  the 
dire  period  of  reconstruction. 

The  Party  in  Reconstruction. — During  the 
war  a conflict  on  reconstruction  (see)  had 
been  foreshadowed  within  the  party.  The 
radical  congressional  leaders  refused  to  accept 
Lincoln’s  “ten  per  cent  plan”  and  Lincoln  de- 
feated by  a “pocket  veto”  the  “Wade-Davis 
plan”  of  Congress.  This  was  before  the  elec- 
tion of  1864,  and  the  party,  feeling  the  need 
of  united  action  in  an  electoral  contest  with 
the  opponents  of  the  war,  allowed  reconstruc- 
tion to  rest  until  the  war  was  over.  Johnson 
acted,  virtually,  on  Lincoln’s  policy,  regarding 
reconstruction  as  wholly  an  executive  problem, 
and  in  December,  1865,  he  submitted  to  Con- 
gress a plan  which  he  had  devised  and  put 
into  operation  during  the  summer  and  fall  of 
that  year.  He  had  recognized  the  seceding 
state  governments  with  their  old  electorate, 
their  old  constitutions,  their  old  leadership 


(subject  to  his  amnesty)  and  he  had  arranged 
to  restore  the  states  to  the  Union  on  their 
so  amending  their  constitutions  as  to  invali- 
date secession,  repudiate  the  Confederate  debt, 
and  accept  the  Thirteenth  Amendment.  He  as- 
sumed that  these  guarantees,  though  accepted 
by  the  southern  states  only  under  duress  of 
executive  power  and  as  a means  of  regaining 
their  full  rights  of  local  control,  would  be 
fairly  and  faithfully  executed. 

The  proposal  of  this  plan  to  a Congress  that 
had  never  been  consulted  in  its  devising 
aroused  a political  conflict  unsurpassed  in  the 
history  of  Congress.  The  39th  Congress,  elect- 
ed in  1864,  had  a large  Republican  majority. 
The  party  had  borne  the  burden  and  heat  and 
sacrifices  of  the  war.  Its  northern  constit- 
uents had  been  aroused  to  hatred  of  slavery, 
to  sore  anger  by  the  assassination  of  Lincoln, 
and  to  passion  and  resentment  by  what  they 
looked  upon  as  the  deep  and  unprovoked  crimes 
of  the  rebellion.  It  now  faced  a crisis  and  a 
division  within  its  ranks — a conflict  between 
its  presidential  and  congressional  leadership. 
It  was  obvious,  from  the  temper  of  Congress, 
the  tone  of  the  northern  press,  and  notable 
speeches  made  in  the  fall  of  1865  by  Radical 
leaders  like  Sumner  and  Stevens,  that  if 
Johnson  adhered  to  his  “Presidential  Plan” 
of  reconstruction  he  would  antagonize  and 
break  with  the  great  body  of  the  party  that 
elected  him  to  office.  This  he  did,  and  in  his 
“Jolmsonizing”  he  carried  with  him  in  support 
of  his  policy  some  notable  leaders  in  the  Re- 
publican party,  chief  among  whom  were  Seward 
and  Welles  in  the  Cabinet,  Doolittle  and  Cowen 
in  the  Senate,  and  Henry  J.  Raymond  in  the 
House,  the  latter  at  the  time  being  the  chair- 
man of  the  party’s  national  committee.  If 
these  men,  all  of  whom  were  acting  as  Republi- 
cans, hoped  to  induce  Congress  to  accept  John- 
son’s plan  of  restoration,  unmodified  by  con- 
gressional influence  or  advice,  it  shows  how 
little  they  understood  the  sentiment  and  pur- 
pose of  the  country  and  its  representatives. 
The  radical  Republican  leaders  in  Congress, 
together  with  more  moderate  ones,  like  Fes- 
senden, Sherman,  Morrill  and  Trumbull,  were 
able  to  hold  the  great  body  of  the  party  in 
opposition  to  Johnson.  They  refused  to  recog- 
nize Johnson’s  reconstructed  states  or  to  ad- 
mit their  representatives  to  seats  in  Con- 
gress, and  they  resolved  that  there  should 
be  no  such  recognition  until  a joint  committee 
on  reconstruction  from  the  two  houses  should 
report  in  favor  thereof.  The  Republican  lead- 
ers in  Congress  then  applied  themselves  to  a 
congressional  plan  of  reconstruction  that  would 
make  secure  what  they  deemed  to  be  the  vital 
and  essential  results  of  the  war. 

In  the  first  place  they  insisted  that 
the  rebuilding  of  the  nation  after  its  de- 
struction by  war  -was  a fundamental  na- 
tional problem,  in  the  solution  of  which 
Congress  should  assert  its  prerogative  of 


194 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


determining  the  policy  to  be  pursued.  There 
had  been  an  abnormal  increase  of  executive 
power  during  the  war,  but  what  congressional 
leaders  endured  in  the  emergency  of  war  under 
Lincoln  they  were  not  patient  with  now.  Now 
that  the  war  was  over,  Lincoln  dead,  a “state 
rights”  southern  Democrat  in  the  President’s 
chair,  and  the  conservative  Seward  and  his 
colleagues  in  the  Cabinet  tainted  with  asso- 
ciation with  Johnson  and  his  policy,  radicalism 
came  into  more  complete  control  of  the  Re- 
publican party  in  Congress.  Thaddeus  Stevens, 
the  masterful  Republican  leader  in  the  House, 
with  the  party  majority  at  his  back,  now  pro- 
posed that  Congress  should  assert  itself  against 
the  President,  exercise  its  due  authority  and 
not  permit  the  absurdity  and  humilation  of 
having  its  functions  reduced,  in  a great  na- 
tional emergency,  to  those  of  its  committee 
on  privileges  and  elections.  If  the  President 
had  presumed  to  reconstruct  the  LTnion  and  the 
states  in  his  military  capacity  as  commander- 
in-chief,  he  should  be  given  to  understand 
that  Congress  was  his  commander-in-chief  and 
that  he  should  obey  its  will.  The  Republican 
party  had  to  choose  its  course  in  this  impend- 
ing conflict  of  powers. 

In  the  second  place,  the  Republican  con- 
gressional leaders  proposed  to  guarantee  more 
fully  the  rights  and  interests  of  the  freedmen. 
The  slaves  had  been  set  free  by  the  war,  but 
they  were  ignorant,  helpless,  and  in  poverty, 
and  the  reconstructed  state  governments  that 
Johnson  had  set  up  had  adopted  vagrancy 
codes  that,  as  was  believed,  would  virtually  re- 
duce the  blacks  again  to  bondage.  Johnson 
cared  but  little  for  the  “rights”  of  the  black 
man,  but  he  held  tenaciously  to  the  idea  that 
it  was  a “state’s  right”  to  safeguard  the  rights 
and  interests  of  all  domiciled  within  its 
borders;  while  the  anti-slavery  Republicans  of 
the  North  thought  with  dread  of  the  negro’s 
fate  if  left  entirely  to  the  tender  mercies  of 
the  former  masters  who  had  been  made  to 
surrender  slavery  only  by  the  fortunes  of  war. 
The  Republican  party,  therefore,  became  re- 
sponsible for  a number  of  measures  designed 
to  afford  national  protection  to  the  freedmen. 
It  passed  the  Freedmen’s  Bureau  Bill  (see) 
asserting  a national  guardianship  of  the  freed- 
men through  military  agencies.  It  passed  the 
Civil  Rights  Bill  (see)  recognising  the  negro 
as  a citizen,  securing  him  in  his  rights  of  per- 
son and  property  and  forbidding  any  state  to 
discriminate  against  him  in  its  laws.  It  was 
the  intention  of  the  Republican  party,  in  ad- 
herence to  the  broad  democratic  principle  of 
“equal  rights  for  all  and  special  privileges 
for  none,”  to  make  the  protection  of  civil 
liberty  and  human  rights  a national  function, 
requiring  the  states  to  treat  all  their  inhabi- 
tants with  equal  justice  in  respect  to  life, 
liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness.  Herein 
lay  the  vitality  of  the  Republican  cause  in  re- 
construction— in  this  noble  ideal  of  American 


democracy.  In  order  to  secure  this  democratic 
principle  against  subsequent  violation  or  eva- 
sion by  the  states,  the  Republican  party  wrote 
it  into  the  fundamental  law  of  the  land  in 
the  first  clause  of  the  Fourteenth  Amend- 
ment (see). 

The  Republican  leaders  next  sought  a read- 
justment of  political  power.  Anti-slavery  men 
had  never  liked  southern  representation  for 
three-fifths  of  the  slaves  (Const.  Art.  I,  Sec. 
ii,  If  3).  Now  that  slavery  was  abolished,  all 
the  former  slaves  would  be  counted  for  repre- 
sentation, while  only  the  whites  would  vote; 
and  thus  the  political  power  of  the  southern 
whites  would  be  proportionately  increased.  As 
Colliding  expressed  it,  “the  death  of  slavery 
would  add  two-fifths  to  the  entire  power  which 
slavery  had  when  slavery  was  living.”  The 
result  would  be  that  one  ex-Confederate  in 
South  Carolina  could  exercise  more  political 
power  in  Washington  than  two  returned 
soldiers  of  the  Union  in  Ohio  or  Massachu- 
setts. While  127,000  whites  in  New  York 
would  have  one  vote  in  Congress,  the  same 
number  of  whites  in  Mississippi  would  have 
three.  The  glaring  inequity  called  for  re- 
adjustment. The  Republican  leaders,  there- 
fore, proposed,  not  to  force  negro  suffrage  on 
the  South — suffrage  should  still  be  left  with 
the  states — but  that  if  the  negroes  were  to  be 
excluded  from  the  suffrage  the  South  should 
suffer  a corresponding  reduction  in  representa- 
tion and  power.  The  radical  Republicans  be- 
lieved that  if  Johnson’s  reconstructed  states 
were  recognised  and  their  representatives  ad- 
mitted to  seats  in  Congress  and  the  electoral 
College,  they  could,  in  combination  with  the 
“copperheads”  of  the  North,  as  they  called  the 
Democrats,  control  a majority  in  Congress 
and  elect  the  President,  and,  as  a consequence, 
the  legislation  of  the  “Loyal  Union  Party,” 
and  the  results  of  the  war  would  be  lost  and 
undone — the  “rebel”  debt  would  be  assumed, 
the  federal  debt  repudiated,  the  freedmen  op- 
pressed, and  southern  state  constitutions  would 
be  so  reamended  as  to  enable  those  com- 
munities virtually  to  restore  slavery.  They 
would  scorn  and  disregard  their  constitutions 
that  had  been  imposed  upon  them  by  the  Presi- 
dent in  the  exercise  of  his  military  power. 
There  must  be  permanent  constitutional  pro- 
vision against  such  a possibility.  If  the  Re- 
publicans could  induce  negro  suffrage  by  the 
premium  of  added  power,  they  hoped  to  build 
up  a Republican  party  in  the  South  and  share, 
if  not  control,  southern  representation  in  Con- 
gress. If,  on  the  other  hand,  negro  suffrage 
were  denied  by  the  states,  then  they  would 
inflict  such  a material  reduction  of  power  on 
that  section — a reduction  of  representation 
from  83  to  46  in  Congress  and  the  electoral 
college,  that,  as  Stevens  expressed  it,  “let  them 
have  all  the  ‘Copperhead’  assistance  they  can 
get,  they  will  remain  a shriveled  and  dried 
up  nonentity,”  in  a hopeless  minority. 


195 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


The  Republicans,  then,  appealed  to  the 
country  on  the  guarantees  of  the  Fourteenth 
Amendment — citizenship  and  civil  rights  for 
all,  fair  political  apportionment,  repudiation 
of  the  Confederate  debt,  guarantee  of  the  fed- 
eral debt,  and  the  exclusion  from  office  in 
state  and  nation,  subject  to  the  grace  of  Con- 
gress, of  all  who,  having  taken  an  oath  to 
support  the  Constitution,  had  afterwards  gone 
into  the  rebellion.  In  the  notable  election  of 
1866,  the  people  sustained  the  Congressional 
policy  by  returning  a Congress  of  more  than 
two-thirds  majority  against  the  President.  In 
this  campaign,  the  Republicans  organized  for 
the  first  time  the  congressional  campaign 
committee,  ( see  Committees,  Party)  as  an 
agent  to  present  the  party  cause  to  the  people, 
since  the  machinery  of  the  party  and  its 
patronage  were  in  the  hands  of  the  President 
and  his  supporters.  The  conflict  was  between 
the  “Congressional  party”  and  the  “Presiden- 
tial Party,”  the  Democrats  rallying  to  the 
support  of  the  President.  The  Johnson  follow- 
ing of  state  rights  conservative  Democrats 
who  had  been  attached  to  the  Republicans  by 
the  “Union  Party”  name  and  purpose  of  1864 
were  now  merged  into  the  regular  Democratic 
party,  while  the  Republican  party  was  still 
represented  and  controlled  by  its  original  con- 
stituents. The  overwhelming  verdict  against 
the  President,  coupled  with  the  rejection  of 
the  Fourteenth  Amendment  by  the  southern 
states,  strengthened  the  cause  of  the  more 
radical  Republicans,  who,  now  in  full  control 
of  the  party  policy,  proceeded  to  more  string- 
ent conditions  of  reconstruction.  They  set 
aside  Johnson’s  reconstructed  states,  and 
placed  the  South  under  military  rule  from 
which  it  was  to  escape  only  on  condition 
that  the  states  should  choose  constitutional 
conventions  under  manhood  (negro)  suffrage, 
(excluding  the  former  and  natural  white  lead- 
ers who  had  been  prominent  in  the  war),  and 
adopt  state  constitutions  providing  for  equal 
suffrage,  regardless  of  race.  On  these  con- 
ditions all  the  states  were  restored  by  1870, 
and  with  the  adoption  of  the  Fifteenth  Amend- 
ment which  the  Republicans  proposed  in  order 
to  make  manhood  suffrage  secure  against  any 
undoing  by  the  states,  the  Republican  con- 
gressional plan  of  reconstruction  may  be  said 
to  be  completed.  > 

The  Republicans  made  their  work  in  recon- 
struction the  chief  issue  and  General  Grant 
their  candidate  in  1868.  They  were  successful 
in  the  election,  but  under  the  first  Grant  ad- 
ministration they  confronted  the  difficulties 
and  failures  of  reconstruction  in  the  South. 
It  was  found  to  he  impracticable,  not  to  say 
impossible,  to  maintain  the  negro  governments 
in  the  South  that  had  been  set  up  under  con- 
gressional rule.  The  congressional  policy,  es- 
pecially the  imposition  of  military  rule  and 
negro  suffrage,  had  aroused  a deep  seated 
and  undying  antagonism  among  the  southern 


whites  among  the  men  of  leadership,  intelli- 
gence, and  property.  As  a consequence,  the 
Republican  party  came  to  confront  the  oppo- 
sition of  a “Solid  South”  for  a generation  to 
come.  The  Republican  party  that  it  was  hoped 
might  be  built  up  in  the  South  came  to  con- 
sist, chiefly,  of  three  elements — the  negroes, 
the  “carpet-baggers”  (see)  and  the  “scala- 
wags” ( see ) . The  state  governments  based  on 
these  elements  were  in  many  instances  ineffi- 
cient, wasteful,  oppressive,  and  corrupt.  Cor- 
rupt practices  and  lawless  and  violent  agen- 
cies, such  as  that  of  the  “Ivu  Klux  Klan” 
(see),  were  resorted  to  by  the  ex-Confederate 
whites  for  their  overthrow,  and  in  spite  of 
“Force  Bills”  and  President  Grant’s  earnest 
effort  to  uphold  these  governments,  they  could 
not  be  successfully  maintained. 

The  Party  under  Grant. — The  protest  of  the 
Liberal  Republicans  (see)  against  certain 
abuses  under  Grant  brought  schism  to  the  Re- 
publicans, in  1872  with  the  loss  of  distinguished 
leaders  who  were  prominent  in  the  founding 
of  the  party.  Though  this  protest  represented 
a movement  of  leaders  rather  than  of  the  rank 
and  file  of  the  party  it  resulted  in  loss  of  vot- 
ing strength,  if  not  in  moral  decline  within  the 
party.  The  party  suffered  also  (being  the 
party  in  power)  from  the  hard  times  following 
the  panic  of  1873;  and  in  1874,  for  the  first 
time  in  twenty  years,  it  lost  the  Congressional 
elections,  while  in  1876,  it  was  saved  from  the 
effects  of  defeat  in  the  presidential  election 
only  by  the  finding  of  the  Electoral  Commis- 
sion (see). 

The  Second  Period  of  the  Party,  1876-1896. 

— With  the  election  of  1876  and  the  with- 
drawal of  the  federal  troops  from  the  South  by 
President  Hayes,  there  began  a new  period  in 
the  history  of  the  Republican  party.  The  “south- 
ern question,”  which  may  be  held  to  include  all 
controversies  relating  to  the  negro,  the  war, 
and  reconstruction,  now  no  longer  held  the 
chief  interest  in  public  attention.  The  with- 
drawal of  military  support  from  the  southern 
Republicans  and  the  consequent  restoration  of 
the  “white  man’s  government”  there  ( accom- 
plished sometimes  by  fraud  and  sometimes  by 
violence)  was  much  disliked  by  a great  body 
of  Republicans  in  the  North  who  held  that 
the  party  faith  was  pledged  to  the  maintenance 
of  the  political  rights  of  the  colored  people. 
These  “Stalwarts”  (see)  accused  the  Hayes 
administration  and  its  adherents  with  being 
recreant  or  only  half-hearted  in  the  party 
cause,  of  acting  as  “Half-breeds”  (see)  in  the 
party  camp.  The  division  of  the  party  into 
two  wings  known  by  these  names  indicated 
probable  defeat  for  the  party  in  1880.  The 
Stalwarts  led  by  Conkling  and  Cameron  and 
a coterie  of  Republican  Senators,  who  by 
patronage  had  built  up  powerful  party  organi- 
zations within  their  states,  attempted  to  nomi- 
nate General  Grant  for  a third  term,  but  be- 
cause of  an  independent  protest  and  the  per- 


196 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


sonal  following  of  James  G.  Blaine,  a rival 
candidate  and  a rival  of  Conkling  for  leader- 
ship within  the  party,  the  effort  was  defeated. 
The  Hayes  administration  was  clean,  honor- 
able, efficient,  and  conciliatory,  based  on  a 
dictum  of  the  President  that  “he  serves  his 
party  best  who  serves  his  country  best,”  and 
with  the  administration’s  effective  support  of 
civil  service  reform  and  the  return  of  indus- 
trial prosperity,  the  Republicans  were  able  to 
elect  Garfield  and  Arthur  in  1880.  In  this 
campaign,  the  tariff  was  emphasized  by  the 
Republicans,  and,  for  the  first  time  since  the 
Whig  days,  protection  assumed  the  place  of 
chief  importance  in  party  contests.  Under  the 
growing  leadership  of  Blaine,  whose  influence 
had  nominated  Garfield  and  who  himself  be- 
came the  presidential  nominee  in  1884  the 
Republicans  committed  themselves  more  defi- 
nitely and  aggressively  to  the  policy  of  a pro- 
tective tariff.  By  1884,  the  party  had  been 
weakened  by  the  Blaine-Conkling  quarrel  over 
patronage  and  party  control  in  New  York,  by 
the  assassination  of  Garfield,  by  Blaine’s  : n- 
tagonism  to  Arthur,  and,  after  Blaine’s  nomi- 
nation for  the  presidency,  by  defection  of  the 
“Mugwumps”  (see)  who  were  alienated  by  a 
disbelief  in  the  integrity  of  Blaine’s  public 
career  and  his  personal  fitness  for  the  presi- 
dency. Also,  the  growth  of  the  Prohibition 
party  (see)  drew  off  votes  from  the  Republi- 
cans in  close  northern  states,  while  there  was 
an  increasing  feeling  in  the  country  that  the 
program  of  the  party  was  not  very  definite 
nor  the  issues  for -which  it  stood  very  vital. 
For  these  reasons  the  Republicans  lost  the 
presidential  contest  in  1884,  the  first  defeat 
since  1856.  New  questions  had  arisen — silver 
coinage,  civil  service  reform,  railway  trans- 
portation, trusts  and  monopolies,  conflicts  be- 
tween labor  and  capital — upon  which  there 
was  no  distinct  line  of  cleavage  between  the 
parties,  and  on  which  the  Republicans  assumed 
no  distinctive  position.  In  appealing  to  the 
voters  for  support,  the  party  leaders  relied 
more  than  ever  upon  the  perfection  of  the 
party  organization;  upon  the  activity  of  party 
agents  who  were  anticipating  party  appoint- 
ments and  perquisites;  upon  appeals  to  party 
traditions,  prejudices,  and  habits;  and  still  on 
the  old  soldier  fear  of  restoring  the  old  De- 
mocracy of  the  South. 

Large  moneyed  and  corporate  interests  and 
professional  politicians  and  office-holders  were, 
in  this  period,  very  largely  in  control  of  the 
nominating  machinery,  if  not  of  the  public 
policy,  of  the  Republican  party,  and  the  party 
experienced  alternate  victory  and  defeat  in 
1884,  1888,  and  1892.  It  was  a period  marked 
by  an  alarming  growth  of  campaign  funds 
and  of  corruption  within  the  party  in  the  use 
of  money  to  control  elections,  by  the  appli- 
cation of  Dorsey’s  “soap”  (see)  to  smooth  the 
way  to  success  in  the  party  contests  in  the 
close  states,  by  the  herding  of  the  voters  into 


Dudley’s  “blocks  of  five”  (see),  and  by  “fry- 
ing the  fat”  from  the  protected  industries  to 
secure  an  administration  that  would  safeguard 
their  interests.  Under  Harrison,  the  Republi- 
cans tended  more  aggressively  toward  high  pro- 
tection (see  Tariff  Policy),  but  after  the 
McKinley  bill  (see)  of  1890  there  was  re- 
action in  the  country  and  because  of  this  and 
industrial  troubles,  and  more  especially  on  ac- 
count of  the  drastic  suppression  of  the  Home- 
stead strike  and  the  consequent  offense  given 
to  the  labor  vote,  the  Republicans  suffered  an 
overwhelming  defeat  by  the  second  election  of 
Cleveland  in  1892.  The  party  lost  to  the 
Democrats  old-time  Republican  states  like 
Illinois,  Wisconsin,  North  Dakota,  and  barely 
saved  Ohio;  while  their  former  loyal  agri- 
cultural adherents  in  Kansas  and  Nebraska 
turned  those  states  over  to  the  Populists  (see). 
But  in  two  years’  time,  in  the  congressional 
elections  of  1894,  owing  chiefly  to  internal 
divisions  among  their  opponents  and  the  fear- 
ful panic  of  1893,  occurring  while  the  Demo- 
crats were  in  power,  a Republican  “landslide” 
buried  these  adverse  majorities  in  every  north- 
ern state  and  left  only  the  “Solid  South”  to 
the  Democrats.  These  fluctuating  and  one- 
sided results  which  are  to  be  understood  only 
in  connection  with  the  growth  of  the  Farmers’ 
Alliance  (see),  the  Populist  party,  the  silver 
agitation,  and  changing  industrial  conditions, 
indicated  a coming  readjustment  of  parties. 

The  Third  Period  of  the  Party,  1 896—1 91 3. — - 
The  readjustment  came  in  1896.  Financial 
and  industrial  questions  which  had  been  cut- 
ting across  party  lines  for  two  decades,  to- 
gether with  the  agitation  of  minor  parties  and 
industrial  organizations  that  had  been  urg- 
ing radical  financial  and  economic  changes, 
were  now  able  to  bring  into  the  open  the  real 
divisions  that  have  been  for  years  existing 
within  both  parties.  Incidentally  and  nomi- 
nally, the  question  of  silver  coinage  at  “the 
rate  of  16  to  1”  (see  Sixteen  to  One)  came  to 
the  front  and  largely  absorbed  public  atten- 
tion (see  Silver  Coinage  Controversy)  ; but 
there  were  deeper  and  more  fundamental  causes 
of  division  that  disrupted  the  old  parties  in 
1896  and  brought  about  a new  alignment. 
There  were  questions  of  money,  land,  trans- 
portation, the  income  tax,  the  control  of  trusts 
and  monopolies,  and  the  attitude  of  the  Amer- 
ican democracy  toward  judicial  interference  in 
political  policies,  and  toward  the  concentra- 
tion of  wealth  and  its  corrupt  control  of  legis- 
latures and  elections.  On  all  these  matters 
there  had  been  discussion,  agitation,  and  divi- 
sion within  the  Republican  party,  and  defec- 
tions from  it  had  been  going  on  for  several 
years  prior  to  1896.  However,  the  division 
within  the  ranks  of  its  opponent  was  even  more 
pronounced.  The  Republican  leaders  were  pre- 
paring to  combat  the  traditional  Democratic 
party  chiefly  upon  the  issue  of  the  tariff,  as 
they  were  hardly  expecting  that  their  oppon- 


197 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


cuts  would  openly  attack  the  gold  standard  and 
repudiate  the  administration  of  their  own  mak- 
ing. But  when  this  was  done  in  the  Demo- 
cratic convention  of  1890  that  nominated  Mr. 
Bryan,  the  eastern  and  gold  standard  Demo- 
cratic supporters  of  Mr.  Cleveland,  as  did 
President  Cleveland  himself,'  came  to  the  sup- 
port of  the  Republicans  and,  most  of  them, 
voted  for  Mr.  McKinley.  The  accession  of 
the  “Gold  Democrats”  (see)  more  than  offset 
the  defection  of  the  “Silver  Republicans”  (see) 
who  followed  Senator  Teller  and  other  Repub- 
licans of  the  agricultural  and  silver-mining 
states  in  a revolt  from  the  Republican  conven- 
tion of  1896,  when  it  declared  for  the  single 
standard  of  gold  unless  there  could  be  an  in- 
ternational agreement  for  bimetallism.  The 
combination  of  the  Democrats,  the  “Silver 
Party”  and  the  Populists  on  a free  silver, 
and  an  otherwise  radical,  platform  forced 
the  Republicans  in  that  year  and  their  candi- 
date, Mr.  McKinley  (who  had  in  his  congres- 
sional career  been  complaisant,  if  not  favor- 
able, to  free  silver  coinage),  to  turn  from  the 
tariff  and  confront  the  money  issue,  and  to 
come  to  a more  positive  defense  of  “sound 
money,”  as  the  gold  standard  advocates  named 
their  cause. 

Thus,  in  the  agitations,  changes,  and  uncer- 
tainties of  1896,  the  Republican  became  the 
conservative  party  of  the  country  and  under  the 
vigorous  leadership  of  the  chairman  of  the  na- 
tional Republican  committee,  Mr.  Hanna  (see), 
of  Ohio,  who  organized  and  managed  Mr.  Mc- 
Kinley’s campaign  for  the  presidency,  the  Re- 
publican appeal  was  made  not  only  to  those 
who  were  interested  in  the  protective  tariff  and 
so-called  “sound  money,”  but  to  conservative 
business  men  generally;  to  the  banking  inter- 
ests; to  the  managers  of  great  railways;  to 
manufacturers,  and  to  their  wage-earners,  whose 
fears  were  wrought  upon  by  the  threat  of  sus- 
pended industries  or  whose  hopes  were  aroused 
by  the  promise  of  returning  prosperity;  and  to 
all  who  were  opposed  to  any  radical  advance 
toward  a larger  social  control  of  natural 
monopolies,  or  to  any  disturbance  of  the  finan- 
cial policy  and  industrial  status  existing  under 
Mr.  Cleveland’s  policy  and  administration. 
The  tendency  therefore  was,  in  the  years  im- 
mediately following,  for  the  conservative  Cleve- 
land Democrat  to  support,  if  not  to  join,  the 
Republican  party,  while  the  more  radical  ele- 
ment in  the  Republican  party  tended  toward 
the  Bryan  Democracy,  and  there  were  many 
changes  of  this  kind  from  1896  to  1904. 

The  Epoch  of  Roosevelt,  1901-1905, — By  the 
death  of  McKinley — the  third  Republican  Pres- 
ident assassinated — and  by  the  accession 
of  Roosevelt  (1901),  a change  was  destined 
to  come  in  the  presidential  leadership  and 
policies  of  the  Republican  party.  It  was  to 
be  a swing  of  the  pendulum  toward  radicalism, 
marking  an  epoch  in  party  history.  Roosevelt 
as  President  had  not  been  in  the  calculations  of 


the  managing  and  official  leaders  of  the  party, 
nor  of  the  powers  behind  the  party  organiza- 
tion. Mr.  Roosevelt  in  assuming  the  presi- 
dency recognized  that  his  administration  should 
be  a continuation  of  Mr.  McKinley’s,  and  he 
pledged  himself  to  pursue  the  policies  of  the 
more  conservative  leader  whom  the  country 
had  twice  chosen  against  the  radical  Bryan 
Democracy.  This  he  fairly  did,  as  a review 
of  the  two  terms  of  McKinley  and  Roosevelt 
reveals  no  essential  differences  in  the  policies 
and  purposes  of  these  two  leaders  of  such  es- 
sentially different  personalities.  Either  one 
in  the  seat  of  power  would  have  stood  for  the 
achievements  of  the  other — the  achievements 
which  are  to  be  placed  to  the  credit  of  the  Re- 
publican party  in  this  period — the  annexation 
of  Hawaii;  the  final  establishment  of  the  gold 
standard;  the  expulsion  of  Spain  from  Cuba; 
and  the  acquisition  of  the  Philippines  and 
Porto  Rico  in  the  Spanish  War,  and  the  sub- 
sequent government  of  these  acquisitions  as  in- 
sular dependencies  beyond  the  pale  of  the  Con- 
stitution; and  the  open  door  policy  in  China 
and  the  extension  of  American  trade  in  the 
East. 

But  despite  mutual  agreements  between  con- 
servatives and  radicals  within  the  party  on 
these  policies,  it  was  recognized  that  the  party 
now  had  as  its  official  head  a President  of  a 
new  type.  McKinley  had  been  complaisant,  ac- 
commodating, pliable,  seeking  party  “har- 
mony,” working  with  the  politicians,  disposed 
to  accept  the  view  that,  in  clashes  of  opinions 
and  purposes  between  the  executive  and  the 
party  leaders  in  Congress,  the  President  should 
follow  rather  than  lead.  Roosevelt,  on  the 
other  hand,  though  a strong  and  loyal  party 
man,  demanded  presidential  leadership.  He 
was  determined,  energetic,  masterful.  He  was 
impatient,  if  not  dictatorial,  toward  certain 
party  leaders  in  Congress,  and  though  himself 
a masterful  politician,  having  a remarkable 
acquaintance  with  all  classes  and  conditions  of 
his  countrymen,  he  was  not  pleasing  to  the  old 
leaders  and  politicians  of  his  party,  who  re- 
garded him  as  “unsafe”  and  looked  upon  him 
with  suspicion,  if  not  with  fear.  The  conse- 
quence was,  that  before  the  close  of  the  Mc- 
Kinley term  to  which  Roosevelt  had  succeeded, 
a breach  was  pending  between  the  Republican 
President  and  the  “old  guard”  of  senatorial 
and  congressional  Republican  leaders  and  par- 
ty chiefs  who  had  behind  them  the  machine 
forces  of  the  party.  These  forces  were  prepar- 
ing to  contest  the  President’s  renomination, 
encouraged  by  the  historic  tradition  that  no 
man  who  had  ever  inherited  the  presidency, 
could  ever  win  it.  But  the  illness  and  death  cf 
Marcus  A.  Hanna,  the  great  McKinley  captain 
and  the  most  powerful  personal  force  within 
the  party  making  for  political  and  industrial 
conservatism,  around  whom  the  opposition 
might  have  rallied  with  some  chance  of  suc- 
cess, caused  a collapse  of  the  politicians’  plans 


198 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


for  defeating  Roosevelt  within  the  party. 
Moreover,  before  the  close  of  his  inherited 
term,  Roosevelt’s  name  had  become  associated 
with  certain  notable  and  popular  achievements 
and  ideas  that  gave  him  such  a remarkable 
personal  popularity  that,  in  spite  of  the 
dislike  of  the  old  party  leaders  and  politi- 
cians, he  was  nominated  by  his  party  con- 
vention to  be  his  own  successor;  and  he  was 
reelected  by  such  popular  and  electoral  major- 
ities as  no  President  before  him  had  ever  re- 
ceived (1904).  This  result  was  interpreted 
not  so  much  as  a Republican  as  a Rooseveltian 
victory,  and  as  a non-partisan  approval  of 
what  Roosevelt  had  done  and  what  he  stood  for, 
since  many  Bryan  Democrats  had  voted  for 
him  as  against  a conservative  candidate  of 
their  own  party. 

Roosevelt  Policies,  1905-1909. — When  Roose- 
velt came  to  the  presidency  “by  his  own  right,” 
the  struggle  to  dominate  the  party  was  contin- 
ued. There  was  all  but  open  war  between  the 
President  and  distinguished  party  leaders  in 
the  Senate.  The  difference  between  the  Presi- 
dent and  the  “Old  Guard,”  lay  partly  in  per- 
sonal traits,  but  more  largely  in  radically  dif- 
ferent and  divergent  views  and  tendencies  in 
politics.  By  conviction,  composition,  ante- 
cedents, and  political  affiliation,  the  Repub- 
lican party  as  represented  in  Congress — led  in 
the  Senate  by  Mr.  Aldrich,  the  captain  and 
spokesman  for  large  corporate  interests,  and  in 
the  House  by  Speaker  Cannon  and  his  “steer- 
ing committee”  on  rules  (see) — was  deeply 
conservative.  Its  leaders  were  denounced  as 
“Reactionaries”  and  “Standpatters”  (see)  ; 
they  would  stand  fast  by  the  old  ways,  for  vest- 
ed interests,  for  the  high  tariff,  that,  as  they 
contended,  had  brought  material  prosperity. 
Roosevelt  stood  for  the  “Progressive  Repub- 
licans” (see).  He  perceived  the  menace  of 
plutocracy  with  its  social  injustice  and  moral 
decay,  and  he  wished  to  commit  his  party  to 
moderate  radicalism  in  order  to  forestall  the 
greater  radicalism  of  Bryan  and  Hearst  (see 
Independence  League)  and  to  save  the  coun- 
try from  the  alternative  of  a choice  between 
corporate  capitalism,  as  represented  by  Aldrich, 
and  socialism  as  represented  by  Debs  (see)  ; 
while  in  Congress,  there  were  a few  still  more 
radical  Republicans  represented  chiefly  by  Sen- 
ator La  Follette,  of  Wisconsin,  who  became 
“Insurgents”  (see)  against  what  they  deemed 
the  autocratic  one-man  power  of  the  Speaker 
in  the  House  and  the  “big  business”  capitalistic 
oligarchy  in  the  Senate,  who,  as  the  Insur- 
gents claimed,  were  ruling  the  country  and 
dictating  its  laws  by  an  alliance  of  the  cap- 
italist and  the  politician,  the  millionaire  and 
the  boss. 

The  President  and  the  “Progressives”  urged 
a railroad-rate  regulation  bill,  a pure  food  bill, 
arbitration  treaties,  a bureau  of  corporations, 
and  other  measures.  But  if  any  of  these  passed 
the  House,  they  were  likely  to  be  held  up,  or  1 


amended  out  of  form,  or  strangled,  in  the  Sen- 
ate. But  the  President  by  special  messages 
and  appeals  to  public  opinion,  by  wielding  the 
“big  stick”  (see),  frequently  forced  reluctant 
acquiescence  in  Congress  to  “progressive” 
measures.  It  was  made  apparent  to  the  con- 
gressional leaders  that  the  President  had  pub- 
lic sentiment  and  the  great  mass  of  the  party 
behind  him;  and  by  1908  opposition  to  his 
policies  within  the  party  was  seen  to  be  futile; 
it  was  also  recognized  that,  if  Mr.  Roosevelt 
himself  would  not  stand  for  reelection,  none 
but  a “Roosevelt  Republican”  who  would  pledge 
himself  to  carry  out  the  “Roosevelt  policies” 
could  hope  to  be  nominated  and  elected. 

The  “Roosevelt  policies”  to  which  the  Repub- 
lican party  now  found  itself  inevitably  united, 
are  to  be  seen  partly  in  those  achievements  and 
ideas,  which  had  brought  the  President  his  re- 
markable popularity  and  vindication-  at  the 
polls  in  1904.  He  had  vigorously  denounced 
corporate  abuses  and  shown  sincere  friendli- 
ness to  labor  unions ; he  had  preached  civic 
righteousness  with  great  effect,  while  the  coun- 
try was  aroused  by  exposures  of  “graft”  and 
corporate  corruption  in  legislatures  and  elec- 
ions;  he  had  a “wild  western”  popularity 
and  a “rough  rider”  war  record  in  Cuba;  he 
had  pursued  an  energetic  and  effective  policy 
towards  Colombia  and  Panama  and  had  begun 
the  great  canal;  he  had  construed  the  Con- 
stitution broadly,  assuming  for  the  presidential 
office  all  powers  not  forbidden,  instead  of  lim- 
iting his  activities  only  to  those  powers  that 
were  specifically  granted;  he  had  urged  effi- 
ciency and  reforms  in  the  Army  and  Navy,  cut- 
ting through  the  red  tape  of  rank  and  bureau- 
cracy; he  achieved  a world-wide  distinction  by 
bringing  about  peace  between  Russia  and 
Japan ; he  had  advocated  the  “square  deal,” 
and  above  all,  in  exemplification  of  it,  he  had 
boldly  taken  to  task  the  railways  and  the  “coal 
barons”  and  had  brought  about  the  settlement 
of  the  anthracite  coal  strike  by  presidential  in- 
terference. Most  of  these  things  were  to  his 
credit  with  the  people  while  he  was  still  serv- 
ing out  McKinley’s  term.” 

Roosevelt’s  second  administration  added  to 
the  list  of  the  “Roosevelt  policies”:  (1)  equal 
industrial  opportunities,  and  equal  punishment 
for  all  illegal  acts;  government  must  “shackle 
cunning,”  and  especially  bring  to  book  the  more 
culpable  rich  malefactors;  (2)  government 
regulation  of  public  service  corporations,  es- 
pecially the  railways,  which  should  be  made  to 
serve  all  equally;  (3)  the  development  of 
waterways,  to  supplement,  and  to  help  to  con- 
trol, the  railways;  (4)  the  promotion  of  agri- 
culture by  promoting  small  holdings  of  land, 
and  giving  title  to  homesteaders;  (5)  a strong 
Navy  for  the  security  of  peace  and  the  protec- 
tion of  our  coast  line,  to  be  unified  by  the 
Canal;  (6)  the  conservation  movement — sav- 
ing for  the  public  under  national  authority  the 
natural  resources  of  the  country,  namely,  water 


199 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


power  for  irrigation,  tlie  forests,  the  mines,  and 
ungranted  homesteads  for  homeseekers. 

Taft’s  Administration,  1909-1913. — Secretary 
of  War,  William  Howard  Taft,  was  nominated 
and  elected  in  1908,  largely  through  the 
influence  of  Roosevelt,  and  as  one  who  would 
carry  on  these  policies.  One  of  his  first  offi- 
cial acts  was  to  call  Congress  into  extra  ses- 
sion to  revise  the  tariff,  as  revision  had  been 
promised  in  the  party  platform.  Tariff  re- 
vision had  not  been  a distinctive  Roosevelt 
policy,  and  tbe  party  was  divided  upon  it.  The 
Republican  “Insurgents,”  especially  in  the  Mid- 
dle West,  led  by  Senator  La  Follette,  and  Sen- 
ator Cummins,  of  Iowa,  had  been  demanding 
revision  for  a number  of  years,  favoring  such 
modification  of  the  schedules  as  might  be  re- 
quired to  prevent  their  affording  shelter  to 
monopolies,  or  in  all  cases  where  protection 
was  employed  to  give  special  interests  of  cap- 
ital undue  advantages  and  to  the  injury  of 
workingmen  and  consumers.  The  revision  ef- 
fected by  the  Payne-Aldrich  (see)  tariff  bill 
of  1909,  was  dominated  by  the  “standpatters” 
in  Congress,  under  the  leadership,  chiefly  of 
Cannon  in  the  House  and  Aldrich  in  the  Sen- 
ate. President  Taft  accepted  it,  and  approved 
it  to  the  country  in  a public  speech  as  “one 
of  the  best  tariff  measures  ever  enacted,”  while 
it  was  denounced  by  the  Insurgents  as  a 
fraudulent  revision — a revision  upward  rather 
than  downward,  a revision  in  the  interest  of  the 
“interests”  (see).  Following  its  enactment  the 
Republican  party  suffered  a decisive  defeat 
at  the  polls  in  the  congressional  election  of 
1910,  losing  control  of  the  House,  while  in- 
surgency in  the  West  gained  victories  and  re- 
cruits, especially  in  Wisconsin,  Iowa,  Mich- 
igan, Kansas,  California,  and  Washington. 
President  Taft,  at  the  last  session  of  the  Re- 
publican Congress,  urged  further  tariff  revi- 
sion under  the  form  of  a reciprocity  compact 
with  Canada.  His  party  refused  to  accept  it, 
whereupon  he  immediately  called  an  extra  ses- 
sion (in  April,  1911)  of  the  newly  elected 
Democratic  Congress  to  consider  Canadian  rec- 
iprocity. The  Democratic  leaders  and  a Dem- 
ocratic House  gave  cordial  support  to  a meas- 
ure urged  by  a Republican  President,  but  when 
Mr.  Taft’s  reciprocity  treaty  came  to  the  Sen- 
ate, more  Republican  votes  were  cast  against 
it  than  for  it  (24  to  21 ) , the  Insurgents  an- 
tagonizing it  on  the  claim  that  it  was  designed 
to  promote  special  interests  and  was  calculated 
to  injure  the  interest  of  their  agricultural 
constituents.  It  was  passed  only  by  Demo- 
cratic support. 

The  Liberal  Party  in  Canada  advocating  re- 
ciprocity was  defeated  in  the  election  of  1911 ; 
and  thus  the  issue  was  at  least  temporarily 
put  to  one  side. 

The  passage  of  the  bill  for  Canadian  rec- 
iprocity was  interpreted  as  the  first  se- 
rious break  in  the  Republican  high  protective 
policy,  the  beginning  of  a readjustment  of 


the  whole  protective  system.  It  revealed  a di- 
vision that  has  existed  within  the  Republican 
party  for  ten  years,  between  the  “regulars” 
of  the  “Old  Guard”  and  the  progressives. 

President  Taft  in  the  first  three  years  of  his 
administration  made  an  honest  effort  to  find 
a middle  ground  between  the  contending  fac- 
tions that  were  rending  his  party.  He  was 
anxious  to  keep  the  peace  and  preserve  intact 
the  harmony  and  integrity  of  the  Republican 
organization.  He  failed  to  appreciate  the 
deep  seated  character  of  the  issues  and  causes 
that  arrayed  the  opposing  forces  against  one 
another;  or  where  he  did  appreciate  the  is- 
sues involved,  or  when  he  found  himself  in 
the  midst  of  contending  forces  and  had  either 
to  approve  or  resist  the  radical  advance,  his 
natural  disposition  and  the'  legalism  in  his 
habits  of  thought  led  him  to  ally  himself  with 
the  conservative  elements. 

Contest  of  1912. — In  1912  began  a violent 
contest  for  the  control  of  the  approaching 
national  convention  of  the  party.  Within  sev- 
eral of  the  states  the  progressive  Republicans 
organized  leagues  and  set  actively  to  work  with 
the  purpose  of  securing  a majority  of  the 
delegates  in  opposition  to  President  Taft’s  re- 
nomipation.  They  arraigned  the  President  for 
his  failure  to  carry  out  the  party  pledges  and 
for  acquiescence  in  “boss  control.”  The  pro- 
gressive Republicans  insisted  upon  a more  pop- 
ular control  of  the  party.  They  induced  ex- 
President  Roosevelt  to  stand  for  renomination 
before  the  Republican  voters,  and  there  ensued 
a bitter  contest  between  the  two  former  politic- 
al friends  for  the  leadership  and  nomination 
of  the  party.  Taft  was  backed  by  tbe  regular 
and  machine  forces,  the  Cannon-Aldrich  group 
representing  the  Old  Guard,  and  many  emin- 
ently respectable  conservative  men  of  affairs 
and  of  property  who  distrusted  and  disliked 
Roosevelt  and  who  felt  that  the  new  issues 
that  were  being  pushed  to  the  front  by  the 
radicals  were  fads  and  follies  or  dangerous  and 
un-Republican  innovations.  Roosevelt  on  the 
other  hand,  proclaimed  himself  in  favor  of  a 
pure  democracy  and  for  the  full  progressive 
program — downward  tariff  revision,  popular 
control  of  the  party,  the  initiative  and  refer- 
endum, short  ballot,  popular  election  of  United 
States  Senators,  direct  primaries,  preferential 
voting  for  presidential  nominees  and  the  pop- 
ular election  of  delegates  to  the  national  con- 
ventions. To  these  he  added  the  recall  of  ju- 
dicial decisions,  by  which  he  meant  that  when 
a court  decides  “what  the  people  can  or  cannot 
do”  under  the  Constitution,  “the  people  should 
have  a right  to  recall  that  decision  if  they 
think  it  wrong.”  This  platform  of  principles 
announced  in  his  address,  “A  Charter  of  Dem- 
ocracy,” before  the  Ohio  constitutional  conven- 
tion, February  21,  1912,  put  Roosevelt  squarely 
in  the  radical  progressive  group. 

The  outcome  of  the  preconvention  contest 
was  a divided  party.  The  Taft  forces  controlled 


200 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY 


tlie  national  committee  and  after  its  decision 
on  the  contested  seats  they  controlled  the  con- 
vention and  nominated  Mr.  Taft.  Mr.  Roose- 
velt and  his  supporters  charged  that  it  was  a 
stolen  nomination,  secured  by  fraud,  and  that 
the  will  of  the  Republican  rank  and  file  as  ex- 
pressed in  the  party  primaries  in  the  Republi- 
can states  had  been  defied  and  set  at  naught. 
The  Roosevelt  delegates,  those  who  had  been 
denied  seats  in  the  convention  by  the  national 
committee  together  with  those  who  had  car- 
ried on  the  struggle  on  the  floor  of  the  con- 
vention to  the  end,  met  in  mass  meeting  with 
other  supporters  of  Roosevelt  and  organized 
a new  Progressive  party  and  issued  a call  for 
another  national  convention  { see  Progressive 
Party ) . 

The  outcome  of  the  voting  in  November  was 
the  overwhelming  election  of  the  Democratic 
candidate,  Woodrow  Wilson  of  New  Jersey, 
who  carried  435  electoral  votes  out  of  531,  Mr. 
Roosevelt,  the  candidate  of  the  new  Progressive 
party  receiving  88  votes  and  Mr.  Taft  but  8 
(Utah  and  Vermont).  In  the  popular  vote  the 
opposition  to  the  Democrats  were  in  the  major- 
ity by  over  2,000,000  votes  but  these  voters 
(apart  from  the  Socialists)  were  about  equally 
divided  between  the  Progressives  and  the  Re- 
publicans. So  the  year  closed  with  the  Re- 
publican party  cut  in  twain.  Some  of  the 
Progressive  vote  came  from  the  Democrats 
while  many  of  the  former  Republicans  voted 
for  Mr.  Wilson,  from  fear  of  the  election  of 
Mr.  Roosevelt.  In  fact  the  majority  of  the 
Republicans  as  well  as  of  the  Progressives, 
preferred  Mr.  Wilson,  the  Democrat,  as  their 
second  choice,  so  bitter  had  become  the  antagon- 
ism of  the  two  factions  of  the  old  party  toward 
one  another. 

The  Future. — The  Republican  party  in  1914 
was  in  a waiting  attitude,  leaders  and  rank 
and  file  looking  forward  to  its  reorgani- 
zation and  rehabilitation.  In  two  by-elections 
for  the  choice  of  congressmen  in  1913  the 
party  met  with  some  gains  and  successes  while 
the  Progressive  vote  fell  off.  The  Progressive 
Republicans  that  remained  with  the  party 
(Senators  La  Follette,  Cummins,  Borah,  and 
others)  held  a conference  in  May,  1913,  and 
urged  the  national  committee  to  call  a national 
convention  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  about 
the  reorganization  of  the  party  and  the  re- 
adjustment of  representation.  On  September 
24,  1913,  the  New  York  Republicans  in  state 
convention,  under  the  leadership  of  Senator 
Elihu  Root  and  Henry  F.  Stimson,  Secretary 
of  War  under  President  Taft,  renewed  the  sug- 
gestion. instructing  the  New  York  member  of 
the  national  committee  to  urge  that  a national 
convention  be  called  as  soon  as  practicable  for 
the  purpose  of  so  changing  the  party  rules  as 
to  provide  that  the  delegates  from  the  states 
be  chosen  as  the  Republican  voters  of  each 
state  might  determine.  In  response  to  these 
demands  the  national  committee  in  Decem- 


ber, 1913,  resolved,  subject  to  the  ap- 
proval of  the  state  conventions,  to  reform  the 
basis  of  representation  in  the  South  and  to 
grant  full  recognition  to  the  principle  of  the 
primary  in  the  selection  of  delegates,  without 
the  holding  of  a special  convention.  If  ratified 
before  January  1,  1915,  by  the  Republican 
state  conventions  in  such  a number  of  states 
as  are  entitled  to  cast  a majority  of  the  votes 
in  the  Electoral  College,  the  following  plan  of 
reapportionment  will  be  made  the  basis  of  the 
call  for  the  national  convention  of  1916 : 

Each  state  shall  be  entitled  in  such  convention 
to  four  delegates  at  large ; one  delegate  at  large 
for  each  Representative  at  large  in  Congress  from 
any  state;  one  delegate  from  each  congressional 
district ; an  additional  delegate  from  each  con- 
gressional district  in  which  the  Republican  vote 
for  Republican  Presidential  electors  in  1908,  or 
for  the  Republican  candidate  for  Congress  in 
1914.  shall  have  been  not  less  than  7,500  in  such 
district;  and  for  each  delegate  chosen  an  alter- 
nate delegate  shall  be  chosen  in  the  same  man- 
ner and  at  the  same  time  to  act  in  the  event  of 
the  absence  of  the  delegate. 

This  reform,  by  which  the  South  loses  82 
votes,  it  is  hoped  will  remove  the  complaints 
and  charges  of  the  Progressives  as  to  the  un- 
representative character  of  the  old  party  con- 
ventions and  induce  their  voters  to  return  to 
the  old  party  fold. 

See  Fourteenth  Amendment;  Insurgents; 
Progressives;  Reconstruction;  Silver  Coin- 
age Controversy;  Tariff  Policy  of  the 
United  States. 

References:  F.  M.  Curtis,  The  Republican 
Party,  1851,-190^  (1904);  J.  D.  Long,  Ed., 
The  Republican  Party  (1896);  E.  Stanwood, 
Hist,  of  the  Presidency  (1898),  chs.  xx-xxx; 
J.  Macy,  Political  Parties  in  the  U.  S.  (1900), 
chs.  xiii,  xiv,  xv;  J.  A.  Woodburn,  Pol.  Parties 
and  Party  Problems  (1914),  chs.  vii,  viii;  T. 
C.  Smith,  Parties  and  Slavery  (1906),  chs.' 
viii,  xii;  W.  H.  Smith,  A Pol.  Hist,  of  Slavery 
(1903),  I,  ch.  viii;  J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of 
U.  S.  (1893-1906)  ; H.  T.  Peck,  Twenty  Years 
of  the  Republic,  1885-1905  (1906);  J.  Hay, 
Address,  Fifty  Years  of  the  Republican  Party 
(1907);  G.  W.  Julian,  Political  Recollections 
(1884),  “First  Republican  National  Conven- 
tion” in  Am.  Hist.  Rev.,  IV  (1899),  313,  322; 
W.  A.  Dunning,  “Second  Birth  of  the  Repub- 
lican Party”  in  ibid,  XVI  (1910),  56-63,  Re- 
construction ( 1907 ) ; C.  M.  Harvey,  “Origin 
of  the  Republican  Party”  in  Chatauqua,  1897 ; 
J.  G.  Blaine,  Tioenty  Years  of  Congress  (1884- 
1886)  ; P.  L.  Haworth,  Hayes-Tilden  Disputed 
Election  of  1816  (1906)  ; R.  M.  La  Follette, 
Autobiography  (1913)  ; T.  Roosevelt,  An  Au- 
tobiography (1913)  ; F.  E.  Leupp,  The  Man 
Roosevelt  (1904)  ; J.  Sherman,  Recollections 
of  Fifty  Years  (1895)  ; Geo.  F.  Hoar,  Autobi- 
ography of  Seventy  Years  (1903)  ; J.  P.  Dol- 
liver,  “Forward  Movement  in  the  Republican 
Party”  in  Outlook,  XCVI  (1910),  161;  T.  H. 
McKee,  Rational  Conventions  and  Platforms 
(1901);  Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  and  year  by 
year.  James  A.  Woodburn. 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY  (JEFFERSONIAN)— RESERVE  ACT,  FEDERAL 


REPUBLICAN  PARTY  (JEFFERSONIAN). 

The  party  of  which  Jefferson  became  the  ac- 
knowledged leader  owed  its  origin  to  a wide- 
spread distrust  engendered  by  the  strong  cen- 
tralizing measures  of  the  first  Federalist  ad- 
ministration. Believing  that  Hamilton  and  the 
group  of  intimates  surrounding  Washington 
were  monarchists  at  heart,  the  opponents  of 
the  administration  assumed  the  name  Republi- 
can. See  Democratic-Republican  Party. 

A.  J. 

RESERVATION  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  See 

Public  Lands,  Reservation  of. 

RESERVE  ACT,  FEDERAL.  History.— This 
statute,  commonly  called  the  Glass  Banking 
and  Currency  Act,  was  preceded  by  more  than 
a year  of  preliminary  work  of  investigation 
and  preparation  by  a subcommittee  of  the 
House  committee  on  banking  and  currency. 
The  bill  was  introduced  in  the  first  (special) 
session  of  the  Sixty-third  Congress  by  Represen- 
tative Carter  Glass,  of  Virginia,  in  June,  1913; 
it  was  reported  from  the  committee  September 
9,  and  passed  its  final  reading  in  the  House  Sep- 
tember 17,  by  a vote  of  286  to  85.  The  Senate 
committee  on  banking  and  currency  subjected 
the  measure  to  a severe  examination.  Public 
hearings  were  held  at  Washington  and  some 
amendments  were  accepted  by  the  Committee. 
The  bill  was  reported  December  1 under  strong 
administrative  pressure,  and  did  not  differ  seri- 
ously from  the  original  House  bill.  After  con- 
ference it  finally  passed,  December  23,  1913, 
and  the  President  duly  attached  his  signature. 

Reserve  Banks. — The  act,  as  the  name  im- 
plies, has  for  one  of  its  main  purposes  the  mar- 
shalling of  the  bank  reserves  of  the  country. 
To  this  end  federal  reserve  banks  were  created, 
one  to  be  in  each  of  the  districts  into  which 
the  United  States  was  to  be  divided.  In  1914 
twelve  districts,  the  maximum  number  permit- 
ted, were  marked  out,  containing  severally  the 
federal  reserve  cities  of  Boston,  New  York, 
Philadelphia,  Cleveland,  Richmond,  Atlanta, 
Chicago,  St.  Louis,  Minneapolis,  Kansas  City, 
Dallas,  and  San  Francisco.  Every  national 
bank  must  become  a member  of  the  reserve 
bank  in  its  district  and  subscribe  to  its  capi- 
tal stock.  State  banks  may  also  enter  the 
system  by  complying  with  certain  require- 
ments; and  it  is  hoped  that,  because  of  the 
benefits  that  will  inure  to  member  banks,  many 
state  banks  will  join.  What  these  benefits  are, 
appears  from  a discussion  of  the  functions  of 
the  new  reserve  banks. 

Reserves. — In  the  first  place,  they  are  to 
hold  part  of  the  reserves  of  member  banks. 
The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  may  also  use  the 
reserve  banks  as  government  depositaries. 
Through  these  two  channels  will  come  most  of 
the  resources  of  the  banks;  and  by  means  of 
these  deposits,  against  which  a 35  per  cent 
reserve  must  be  held,  the  reserve  banking  power 


of  the  country  is  to  be  safeguarded  and  concen- 
trated, instead  of  being  scattered  as  at  present. 
Bankers’  deposits  will  not  draw  interest  but 
as  an  offset  will  carry  with  them  the  privileges, 
among  others,  of  the  machinery  for  clearances 
and  exchanges  that  the  system  provides. 

These  reserves  will  be  made  available  to  the 
banks,  and  therefore  to  the  public,  in  several 
ways.  The  first  is  through  the  function  of 
rediscount.  Any  member  bank  may  indorse  and 
rediscount  with  its  reserve  bank  “notes,  drafts, 
and  bills  of  exchange  issued  or  drawn  for  agri- 
cultural, industrial  or  commercial  purposes,” 
of  good  quality  and  with  “a  maturity  at  the 
time  of  discount  of  not  more  than  ninety  days,” 
and  also  a limited  amount  of  longer  paper 
“drawn  or  issued  for  agricultural  purposes,  or 
based  on  live  stock.”  No  paper  shall  be  eligible 
that  is  drawn  for  carrying  on  speculation  in 
securities.  Here  are  attempts:  first,  to  create 
a real  discount  market  which  shall  make  com- 
mercial paper  a thoroughly  liquid  asset;  second, 
to  standardize  prime  paper;  third,  to  allow  for 
agricultural  credits;  and  fourth,  to  minimize 
the  importance  of  the  collateral  loan. 

A second  means  of  making  reserves  available 
is  through  note  issues.  The  federal  reserve 
notes  will  be  backed  in  full  by  rediscounted 
commercial  paper  and  will  have  behind  them 
a reserve  of  at  least  40  pe1-  cent  in  gold;  they 
are,  further,  a prior  lien  on  the  assets  of  the 
issuing  banks,  besides  being  government  obli- 
gations. Issued  in  denominations  as  low  as 
five  dollars,  they  will  form  a new  type  of 
hand-to-hand  currency,  which  will  get  into 
circulation  through  payments  by  the  reserve 
banks  to  member  banks.  Elasticity  will  be 
secured  in  this  new  element  of  our  circulating 
medium,  first,  on  account  of  the  seasonal  va- 
riations in  the  supply  of  commercial  paper  in 
the  possession  of  the  reserve  banks;  second, 
through  processes  of  effective  note  redemption; 
third,  through  the  possibility  of  reducing  the 
gold  reserve  subject  to  the  payment  of  a tax. 

Other  Functions. — These  include  taking  over 
some  of  the  bond  secured  note  issue  of  the 
national  banks  by  the  purchase  of  United  States 
bonds  from  member  banks;  purchase  of  bills  of 
exchange  from  members;  discount  of  acceptance 
of  member  banks;  purchase  and  sale  of  short 
term  government  securities;  opening  of  for- 
eign accounts  and  agencies;  and  dealing  in  gold 
coin  and  bullion,  at  home  and  abroad;  most  of 
these  functions  being  connected  with  the  pur- 
pose of  making  the  new  banks  factors  in  the 
foreign  as  well  as  in  the  domestic  financial 
situation. 

National  banks  are  given  a new  series  of 
privileges,  some  of  which  may  be  shared  by 
member  state  banks.  Among  these  are  the 
power  of  acceptance,  the  power  to  establish  sav- 
ings departments,  the  power  to  lend  on  real 
estate,  and  the  ability  to  exercise  trust  func- 
tions. In  other  ways  the  national  banking 
system  is  liberalized. 


202 


RESERVE  MILITIA— RESERVES,  ARMY  AND  NAVY 


Management. — The  management  of  each  re- 
serve bank  will  be  in  the  hands  of  a board  of 
nine  directors.  Three  (in  Class  C)  will  be 
chosen  by  the  Federal  Reserve  Board;  the 
others  (in  Classes  A and  B)  by  the  member 
banks,  under  conditions  which  seek  to  prevent 
control  by  big  banking  interests  and  to  secure 
representation  of  commercial  and  industrial 
interests.  Two  of  the  Class  C directors  will 
be  respectively  chairman  and  deputy  chairman 
of  the  board  and  ipso  facto  federal  reserve 
agent  and  deputy  agent  for  the  district.  They 
must  be  men  of  tested  banking  experience  but 
not  connected  with  any  bank. 

The  keystone  of  the  whole  arch  is  the  Federal 
Reserve  Board.  On  its  ability  and  judgment, 
supplemented  by  that  of  a Federal  Advisory 
Council  (the  latter  with  power  to  call  for  gen- 
eral information  and  make  recommendations), 
depends  largely  the  success  of  the  system.  It 
is  composed  of  seven  men,  all  appointees  of  the 
President,  including  ex  officio  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  and  the  comptroller  of  the  cur- 
rency. The  following  are  its  most  important 
functions:  (1)  to  permit  or  require  one  re- 
serve bank  to  rediscount  for  another;  (2)  to 
review  and  determine  the  rates  of  rediscount  of 
reserve  banks ; ( 3 ) to  suspend  temporarily  any 
reserve  requirement,  providing  penalties  for 
violations;  (4)  to  regulate  the  issue  of  federal 
reserve  notes  to  the  federal  reserve  agents  ap- 
plying therefor;  (5)  to  define  the  commercial 
paper  eligible  for  rediscount;  (6)  to  require 
the  reserve  banks  to  buy  each  year  for  20  years, 
from  the  national  banks  wishing  to  sell  them, 
not  more  than  $25,000,000  of  United  States 
bonds  held  against  circulation;  (7)  to  permit 
reserve  banks  to  establish  foreign  agencies; 

(8)  to  redistrict  the  country  if  they  see  fit; 

(9)  to  reclassify  or  add  to  existing  reserve 
and  central  reserve  cities;  (10)  to  appoint 
Class  C directors  and  remove  any  officer  or 
director  of  a reserve  bank,  for  cause;  and  to 
exercise  general  supervision  over  all  federal 
reserve  banks,  and  in  certain  regards  over  all 
member  banks. 

See  under  Bane,  Banking;  Bonds:  Coin- 
age and  Specie  Currency  in  the  United 
States;  Currency;  Elasticity  of  tiie  Cur- 
rency. 

References:  G.  Harvey.  “Currency  Bill”  in 
No.  Am.  Rev.  (Nov.,  1913)  ; R.  L.  Owen, 
“Origin,  Plan  and  Purpose  of  the  Currency 
Bill”  in  ibid  (Oct.,  1913)  ; “Progress  in  Bank- 
ing Legislation”  in  Jour,  of  Pol.  Econ.  (Oct., 
1913)  ; H.  P.  Willis,  “The  Federal  Reserve  Act” 
in  Am.  Econ.  Rev.  (March,  1914)  ; J.  L.  Laugh- 
lin,  “Banking  and  Currency  Act  of  1913”  in 
Jour  of  Pol.  Econ.  (April,  May,  1914);  J. 
Conway,  Jr.,  “Financial  Policy  of  the  Federal 
Reserve  Banks”  in  ibid  (April,  1914)  ; W.  B. 
Scott,  “Banking  Reserves  under  the  Federal 
Reserve  Act”  in  ibid;  G.  Woodruff,  “Collecting 
Checks  under  the  Currency  Law”  in  ibid;  R. 
C.  Schaffner,  “Relation  of  the  New  Currency 
111 


Act  to  the  Work  of  Commercial  Paper  Houses” 
in  ibid;  0.  M.  W.  Sprague,  “Commercial  Paper 
and  the  Federal  Reserve  Banks”  in  ibid  (May, 
1914)  ; J.  H.  Hollander,  “The  Probable  Effects 
of  the  New  Currency  Act  in  Bank  Investments” 
in  ibid;  F.  M.  Taylor,  “The  Elasticity  of  Note 
Issue  under  the  New  Currency  Law”  in  ibid; 
Am.  Year  Book,  1913,  38-53,  365-367. 

A.  N.  Holcombe. 

RESERVE  MILITIA.  The  organized  na- 
tional guard  of  the  states  may  be  considered 
as  a reserve  for  the  regular  Army;  and  meas- 
ures taken  under  the  militia  act  of  1903  prom- 
ise to  make  this  relation  effective  for  70,000 
militiamen,  who  may  serve  at  home  or  abroad 
during  war.  The  whole  population  of  military 
age,  amounting  to  15,000,000,  is  sometimes  re- 
ferred to  as  the  reserve  or  enrolled  militia  of 
the  states;  but  such  figures  lack  military  sig- 
nificance, since  they  include  the  half  who 
would  be  exempted  for  disability,  a large  body 
of  men  of  middle  age,  and  few  trained  soldiers. 
See  Army  and  Navy;  Army,  Standing;  Mili- 
tia; Reserves,  Volunteer.  References:  U.  S. 
War  Department,  Annual  Reports,  1899-1903 
(1904),  167,  286-289,  352  (1909),  I,  35,  183 
(1910),  I,  51  (1912),  78,  97-101. 

C.  G.  C. 

RESERVES,  ARMY  AND  NAVY.  The  en- 
rolled militia  includes  all  citizens  of  military 
age,  and  a statute  of  1792  made  this  force 
subject  to  the  call  of  the  President  to  suppress 
insurrection  or  repel  invasion;  but  in  practice 
only  the  organized  militia  of  the  states  has 
been  counted  as  a reserve  force  behind  the  na- 
tional Army  and  Navy.  Though  organized  as 
militia  at  the  opening  of  hostilities  this  force 
has  become  a volunteer  Army  of  the  United 
States  during  war. 

Reserves  for  the  armies  of  Europe  are 
trained  men  who  can  be  summoned  to  the  ranks 
as  soon  as  mobilization  is  ordered;  and  meas- 
ures are  now  before  Congress  which  would  or- 
ganize men  honorably  discharged  from  the 
Army  or  Navy  as  reserves,  paying  them  a re- 
taining allowance  and  holding  annual  musters. 
For  the  naval  reserve  the  seamen  and  firemen 
of  the  merchant  service  would  be  eligible  as 
in  Great  Britain. 

Universal  military  training  produces  an  un- 
limited reserve  from  which  classes  of  young 
recruits  can  be  drawn  into  the  active  army, 
while  seamen  and  others  follow  their  specialty, 
and  older  men  join  territorial  or  reserve  regi- 
ments. Shortening  the  term  of  service  with 
the  colors  to  two  years  has  given  Germany  and 
France  more  numerous  and  younger  reserves; 
but  France  has  restored  the  three  years’  term, 
thus  strengthening  the  active  army  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  reserve.  The  British  army  has  also 
secured  a trained  reserve  by  enlisting  men  for 
12  years  and  passing  them  to  the  reserve 
after  five  years’  training;  and  the  army  of  the 
LTnitea  States  is  to  secure  a reserve  by  keeping 


203 


RESIDENCE— RESOURCES  OF  NORTH  AMERICA 


men  in  active  service  for  only  four  of  the 
seven  years’  term  of  enlistment  authorized  in 
1912.  Organizations  where  both  officers  and 
men  belong  to  the  reserves  are  not  admitted  to 
the  first  line  of  European  armies  during  war, 
but  are  assigned  to  guard  or  garrison  duty  to 
relieve  regular  troops.  Each  battalion  of  the 
active  army  is  placed  on  a war  footing,  how- 
ever, by  summoning  its  own  men  from  the  re- 
serve. See  Armies  and  Navies,  Foreign; 
Army,  Standing;  Military  Service;  Mili- 
tia; Reserve  Militia;  Reserves,  Army  and 
Navy;  Volunteer.  References:  I.  Hamilton, 
Compulsory  Service  (1911),  27 ; E.  Upton,  Mili- 
tary Policy  of  the  V.  S.  (1907),  257,  438;  U. 
S.  War  Department,  Annual  Reports,  1904,  68, 
137,  167,  339,  1908,  I,  36,  148-155,  1910,  I, 
51-53,  131,  1912,  I,  20,  96-101,  297;  U.  S. 
Navy  Department,  Annual  Reports,  1910,  49, 
123,  1912,  63,  64,  141,  Transactions  of  the 
Naval  Militia  Assoc.,  1909,  1910.  C.  G.  C. 

RESIDENCE.  See  Domicile  and  Resi- 
dence. 

RESIGNATION  OF  PUBLIC  OFFICIALS. 

Any  public  official  has  the  right  to  resign. 
The  resignation  is  sent  to  the  official  or  body 
by  whom  the  vacancy  would  be  filled,  or  to  the 
official  or  body  having  charge  of  the  new  elec- 
tion, if  a special  election  is  required.  Senators 
and  members  of  the  House  of  Representatives 
send  their  resignations  to  the  state  governor, 
information  of  resignation  coming  to  the  House 
directly  from  the  members,  or  from  the  gover- 
nor, or  through  the  election  of  a successor. 
Members  of  Congress  may  resign,  the  resigna- 
tion to  take  effect  at  some  future  date,  without 
forfeiting  the  right  to  exercise  the  powers  of 
the  office  before  that  date.  Similar  rights  are 
permitted  state  and  local  officers  unless  the 
appointing  power  removes  the  resigning  official 
and  fills  the  vacancy.  See  Expulsion;  Re- 
moval of  Public  Officials.  References:  W. 
Clampitt,  in  Cyclopaedia  of  Pol.  Sci.  (Lalor, 
Ed.,  1890),  III,  613-615;  A.  C.  Hinds,  Digest 
and  Manual  of  Rules  and  Practices  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  (1908),  § 686. 

R.  L.  A. 

RES  JUDICATA.  An  issue  of  law,  or  a 
matter  formerly  in  controversy,  decided  by  a 
court  of  competent  jurisdiction.  (Sometimes 
erroneously  written  res  adjudicata.)  To  sus- 
tain the  contention  of  res  judicata  there  must 
be  proved  identity  of  subject  matter,  of  the 
cause  of  action,  of  parties  and  capacity  in 
which  they  sue  or  are  sued,  and  a final  deter- 
mination in  the  previous  action.  H.  M.  B. 

RESOLUTIONS  IN  CONGRESS.  Three 
kinds  of  resolutions  are  employed  in  Congress 
— simple  resolutions,  concurrent  resolutions 
and  joint  resolutions.  The  simple  resolution 
is  employed  for  the  enactment  of  measures 


which  affect  only  the  house  which  adopts  it. 
It  is  in  this  form  that  each  house  adopts  the 
rules  which  govern  its  procedure,  calls  upon 
officers  of  other  departments  to  furnish  in- 
formation, disciplines  its  own  members,  and 
expresses  its  opinions  upon  public  questions. 
Such  a resolution  has  the  force  of  a statute 
within  the  house  which  adopts  it,  but  it  is 
not  presented  to  the  other  house,  nor  to  the 
President,  and  does  not  appear  among  the 
statutes.  Resolutions  which  are  adopted  by 
botli  houses  may  be  concurrent  or  they 
may  be  joint.  In  compiling  the  enactments 
of  each  session  of  Congress,  the  joint  resolu- 
tions are  grouped  by  themselves  after  the  pub- 
lic and  private  acts.  They  seem  to  have  little 
excuse  for  existence  and  their  use  is  confusing 
rather  than  helpful.  Several  attempts  have 
been  made  to  discontinue  this  form  of  legisla- 
tion. See  Concurrent  Resolution;  Joint 
Resolution.  L.  B.  E. 

RESOURCES  OF  NORTH  AMERICA.  Non- 
Metallic  Minerals. — The  primary  resource  in 
all  lands  is  the  soil,  which,  though  largely  of 
a mineral  nature,  is  usually  considered  under 
agriculture.  The  mineral  resources,  as  com- 
monly reckoned,  may  be  classified  as  non-metal- 
lie  and  metallic.  The  non-metallic  minerals  of 
North  America  which  have  economic  value  are 
of  great  variety.  First  may  be  named  the 
fuels,  of  which  coal  is  chief.  The  United  States 
has  the  most  extensive  and  widely  diffused 
supplies  of  coal  in  the  world,  with  the  possible 
exception  of  China.  Under  this  head  come: 
(1)  the  anthracite  of  Pennsylvania;  '2)  the 
bituminous  coals  of  the  Appalachian  region 
and  Mississippi  basin;  (3)  the  great  variety 
of  soft  coals  and  lignites  of  the  South  and 
West.  In  the  coal  group  may  be  included 
considerable  reserves  of  peat  in  the  United 
States  and  Canada.  Canada  has  three  coal 
regions,  one  in  the  Maritime  Provinces,  a 
second  in  the  plains  of  the  Northwest,  and  a 
third  in  British  Columbia.  The  coal  of  Alaska 
is  little  developed  and  only  partially  known. 

In  petroleum  also,  the  United  States  has  the 
chief  store  in  North  America,  and  the  deposits 
are  much  more  widely  diffused  than  those 
of  her  only  rival,  Russia.  The  center  of  pro- 
duction has  moved  steadily  southwestward, 
and  at  the  present  time  California  is  the  heav- 
iest producer.  In  like  manner,  natural  gas 
is  an  important  fuel,  especially  in  the  states 
of  Pennsylvania,  West  Virginia,  Ohio,  and  In- 
diana. 

Structural  materials  are  of  every  kind  and 
of  wide  distribution,  belonging  to  the  class 
of  inexhaustible  useful  minerals.  Because  the 
United  States  has  the  largest  population  of 
an  advanced  type  of  any  American  country, 
these  substances  have  here  been  most  exploited. 
Among  them  are  building  stones — granite, 
sandstone,  marbles,  and  other  limestones,  and 
slates.  The  chief  beds  of  natural  cement  are 


204 


RESOURCES  OF  NORTH  AMERICA 


in  eastern  New  York,  but  this  cement  is  now  of 
minor  importance,  since  the  rise  of  the  Port- 
land cement  industry,  which,  with  the  growth 
of  population,  and  the  limitations  of  the  tim- 
ber supply,  supplies  a great  variety  of  needs. 
Glass  sands  are  abundant,  the  principal  pres- 
ent centers  of  manufacture  being  at  Pittsburgh, 
Pa.,  and  Muncie,  Ind. 

In  the  group  of  fertilizers,  phosphates  are 
found  in  South  Carolina,  Florida  and  Ten- 
nessee, and  even  more  extensive  deposits  are 
now  undergoing  development  in  Wyoming,  Ida- 
ho, and  Utah;  these  last  are  believed  to  be  the 
largest  in  the  world.  Marls  are  found  on  the 
Atlantic  coastal  plain,  and  gypsum  beds  are 
very  extensive  in  parts  of  the  South  and  West. 

Abrasives  are  widely  distributed  in  the  Unit- 
ed States,  especially  in  the  Appalachian  region. 
The  grindstones  used  in  the  United  States  are 
largely  derived  from  sandstones  found  in  Ohio. 
Arkansas  has  one  of  the  chief  deposits  of  rock 
suitable  for  whetstones.  The  largest  stores  of 
corundum  are  in  North  Carolina  and  Georgia. 

Salt  is  widely  distributed  in  the  United 
States.  New  York  and  Michigan  are  the  larg- 
est producers.  Other  important  states  are 
Kansas,  Cailfornia,  Texas,  Ohio,  Utah,  and 
Louisiana. 

Canada  leads  all  North  American  countries 
in  the  production  of  asbestos,  has  salt  and  pe- 
troleum in  the  province  of  Ontario,  and  mines 
also  mica,  graphite,  apatite,  and  other  non- 
metallic  substances. 

Metallic  Minerals. — Of  the  metallic  miner- 
als, Canada  has  her  largest  supplies  in  gold,  in 
the  Yukon  Territory  and  in  British  Columbia. 
Copper  and  iron  ore  are  important,  but  the 
Dominion’s  wealth  in  these  metals  is  far  in- 
ferior to  that  of  the  United  States,  which 
leads  all  countries  in  the  production  of  both. 
The  Lake  Superior  region  is  the  greatest  pro- 
ducer, and  the  southern  Appalachian  region  is 
second,  though  it  has  the  greater  reserves. 
Lesser  deposits  of  iron  are  widely  distributed. 
Michigan,  Montana,  and  Arizona  are  the  lead- 
ing states  in  copper  and  southern  Missouri  is 
known  for  its  lead  and  zinc.  Lead  is  produced 
as  a by-product  of  silver  mining  in  the  West. 

Gold  and  silver  are  produced  in  every  Cordil- 
leran  state.  Gold  is  mined  to  the  value  of 
millions  of  dollars  annually  in  Alaska,  and 
Mexico  is  one  of  the  foremost  silver-producing 
countries,  having  in  addition  great  wealth  in 
copper,  platinum,  iron,  lead,  and  mercury.  The 
last  is  also  produced  in  California.  Taken  al- 
together, North  America  is  richly  endowed  in 
coal,  copper  and  iron,  the  metals  basal  to 
industry,  and  in  the  precious  metals. 

Water. — Water  has,  during  recent  years, 
been  recognized,  as  never  before,  as  an  im- 
portant resource  and  its  uses  in  due  relation 
to  each  other  are  now  receiving  new  attention 
( see  Conservation).  (1)  The  prime  essential 
use  of  water  is  for  domestic  and  municipal 
supply.  With  the  growth  of  population,  espe- 


cially in  the  United  States,  this  function  of 
water  is  receiving  thorough  and  scientific  at- 
tention. Emphasis  on  this  phase  also  has 
grown  through  more  exact  knowledge  of  the 
transmission  of  disease.  In  order  to  measure 
the  amount  of  water  available  for  this  and 
other  purposes,  hydrographic  surveys  of  a de- 
tailed character  have  been  carried  on,  particu- 
larly by  the  United  States  Geological  Survey. 

(2)  A further  use  of  water  is  for  irrigation. 
Extensive  operations  of  a private  and  corporate 
character,  have  been  in  progress  for  more  than 
half  a century,  but  the  past  decade  has  been 
marked  by  federal  activity,  until  at  the  pres- 
ent time  irrigation  in  the  arid  regions  west  of 
the  Mississippi  River,  may  be  said  to  be  in 
an  advanced  stage. 

(3)  Our  interior  waterways  have  been  em- 
ployed for  navigation  since  the  days  of  early 
exploration,  and  it  was  attempted  with  much 
success  even  in  the  early  days  of  the  republic 
to  join  the  main  water  systems  by  canals  ( see 
Canals  and  Other  Artificial  Waterways). 
It  is  now  seen  more  clearly  than  ever  before, 
that  the  rivers  and  lakes  of  North  America 
offer  unsurpassed  opportunity  for  this  form  of 
transportation.  Indeed,  the  extent  and  con- 
tinuity of  the  interior  lowland  make  it  possible, 
by  improving  rivers,  and  constructing  ship 
canals,  to  make  a complete  and  efficient  net- 
work of  waterways  from  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  to 
the  Arctic  Ocean  and  from  the  Rocky  Moun- 
tains to  the  Atlantic. 

(4)  A fourth  use  of  water  is  for  power. 
The  evident  limitation  of  the  coal  supply,  the 
increasing  industrial  necessity,  and  the  rich- 
ness of  our  natural  reservoirs  and  falling 
streams,  focus  attention  upon  this  resource, 
and  upon  its  enormous  extent,  as  in  the  Pro- 
vinces of  Quebec  and  British  Columbia,  and  in 
many  parts  of  the  United  States,  where  only 
a small  part  of  available  power  is  now  used. 

Agriculture. — The  uses  of  soil  are  condi- 
tioned by  water  and  temperature.  No  con- 
tinent has  a greater  variety  of  surface,  soil,  or 
climate,  for  the  purposes  of  agricultural  pro- 
duction. The  temperate  belt  is  superior  to 
that  of  any  other  continent,  being  wide,  and 
extending  far  southward  on  the  Mexican  pla- 
teau, and  northward  over  the  Canadian  plains. 
The  temperate  region  passes  gradually  into  the 
subtropical  conditions  of  the  southern  states 
and  of  the  middle  altitudes  of  Mexico.  These 
conditions  are  favorable  to  the  production  of 
cotton,  sugar  cane,  rice,  and  many  varieties  of 
fruit.  The  subtropical  belt  in  turn  leads  into 
regions  of  equatorial  warmth,  marked,  as  in 
Central  America,  southern  Mexico,  and  the 
West  Indies,  by  the  production  of  coffee,  rub- 
ber, and  bananas. 

Forests. — About  one-fourth  of  Canada  is  cov- 
ered by  forests.  These  are  found  in  the  Mari- 
time Provinces,  in  the  Labrador  Peninsula, 
in  Quebec,  and  Ontario,  and  in  British  Colum- 
bia. Hudson  Bay  is  bordered  by  forests  except 


RESPONSIBLE  GOVERNMENT— RESPONSIBLE  GOVERNMENT  IN  CANADA 


in  tlie  cold  regions  on  the  north.  From  this 
forest  area  a belt  of  trees  extends  westward 
across  the  upper  basin  of  the  Mackenzie  and 
joins  the  forests  of  British  Columbia.  The 
three  chief  lumber  centers  are  in  New  Bruns- 
wick, the  region  of  the  upper  Ottawa  River, 
and  British  Columbia. 

The  United  States  has  the  waning  timber 
supplies  of  the  New  England  and  middle  states, 
the  important  reserves  of  the  southern  Appala- 
chians, and  the  still  important,  but  much  re- 
duced resources  of  the  upper  Great  Lakes. 
The  largest  reserves  at  the  present  time  are  in 
the  south  central  states,  and  in  the  Pacific 
northwest.  The  Latin  regions  of  the  con- 
tinent all  have  valuable  reserves  of  rubber 
forest,  of  mahogany  and  other  cabinet  woods, 
and  of  dye  woods. 

Animal  Resources. — These  include  the  fish- 
eries (see),  which  may  be  regionally  classified 
in  a fourfold  way  as:  (1)  the  historic  fishing 
grounds  of  the  Atlantic  coast,  centering  in  the 
Banks  of  Newfoundland;  (2)  the  Great  Lakes; 
(3)  the  innumerable  rivers  and  smaller  lakes 
of  the  United  States  and  Canada;  (4)  the 
Pacific  Coast  fishing  grounds  bordering  Alaska, 
British  Columbia,  and  the  United  States,  in- 
cluding the  salmon  industry  of  the  Columbia 
and  Fraser  River  systems. 

The  fur-bearing  animals  are  of  less  im- 
portance than  in  the  early  days,  but  in  this 
field  also,  the  necessity  for  conservation  is 


leading  to  suitable  restrictions,  and  promises 
permanence  and  reasonable  value  to  the  fur 
trade.  The  same  is  true  of  wild  game,  for 
almost  all  the  states  of  the  Union  now  have 
more  or  less  stringent  restrictions  and  many  of 
them  wholly  prohibit  the  export  of  game. 

It  may  be  said  in  general  of  all  the  natural 
resources  of  the  continent  that  the  principles 
and  practice  of  conservation  have  established 
themselves  in  time  to  prevent  such  serious 
havoc  as  has  been  wrought  with  the  natural 
resources  of  some  countries  of  the  Old  World. 

See  American  Government  and  Geogra- 
phy; Far  West;  Middle  States;  Middle 
West;  New  England;  Pacific  Slope;  Physi- 
ography of  North  America;  South. 

References:  A.  P.  Brigham,  Commercial  Ge- 
ography (1911);  H.  Ries,  Economic  Geology 
(1910);  N.  S.  Shaler,  The  United.  States 
(1894),  I,  II;  Thirteenth  Census,  Reports-, 
Canadian  Year  Book;  Am.  Year  Book,  1910, 
and  year  by  year.  Albert  Perry  Brigham. 

RESPONSIBLE  GOVERNMENT.  A gov- 
ernment in  which  the  ministry  is  responsible 
to  the  legislature  (ordinarily  to  the  more  popu- 
lar branch  of  the  legislature),  and  normally 
ceases  to  exercises  power  when  it  loses  the  sup- 
port of  a majority  of  the  members  of  that  body 
See  Cabinet  Government;  Ministers  and 
Ministerial  Responsibility;  Parliament. 

W.  F.  D. 


RESPONSIBLE  GOVERNMENT  IN  CANADA 


Constitutional  Basis. — The  system  of  respon- 
sible or  cabinet  government  is  in  operation  in 
the  Dominion  of  Canada,  and  in  each  of  its 
nine  provinces.  The  essence  of  the  system  lies 
in  the  fact  that  the  heads  of  the  chief  execu- 
tive departments  hold  office  only  so  long  as 
they  are  able  to  command  the  support  of  the 
majority  of  the  popular  house  (in  the  case  of 
all  the  provinces  except  Quebec  and  Nova  Sco- 
tia, the  sole  house)  of  the  legislative.  As 
in  the  United  Kingdom,  this  arrangement  rests 
upon  constitutional  practice  rather  than  stat- 
ute law.  In  Canada,  however,  the  office  of  the 
prime  minister  has  legal  recognition  in  that 
he  receives  a salary  of  $12,000,  instead  of  the 
$7,000  granted  to  other  ministers  of  the  Crown. 
The  British  North  America  Act  of  1867  pro- 
vides that  “there  shall  be  a council  to  aid  and 
advise  in  the  Government  of  Canada  to  be 
styled  the  Queen’s  (King’s)  Privy  Council  for 
Canada;  and  the  persons  who  are  to  be  mem- 
bers of  that  council  shall  be  from  time  to  time 
chosen  and  summoned  by  the  Governor  Gen- 
eral, and  sworn  in  as  Privy  Councillors,  and 
members  thereof  may  be  from  time  to  time 
removed  hv  the  Governor  General.”  But  this 
privv  council  includes  all  surviving  members 
of  past  and  present  cabinets,  except  such  as 


may  have  been  removed  from  that  dignity  for 
cause — a proceeding  practically  never  adopted. 
The  privy  council,  therefore,  as  Sir  George 
Bourinot  has  phrased  it,  is  “the  only  advisory 
body  known  to  the  constitutional  law.”  But 
it  is  not  in  entirety  an  organ  of  government. 

Historical  Evolution. — The  system  of  respon- 
sible government  in  Canada  has  been  evolved 
as  an  attempt  to  harmonize  colonial  freedom 
with  the  imperial  connection.  It  was  institut- 
ed at  the  time  of  the  union  of  Upper  and  Low- 
er Canada  in  1841.  Prior  to  this  each  province 
had  an  elected  legislature,  but  the  executive 
and  legislative  councils  were  appointed  by  the 
Crown.  This  led  to  friction  and  presently  to 
the  armed  rebellion  of  1837.  After  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  rebellion  the  British  Government 
sent  out  Lord  Durham  as  high  commissioner 
to  enquire  into  its  cause.  In  the  report  which 
he  presented  (1839)  Lord  Durham  recognised 
the  validity  of  the  colonial  grivances  and  rec- 
ommended the  institution  of  responsible  gov- 
ernment by  which  means  the  colonies  might 
control  their  own  executive  officers. 

“Without  a change  in  our  system  of  govern- 
ment,” he  wrote,  “the  discontent  which  now 
prevails  will  spread  and  advance.  ...  It 
is  difficult  to  understand  how  any  English 


206 


RESPONSIBLE  GOVERNMENT  IN  CANADA 


statesman  could  have  imagined  that  representa- 
tive and  irresponsible  government  could  be 
successfully  combined.  ...  It  needs  no 
change  in  the  principles  of  government.  . . . 

It  needs  but  to  follow  out  consistently  the 
principles  of  the  British  constitution  and  in- 
troduce into  the  government  of  these  great 
colonies  those  wise  provisions  by  which  alone 
the  working  of  the  representative  system  can 
. . . be  rendered  harmonious  and  efficient.” 

Lord  Durham  also  recommended  the  union 
of  the  two  Canadas,  by  means  of  which  the 
French  of  the  lower  provinces  would  be  out- 
voted and  thus,  while  enjoying  the  liberty  ot 
responsible  government,  would  be  under  Brit- 
ish control.  The  plan  of  government  suggested 
by  Lord  Durham  was,  of  course,  merely  an 
adaptation  of  the  British  system.  Nor  can  he 
claim  the  honor  of  having  been  the  first  to 
recommend  it.  Among  the  reformers  of  upper 
Canada  prior  to  the  rebellion  of  1837,  the  de- 
mand for  responsible  government  had  been 
freely  expressed.  It  appears  in  the  petition  of 
1829  sent  from  the  town  of  York,  in  protest 
against  the  dismissal  of  Judge  Willis.  It  was 
part  of  the  platform  of  the  Canadian  Alliance 
Society  (1834),  and  the  Constitutional  Re- 
form Society,  (1836).  It  was  explicitly  asked 
for  in  the  famous  Seventh  Report  on  Griev- 
ances piesented  to  the  assembly  of  Upper  Can- 
ada in  1835.' 

Union  of  the  Canadas. — The  British  Govern- 
ment decided  to  act  upon  Lord  Durham’s  rec- 
ommendation. Lord  Sydenham  came  to  Canada 
as  governor  in  1839,  to  effect  the  union.  Resolu- 
tions were  passed  in  its  favor  by  the  legisla- 
tures of  United  Canada  and  the  special  coun- 
cil of  the  lower  provinces.  The  Act  of  Union, 
passed  by  the  imperial  Parliament  in  1840, 
went  into  force  by  proclamation  February  10, 
1841.  It  was  presumed  by  the  reformers  that 
it  would  carry  with  it  responsible  government; 
but  some  years  were  needed  before  the  British 
governors  and  the  imperial  authorities  either 
understood  or  sanctioned  the  full  working  of 
the  cabinet  system  in  the  colonics.  Sydenham 
himself  inclined  to  personal  government.  “I 
am  not  a bit  afraid,”  he  wrote,  “of  the  re- 
sponsible government  cry  . . . the  council 

are  a council  for  the  Governor  to  consult,  but 
no  more.”  In  vain  the  legislature  passed  reso- 
lutions demanding  responsible  government. 
Sydenham  died  in  office  (1841).  Sir  Charles 
Bagot  who  succeeded  him  was  willing  to  ac- 
cept the  new  principle.  He  appointed  (Sept., 
1842)  a ministry  partly  French  and  partly 
English,  under  Robert  Baldwin  and  Louis  La 
Fontaine,  with  the  support  of  the  majority  in 
the  assembly.  This  was  responsible  govern- 
ment. But  the  British  Government  was  not 
prepared  to  sanction  Bagot’s  action.  “The 
Duke  of  Wellington,”  wrote  Sir  Robert  Peel 
“has  been  thunderstruck  by  the  news  from 
Canada.  He  considers  what  has  happened  as 
likely  to  be  fatal  to  the  connection  with  Eng- 


land.” The  government  was  saved  from  re- 
calling Bagot  by  his  death  in  office  (May,  1843). 

After  him  came  Sir  Charles  Metcalfe  who 
waged  war  against  the  principle  of  responsible 
government,  very  probably  at  the  express  bid- 
ding of  the  Tory  ministry  in  po\Ver  in  Eng- 
land. Metcalfe  precipitated  a crisis.  His  min- 
istry, with  one  exception,  resigned  in  a body 
(Nov.,  1843).  For  some  months  the  country, 
practically  without  a cabinet,  seethed  witli  con- 
tioversy  The  governor  and  the  Tory  party 
worked  desperately,  and  in  the  ensuing  elec- 
tions (1844)  obtained  a slight  majority.  But 
their  cause  was  in  reality  lost.  Metcalfe  ling- 
ered in  office  till  1845  After  him.  the  prin- 
ciple of  responsible  government  was  never  dis- 
puted. It  found  its  great  ratification  four 
years  later  under  the  governorship  of  Lord 
Elgin.  This  was  the  occasion  of  the  Rebellion 
Losses  Bill,  which  has  since  served  as  a prece- 
dent for  British  colonial  relations.  The  La 
Fontaine-Bald  win  ministry,  restored  to  office, 
brought  in  a bill  to  pay  owners  of  property  for 
losses  in  the  rebellion  of  1837.  To  the  Tories 
this  meant  compensation  to  the  rebels  them- 
selves. They  bitterly  opposed  the  bill  and  in 
a riot  at  Montreal  stoned  the  governor’s  car- 
riage and  burned  the  houses  of  parliament; 
they  clamored  for  the  recall  of  Lord  Elgin,  and 
the  imperial  disallowance  of  the  bill.  The 
governor  held  firm  and  assented  to  the  bill. 
The  British  Government,  now  controlled  by  a 
Liberal  cabinet,  refused  to  disallow  it.  Since 
that  time  the  principle  stands  firm  that  colo- 
nial legislation  of  a local  character  sanctioned 
by  the  legislature  with  a responsible  ministry 
at  the  head  of  it,  will  not  be  disallowed  by 
the  imperial  government. 

The  Governor  General. — Responsible  govern- 
ment, thus  established,  in  Canada  runs  on  sim- 
ilar lines  to  the  cabinet  government  of  the 
United  Kingdom.  The  position  of  the  governor 
general  is  parallel  to  that  of  the  king,  in  whose 
name  he  acts.  While  exercising  great  social 
and  personal  influence,  he  is  without  independ- 
ent political  power.  Everything  that  he  does 
is  done  with  the  advice  of  his  ministry.  It  is 
true  that  he  may  reserve  Canadian  legislation 
for  the  consideration  of  the  Crown.  Prior  to 
1878  the  instructions  given  him  in  writing  at 
the  time  of  his  appointment  commended  him 
to  reserve  certain  classes  of  bills.  The  Cana- 
dian Government,  however,  urged  that  such 
reservation  was  undesirable.  The  instructions, 
therefore,  were  altered,  and  reservation  though 
constitutional  has  fallen  out  of  use.  In  the 
same  way  the  power  of  pardon  is  now  exercised, 
solely  on  the  advice  of  the  minister  of  justice. 
According  to  settled  precedent  the  imperial  gov- 
ernment will  not  interfere  in  any  local  matter. 
Even  for  the  dismissal  of  the  lieutenant-gov- 
ernor of  a province  by  the  governor  general,  the 
advice  of  the  Dominion  cabinet  is  final.  This 
was  settled  by  the  acquiescence  of  Lord  Lome 
in  1879,  on  instructions  from  the  imperial 


207 


RESTRAINT  OF  TRADE 


government,  in  the  dismissal  of  a lieutenant- 
governor  of  Quebec  by  the  Macdonald  ministry. 
Only  in  certain  cases  will  the  governor  general 
be  called  on  to  act  upon  his  own  responsi- 
bility. One  of  these  must  necessarily  be  in 
regard  to  the  dissolution  of  Parliament.  He 
is  not  bound  to  accept  the  demand  of  a min- 
istry out-voted  in  the  House  of  Commons  for 
a new  election.  The  refusal  of  the  governor, 
Sir  Edmund  Head,  to  dissolve  Parliament, 
(1858)  set  a precedent  in  this  case.  The  gov- 
ernor general  remains  the  representative  in 
the  last  resort  of  the  power  of  the  British 
Crown,  and  in  moments  of  national  danger,  or 
civil  conflict,  he  might  have  to  depart  from 
the  constitutional  limits  just  described.  But 
these  are  cases  which  can  hardly  be  defined 
in  strict  terms  of  public  law. 

Organization  of  the  Executive. — In  Canada 
there  is  no  distinction,  as  there  is  in  England, 
between  the  cabinet  and  the  ministry.  The 
cabinet  includes  the  chief  executive  officers  and 
persons  nominated  to  the  privy  council,  to  act 
as  members  of  the  cabinet  without  portfolio. 
The  executive  departments  are  organized  un- 
der statutes  of  the  Dominion.  The  position 
of  the  executive  councils  or  cabinets  of  the 
provincial  governments  is  parallel  to  that  of 
the  federal  cabinet. 

Responsible  Government  and  Independence. — 
It  must  be  understood  that  responsible  govern- 
ment stops  definitely  short  of  colonial  inde- 
pendence. Legally  speaking,  the  sovereign 
power  of  the  British  Parliament  is  unimpaired 
and  may  be  exercised  at  any  time.  “The  Brit- 
ish North  America  Act,”  said  Judge  Gray, 
(himself  a member  of  the  Quebec  Conference  of 
1864)  in  a decision  of  the  supreme  court  of 
British  Columbia,  “was  framed  not  as  altering 
or  defining  the  changed  or  relative  positions 
of  the  Provinces  towards  the  Imperial  Govern- 
ment, but  solely  as  between  themselves.  . . . 

as  the  paramount  or  sovereign  authority  (the 
British  Parliament)  could  not  be  restrained 
from  future  legislation.  ...  It  was  not 
intended  as  a declaration  that  the  imperial 
government  renounced  any  part  of  its  author- 
ity.” In  practice,  of  course,  the  imperial  gov- 
ernment in  no  way  interferes  with  the  consti- 
tution of  Canada,  or  legislation  adopted  under 
it.  Such  changes  as  have  been  made  by  im- 
perial statute  in  the  constitution  of  Canada 
( 1871,  1886  and  1907,  and  the  Parliament  of 
Canada  Act  of  1875)  have  been  made  in 
response  to,  and  in  the  terms  of,  addresses 
sent  up  by  the  Canadian  Parliament. 

See  Canada,  Dominion  of;  Canadian  Prov- 
inces; Parliament,  Canadian. 

References:  A.  Todd,  Parliamentary  Govern- 
ment in  the  British  Colonies  (2d  ed.,  1894)  ; 
A.  B.  Keith,  Responsible  Government  in  the 
Dominions  (1909)  ; S.  Leacock,  “Responsible 
Government  in  the  British  Colonial  System”  in 
Pol.  Sci.  Review,  I (1907),  355-392;  V.  R. 
Markham,  “Lord  Durham  and  the  Colonies”  in 


Nineteenth  Century,  LXIX  (1906),  914-923; 
J.  G.  Bourinot,  Manual  of  Const,  llist.  of  Can- 
ada (188),  Story  of  Canada  (1896). 

Stephen  Leacock. 

RESTRAINT  OF  TRADE.  In  the  opinion 

on  the  Standard  Oil  Company  et  al.,  appel- 
lants, vs.  The  United  States,  the  Supreme 
Court  for  the  first  time  defines  and  limits  the 
terra  “restraint  of  trade”  as  prohibited  by  the 
Sherman  Anti-Trust  Law. 

The  court  says  that  the  meaning  of  the 
term  “restraint  of  trade  and  monopolization” 
must  be  sought  in  the  common  law,  and  that 
by  the  common  law  any  contract  which  tended 
to  bring  about  any  of  the  recognized  evils  of 
monopoly  was  held  to  be  unlawful.  These  evils 
of  monopoly  are:  first,  “the  power  which  the 
monopoly  gave  to  one  who  enjoyed  it  to  fix 
the  price  and  thereby  injure  the  public;  sec- 
ond, the  power  which  it  engendered  of  enabling 
a limitation  on  production;  third,  the  danger 
of  deterioriation  in  quality  of  the  monopolized 
article  which  it  was  deemed  was  the  inevitable 
resultant  of  the  monopolistic  control  over  its 
production  and  sale.” 

Of  these  three  evils,  the  court  deemed  the 
power  to  fix  the  price  of  the  necessaries  of 
life  to  be  the  most  serious,  and  continually 
refers  to  this  as  a controlling  consideration  in 
determining  whether  the  appellant  company  is 
an  unlawful  combination  in  restraint  of  trade. 

Starting  from  this  classification  of  the  evils 
of  monopoly,  the  court  finds  that  the  common 
law  by  which  the  term  restraint  of  trade  and 
monopoly  should  be  interpreted,  treated  a3  il- 
legal “all  contracts  or  acts  which  were  un- 
reasonably restrictive  of  competitive  conditions, 
either  from  the  nature  or  character  of  the 
contract  or  act  or  where  the  surrounding  cir- 
cumstances were  such  as  to  justify  the  conclu- 
sion that  they  had  not  been  entered  into  or 
performed  with  the  legitimate  purpose  of  rea- 
sonably forwarding  personal  interest  and  de- 
veloping trade,  but  on  the  contrary  were  of 
such  a character  as  to  give  rise  to  the  inference 
or  presumption  that  they  had  been  entered  into 
or  done  with  the  intent  to  do  wrong  to  the 
general  public,  and  to  limit  the  rights  of  in- 
dividuals, thus  restraining  the  free  flow  of 
commerce  and  tending  to  bring  about  the  evils, 
such  as  enhancement  of  prices,  which  were 
considered  to  be  against  public  policy.”  Both 
the  Standard  Oil  Company  and  the  American 
Tobacco  Company,  measured  by  this  standard, 
were  declared  to  be  in  violation  of  the  Sherman 
Anti-Trust  Act,  and  their  dissolution  was  or- 
dered. 

In  spite  of  the  many  criticisms  from  influ- 
ential sources  of  these  opinions  on  the  ground 
that  they  are  vague  and  indefinite,  a careful 
reading  of  the  paragraph  just  quoted,  coupled 
with  the  decisions  in  these  two  cases,  shows 
that  any  combination  of  competitors  which 
aims  at  securing  such  a dominant  position  in 


208 


RESULTING  POWERS— RETIREMENT  OF  MILITARY  AND  NAVAL  OFFICERS 


any  branch  of  trade  or  industry  that  it  will 
have  the  power,  whether  this  power  is  exercised 
or  not,  to  fix  prices,  especially  of  the  necessa- 
ries of  life,  will  be  regarded  by  the  Supreme 
Court,  if  the  question  is  brought  before  it,  as 
a combination  in  restraint  of  trade. 

See  Law,  Common  ; Reasonableness  in  Re- 
straint of  Trade;  Sherman  Anti-Trust  Act. 

References:  G.  H.  Montague,  “Shibboleth  of 
Restraint  of  Trade”  in  Electric  Magazine, 
CXLVIII  (Jan.,  1907),  18-23;  F.  H.  Cooke, 
Law  of  Combinations,  Monopolies  and  Labor 
Unions  (1909),  chs.  xvi,  xvii;  Bruce  Wyman, 
“Cases  on  Restraint  of  Trade”  in  Harvard  Law 
School,  Publications,  III  (1911);  “Trusts  and 
the  Doctrine  Against  Contracts  in  Restraint 
of  Trade”  in  Am.  Law  Review,  XXXIII  (1899), 
63;  F.  J.  Goodnow,  in  Pol.  Sci.  Quart.,  XII 
(1899),  212-245;  W.  H.  Harper,  Restraint  of 
Trade  ( 1909 ) . E.  S.  Mead. 

RESULTING  POWERS.  In  ascertaining  the 
powers  of  the  Federal  Government  it  is  not 
necessary  that  the  power  sought  shall  be  ancil- 
lary to  some  one  particular  enumerated  power, 
but  from  the  nature  of  the  Federal  Government 
as  determined  by  its  enumerated  powers  in  the 
aggregate  may  be  implied  resulting  powers 
reasonably  proper  and  necessary  to  be  exercised 
in  discharging  the  functions  of  a government 
on  which  the  expressed  powers  have  been  con- 
ferred (see  Implied  Powers).  In  his  cabinet 
paper  on  the  Bank  Bill,  Hamilton  said: 

It  is  not  denied  that  there  are  implied,  as  well 
as  express  powers,  and  that  the  former  are  as 
effectually  delegated  as  the  latter.  And  for  the 
sake  of  accuracy  it  shall  be  mentioned  that  there 
is  another  class  of  powers,  which  may  be  properly 
denominated  resulting  powers.  It  will  not  be 
doubted,  that  if  the  United  States  should  make  a 
conquest  of  any  of  the  territories  of  its  neighbors, 
they  would  possess  sovereign  jurisdiction  over  the 
conquered  territory.  This  would  be  rather  a re- 
sult, from  the  whole  mass  of  the  powers  of  the 
government,  and  from  the  nature  of  political  so- 
ciety, than  a consequence  of  either  of  the  powers 
specially  enumerated. 

See  Construction  and  Interpretation. 

Reference:  A.  Hamilton,  Works  (ed.,  1851), 
IY,  104-107.  E.  McC. 

RESUMPTION  OF  SPECIE  PAYMENTS. 

This  term  refers  to  the  redemption  of  legal 
tender  notes  in  1879  and  thereafter,  putting  an 
end  to  the  suspension  of  specie  payments  by 
the  government  and  the  banks  which  began 
early  in  December,  1861.  See  Legal  Tender 
Controversy.  References:  D.  R.  Dewey,  Fi- 
nancial History  of  the  U.  8.  (1903),  372-378; 
A.  S.  Bolles,  Financial  History  of  the  U.  S., 
Ill  (1886),  282-304.  D.  R.  D. 

RETALIATION  ACT.  A name  applied  to 

the  act  passed  by  Congress,  1818,  excluding 
from  United  States  ports  British  vessels  from 
any  British  colonial  port  from  which  Ameri- 
can vessels  were  excluded,  in  retaliation  for 
British  exclusion  of  American  vessels  from 


British  West  Indies.  The  embargo  acts  of  1794 
and  1807,  the  non-importation  act  of  1806,  and 
the  non-intercourse  act  of  1809  were  acts  in 
retaliation  for  the  British  Orders  in  Council 
and  the  French  Decrees.  O.  C.  H. 

RETIRED  LIST.  A term  denoting  the  list 
of  Army  and  Navy  officers  relieved  from  active 
service  under  certain  conditions  (especially  at 
the  age  of  sixty-four  for  army  officers  and 
sixty-two  for  navy  officers).  They  receive 
75  per  cent  of  the  salary  of  their  rank  and  are 
subject  to  court-martial.  O.  C.  H. 

RETIREMENT  OF  JUDGES.  The  judges 
of  the  federal  courts  hold  office  during  good 
behavior  and  can  be  removed  only  by  impeach- 
ment. While  their  independent  position  is  one 
of  the  chief  causes  of  their  usefulness  it  must 
be  recognized  that  judges  may  through  sick- 
ness or  age  become  incapacitated.  Since  such 
incapacity  would  not  warrant  impeachment, 
and  a judge  could  not  be  compelled  to  resign, 
it  only  remained  for  Congress  to  remove  all 
financial  obstacles  to  retirement  by  providing, 
as  it  did  in  1869,  that  any  federal  judge  who 
had  attained  the  age  of  seventy  and  had  served 
as  judge  for  ten  years  might  retire  and  con- 
tinue to  receive  for  the  rest  of  his  life  the 
full  salary  to  which  he  was  entitled  at  the 
time  of  his  resignation.  Several  judges  who 
had  become  incapacitated  but  who  could  not 
meet  the  requirements  of  this  act  have  been 
retired  on  full  pay  by  special  acts.  In  the 
states  judges  are  usually  elected  for  short 
terms  and  no  such  provision  is  necessary. 
Rhode  Island  however  allows  her  judges  to  re- 
tire on  full  pay  after  twenty-five  years’  serv- 
ice, and  Massachusetts  and  Maryland  allow 
the  same  privilege,  the  retiring  allowance  how- 
ever being  less  than  the  salary.  In  Connecti- 
cut, where  judges  are  retired  at  the  age  of 
seventy,  they  are  appointed  state  referees  for 
life  at  a reduced  salary.  See  Pensions,  Civil. 
References:  S.  E.  Baldwin,  American  Judiciary 
( 1905 ) , 326 ; A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government 
(1904),  300.  L.  B.  E. 

RETIREMENT  OF  MILITARY  AND  NA- 
VAL OFFICERS.  The  half  pay  for  life  prom- 
ised the  officers  of  the  Continental  Army  might 
have  been  regarded  as  providing  for  their  re- 
tirement; but  this  was  commuted  in  1783  for 
five  years’  full  pay.  Washington  favored  a 
liberal  provision  for  the  professional  officers 
of  a regular  establishment  as  a means  of  se- 
curing service  for  life;  and  later  generations 
of  officers  have  served  under  an  implied  con- 
tract to  this  effect.  Retirement  has  never  been 
granted  to  officers  whose  services  was  discredit- 
able or  intermittent,  and  it  has  been  withheld 
from  volunteer  officers,  though  exceptions  have 
been  made  by  special  acts  of  Congress. 

The  need  of  compulsory  retirement  was  evi- 
dent when  disabled  or  superannuated  officers 


209 


RETROSPECTIVE  LEGISLATION— RETURNING  BOARDS 


were  called  to  commands  during  the  Mexican 
War;  but  it  was  not  until  1861  that  any 
general  law  was  passed.  Retirement  after  45 
years’  service  is  the  general  rule;  but  it  is 
compulsory  for  officers  of  the  Army  or  Marine 
Corps  upon  attaining  the  age  of  64,  for  officers 
of  the  Navy  at  62;  and  for  all  in  case  of 
disability  incident  to  the  service.  Officers  may 
retire  after  30  years’  service  if  their  applica- 
tion is  approved  by  the  President;  and  volun- 
tary retirement  in  certain  grades  of  the  Navy 
has  been  authorized  since  1899  in  order  to 
maintain  a regular  flow  of  promotion,  officers 
being  selected  for  retirement  if  the  40  specified 
vacancies  are  not  produced  by  casualties  or 
voluntary  retirements.  Retirements  under  this 
law  carried  advancement  to  the  next  higher 
grade  up  to  1913,  when  there  was  a propor- 
tionate increase  in  the  number  of  compulsory 
retirements.  Promotion  to  a higher  grade  on 
retirement  was  also  granted  to  all  survivors 
who  served  during  the  Civil  War.  To  be 
“wholly  retired”  is  to  be  dropped  from  the 
service. 

Officers  retired  for  disabilities  not  incident 
to  the  service  receive  half  pay;  and  the  lower 
rate  of  “furlough  pay”  may  be  allotted  to  those 
separated  for  misconduct  at  the  discretion  of  a 
retiring-board.  The  attempt  to  limit  the  num- 
ber of  officers  of  the  Army  has  been  abandoned; 
but  it  is  proposed  to  adopt  a graduated  scheme 
of  retirement  for  both  services  with  retired 
pay  proportionate  to  length  of  service.  Nearly 
all  retired  officers,  including  a few  who  have 
served  less  than  30  years,  receive  three-fourths 
of  the  pay  of  the  rank  which  they  hold  on  the 
retired  list. 

In  1912  the  Army  had  1,017  officers  on  the 
retired  list,  of  whom  5 were  lieutenant-generals, 
5 major-generals,  and  251  brigadier -generals ; 
and  the  Navy  had  920,  including  148  rear-ad- 
mirals, 53  commodores,  and  226  warrant  of- 
ficers. The  Marine  Corps  has  63  officers  on 
the  retired  list.  Enlisted  men  in  both  services 
may  retire  with  three-fourths  of  their  pay 
after  30  years  service. 

See  Akmy,  Standing;  Officers,  Military 
and  Naval;  Pensions,  Military  and  Naval.; 
Public  Officers,  Classification  and  Duties 
of. 

References;  L.  C.  Hatch,  Administration  of 
the  Am.  Revolutionary  Army  (1904),  79-82, 
143;  E.  Upton,  Military  Policy  of  the  U.  »S'. 
(1907),  15,  63,  206,  254;  U.  S.  Navy  Depart- 
ment, Annual  Reports,  1910,  289,  302,  Laws 
Relating  to  the  Navy  (1898),  116-121,  515-517, 
Navy  Regulations,  1909,  423,  424,  Navy  Reg- 
ister (annual),  201;  W.  Pulsifer,  Navy  Year- 
book, 1912,  741,  742,  747,  807,  810,  812,  825, 
and  year  by  year;  U.  S.  War  Department, 
Military  Laws  (1908),  489-495,  515,  1228, 
1231,  Army  Register  (annual),  Annual  Re- 
ports, 1908,  I,  82-90;  1910,  I,  25,  162-164; 
1912,  I,  445,  446;  and  year  by  year. 

C.  G.  Calkins. 


RETROSPECTIVE  LEGISLATION.  In  the 

distribution  of  powers,  the  legislative  depart- 
ment is  given  authority  to  make  the  laws,  while 
it  is  for  the  judicial  department  to  determine 
in  each  case  the  rules  and  principles  of  law 
applicable  to  transactions  brought  before  it. 
Therefore  legislation  in  its  nature  is  prospec- 
tive, not  retrospective.  It  is  not,  however, 
beyond  the  scope  of  legislative  power  to  pass 
remedial  statutes  which  shall  cure  defects  in 
proceedings  which,  owing  to  their  irregularity 
in  matters  of  form,  are  not  effectual  to  accom- 
plish the  purposes  intended.  Thus  irregulari- 
ties in  the  execution  of  powers  by  guardians, 
administrators  and  others  acting  in  a fiduciary 
capacity  may  be  cured  by  retrospective  legis- 
lation so  that,  from  the  time  such  legislation 
becomes  operative,  the  proceedings  which  were 
irregular  become  as  effectual  as  though  they 
had  been  from  the  first  in  due  form.  Like- 
wise, proceedings  of  municipal  bodies  not  taken 
in  the  form  required  by  law  may  be  legalized. 
And  even  the  insufficiency  of  the  action  of 
individuals  which  has  not  been  in  accordance 
with  prescribed  forms  may  be  cured  so  as  to 
carry  out  the  real  intent.  The  general  rule 
is  that  the  legislature  may  by  retrospective  ac- 
tion cure  irregularities  in  regard  to  matters 
which  might  have  been  dispensed  with  or  ren- 
dered immaterial  by  legislation  antedating  the 
doing  of  the  irregular  act;  but  it  can  not  do 
this  to  the  prejudice  of  rights  which  have  be- 
come vested  (see  Vested  Rights).  Retrospec- 
tive criminal  statutes  to  the  prejudice  of  one 
charged  or  to  be  charged  with  a crime  already 
committed  are  prohibited  by  constitutional 
provisions  ( see  Ex  Post  Facto  Law).  Legis- 
lative interference  with  the  obligation  of  pre- 
existing contracts  is  also  prohibited  (see  Con- 
tract, Impairment  of).  It  is  a rule  of  con- 
struction that  statutes  shall  not  be  given  a 
retroactive  effect  unless  such  is  the  plain  in- 
tention of  the  legislature.  References:  T.  M. 
Cooley,  Constitutional  Limitations  (7th  ed., 
1903),  135,  et  seq.,  Principles  of  Constitutional 
Law  (3d  ed.,  1898),  354-60;  W.  W.  Willough- 
by, Constitutional  Law  (1910),  II,  1265. 

E.  McC. 

RETURNING  BOARDS.  State  laws  differ 
widely  as  to  the  methods  by  which  the  results 
of  popular  elections  shall  be  officially  deter- 
mined. In  some  the  returns  are  sent  from  the 
individual  voting  districts  to  the  secretary  of 
state;  in  others  they  are  sent  directly  to  the 
presiding  officers  of  the  branches  of  the  legis- 
lature, and  are  opened  and  canvassed  in  their 
presence.  Still  other  states  designate  certain 
officers  to  serve  as  returning  boards.  In  regard 
to  such  boards  the  chief  question  has  been, 
have  they  purely  ministerial  powers,  or  may 
they  pass  upon  the  validity  of  the  returns  and 
correct  mistakes?  In  interpreting  its  own 
powers,  a board’s  choice  between  varying  prec- 
edents may  vitally  affect  the  result. 

210 


RETURNS,  CAN’T  GO  BEHIND  THE— REVENUE  CUTTER  SERVICE 


Returning  boards  figured  most  prominently 
in  our  history  in  the  decade  following  the 
Civil  War,  when  the  legislatures  of  Louisiana, 
South  Carolina  and  Florida  created  state  re- 
turning boards  and  gave  them  judicial  powers 
in  canvassing  the  results  of  elections.  In  1876 
these  boards,  by  and  with  the  advice  of  Repub- 
lican “visiting  statesmen,”  proceeded  to  “go 
behind  the  returns,”  and,  alleging  election  ir- 
regularities, threw  out  the  votes  of  many  dis- 
tricts. In  the  confusion  and  bitter  feeling 
which  developed,  Congress  instituted  the  Elec- 
toral Commission  (see)  to  determine  the  re- 
sults of  the  presidential  election. 

At  present,  there  is  general  acceptance  of 
Judge  Cooley’s  dictum,  that  state  returning 
boards  “act  for  the  most  part  in  a ministerial 
capacity,  and  are  not  vested  with  judicial 
powers  to  correct  the  errors  and  mistakes  that 
may  have  occurred  with  any  officer  who  pre- 
ceded them  in  the  performance  of  any  duty 
connected  with  the  election,  or  to  pass  upon 
any  disputed  fact  which  may  effect  the  re- 
sult.” Such  powers  can  be  conferred  by  the 
legislature  only  if  it  is  authorized  so  to  do  by 
the  constitution. 

See  Election  System  in  U.  S.;  Elections, 
Contested. 

Reference:  T.  M.  Cooley,  Constitutional  Lim- 
itations (7th  ed.,  1903),  933. 

Geobge  H.  Haynes. 

RETURNS,  CAN’T  GO  BEHIND  THE.  A 

phrase  indicating  the  demands  of  the  Republi- 
can party,  adopted  by  the  electoral  commission 
Feb.  7,  1877,  in  the  Hayes-Tilden  disputed 
election  case,  that  the  commission  was  not  com- 
petent to  investigate  the  eligibility  of  the  list 
of  electors  submitted  by  the  state  authorities. 
See  Electoeal  Commission.  0.  C.  H. 

REVENUE,  BILLS  FOR  RAISING.  The 

Constitution  (Art.  I,  Sec.  vii,  If  1)  provides 
that  “all  bills  for  raising  revenue  shall  orig- 
inate in  the  House  of  Representatives ; but  the 
Senate  may  propose  or  concur  with  amendments 
as  on  other  bills.”  The  chief  difficulties  of  this 
provision  have  been  as  to:  (1)  the  definition 
of  “bills  for  raising  revenue”;  (2)  the  scope 
of  the  Senate’s  amending  power;  (3)  the  bear- 
ing of  this  clause  on  the  treaty-making  power. 
There  has  been  much  controversy  between  the 
two  houses  on  all  these  points.  It  has  been 
ruled  in  the  House  that  a bill  for  raising  rev- 
enue is  one  arising  out  of  the  power  of  Con- 
gress to  lay  and  collect  taxes,  duties,  imposts, 
and  excises.  In  the  case  of  U.  S.  vs.  James 
(13  Blatchford  207),  decided  by  the  fed- 
eral circuit  court',  a fuller  definition  is  given 

Certain  measures  are  unmistakably  bills  for 
raising  revenue.  These  impose  taxes  upon  the 
people,  either  directly  or  indirectly,  or  lay  duties, 
imposts,  or  excises  for  the  use  of  the  govern- 
ment, and  give  to  the  persons  from  whom  the 
money  is  exacted  no  equivalent  in  return,  un- 
less in  the  en.ioyment,  in  common  with  the  rest 
of  the  citizens,  of  the  benefit  of  good  govern- 


ment. It  is  this  feature  which  characterizes  bills 
for  raising  revenue.  They  draw  money  from 
the  citizen;  they  give  no  direct  equivalent  in 
return. 

In  this  case  it  was  held  that  an  act  fixing 
certain  rates  of  postage  was  not  a bill  for 
raising  revenues. 

This  definition  has  not  been  understood 
to  include  appropriation  bills,  or  bills  for 
other  purposes  which  incidentally  create 
revenue.  Thus  it  was  held  that  the  Na- 
tional Bank  Act  though  imposing  a tax  upon 
the  circulation  of  bank  notes,  was  not  a bill 
for  raising  revenue  within  the  meaning  of  the 
constitution  (Twin  City  Bank  vs.  Nebeker,  167 
U.  S.  196).  Connected  with  the  question  of 
definition  is  the  controversy  as  to  whether  a 
bill  repealing  an  existing  tax  is  a bill  for 
raising  revenue;  except  for  two  early  instances 
the  House  has  always  vigorously  denied  the 
Senate’s  power  to  originate  such  measures. 
The  Senate  on  its  side  has  just  as  stoutly  in- 
sisted on  the  opposite  view. 

The  Senate  has  always  freely  exercised  its 
constitutional  right  to  amend  revenue  bills. 
The  Payne-Aldrich  (see)  Tariff  Bill  of  1909 
furnished  ample  illustration  of  this.  The  Sen- 
ate’s right  in  this  matter  has,  in  fact,  never 
been  questioned.  The  trouble  over  the  amend- 
ing clause  has  arisen  out  of  attempts  on  the 
part  of  the  Senate  to  add  revenue  provisions 
to  non-revenue  bills,  or  so  to  amend  House 
revenue  measures  as  essentially  to  change  their 
nature.  Both  these  matters  have  more  than 
once  been  submitted  to  conferences,  but  with- 
out definite  result. 

Another  conflict  has  been  that  between  the 
House  and  the  treaty-making  power  as  to  the 
right  of  the  latter  to  conclude  treaties  having 
revenue  clauses.  Strict  interpretation  might 
limit  the  constitutional  provision  to  “bills,” 
that  is  to  propositions  for  statutes.  In  prac- 
tice, however,  the  spirit  rather  than  the  letter 
of  the  clause  has  prevailed.  At  all  events  the 
Senate  does  not  pass  treaties  repeating  or  an- 
nulling existing  revenue  laws  without  coop- 
eration of  the  House;  an  example  is  the  Ca- 
nadian Reciprocity  Bill  under  discussion  in 
1911.  The  Supreme  Court  has  never  passed  on 
this  matter  directly,  although  there  are  two 
cases  (Bartram  vs.  Robertson,  122  V.  S.  116 
and  Whitney  vs.  Robertson,  124  U.  S.  190) 
which  might  possibly  indirectly  imply  that  a 
treaty  might  modify  revenue  laws. 

See  Appbopeiations  ; Congeess;  House  of 
Repeesentatives. 

References:  A.  C.  Hinds,  Precedents  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  (1907),  II,  ch.  xlvii; 
W.  W.  Willoughby,  The  Constitutional  Law  of 
the  United  States  (1910),  I,  488-492;  566-567. 

Andeew  C.  McLaughlin. 

REVENUE  CUTTER  SERVICE.  A branch 
of  the  Treasury  Department,  under  the  direct 
control  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and 
a captain  commandant  appointed  by  the  Pres- 


REVENUE,  INTERNAL 


ident  with  the  consent  of  the  Senate.  Its 
original  function  when  organized  in  1790  was 
to  assist  the  customs  officials,  and  the  officers 
of  the  revenue  cutters  board  vessels  to  inspect 
and  demand  manifests,  examine  the  cargo,  affix 
proper  fastenings  on  the  latches,  accompany 
the  vessels  to  their  American  destination,  and 
fire  on  any  vessels  subject  to  examination 
which  do  not  bring  to  when  requested.  In 
addition,  revenue  cutters  aid  the  Department 
of  Commerce  in  the  task  of  enforcing  the  navi- 
gation laws  and  the  Alaskan  seal  hunting  and 
fishing  laws.  When  detailed  by  the  Secretary 


of  the  Treasury,  they  aid  the  Life  Saving  Serv- 
ice by  acting  as  inspectors  of  stations,  and  in 
other  ways  as  required  by  the  general  super- 
intendent. They  also  aid  vessels  in  distress, 
and  remove  derelicts  from  the  paths  of  sea- 
going vessels.  See  Tariff  Administration  ; 
Treasury  Department.  References:  U.  S. 
Treasury  Department,  Navigation  Laws  of  the 
U.  8.  (1911)  ; U.  S.  Revenue  Service,  Annual 
Report;  Acts  of  June  18,  1878,  March  6,  189G, 
Dec.  29,  1897,  May  12,  June  14,  1906,  April 
16,  1908,  April  21,  1910;  Revised  Statutes, 
§§  1506,  2759-2768.  G.  G.  H. 


REVENUE,  INTERNAL 


First  Federal  Statutes  (1791-1816).— Inter- 
nal revenue  or  excise  duties  have  been  imposed 
at  three  different  periods:  1791-1802;  1813- 
1818;  and  since  1862.  When  the  revenue 
system  was  framed  in  1789,  there  was  much 
opposition  to  excise  duties;  they  were  re- 
garded as  an  invasion  of  domestic  personal 
rights,  creating  an  undue  extension  of  federal 
power.  The  need  of  additional  revenue  led, 
however,  to  the  imposition,  in  1791,  of  duties 
upon  distilled  spirits.  Bitter  resentment 
caused  open  conflict  in  Pennsylvania,  seen  in 
the  Whiskey  Insurrection  (see)  of  1794.  As 
the  tax  failed  to  yield  revenue,  duties  were 
imposed  in  the  same  year  upon  carriages,  sales 
of  certain  liquors,  manufacture  of  snuff,  re- 
fining of  sugar  and  auction  sales.  In  1802 
these  taxes  were  repealed  by  the  Republicans 
who  had  just  come  into  power.  The  total 
yield  of  all  these  taxes  was  $5,300,000,  as  com- 
pared with  $65,500,000  collected  from  customs 
during  the  same  period — a ratio  of  about  1:12. 

Financial  necessity  again  brought  similar 
duties  into  operation  in  1814,  in  order  to  pro- 
vide revenue  for  carrying  on  the  war  with 
England.  In  1818,  when  the  emergency  was 
over,  the  taxes  were  repealed.  The  receipts 
during  this  five-year  period  were  $15,000,000 
as  compared  with  $93,000,000  from  customs — 
a ratio  of  about  1 : 6. 

War  Internal  Revenue. — No  further  attempt 
was  made  to  revive  internal  revenue  duties 
until  the  financial  crisis  created  by  the  Civil 
War.  Revenue  was  sought  for  from  every 
quarter;  loans  were  made,  treasury  notes  is- 
sued, and  customs  duties  increased;  and  it 
was  inevitable  that  Congress  should  turn  once 
more  to  the  taxation  of  domestic  industry  and 
trade.  Duties  were  therefore  imposed  upon  a 
wide  range  of  objects;  luxuries  represented  by 
spirits,  ales,  beer  and  tobacco;  licenses  upon 
occupations;  duties  upon  manufactures  and 
products;  taxes  on  auction  sales,  carriages, 
yachts,  billiard  tables  and  plate;  upon  slaugh- 
tered cattle,  hogs  and  sheep;  upon  railroads, 
banking  institutions  and  insurance  companies; 
upon  salaries  and  pay  of  officers  in  the  serv- 


ice of  the  United  States;  upon  income  and 
legacies;  and  an  extended  list  of  stamp  duties. 
According  to  David  A.  Wells,  Congress  fol- 
lowed the  principle,  “Wherever  you  find  an 
article,  a product,  a trade,  a profession  or  a 
source  of  income,  tax  it.” 

In  1864  these  duties  were  increased  and  ex- 
tended to  new  objects.  The  duty  on  spirits 
was  increased  from  20  and  60  cents  per  gallon 
to  $1.50  and  $2.00  per  gallon.  The  maximum 
tax  on  cigars  was  raised  from  $3.50  to  $40.00 
per  thousand.  The  general  ad  valorem  rate 
was  increased  by  from  3 to  5 per  cent.  As 
summarized  by  Howe,  “Nothing  was  omitted 
from  the  raw  product  to  the  finished  com- 
modity. Often  an  article  received  a half  dozen 
additions  ere  it  reached  the  consumer,  and 
not  only  were  all  the  constituent  elements 
which  entered  into  an  article  taxed,  as  the 
bolts,  castings,  trimmings  and  the  like  of  an 
engine,  but  the  engine  when  completed  was 
subject  to  an  ad  valorem  duty  upon  its  value, 
while  all  repairs  which  increased  the  value 
of  an  article  10  per  cent  were  rendered  dutiable 
at  a like  rate.” 

Commodities  were  taxed  not  only  during 
manufacture,  but  also  upon  sale,  so  that  from 
8 to  20  per  cent  of  the  value  of  nearly  every 
finished  product  went  into  the  treasury.  For 
the  mechanical  production  of  a book  a dozen 
different  taxes  were  levied;  upon  each  con- 
stituent part  of  the  book,  as  paper,  cloth, 
leather,  boards,  thread,  glue,  gold-leaf,  and 
type  material,  amounting  in  each  case  to  from 
3 to  5 per  cent,  while  the  finished  product 
paid  its  tax  of  5 per  cent.  The  revenue  from 
these  sources  exceeded  expectation,  amounting 
in  1866  to  nearly  a million  dollars  a day,  far 
in  excess  of  the  yield  from  customs.  By  years 
the  total  receipts  were  as  follows  (in  mil- 
lions) : 

1865  _ $209.5 

1866  309.2 

1S67  _ __  266.0 

1870  184.9 

1875  - 110.0 

1880  124.0 

1885  112.5 

1890  142.6 


212 


REVENUE,  INTERNAL 


Post  Bellum  Taxes. — When  the  war  was  over 
many  of  the  taxes  were  reduced  or  repealed, 
especially  those  on  manufactures  and  prod- 
ucts. The  only  taxes  left  after  the  revision 
of  July  14,  1870,  were  those  on  spirits,  fer- 
mented liquors,  tobacco;  banks  and  bankers; 
a small  amount  on  certain  manufactures  and 


1902.  In  1909  a special  excise  tax  was  placed 
upon  the  net  profits  of  corporations;  and 
slight  increases  were  also  made  in  the  rates 
on  certain  manufactures  of  tobacco. 

The  following  table  shows  internal-revenue 
receipts  according  to  certain  specified  sources 
(in  millions)  : 


Spirits 

Tobacco 

Fermented  Liquors 

Oleomargarine 

Total 

1875  

$52.1 

$37.3 

■ $ 9.1 

$110.5 

1880  

61.2 

38.9 

12.8 

124.5 

1890  

81.7 

34.0 

26.0 

$0.8 

142.6 

1900  

109.9 

59.4 

73.6 

2.5 

295.3 

1910  

148.0 

58.1 

60.6 

i.i 

290.0 

1912  

156.4 

70.6 

63.2 

i.i 

321.6 

products;  certain  stamp  taxes  on  bank  checks, 
transfers  and  proprietary  articles;  and  the  in- 
come tax  (to  expire,  however,  in  1872).  Un- 
fortunately many  of  the  changes  in  rates  were 
made  with  little  forethought  or  wisdom,  par- 
ticularly in  the  case  of  duties  on  distilled 
spirits.  Taking  advantage  of  the  frequent 
fluctuations  of  rates,  distillers  were  tempted  to 
fraud  which  culminated  in  the  disgraceful  ex- 
posure of  the  Whiskey  Ring  in  1876  (see 
Whiskey  Frauds  on  the  Revenue). 

In  1883  surplus  revenue  justified  a reduc- 
tion in  taxes.  Internal  revenue  taxes  were 
sacrificed  in  part;  first,  because  of  a desire 
to  keep  the  protective  system  embodied  in 
tariff  duties  as  intact  as  possible;  second,  be- 
cause there  was  a lingering  tradition  that  in- 
ternal duties  were  war  taxes  suitable  for  an 
emergency,  but  not  to  be  incorporated  perma- 
nently into  the  scheme  of  taxation.  Duties 
were  consequently  repealed  on  watches,  sav- 
ings bank  deposits,  capital  and  deposits  of 
national  banks,  and  on  patent  medicines  and 
perfumeries;  on  tobacco  they  were  cut  in 
half.  In  1890  a further  reduction  of  25  per 
cent  was  made  on  snuff,  smoking  and  chewing 
tobacco,  and  the  special  license  taxes  upon  the 
sale  of  tobacco  were  repealed.  No  longer, 
however,  was  there  any  contention  that  inter- 
nal revenue  duties  as  a whole  should  be  abol- 
ished, for  the  treasury  ceased  to  enjoy  the 
large  surpluses  of  the  preceding  decade.  In 
1887  a duty  was  imposed  upon  oleomargarine, 
rather  to  restrict  the  industry  or  to  bring  it 
in  under  federal  supervision,  than  as  a source 
of  revenue.  In  1894  a duty  was  placed  upon 
playing  cards,  and  a slight  increase  was  made 
in  the  rates  on  spirits. 

Spanish  War  Taxes. — In  1898  new  duties 
were  imposed  on  account  of  the  Spanish  War. 
The  taxes  on  tobacco  and  fermented  liquors 
were  increased,  special  duties  were  laid  upon 
banks,  brokers  and  theatres ; stamp  taxes  were 
imposed  upon  a great  variety  of  commercial 
transactions,  including  the  use  of  bank  checks, 
express  and  freight  receipts,  and  telegraph 
messages;  upon  patent  medicines;  firms  en- 
gaged in  refining  sugar  or  petroleum  were  also 
taxed.  All  of  these  new  taxes  were  repealed  in 


During  the  five  years  after  the  Spanish  War, 
1898-1902,  receipts  from  stamp  taxes  averaged 
over  $27,000,000,  and  from  inheritances  (see) 
$3,500,000  a year.  In  1912  the  yield  of  the 
corporation  tax  ( see  Tax,  Corporation)  was 
$28,580,000. 

Present  Administration. — As  now  estab- 
lished, the  internal  revenue  system  forms  as 
stable  a support  of  government  income  as 
customs  duties.  In  1894  and  1898-1902  the 
proceeds  were  in  excess  of  customs ; and  dur- 
ing the  three  years  1908-1910,  for  every  $100 
of  customs  receipts  there  was  collected  $84 
in  internal  revenue  duties. 

From  the  foregoing  table  it  will  be  observed 
that  the  revenue  from  duties  on  distilled  spir- 
its is  the  most  important,  yielding  a little 
more  than  one-third  of  the  total.  Notwith- 
standing the  enactment  of  state-wide  prohib- 
itory laws  in  some  states  and  of  local  option 
(see)  laws  in  others,  the  production  of  spir- 
its increased  by  one-half  between  1900  and 
1910. 

In  the  collection  of  the  tax  on  distilled 
spirits  there  are  many  important  technical  de- 
tails, the  principal  of  which  is  the  bonded 
system.  As  whiskey  has  to  age  in  order  to  be 
a merchantable  commodity,  the  law  permits 
the  distillers  to  place  the  product  in  bonded 
warehouses,  under  the  supervision  of  the  gov- 
ernment, for  a specified  term  of  years  from 
3 to  8 years — and  defer  payment  of  duty  until 
withdrawal.  Under  this  liberal  treatment, 
there  is  a tendency  to  manufacture  in  excess 
of  demand,  and  to  overstock  the  future  mar- 
ket. This  frequently  leads  to  organized  effort 
on  the  part  of  the  distilling  interest  to  secure 
a reduction  of  the  rate  of  duty  before  with- 
drawal of  the  whiskey,  since  reduction  would 
be  so  much  clear  profit  to  the  distiller.  Be- 
tween 1898  and  1910  production  was  far  in 
excess  of  withdrawal,  so  that  the  stock  in 
hand  increased  from  112,000,000  to  233,000,- 
000  gallons.  The  profit  at  stake,  if  only  a 
slight  lowering  in  the  tax  could  be  secured, 
is  considerable. 

Rates. — The  incidence  of  tax  on  the  cigar 
in  ordinary  use  is  three-tenths  of  a cent;  and 
on  smoking  tobacco  8 cents  a pound.  The  rates 


213 


REVENUE,  PUBLIC,  COLLECTION  OF 


on  tobacco  and  liquors  in  force  in  1914  were 
as  follows: 


Commodities  Hate 

Cigars  weighing  more  than  3 lbs. 

per  1000  $3.00  per  1000 

Cigars  weighing  not  more  than  3 

lbs.  per  1000  .54  per  1000 

Cigarettes  weighing  not  more  than 
3 lbs.  per  1000,  and  worth  whole- 
sale more  than  $2.00  1.08  per  1000 

Cigarettes  weighing  not  more  than 
3 lbs.  per  1000,  and  of  a whole- 
sale value  not  more  than  $2.00 

per  1000  1 .54  per  1000 

Cigarettes  weighing  more  than  3 

lbs.  per  1000  3.00  per  1000 

Snuff  .06  per  lb. 

Tobacco  .06  per  lb. 

Fermented  liquors  per  bbl.  of  not 

more  than  31  gallons  1.00  per  bbl. 

Brewers,  annual  manufacture  less 

than  500  bbl.  50.00 

Brewers,  annual  manufactures  of 

500  bbl.  or  more  100.00 

Retail  dealers  in  malt  liquors 20.00 

Wholesale  dealers  in  malt  liquors  50.00 


Collection. — The  number  of  persons  paying 
taxes  either  on  products  or  for  license  were  in 
1910: 


Rectifiers  2,413 

Retail  liquor  dealers  217,813 

Wholesale  liquor  dealers  6,652 

Brewers  1.568 

Retail  dealers  in  malt  liquors 19,655 

Wholesale  dealers  in  malt  liquors  11,645 

Retail  dealers  in  oleomargarine  free  from 

artificial  coloring  42,029 

Cigar  manufacturers  23,4S4 

Manufacturers  of  tobacco  3,052 


The  collection  of  internal  revenue  is  made  by 
a bureau  of  the  Treasury  Department,  at  the 
head  of  which  is  a commissioner.  The  country 
is  divided  into  66  districts,  in  each  of  which 
there  is  a collector;  and  the  total  force  of 
enployees  of  the  entire  service  in  1910  amount- 
ed to  3834.  The  cost  of  collecting  the  duties 
in  1910  was  1.74  per  cent  of  the  revenue,  as 
compared  with  an  average  of  2.66  since  the 
creation  of  the  bureau.  Revenue  is  collected 
through  the  sale  of  stamps  which  are  affixed 
to  the  products,  or  in  the  case  of  licenses,  by 
the  issue  of  certificates  or  notices  which  must 
he  displayed  in  the  places  of  business  of  the 
licensees. 

See  Financial  Policy  of  the  United 
States;  Financial  Statistics;  Imports;  Li- 
quor Legislation;  Oleomargarine  Tax;  Rev- 
enue, Public,  Collection  of;  Stamp  Tax. 

References:  F.  C.  Howe,  Taxation  and  Taxes 
in  the  U.  S.  under  the  Internal  Revenue  Syetem, 
1101-1895  (1896),  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  In- 
ternal Revenue,  Annual  Reports  (containing 
statistics  and  laws)  ; W.  M.  Daniels,  Public 
Finance  (1899),  136-143,  tax  on  spirits;  F.  L. 
Olmstead,  “Tobacco  Tax”  in  Quart.  Journ. 
Been .,  V (1891),  193,  262;  D.  R.  Dewey,  Finan- 
cial Ilist.  of  the  U.  8.  (3d  ed.,  1907),  105-108, 
119,  138-140,  301,  391-395,  418-419,  465-467; 
A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government  (3d  ed.,  1910), 
401-403 ; C.  C.  Plehn,  In  tro,  to  Public  Finance 
(3d  ed.,  1909),  204-214;  C.  F.  Bastable,  Public 
Finance  (2d  ed.,  1895),  475-486,  English  prac- 
tice. Davis  R.  Dewey. 


REVENUE,  PUBLIC,  COLLECTION  OF.  A 

government  is  immediately  dependent  for  its 
support  upon  the  revenue  which  it  may  collect. 
Consequently  it  is  necessary  that  taxes  be 
collected  promptly;  and  it  is  also  desirable 
that  the  methods  of  collection  be  inexpensive. 
The  cost  of  collection,  however,  depends  upon 
the  kind  of  tax  from  which  the  revenue  is  de- 
rived. The  collection  of  federal  revenues 
through  customs  and  internal  revenue  duties 
is  in  a measure  automatic.  Foreign  goods  can- 
not be  imported,  and  domestic  goods  cannot 
be  manufactured  or  sold  until  the  importer, 
manufacturer  or  merchant  has  satisfied  the 
revenue  authorities.  Not  until  then  does  the 
commercial  transaction  become  lawful ; and  if 
not  done  the  act  is  tainted  with  fraud,  subject- 
ing the  doer  to  heavy  penalties,  such  as  con- 
fiscation of  property  in  excess  of  the  tax,  and 
even  fine  and  criminal  suit.  The  result  is  that 
federal  taxes  are  easily  collected. 

Nor  does  the  law  tolerate  delay.  Cash  must 
be  paid  without  credit  at  the  time  of  entry 
of  imported  goods,  except  for  goods  tempora- 
rily stored  in  bonded  warehouses.  In  the  case 
of  internal  revenue  taxes,  stamps  are  sold 
which  must  be  affixed  to  the  goods  subject  to 
the  tax,  or  licenses  must  be  taken  out  before 
certain  manufacturing  or  mercantile  opera- 
tions can  be  begun.  Goods  without  the  proper 
stamps  may  be  seized,  and  persons  without 
licenses  may  be  arrested.  In  neither  branch 
of  the  service  are  there  delinquent  accounts 
save  those  due  to  fraud  or  commercial  failures. 

State  and  Local  Taxes. — It  is  entirely  differ- 
ent in  the  collection  of  state  and  local  taxes, 
except  that  minor  part  which  is  derived  from 
fees  and  licenses.  Taxes  are  assessed  by  states 
and  municipalities  against  individuals  and  cor- 
porations; bills  are  rendered  calling  for  pay- 
ment within  a certain  specified  time;  and  if 
not  paid  pecuniary  penalties  are  imposed,  and 
the  bills  put  in  the  hands  of  officials  to  collect 
by  regular  processes  of  law.  The  law,  however, 
permits  great  leniency,  and  property  is  not 
seized  until  a considerable  period  of  time  has 
elapsed.  Even  then,  in  the  final  settlement, 
the  taxpayer  is  subject  only  to  slight  mone- 
tary penalties,  primarily  designed  to  cover 
interest  and  costs  of  bringing  proceedings.  The 
burden  of  collection  is,  therefore,  upon  the 
government  rather  than  upon  the  taxpayer. 
Delinquency  or  neglect  is  not  a crime  or  mis- 
demeanor. 

Customs  Duties. — Payments  of  customs  du- 
ties are  made  to  the  collecter  of  the  port  and 
by  him  transmitted  to  the  Treasury  Depart- 
ment. The  payment  may  be  made  in  gold, 
silver,  United  States  notes,  and  gold  and  silver 
certificates.  In  New  York  duties  may  be  paid 
by  special  orders  drawn  upon  coin  previously 
deposited  in  the  subtreasury.  By  far  the 
largest  amount  is  collected  at  New  York, 
amounting  in  1910  to  64  per  cent  of  the  total. 
To  state  accurately  the  exact  cost  of  collect- 


214 


REVENUE,  PUBLIC,  SOURCES  OF 


ing  customs  is  not  possible  as  the  treasury 
reports  do  not  include  in  cost  the  expense  of 
building  customs-houses,  or  their  annual  care, 
or  the  expenditures  for  revenue  cutters.  Ex- 
cluding these  items,  the  annual  cost  of  collec- 
tion has  varied  in  the  years  1900-1910  from 
2.55  to  3.48  per  cent.  This  cost,  which  is  ma- 
terially higher  than  in  Great  Britain,  is  due  to 
the  enforcement  of  stringent  regulations  de- 
manded by  an  extensive  range  of  protective 
tariff  duties. 

Internal  Revenue. — For  indirect  taxes  im- 
posed upon  products,  the  manufacturer  pur- 
chases stamps,  which  are  destroyed  when  the 
packages  are  opened.  Penalties  for  non-pay- 
ment extend  not  only  to  the  products  but  also 
to  the  property  employed  in  the  manufacture. 
The  cost  of  collection  is  low,  not  exceeding 
since  1900  two  per  cent  per  annum. 

State  taxes,  with  the  exception  of  certain 
corporation  taxes  which  are  paid  directly  to 
state  officials  are  collected  either  by  county 
collectors,  by  township  collectors,  as  in  New 
York  and  Pennsylvania,  or  by  towns  which 
are  responsible  in  their  corporate  capacity,  as 
in  most  of  the  New  England  states.  The  col- 
lectors may  be  paid  by  salary,  or  by  fees  and 
commissions,  the  latter  being  common  in  small- 
er towns.  The  most  common  penalty  for  de- 
linquency is  the  addition  of  a certain  percent- 
age of  the  original  tax,  or  the  charge  of  col- 
lectors’ fees,  costs  and  interest.  In  some  states 
there  is  a rebate  for  prompt  or  advance  pay- 
ment. 

Municipal  Taxes. — Municipal  taxes  are  col- 
lected in  much  the  same  way  as  state  taxes. 
The  cost  of  collection  of  revenue  .in  158  cities 
having  a population  of  over  30,000,  in  1908  was 
$2,580,000,  or  a little  over  one-half  per  cent 
of  the  total  revenue.  In  a few  states  where 
there  is  a state  Tax  Commission,  certain  taxes 
are  not  only  assessed  but  collected  by  the  com- 
mission. This  is  particularly  true  of  inheri- 
tance taxes  when  the  revenue  accrues  to  the 
state  treasury. 

See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Collector  of 
Customs;  Collector  of  Internal  Revenue; 
Corporations,  Taxes  on;  Revenue,  Inter- 
nal; Tariff  Administration. 

References:  U.  S.  Census  Bureau,  Wealth, 
Debt  and  Taxation  (1907),  620,  630,  643,  645; 
C.  C.  Plelin,  Introduction  to  Public  Finance 
(3d  ed.,  1909),  43,  431-433,  436. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

REVENUE,  PUBLIC,  SOURCES  OF.  In  the 

latter  half  of  the  sixteenth  century  (1576)  a 
French  writer,  Bodin,  wrote  that  there  were 
seven  ways  of  raising  public  revenue:  from 
landed  domain,  conquest,  gifts,  tribute  from 
subject  states,  public  traffic  or  trading,  customs 
duties  upon  merchants  who  bring  in  or  carry 
out  merchandise,  and  taxes  upon  citizens.  The 
first,  revenue  from  public  land,  was  held  to 
be  the  most  just  and  certain  of  all.  Not  only 


in  ancient  times  but  in  the  mediaeval  period, 
many  governments  relied  largely  upon  rents 
and  use  of  public  estates  for  support.  With 
the  advent  of  democratic  institutions,  govern- 
ments have  been  largely  stripped  of  their  self- 
sustaining  powers ; lands  have  been  alienated 
to  private  ownership;  and  until  recently  gov- 
ernments participated  less  and  less  in  public 
industry. 

For  more  than  a century  taxes  have  been 
the  chief  source  of  revenue  of  most  nations. 
Besides  taxes,  there  are  fees,  assessments,  sales 
of  property,  rent  of  property,  commercial  or 
contractual  receipts  prices,  fines  and  forfei- 
tures, gifts,  and  loans.  The  distinction  be- 
tween the  first  three — taxes,  fees  and  assess- 
ments— is  not  always  sharply  defined;  but  in 
general  it  may  be  said  that  a tax  is  a forced, 
compulsory  contribution,  levied  presumably  for 
the  common  benefit;  a fee  is  a compulsory 
charge  for  a special  benefit,  made  for  services 
“constantly  recurring  in  the  ordinary  course 
of  relations  between  a government  and  its  sub- 
jects” (Hadley)  ; and  an  assessment  is  sim- 
ilar to  a fee  except  that  “it  is  levied  once 
for  all  to  meet  some  extraordinary  expense.” 
Another  distinguishing  mark  is  that  a fee  is 
charged  for  a transaction,  while  an  assess- 
ment is  levied  upon  property.  More  specifical- 
ly, according  to  Seligman,  an  assessment  is  a 
“payment  made  once  for  all  to  defray  the  cost 
of  a specific  improvement  to  property  under- 
taken in  the  public  interest,  and  levied  by  the 
government  in  proportion  to  the  particular  in- 
terest accruing  to  the  property  owner,”  while 
“a  fee  is  a payment  to  defray  the  cost  of  each 
recurring  service  undertaken  by  the  govern- 
ment primarily  in  the  public  interest,  but  con- 
ferring a measurable  special  advantage  on  the 
fee-payer.”  A fee,  therefore,  is  a payment  for 
a special  benefit  as  distinguished  from  a tax 
which  has  a common  benefit  in  view.  Al- 
though an  assessment  has  a common  benefit 
as  its  object,  the  special  benefit  is  so  great 
that  an  additional  payment  over  and  above 
an  ordinary  tax  is  considered  to  be  justifiable. 

Commercial  receipts  or  prices  are  “charges 
for  special  services  which  people  are  not  com- 
pelled to  accept  unless  they  choose”  (Hadley), 
or  “payments  made  by  an  individual  for  a 
service  or  commodity  sold  by  the  government 
primarily  for  the  special  benefits  of  the  in- 
dividual, but  secondarily  in  the  interest  of 
the  community”  (Seligman). 

Bureau  of  Census  Schedule. — In  its  effort  to 
secure  greater  uniformity  in  public  accounting, 
the  Bureau  of  the  Census,  following  Professor 
Plehn,  has  adopted  the  following  classifications 
of  revenues,  in  which  greater  consideration  is 
given  to  administrative  needs  and  practice: 

I.  General  revenues  ; being  compulsory  or  volun- 
tary contributions,  levied  to  defray  the  general 
cost  of  government,  and  not  conditional  upon  the 
performance  of  any  specific  service  to  the  individ- 
ual contributor.  Here  are  placed  receipts  from 
I taxes,  licenses,  permits,  penalties,  fines,  forfeits, 
subventions,  grants,  donations,  gifts. 


215 


REVENUE,  PUBLIC,  SOURCES  OF 


A.  Taxes : 

(1)  Property  taxes : (a)  General  property,  or 

direct  taxes  upon  property  in  proportion  to  ap- 
praised or  assessed  value j (b)  Special  property, 
as  corporation,  bank,  security,  and  mortgage  taxes. 

(2)  Business  taxes. 

(2)  Poll  taxes. 

(4)  Other  taxes,  as  taxes  on  income,  commis- 
sions of  public  offices,  litigation  taxes,  frontage 
taxes,  tonnage  taxes,  customs,  and  internal  revenue 
taxes. 

B.  Licenses  and  permits  ; here  are  included  rev- 
enues when  the  granting  of  a license  or  permit  is  a 
condition  to  the  transaction  of  business.  Such 
revenue  includes  a fee  or  charge  for  the  clerical 
labor  in  issuing  and  recording  the  license,  and  a 
tax  in  excess  of  the  fee.  Sometimes  they  are 
known  as  occupation  or  privilege  taxes. 

C.  Penalties,  tines  and  forfeits  are  collected  as 
punishment  for  failure  to  obey  civil  and  criminal 
laws  and  local  ordinances. 

D.  Subventions  include  receipts  by  one  govern- 
mental unit  from  another,  as  a municipality  from 
a state,  to  be  used  for  some  particular  govern- 
mental service,  as  schools. 

E.  Grants  are  receipts  like  subventions,  but  with 
no  condition  attached  to  the  gift. 

F.  Donations  and  gifts  are  payments  by  individ- 
uals to  a government. 

II.  Commercial  revenues.  These  may  be  divided 
into  three  subclasses,  as  income  from  industries, 
investments,  and  special  services. 

A.  Industrial  income,  as  from  the  post  office, 
water  works,  electric  lighting,  etc.  Industries  un- 
dertaken by  cities  are  in  England  referred  to  as 
examples  of  municipal  trading. 

B.  Investment  income,  as  rent,  Interest,  and  divi- 
dends from  real  estate  or  securities  held  by  the 
government  as  investments. 

C.  Special  service  income  refers  to  receipts  from 
special  service  other  than  industries.  They  are 
subdivided  into  two  classes  according  as  they  are 
available  for  meeting  special-service  expenses  and 
special-improvement  outlays.  In  the  former  are 
included  fees,  and  in  the  latter  payments  or  assess- 
ments for  the  opening  of  highways,  construction  of 
pavements,  sprinkling  of  streets,  etc. 

Federal  Analysis. — Unfortunately  the  ac- 
counts of  the  federal  treasury  are  not  kept 
in  a form  which  admits  of  a classification  of 
revenue  in  strict  conformity  to  private  or 
academic  usage.  By  far  the  largest  amount  of 
revenue  is  derived  from  taxes;  in  1910,  out  of 
total  receipts  of  $900,000,000,  taxes  from  cus- 
toms and  internal  revenue  provided  $627,000,- 
000.  Fees  are  included  under  one  entry,  “con- 
sular, letters  patent  and  land,”  amounting  to 
$5,741,000.  Commercial  receipts  or  prices  are 
derived  from  the  postal  service  and  the  mint; 
from  the  former  was  obtained  $224,000,000; 
from  the  latter  it  is  not  possible  from  accounts 
available  to  determine  the  exact  amount  re- 
ceived, but  the  Treasury  report  credits  $4,- 
120,000  as  “profits  on  coinage,  bullion  de- 
posits and  assays.”  From  sales  of  property, 
the  following  items  are  to  be  noted:  public 
lands,  $6,356,000;  government  property,  $1,- 
665,000;  ordnance  material,  $278,000.  From 
fines  and  forfeitures  the  receipts  are  as  a rule 
insignificant.  Occasionally,  as  in  the  recent 
cases  of  penalties  imposed  upon  sugar  refining 
companies  ( see  Sugar  Frauds),  the  penalties 
run  into  the  millions,  but  these  are  exception- 
al. Gifts  to  the  national  government  are  rare- 
ly made,  and  as  a source  of  revenue  may  be 
disregarded.  Revenue  from  loans  is  only  occa- 
sional, depending  upon  special  emergencies; 
since  1880  there  have  been  only  ten  years  in 
which  public  debt  receipts  exceeded  a million 
dollars.  In  past  years  relatively  large  sums 


have  been  received  from  sales  of  public  lands; 
in  1835,  1836  and  1855  together  it  exceeded 
$40,000,000.  The  total  receipts  from  this 
source  since  the  establishment  of  the  govern- 
ment have  been  (to  1910)  nearly  $360,000,000, 
or  less  than  3 per  cent  of  the  combined  total 
of  customs  and  internal  revenue. 

Census  Analysis  of  Non-Federal  Receipts. — 
The  revenues  of  states  and  cities  are  far  more 
varied  than  are  those  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment; and  owing  to  the  activity  of  various  so- 
cieties and  organizations  which  have  carried 
on  a persistent  agitation  for  twenty  years  in 
favor  of  uniform  accounting  (see),  a more  in- 
telligible classification  has  been  made  by  the 
Bureau  of  the  Census.  For  all  states,  cities, 
and  minor  civil  divisions  the  revenue  receipts 
in  1902  were: 


Revenue  Amount 


Taxes 

General  property 
tax  

$706,660,000 

62,327,000 
, 16,582,000 

$785,569,000 

70.9 

Special  property 

and  business  tax 
Poll  tax 

' 

Licenses  : 

75,082,000 

6.8 

Liquor  

Other  licenses  and 
permits  ... 

55.241.000 

19.841.000 

Fines  and  forfeits  .. 
Subventions  and 

grants  

Donations  and  gifts 
Commercial  revenues 
All  others  

7.962.000 

60,985,000 

2.903.000 
172,939.000 

2.127.000 

5.5 

.3 

15.6 

.2 

Total  

$1,107,569,000 

100.0 

By  specified  civil  divisions  the  percentage 
of  receipts  from  commercial  and  general  rev- 
enues were  as  follows: 


Commercial 

Revenues 

General 

Revenues 

States  and  territories 

15.8 

84.2 

Counties 

10.0 

90.0 

Cities  with  over  25,000 

inhabitants 

22.0 

78.0 

Cities  with  8,000—25,000 

inhabitants  ..  

20.7 

79.3 

All  other  minor  civil  di- 

visions  

6.6 

93.4 

If  the  general  receipts  he  considered  apart 
from  the  commercial  revenues  the  percentages 
by  sources  were  as  follows: 


Per  cent 


Taxes  

General  property  tax 75.6 

Special  property  and  busi- 
ness taxes  6.7 

Poll  taxes  1.8 

Licenses  

Liquor  5.9 

Other  2.1 

Fines  and  forfeits  

Subventions  and  grants  

Donations  and  bequests  

All  others 


84.1 


8.0 


0.9 

6.5 

0.2 

u.k 


216 


REVENUE,  SURPLUS 


The  greater  portion  of  subventions  and 
grants  is  represented  by  sums  received  by 
states  from  the  national  government  in  aid 
of  agricultural  colleges  and  experiment  sta- 
tions. 

Commercial  Revenues. — The  commercial  rev- 
enues of  states  amounted  in  1902  to  nearly 
16  per  cent  of  the  total  revenues;  this  was 
derived  from  interest  on  sinking  and  trust 
funds,  from  rents  of  school  lands  in  western 
states;  from  industries  in  penal  institutions, 
and  from  state  owned  enterprises  in  three 
states — South  Carolina,  a state  dispensary 
(since  given  up)  ; in  Ohio,  state  canals;  and  in 
California,  docks  and  wharves  in  San  Fran- 
cisco. 

A still  more  detailed  classification  of  reve- 
nues is  now  made  by  the  Bureau  of  the  Census 
for  cities  with  population  of  over  30,000,  and 
for  1908  the  following  figures  are  taken  to  il- 
lustrate the  nature  of  their  commercial  reve- 
nues : 


Water  supply  systems $55,268,000 

Electric  light  and  power  systems 1,470,000 

Gas  supply  systems  844,000 

Markets  and  public  scales  1,431.000 

Docks,  wharves  and  landings  3,975,000 

Cemeteries  and  crematories  611,000 

Institutional  industries  633,000 

All  others  , 4,906,000 


Total $69,138,000 


This  is  to  be  compared  with  $480,000,000  ob- 
tained by  taxes. 

See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Assessment, 
Special;  Betterments,  Assessments  foe; 
Corporations,  Taxes  on;  Fines  as  Sources 
of  Revenue;  Forfeitures  as  a Source  of 
Revenue;  Gifts  for  Public  Purposes;  Oleo- 
margarine Tax;  Public  Property;  Revenue, 
Public,  Collection  of;  and  under  Taxation; 
Taxes. 

References:  C.  J.  Bullock,  Selected  Readings 
in  Public  Finance  (1906),  50-60;  C.  C.  Plehn, 
Intro,  to  Public  Finance  (3d  ed.,  1909),  79- 
102;  H.  R.  Seager,  Intro,  to  Economics  (3d  ed., 
1905),  540;  E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  Essays  in  Tax- 
ation (2d  ed.,  1897),  ch.  ix;  C.  F.  Bastable, 
Public  Finance  (2d  ed.,  1895),  143-156;  W.  M. 
Daniels,  Elements  of  Public  Finance  (1899), 
207-264;  U.  S.  Census  Bureau,  Wealth,  Debt, 
and  Taxation  (1907),  Statistics  of  Cities 
(1908).  Davis  R.  Dewey. 

REVENUE,  SURPLUS.  Tn  contrast  with 
European  systems  of  national  finance,  there 
is  no  equalization  of  receipts  and  expenditures 
in  the  annual  budgets  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States.  This  is  due:  (1) 
to  the  lack  of  a central  control  of  revenue 
appropriations  in  a single  official  or  commit- 
tee; (2)  to  the  predominating  influence  of  tar- 
iff duties  in  the  revenue  system,  whereby  it  is 
difficult  to  make  accurate  forecasts  owing  to 
the  fluctuations  in  international  trade;  (3)  to 
the  youth  and  rapid  growth  of  the  country, 
attended  by  reactions  in  business  and  industry. 


There  has,  moreover,  been  a disposition  to 
provide  revenue  generously,  partly  because  of 
a deep-seated  aversion  to  a standing  national 
debt,  especially  marked  before  the  Civil  War; 
and  partly  because  of  the  unexpected  fruitful- 
ness of  tariff  duties  imposed  through  a long 
period  of  devotion  to  the  protective  system. 
As  a consequence,  except  during  periods  of 
war,  the  federal  treasury  has  enjoyed  a sur- 
plus in  most  years.  The  handling  of  these 
surpluses  has  created  several  difficult  prob- 
lems, among  them : ( 1 ) the  disposition  of  a 

surplus  when  there  is  no  public  indebtedness 
to  be  paid  off;  (2)  the  use  of  the  surplus  when 
the  debt  has  definite  terms  of  years  to  run 
and  consequently  cannot  be  bought  at  par; 
(3)  the  locking  up  of  funds  in  the  public 
treasury  and  subtreasuries  with  possible  em- 
barrassment to  the  money  market.  An  indirect 
consequence  of  the  occurrence  of  a surplus  is 
the  disposition  of  Congress  to  increase  its 
expenditures  for  purposes  not  of  national  or 
immediate  importance. 

In  1835  the  national  debt  was  paid  off;  but 
there  was  no  disposition  to  reduce  taxes  in 
harmony  with  the  decreased  needs  of  the  treas- 
ury. On  the  contrary,  the  existence  of  a sur- 
plus invited  all  sorts  of  extravagant  expendi- 
tures. As  a method  of  temporary  settlement 
of  the  question  a bill  was  passed  in  1836  pro- 
viding that  the  funds  in  the  treasury  over  and 
above  $5,000,000  should  be  deposited  with  the 
several  states,  and  $27,000,000  was  thus  dis- 
tributed. Although  the  distribution  was  tech- 
nically only  a deposit,  there  was  no  expecta- 
tion that  the  states  would  ever  be  called  upon 
to  pay  their  apportionments. 

From  1866  until  1894  there  was  a surplus  in 
every  year  except  1874.  During  the  first  part 
of  this  period  it  was  advantageously  used  in 
operations  concerned  with  refunding  the  debt. 
One  error,  however,  was  made  in  extending 
the  maturity  of  the  new  bonds  over  too  long 
a period,  so  that  by  1880  there  was  little 
indebtedness  available  for  immediate  liquida- 
tion. Bonds  had  a high  credit  and  sold  at 
a premium.  There  was  opposition  to  settling 
public  indebtedness  under  conditions  which 
meant  a handsome  profit  to  banks  which  held 
large  blocks  of  bonds;  but,  forced  by  the  enor- 
mous accumulation  of  public  funds  in  govern- 
ment vaults,  Secretary  Fairchild  in  Cleveland’s 
administration  (1885-1889)  resorted  to  this 
solution.  In  later  years  this  method  has  been 
freely  followed,  and  new  legislation  has  given 
the  Treasury  greater  liberty  in  depositing  sur- 
plus funds  with  banks. 

See  Deposit  of  Public  Funds;  Debt,  Pub- 
lic, Administration  of;  Financial  Statis- 
tics; Subtreasury  System. 

References:  E.  G.  Bourne,  Hist,  of  the  Sur- 
plus Revenue  of  1837  (1885),  bibliography: 
D.  R.  Dewey,  Financial  Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (3d. 
ed.,  1907),  217-222,  494;  H.  C.  Adams,  Public 
Debts  (1895),  80-83.  Davis  R.  Dewey. 


217 


REVISED  STATUTES— REVOLUTION,  AMERICAN,  CAUSES  OF 


REVISED  STATUTES.  A periodical  compi- 
lation of  the  laws  in  force  either  in  a state 
or  in  the  United  States.  The  term  “revised 
statutes”  is  used  more  generally  to  designate 
such  a compilation  of  laws  in  force,  although 
in  some  states  the  terms  “compiled  statutes” 
or  “compiled  law's”  are  used.  In  a few  states 
a compilation  of  laws  in  force  is  improperly 
termed  a “code”  ( see  Codification).  A “code,” 
to  confine  the  term  to  its  more  proper  mean- 
ing, is  a systematic  statement  of  the  law',  in- 
tended to  include  all  or  practically  all  legal 
rules  concerning  the  subject  treated.  Revised 
statutes,  on  the  other  hand,  constitute  simply 
a revision  or  systematization  of  the  statute 
laws  already  in  force  in  the  territory  to  which 
they  apply.  Where  an  edition  of  revised  stat- 
utes is  prepared  purely  by  private  hands,  it 
ordinarily  constitutes  simply  an  arrangement 
under  proper  headings  of  the  laws  which  are 
in  force.  That  is,  the  work  is  simply  one  of 


compilation,  excluding  laws  no  longer  in  force. 
Where  a revision  is  undertaken  under  official 
supervision,  it  is  not  unusual  to  authorize 
the  person  or  body  doing  the  work  to  restate 
the  law  in  simpler  form,  and  to  eliminate  con- 
flicts; it  is  less  usual  for  the  legislature  to 
authorize  the  revisers  actually  to  change  the 
substance  of  the  law ; such  changes  do  not,  of 
course,  become  effective  until  after  they  have 
received  the  approval  of  the  legislative  bodies. 
Properly,  perhaps,  the  term  “revised  statutes” 
should  be  confined  to  the  official  restatement 
and  simplification  of  the  statute  law  in  force, 
but  the  term  is  in  practice  applied  also  to 
unofficial  or  official  compilations  which  do  no 
more  than  simply  to  collect  the  law  in  force 
without  any  attempt  at  systematic  restate- 
ment and  simplification.  See  Statutes,  State. 
References:  J.  B.  Sanborn,  “Problem  of  Stat- 
utory Revision”  in  Am.  Pol.  Sci.  Assoc.,  Pro- 
ceedings, IV  (1907),  113-127.  W.  F.  D. 


REVOLUTION,  AMERICAN,  CAUSES  OF 


Differences:  Social. — The  causes  of  the 
American  Revolution  may  be  divided  into  sev- 
eral classes.  There  were  those  which  were  due 
to  certain  fundamental  conditions,  the  distance 
of  the  mother  country  from  the  colonies,  and 
the  age  and  conservatism  of  England  set  over 
against  the  youth  and  radicalism  of  America. 
Then  there  were  certain  fundamental  facts  >n 
the  whole  historical  growth  of  the  two  coun- 
tries which  had  left  their  institutions  radical- 
ly unlike  though  in  superficial  view  similar. 
Finally,  a series  of  untoward  events  interpreted 
by  the  people  of  England  and  America,  each 
in  the  light  of  their  own  environment  and  con- 
ditions, in  a very  dissimilar  way,  led  to  com- 
plete misunderstanding  and  separation.  A 
comparison  of  conditions  in  the  two  countries 
just  prior  to  the  events  which  led  immediately 
to  war  will  show  many  of  the  causes  which 
to  this  day  render  it  hard  for  an  old  and  con- 
servative community  to  understand  a frontier 
people  as  were  the  Americans  of  the  eighteenth 
century.  The  refinement  of  English  society 
exhibited  in  the  finished  eloquence  of  Pitt,  the 
deep  and  scholarly  political  philosophy  of 
Burke,  and  the  polished  letters  of  Walpole  con- 
trasted sharply  with  the  ruder  frontier  soci- 
ety of  America,  typified  in  the  somewhat  glor- 
ified stump  oratory  of  Patrick  Henry,  the  farm- 
er philosophy  of  Thomas  Jefferson,  and  the 
practical  wisdom  of  Benjamin  Franklin,  ex- 
pressed in  a simple  and  clear,  but  far  from 
elegant  or  literary  style.  Art  galleries,  li- 
braries, museums,  every  creation  of  civiliza- 
tion abounded  in  England,  while  in  America 
little  had  been  done  in  the  direction  of  culture 
and  refinement  except  to  clear  the  forest  from 
part  of  the  eastern  edge  of  the  continent.  In 


England  there  were  vast  accumulations  of 
wealth,  but  in  America  twenty  to  fifty  thou- 
sand pounds  was  rarely  amassed,  and  no  for- 
tune was  over  three  hundred  thousand  pounds. 
Yet  in  America  few  were  poverty  stricken, 
though  many  were  impecunious.  Even  the 
language  of  the  two  countries  differed,  for, 
while  English  speech  was  dominant  in  America, 
many  causes  had  been  at  work  to  make  strong 
dialectic  peculiarities  there  which  English 
travellers  did  not  fail  to  note  and  ridicule. 
Moreover  England  was  all  English,  or  so  over- 
whelmingly so  that  foreign  immigrants  did  not 
affect  her  political  thought.  America,  on  the 
other  hand,  was  sprinkled  with  various  na- 
tionalities— Germans,  Dutch,  French,  Swiss, 
Swedes  and  Scotch-Irisli — in  such  numbers  that 
in  certain  localities  not  even  the  dominance  of 
the  English  tongue  was  secure.  And  finally 
the  whole  social  fabric  of  England  was  quite 
dissimilar  to  that  of  America.  In  England,  the 
majority  of  people  lived  in  towns,  in  America 
they  lived  on  farms,  often  deep  in  the  forest. 
Town  life  in  England  emphasized  the  commu- 
nity and  made  men  pliant  to  an  imperial  re- 
gime ; the  forest  farm  in  America  made  the 
dweller  there  individualistic,  made  him  love 
self-rule  and  local  self-government. 

Differences:  Political. — This  marked  dissim- 
ilarity between  Englishmen  and  Americans  ex- 
tended to  their  dominant  political  character. 
The  colonial  policy  of  English  kings  had 
stocked  America  with  dissenters  and  radicals 
gathered  from  all  lands.  As  Cotton  Mather 
wrote:  “There  never  was  a generation  that 
did  so  perfectly  shake  off  the  dust  of  Babylon 
both  as  to  ecclesiastical  and  civil  constitution 
as  the  first  generation  of  Christians  that  came 


REVOLUTION,  AMERICAN,  CAUSES  OF 


into  this  land  for  the  gospel’s  sake.”  The 
Americans  were  not  only  Protestants,  but  Pro- 
testants against  Protestantism  itself,  dissent- 
ers from  the  Church  of  England,  Puritans,  Con- 
gregationalists,  Presbyterians,  Baptists  and 
Quakers.  Theirs  was  the  “dissidence  of  dis- 
sent,” as  Burke  expressed  it.  For  twenty  years 
before  the  actual  outbreak  of  the  Revolution, 
the  dissenting  preachers  of  New  England  dis- 
seminated among  the  people  of  their  congrega- 
tions liberal  political  doctrines  culled  from 
Milton,  Locke,  Sydney  and  even  from  Burla- 
maqui  and  Montesquieu.  These  sermons  filled 
men’s  minds  with  democratic  ideas  and  a 
love  of  free  institutions  which  was  sure  to 
make  them  restive  under  an  arbitrary  govern- 
ment or  even  under  one  having  less  liberal 
political  principles. 

This  transformed  character  of  Englishmen 
who  had  settled  in  America  asserted  itself  most 
vigorously  in  the  colonies  which  were  shel- 
tered behind  charters.  These  instruments  had 
been  drawn  in  a very  liberal  spirit  in  the  early 
day  because  of  a desire  to  attract  colonists, 
and  they  were  ill  suited  to  the  ends  of  a strong 
central  administration.  They  “amount,”  de- 
clared Governor  Bernard,  “to  an  alienation  of 
the  dominions  of  Great  Britain,  and  are,  in 
effect,  acts  dismembering  the  British  Empire.” 
Another,  with  pardonable  exaggeration,  assert- 
ed that  Rhode  Island  was  no  more  a part  of 
the  British  Empire  than  the  Bahamas,  when 
they  were  inhabited  by  buccaneers.  Through 
their  representatives  in  the  colonial  legisla- 
tures the  colonists  kept  up  a running  fight 
with  the  royal  agents,  the  governors,  and,  by 
means  of  withholding  salaries  and  refusing 
necessary  taxation  the  colonial  assemblies 
kept  the  upper  hand.  One  royal  governor 
wrote:  “Meanwhile  I was  left  to  begg  my 
daily  bread  from  a hard  hearted  assembly 
here  . . .”  There  were  attempts  by  the 

British  Government  to  have  colonial  money 
paid  out  on  a warrant  by  the  governor  and 
the  subservient  council  which  he  had  appoint- 
ed. But  that  scheme  proved  unworkable,  for 
the  power  that  grants  the  taxes  is  bound  soon- 
er or  later  to  control  their  expenditure.  By 
the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  whole 
center  of  gravity  of  the  colonial  administra- 
tion had  moved  from  England  to  America.  The 
assemblies  had  usurped  the  functions  of  gov- 
ernor and  council,  and  the  chief  law  officers 
had  become  dependent  upon  the  assemblies  for 
their  salaries.  In  Massachusetts  there  was  a 
thirty  years  quarrel  between  the  General  Court 
and  the  royal  governors  over  the  governor’s 
salary;  the  Court  would  grant  only  from  year 
to  year.  A similar  struggle  in  New  York  and 
South  Carolina  ended  likewise.  The  battle 
thus  waged  about  the  executive  was  also  fought 
for  control  of  the  judiciary.  There  were  sig- 
nificant struggles  in  New  York  and  New  Jersey. 

Conditions  after  1763. — This  constant  bick- 
ering between  the  colonial  assemblies  and  the 
112 


royal  authorities  led  many  to  believe  at  an 
early  day  that  the  colonists  were  kept  from  a 
struggle  for  independence  only  by  their  fear 
of  the  French  in  Canada  and  the  Mississippi 
Valley.  When,  by  the  Treaty  of  Paris,  1763, 
France  lost  both  of  those  regions,  the  colonists 
no  doubt  felt  thereafter  less  dependence  upon 
the  British  for  protection.  Moreover,  the  men 
of  different  colonies  had  fought  together 
against  the  French,  and  some  of  the  particular- 
ism which  had  made  united  action  impossible 
at  an  earlier  time  had  now  vanished.  Plans 
looking  toward  confederation  now  made  head- 
way, for  both  Whigs  and  Tories  in  colonial 
politics  could  in  this  matter  agree  for  different 
reasons.  The  Tory  favored  the  idea,  because 
the  plan  seemed  to  further  the  schemes  of  the 
Crown  for  abating  local  power.  The  Whig 
approved,  because  thereby  the  colonies  might 
be  strengthened  in  a military  way.  The  feeling 
that  union  was  possible  made  men  bolder  in 
resisting  what  they  regarded  as  the  oppression 
of  the  British  Government. 

It  was  when  the  historical  past  and  the  ex- 
isting conditions  had  made  the  British  and 
the  American  people  quite  incompatible  and 
unable  to  see  political  questions  in  the  same 
way,  that  England  met  the  greatest  problem 
in  her  colonial  history — the  problem  of  effec- 
tive imperial  organization.  Moreover,  English 
society  was  not  in  condition  to  call  forth  its 
best  taient  for  great  and  statesmanlike  action. 
The  moral  tone  among  the  ruling  classes  was 
very  low.  Government  positions  were  in  the 
hands  of  placemen.  Bribes  were  common  at 
elections,  and  parliamentary  votes  were  notor- 
iously purchasable.  Corruption  was  rampant. 
The  men  who  might  have  preserved  the  empire 
were  out  of  power.  Therefore  it  was  small 
men  who  met  the  great  problem,  should  there 
be  a British  empire  ruled  by  Parliament  in 
all  its  parts,  whether  in  England  or  in  Ameri- 
ca? Or  should  Parliament  rule  in  the  British 
Isles,  and  the  colonial  assemblies  in  the  Ameri- 
can continent,  with  only  a federal  bond  to 
unite  them? 

The  Mercantile  System. — One  great  obstacle 
to  the  federal  solution  was  the  long  established 
mercantile  system  of  colonial  control — the  pro- 
tective commercial  policy  which  England  had 
from  the  first  applied  to  her  American  posses- 
sions. Colonies  existed,  according  to  the  mer- 
cantile theory,  for  the  benefit  of  the  mother 
country  ( see  Economic  Theory).  To  secure 
this  end  restrictions  were  placed  upon  Ameri- 
can trade  and  industries.  This  restrictive  sys- 
tem found  expression  in  three  kinds  of  laws: 
(1)  the  acts  of  navigation  ( see  Navigation 
Acts)  which  protected  English  shipping 
against  foreign  competitors;  (2)  the  acts  of 
trade  which  secured  a monopoly  of  the  colonial 
commerce  for  English  merchants;  (3)  the  acts 
giving  to  English  manufacturers  a monopoly 
of  the  colonial  markets.  Though  these  laws 
must  ultimately  set  up  a real  opposition  of 


219 


REVOLUTION,  AMERICAN,  SIGNIFICANCE  OF 


interests  between  America  and  England,  they 
did  not  for  a long  time  hurt  the  colonies  seri- 
ously, because,  as  a new  country  largely  de- 
voted to  farming,  America  was  not  a rival  of 
industrial  and  commercial  England.  Not  until 
the  Molasses  Act,  1733,  was  there  any  serious 
attack  on  American  interests,  and  even  then 
the  collusion  of  the  custom  house  officers  with 
American  shippers  made  fraudulent  clearances 
and  smuggling  an  antidote  to  the  evil.  When 
in  1761,  however,  efforts  were  made  to  enforce 
the  acts  by  a resort  to  Writs  of  Assistance 
(see)  their  issuance  was  resisted  by  James 
Otis  (see)  in  an  impassioned  appeal  which 
met  almost  universal  approval  in  America. 
The  popularity  of  Otis’s  argument  showed 
what  America  believed,  and  pointed  very  plain- 
ly the  path  of  wise  statesmanship. 

Parliamentary  Acts. — Nevertheless,  jn  1763, 
when  Indian  uprisings  made  a force  of  sol- 
diers necessary  in  Canada,  the  British  minis- 
ter, Grenville,  lowered  the  sugar  and  molasses 
duties  and  set  on  foot  measures  to  enforce  the 
collection.  One  thing  necessary  was  the  crea- 
tion of  American  executive  officers  who  should 
be  independent  of  the  colonial  assemblies. 
This  and  a defensive  system  for  the  colonies 
was  to  be  supported  by  taxation  imposed  by 
Parliament  on  the  colonists.  As  a further 
means  to  accomplish  this,  Grenville  proposed 
and  secured  the  passage  of  a Stamp  Act  (see 
Stamp  Act  Agitation).  At  once  this  was 
opposed  in  America  on  the  ground  that  there 
should  be  no  taxation  without  representation. 
In  the  controversy  that  followed  it  appeared 
that  the  dominant  theory  of  representation  in 
the  two  countries  was  radically  different.  The 
Stamp  Act  was  repealed,  but  Parliament  still 
held,  in  a Declaratory  Act,  to  the  principle 
that  it  had  the  right  to  tax. 

The  next  effort  to  enforce  that  principle  was 
made  in  1767  by  Townshend  who  induced  Par- 
liament to  lay  a tax  upon  certain  imported 
articles,  and  to  provide  efficient  means  for 
collection  at  the  customs  houses.  This  Town- 
shend Act  (see)  again  inflamed  America,  and 
troops — quite  an  inadequate  force — were  sent 
to  America.  Threats  were  made  to  remove  to 
England  persons  charged  in  America  with  trea- 
son, thus  violating  another  dearly  loved  priv- 


ilege of  an  Englishman — the  right  of  trial  by 
a jury  of  his  neighbors.  In  Boston  the  troops 
had  trouble  with  the  populace,  and  the  so- 
called  “Boston  Massacre”  followed  and  further 
embittered  the  relations.  The  Townsend  Act 
was  repealed,  1770,  in  answer  to  the  plea  of 
British  merchants  with  whom  the  Americans 
would  not  trade,  but  it  was  followed  by  the 
Tea  Act,  a small  tax,  but  one  which  still  vio- 
lated the  principle  of  “no  taxation  without  rep- 
resentation.” In  Boston  there  was  violent  re- 
sistance, the  “Boston  Tea  Party,”  (see)  and 
Parliament  to  punish  the  people  there  passe  l 
the  “Five  Intolerable  Acts.”  As  a result  of 
sympathy  for  Boston  the  first  Continental  Con- 
gress (see)  was  called  wherein  all  America 
agreed  to  buy  no  more  British  goods.  The 
British  troops  sent  to  Boston  were  soon  drawn 
into  armed  conflict  with  the  Patriots  at  Lex- 
ington and  Concord,  and  the  war  began  which 
was  to  end  in  American  independence. 

See  Association  ; Committees  of  Corre- 
spondence; Declaration  of  Independence; 
Loyalists  ; Revolution,  American,  Signifi- 
cance of;  Whigs. 

References:  G.  E.  Howard,  Preliminaries  of 
the  Revolution  (1905),  contains  bibliography; 

G.  L.  Beer,  Commercial  Policy  of  England  to- 
ivard  the  Am.  Colonies;  Columbia  College 
Studies,  III  (1893),  No.  2;  E.  Channing, 
“The  Navigation  Laws”  in  Am.  Antiquarian 
Soc.,  Proceedings  (new  series),  VI  (1890);  W. 

H.  Leeky,  Am.  Revolution  (J.  A.  Woodburn, 
Ed.,  1898)  ; H.  L.  Osgood,  “The  American  Revo- 
lution” in  Pol.  Sci.  Quart.,  XIII  (1898),  41- 
59;  L.  P.  Kellogg,  “The  Am.  Colonial  Charter” 
in  Am.  Hist.  Assoc.,  Annual  Report,  1903,  I, 
185-190;  C.  H.  Van  Tyne,  Am.  Revolution 
( 1905 ) , ch.  i. ; G.  Bancroft,  Hist,  of  U.  S. 
(author’s  last  revision,  1888),  II,  III;  R. 
Frothingham,  Rise  of  the  Republic  (6th  ed., 
1895).  The  most  useful  original  sources  are: 
Writings  of  Samuel  Adams  (H.  A.  Cushing, 
Ed.,  1904-1908 ) ; W.  W.  Henry,  Life,  Corre- 
spondence and  Speeches  of  Patrick  Henry 
(1891)  ; Works  of  John  Adams  (C.  F.  Adams, 
Ed.,  1904—1908)  ; W.  W.  Henry,  Life,  Corre- 
tary  Hist,  of  the  Am.  Revolution  (1853-1857)  ; 
P.  Force,  Am.  Archives  (1837-1853). 

C.  H.  Van  Tyne. 


REVOLUTION,  AMERICAN,  SIGNIFICANCE  OF 


Division  of  the  English  Empire. — At  first 
sight  it  would  appear  unnecessary  to  dwell  on 
the  significance  of  a movement  which  resulted 
in  establishing  a new  member  of  the  family 
of  nations — and  that,  too,  a state  which  has 
become  one  of  the  great,  strong,  wealthy  na- 
tions of  the  world;  the  significance  is  too  ap- 
parent to  need  comment.  The  mere  fact  that 
there  are  now  two  great  English  speaking  na- 


tions where  there  might  have  been  one  English 
empire  is,  of  course,  a fact  of  supreme  import- 
ance. The  student  of  politics  is  naturally  inter- 
ested in  the  results  of  mere  separation,  and  he 
is  tempted  to  speculate — if  only  fruitlessly  to 
speculate — on  what  might  have  been,  had  Eng- 
land succeeded  in  maintaining  an  undivided 
empire.  And  yet  there  are,  of  course,  other  as- 
pects ; and  of  chiefest  interest  are  the  questions 


220 


REVOLUTION,  AMERICAN,  SIGNIFICANCE  OF 


as  to  what  were  the  issues  involved,  what  were 
the  principles,  and  what  were  the  results  in  the 
establishment  of  institutions  and  working  the- 
ories of  government. 

Important  Meanings. — The  Revolution  may 
be  considered,  first,  as  an  event  in  the  general 
history  of  colonization,  an  event  from  which 
lessons  have  been  continually  drawn  vitally 
affecting  England’s  ideas  concerning  the  man- 
agement and  control  of  colonies;  second,  as  an 
event  of  the  greatest  importance  in  the  general 
history  of  empire  building,  for  England’s  task 
by  1750  was  more  than  to  manage  colonies  in 
the  ordinary  sense — it  involved  the  apprecia- 
tion of  the  fact  that  she  had  an  empire,  and 
she  actually  blindly  sought  a principle  of  or- 
ganization; third,  as  an  event  which  ended  in 
the  establishment  of  an  empire  on  this  side 
of  the  water,  an  empire  which,  though  built 
in  part  out  of  the  old  one,  was  in  reality  a new 
empire;  fourth,  as  an  event  marking  the  rise 
of  popular  ideas  of  government  and  of  popular 
control  over  government;  fifth,  as  an  event 
marking  the  establishment  in  institutions  of 
philosophical  principles  and  ideas  which  were 
in  some  ways  a product  of  English  history  but 
which  had  gathered  strength  in  America  and 
to  which  the  Revolution  gave  new  and  more 
tangible  meaning. 

Breakdown  of  Old  Colonial  System. — (1)  The 

Revolution,  then,  was  of  significance  because 
it  broke  down  or  helped  to  break  down  the  old 
colonial  system;  to  overthrow  the  idea  that 
colonies  existed  for  the  benefit  of  the  mother 
country.  England  has  had,  since  1783,  many 
turns  and  changes  in  her  colonial  policy;  but 
for  a century  or  more  she  has  gone  on  the 
principle  that  colonies,  made  up  of  Englishmen 
across  the  sea,  to  a considerable  degree,  must 
work  out  their  own  destiny.  She  has  definitely 
accepted  the  idea  that  to  tax  the  colonies  even 
for  their  own  defence  or  for  the  protection 
of  the  empire  is  unwise  or  improper.  The 
American  Revolution,  therefore,  distinctly  ush- 
ered in  the  modern  theory  and  practice  of 
colonization.  It  may  be  said  to  have  marked, 
also,  the  beginning  of  the  break  up  of  the 
colonial  systems  which  the  other  countries  of 
Europe  had  established.  It  is  true,  this  will 
not  hold  of  France  for  she  lost  her  colonies  in 
1763.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  however,  that 
the  example  of  the  United  States  was  influen- 
tial in  the  case  of  the  colonies  in  Central  and 
South  America  which  were  lost  to  Spain  and 
Portugal  in  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth 
century. 

Problem  of  Imperial  Order. — (2)  At  the  out- 
break of  the  French  and  Indian  War,  England 
— it  is  scarcely  an  exaggeration  to  say — had  no 
colonial  system.  The  colonies  of  the  continent 
of  North  America  were  growing  rapidly  and 
were  already  powerful  and  moderately  rich. 
But  not  only  did  England  have  no  proper  meth- 
od of  controlling  and  guiding  them,  there  was, 
also,  no  generally  accepted  principle  of  organi- 


zation. Possibly  before  the  practical  test  ac- 
tually came  in  the  Stamp  Act,  the  colonists 
might  have  agreed  to  the  principle  that  Parlia- 
ment was  sovereign ; in  other  words,  that  the 
empire  was  organized  on  the  theory  that  all 
power  was  gathered  at  the  center  and  that  the 
outlying  parts  of  the  empire  managed  their 
affairs  always  subject  to  the  ultimate  right  of 
Parliament  to  interfere  and  to  legislate  on  any 
subject  it  chose  to  legislate  upon.  But  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  practice  did  not  bear  out  this 
theory;  the  colonists  had  managed  their  inter- 
nal concerns  for  a century  and  more,  largely 
without  let  or  hindrance — and  this  was  notably 
true  of  the  corporate  colonies.  The  French 
and  Indian  War  brought  home  to  England 
the  necessity  of  finding  a method  of  holding 
and  using  the  resources  of  the  empire  for  the 
defence  of  the  empire,  and  thus  disclosed  the 
need  of  a principle  of  organization.  Now  if 
England  had  had,  in  reality,  a simple  empire, 
an  empire  based  on  the  principle  of  centralized 
power,  there  might  have  been  difficulties  in 
collecting  taxes  from  the  outlying  parts  of  the 
empire,  but  there  could  not  have  been  legal 
opposition  or  serious  pretense  of  legal  oppo- 
sition to  the  powers  at  Westminister.  But  the 
fact  was  that  England  had,  in  reality,  been 
developing  a composite  empire  and  had  al- 
lowed or  encouraged  the  growth  of  political 
institutions  in  the  colonies.  When,  therefore, 
the  question  of  contribution  or  taxation  arose 
this  complex  or  composite  make-up  could  not 
be  ignored. 

I have  said  that  with  the  Stamp  Act  arose 
the  question  of  imperial  organization.  Tt 
would  not  be  well  to  say  that  English  states- 
men stated  the  question  in  these  general  ab- 
stract terms.  On  the  contrary  they  commonly 
contented  themselves  with  asserting  that  the 
colonies  should  pay,  at  least  in  part,  for  their 
own  defence  and  that  they  must  acknowledge 
the  right  of  Parliament  to  tax  them.  But  as 
the  days  went  by  they  emphasized  not  so  much 
the  fact  that  the  colonies  must  contribute  as 
the  need  of  a frank  recognition  of  Parliament’s 
ultimate  right  to  make  them  contribute,  and 
thus  the  contest  became  one  of  theory.  As  a 
rule  the  parliamentarian  went  the  whole  figure 
and  announced  that  the  colonies  must  admit 
the  supremacy,  the  sovereignty  of  Parliament. 
Now  this  was  a theory  of  imperial  order  and 
the  theory  was  that  the  empire  was  unitary, 
not  composite;  all  power  was  gathered  at  the 
center,  all  power  in  the  parts  was  exercised 
only  by  sufferance.  Thus  in  facing  the  criti- 
cal question  of  all  empires,  the  contribution 
of  the  outlying  parts,  England  sought  to  ig- 
nore what  she  had  already  done,  and  instead 
of  recognizing  that  she  had  built  up  a compo- 
site system,  she  insisted  on  the  principle  of 
centralization.  We  need  not  wonder  that  she 
could  not  see  the  facts;  for  the  task  was 
full  of  trouble.  And  yet  if  English  statesmen 
had  been  able  to  see  and  talk  in  terms  of  im- 


221 


REVOLUTION,  AMERICAN,  SIGNIFICANCE  OF 


perial  order  rather  than  of  insular  control, 
they  would  have  entertained  at  least  the  ele- 
ments of  the  problem.  It  was  really  Eng- 
land’s task  to  try  to  work  out  the  principle 
of  federalism;  but  she  could  not.  Most  of  her 
statesmen  could  see  nothing  but  an  English 
Parliament  with  world-wide  powers.  A few 
men,  Burke  and  Pownall,  for  example,  grasped 
the  problem;  but  most  Englishmen  failed  to  see 
the  theory  of  federalism  as  the  basis  of  far- 
reaching  dominion. 

Federalism. — (3)  The  Americans,  as  a rule 
did  not  grasp  the  problem.  They  too  worked 
on  the  principles  of  individual  liberty  rather 
than  with  recognition  of  the  theory  of  imperial 
federal  order.  Of  course  to  most  of  them  it  was 
plain  that  the  question  was  concerning  the  re- 
spective rights  of  the  colonies  and  the  mother 
country;  but  the  assertion  of  individual  as 
well  as  colonial  right  was  so  strong  that  few 
saw  the  posibility  of  a system  which  would 
at  once  assure  local  liberty  and  establish  im- 
perial order  and  safety. 

After  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  the 
Americans  were  confronted  with  practically 
the  same  problem  as  before.  How  was  the 
American  empire  to  be  organized?  The  Ar- 
ticles of  Confederation  failed  to  give  to  Con- 
gress some  of  the  powers  which  Parliament  had 
exercised  in  the  old  regime — notably  the  power 
to  regulate  trade — -and  even  the  power  to  man- 
age external  affairs  was  inadequate  because 
Congress  could  not  be  sure  that  treaties  would 
be  respected  by  the  individual  states.  But 
with  America  as  with  England,  the  central 
problem  was  raising  money.  The  system  of 
requisitions  which  was  practically  the  same 
that  England  had  found  unsatisfactory  in  deal- 
ing with  her  colonies,  failed  when  it  was  ap- 
plied in  the  Confederation.  Only  when  the 
whole  union  was  in  direst  straits  were  radical 
steps  taken;  the  United  States  was  formed  as 
a federal  union,  and  the  problem  of  federalism 
was  solved.  A composite  empire  recognized  by 
law  was  formed  in  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States.  The  adoption  of  the  Federal 
Constitution  was  the  end  of  the  American  Revo- 
lution. 

Popular  Government. — (4)  This  problem  of 
discovering  the  principle  of  federalism,  of 
union  and  strength  on  the  one  hand  and  local 
autonomy  on  the  other,  gives  unity  to  the 
whole  work  of  the  generation  from  1765  to 
1789;  but  to  the  men  of  the  time  this  was  not 
the  problem  they  had  consciously  in  mind. 
The  right  of  representation  and  of  self-govern- 
ment was  to  them  rather  an  individual  right 
than  a principle  to  be  recognized  in  the  struc- 
ture of  the  empire.  They  were  interested  in  the 
assertion  of  rights  of  the  individual  against 
government;  and  thus  the  Revolution  was  an 
upheaval,  a rising  among  Englishmen  to  main- 
tain what  they  claimed  as  a birthright.  Eng- 
land, it  is  true,  was  charged  with  denying 
the  rights  of  the  colonies;  but  she  was  also 


persistently  charged  with  denying  the  funda- 
mental rights  of  men  and  of  Englishmen  in 
particular.  Thus  the  Revolution  appeared  to 
be,  and  in  part  was,  a struggle  against  govern- 
ment. It  naturally  took  its  place  in  men’s 
minds  with  other  contests  for  individual  lib- 
erty. The  rights  of  the  people  and  of  in- 
dividual men  were  the  things  that  were  talked 
of  and  emphasized. 

Now  it  is  a very  important  fact  that  the 
American  Revolution — if  we  mean  by  that  the 
war — was  ushered  in  by  a decade  of  discussion 
which  touched  the  fundamentals  of  govern- 
ment, the  state  and  society.  This  discussion 
had  a long  and  far-reaching  effect  on  American 
politics  and  American  law.  To  the  parliamen- 
tarian or  British  pamphleteer  who  asserted 
that  the  English  government  was  possessed  of 
all  power,  the  American  retorted  that  no  gov- 
ernment was  possessed  of  all  power  but  was 
restricted  by  the  plain  purposes  of  its  crea- 
tion, the  protection  of  the  life,  liberty  and 
property  of  the  citizen;  he  insisted  that  gov- 
ernment was  not  possessed  of  inherent  power 
inherited  from  itself,  but  rested  on  the  consent 
of  the  governed;  that  is  to  say  on  their  com- 
pact or  agreement.  Thus  there  came  clearly 
forward  the  idea  that  government  is  not  super- 
imposed, but  comes  from  the  act  of  the  gov- 
erned. And  there  came  forward  the  funda- 
mental American  idea  that  there  are  and  must 
be  fixed  limits  on  free  government — the  founda- 
tion of  much  of  American  constitutional  theory 
and  practice. 

The  State  and  the  Government.— (5)  Just  as 
the  end  of  the  Revolution  and  its  fullest  sig- 
nificance as  an  event  in  empire  building  is  seen 
in  the  adoption  of  the  American  Constitution, 
so  the  end  of  the  Revolution  as  a contest  for 
the  theory  concerning  the  origin  of  government 
is  seen  in  the  constitutional  conventions  which 
drew  up  the  state  constitutions.  These  conven- 
tions carried  out  the  principle  that  government 
does  come  from  the  people  and  that  ultimate 
power  rests  in  the  people.  Many  men  of  the 
time  believed  that  they  were  acting  on  the 
principles  of  the  philosophers  of  the  preceding 
century  and  that  the  state  itself  was  organized 
by  the  agreement  and  the  coalescence  of  in- 
dividuals. Government  was  henceforward  a 
servant  not  a master;  men  were  henceforward 
sovereigns  not  subjects;  individual  rights  were 
henceforward  inherent  not  the  gift  of  govern- 
ment. If  these  assertions  seem  fanciful  to  us 
now,  they  will  not  appear  fanciful  historical 
statements  to  the  student  of  American  politics 
examining  the  theories  of  the  Revolution  and 
of  the  generation  that  followed. 

See  Colonization  ; Constitutional  Conven- 
tion; Natural  Rights;  Popular  Govern- 
ment; Social  Compact  Theory. 

References:  It  is  difficult  to  give  references 
supporting  or  carrying  out  the  principles  of 
this  article.  Some  help  will  be  obtained  from: 
C.  E.  Merriam,  A History  of  American  Politi- 


222 


REVOLUTION,  RIGHT  OF— REVOLUTIONARY  WAR 


cal  Theories  (1903),  ch.  ii;  B.  Holland,  Ini- 
perium  et  Libertas  (1901),  1—91;  A.  B.  Hart, 
'National  Ideals  Historically  Traced  (1907),  ch. 
vi;  G.  Bancroft,  Hist,  of  U.  S.  (author’s  last 
revision,  1888),  III,  IV,  V;  G.  E.  Howard, 
Preliminaries  of  the  Revolution  (1905)  ; C.  H. 
Van  Tyne,  Am.  Revolution  (1905),  chs.  i,  ix. 

Andrew  C.  McLaughlin. 

REVOLUTION,  RIGHT  OF.  In  a strictly 
legal  sense,  the  right  of  revolution  never 
exists,  since  no  one  can  have  a lawful  right 
to  resist  the  legally  established  order  of  things. 
But  the  moral  right  of  the  people  as  a whole, 
though  perhaps  not  as  individuals,  to  resist 
political  oppression  has  always  had  advocates 
among  political  writers,  and  in  practice  the 
right  has  been  many  times  resorted  to  in 
modern  times.  Among  the  writers  of  the  six- 
teenth and  seventeenth  centuries  who  defended 
the  right  of  resistance  to  established  authority 
may  be  mentioned  Hubert  Languet,  Johannes 
Althusius,  George  Buchanan  and  John  Locke, 
though  the  doctrine  was  opposed  by  Grotius, 
Hobbes,  Hume  and  others.  The  mediaeval  and 
early  modern  advocates  of  resistance  based 
their  arguments  on  the  theory  that  the  state 
is  founded  on  compact  and  that  the  violation 
of  the  terms  of  the  compact  by  kings  or  legis- 
latures released  the  people  from  further  obe- 
dience. “Whenever,”  said  Locke,  “legislatures 
endeavor  to  take  away  and  destroy  the  prop- 
erty of  the  people,  and  reduce  them  to  slavery, 
they  forfeit  the  power  which  was  put  in  their 
hands  for  different  purposes  and  put  them- 
selves into  a state  of  war  with  the  people,  who 
are  thereupon  absolved  from  any  further  obe- 
dience and  may  resume  their  original  liberty” 
(Two  Treatises  of  Government,  § 222).  . . . 
Those  who.  violate  public  trusts  confided  to 
them  and  prostitute  the  powers  conferred  upon 
them  by  the  people  for  their  own  good,  are 
themselves  rebels  and  may  be  resisted  in  the 
same  way  that  honest  man  may  oppose  rob- 
bers and  pirates.  The  end  of  government,  he 
said,  is  the  good  of  mankind  and  when  that  end 
is  perverted  for  contrary  purposes,  resistance 
becomes  a right  and  a duty. 

The  celebrated  “Agreement  of  the  People” 
framed  in  1647  as  a constitution  for  the  Eng- 
lish commonwealth,  expressly  recognized  the 
right  of  resistance  and  the  convention  of  1688 
justified  the  revolution  which  it  inaugurated, 
by  the  action  of  James  II  in  “endeavoring  to 
subvert  the  constitution  by  breaking  the  orig- 
inal contract  between  the  king  and  the  people.” 

The  right  of  revolution  was  also  defended  by 
many  American  statesmen  in  their  writings 
and  speeches  at  the  time  of  the  breach  with 
England,  notably  by  Otis,  Samuel  Adams,  Dick- 
inson, Paine  and  Jefferson.  Their  doctrine 
found  place  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
which  declared  that  governments  derive  their 
just  power  from  the  consent  of  the  governed 
and  that  whenever  a long  train  of  abuses  and 


usurpations  evinces  a design  to  reduce  man- 
kind to  a state  of  despotism,  it  is  their  right 
and  duty  to  throw  off  such  government  and  to 
provide  new  safeguards  for  their  future  secur- 
ity. Jefferson,  the  author  of  the  Declaration, 
later  advocated  revolution  as  a wholesome  rem- 
edy for  political  ills.  “God  forbid,”  he  said, 
“that  we  should  ever  be  twenty  years  with- 
out a rebellion;  the  tree  of  liberty  must  be  re- 
freshed from  time  to  time  with  the  blood  of 
patriots  and  tyrants”  (Works,  Vol.  IV,  467, 
1789). 

The  right  of  revolution  has  been  expressly 
sanctioned  in  many  constitutions  both  in 
France  and  in  America.  The  French  constitu- 
tion of  1793  (article  35),  for  example,  de- 
clared that  “when  the  government  violates  the 
rights  of  the  people,  insurrection  is  for  the 
people  and  for  each  portion  of  the  people,  the 
most  sacred  of  rights  and  the  most  indispens- 
able of  duties.”  The  constitution  of  New 
Hampshire  contains  an  assertion  of  the  same 
right  in  language  even  more  emphatic.  “The 
doctrine  of  non-resistance  against  arbitrary 
power  and  oppression,”  it  declares,  “is  absurd, 
slavish  and  destructive  of  the  good  and  happi- 
ness of  mankind.” 

From  the  standpoint  of  the  objects  to  be  at- 
tained revolutions  are  of  three  kinds:  (1) 
those  which  are  anarchical  in  character  or 
which  seek  to  subvert  the  existing  government 
without  establishing  another  in  its  stead;  (2) 
those  which  are  directed  against  a particular 
person,  law  or  policy;  (3)  those  which  are 
intended  to  bring  about  a change  in  the  con- 
stitution of  the  existing  government.  The  first 
is  never  justifiable.  The  second  and  third  may 
be,  depending  upon  the  particular  circum- 
stances. Safeguards  against  revolutions  of  the 
last  mentioned  character  should  be  provided 
through  easy  and  orderly  modes  of  amending 
the  constitution  since  excessive  rigidity  con- 
duces to  revolutionary  changes.  It  is  a com- 
mon rule  of  public  law  that  when  an  existing 
government  has  been  overthrown  and  a revolu- 
tionary one  established  in  its  place,  the  ad- 
herents of  the  latter  government  in  a war 
against  the  displaced  government  do  not  incur 
the  penalties  of  treason  and,  under  certain 
limitations,  the  acts  and  obligations  of  the 
latter  government  will  be  respected  by  the 
former  in  case  it  should  be  restored  (Thorring- 
ton  vs.  Smith,  8 Wallace,  1). 

See  Freedom  of  Speech  and  of  the  Press; 
Liberty;  Social  Compact  Theory. 

References:  S.  Amos,  The  Science  of  Politics, 
(1883),  ch.  xi ; J.  Locke,  Two  Treatises  of  Gov- 
ernment (Henry  Morley,  Ed.,  1887),  ch. 
xix;  C.  E.  Merriam,  Am.  Political  Theories 
(1903),  ch.  ii;  T.  D.  Woolsey,  Political  Science 
(1893),  I.,  §§  131-135. 

James  W.  Garner. 

REVOLUTIONARY  WAR.  See  Wars  of 
the  United  States. 


223 


RHODE  ISLAND  AND  PROVIDENCE  PLANTATIONS 


RHODE  ISLAND  AND  PROVIDENCE 
PLANTATIONS.  Early  History. — Rhode  Is- 
land was  settled  at  two  points — Mooshassuc, 
later  called  Providence,  and  the  island  of 
Aquidneck,  later  called  Rhode  Island.  The 
Providence  settlement  was  effected  by  Roger 
Williams  in  the  summer  of  1636,  and  that  of 
Aquidneck  by  William  Coddington  on  March 
24,  1638,  both  settlements  being  upon  tracts 
of  land  given  by  the  Narragansett  Indians. 
At  Providence,  government  was  first  by  “mas- 
ters of  families”  who  dispatched  business  by 
“mutual  consent;  ” but  young  and  unmarried 
men  having  been  admitted  to  the  settlement, 
it  was  stipulated  that  they  should  be 
subject  “in  active  and  passive  obedience”  to 
the  orders  of  the  major  part  of  the  “present 
inhabitants,  masters  of  families  incorporated 
into  a town,  and  such  others  as  they  should 
admit,  only  in  civil  things.”  On  October  8, 
1638,  Williams  executed  to  twelve  men  a deed 
constituting  the  twelve,  along  with  himself,  a 
“fellowship”  in  the  Providence  grant. 

Upon  Aquidneck  it  was  at  Portsmouth  that 
government  was  established  first.  It  consisted 
of  a judge  (Coddington)  and  three  elders. 
Coddington,  however,  soon  becoming  dissatis- 
fied, withdrew  with  his  chief  supporter,  John 
Clarke,  and  on  May  1,  1639,  founded  New- 
port. On  March  12,  1640,  Portsmouth  and 
Newport  became  united  under  one  government 
for  the  whole  of  Aquidneck — a government  sty- 
ling itself  “a  Democracy”  under  the  control 
of  the  “Body  of  Freemen  orderly  assembled, 
or  the  major  part  of  them”;  and  no  one  was 
to  be  “accounted  a delinquent  for  Doctrine,” 
who  kept  the  civil  peace. 

In  1642  the  Aquidneck  government  decided 
to  send  Roger  Williams  to  England  to  obtain 
a royal  charter  for  the  Island.  Finding  the 
King  (Charles  I)  dethroned,  Williams  ob- 
tained, on  March  14,  1644,  a patent  from  the 
Long  Parliament.  By  the  terms  of  the  instru- 
ment, the  inhabitants  of  the  Narragansett 
settlements — Providence  as  well  as  Aquidneck 
— were  empowered  “to  govern  and  rule  them- 
selves by  such  a form  of  civil  government  as 
by  voluntary  consent  of  all,  or  the  greater  part 
of  them,  they  [should]  find  most  serviceable; 
the  laws  ...  of  the  said  plantation  to 
be  conformable  to  the  laws  of  England,  so 
far  as  the  nature  and  constitution  of  the 
place  [would]  admit.”  Providence  Plantations 
(Providence,  Portsmouth,  Newport,  and  War- 
wick) was  formally  organized  on  May  19, 
1647,  at  Portsmouth.  Legislative  power  was 
vested  in  the  freeholders,  and  was  to  be  ex- 
ercised by  a committee  of  six  from  each  town, 
called  the  general  court  [assembly].  Executive 
power  was  vested  in  the  presiding  officer  of 
the  general  court,  called  the  president,  and 
four  assistants — one  from  each  town;  and  the 
president  and  assistants  together  constituted 
a general  court  of  trials,  the  decisions  of  which 
were  subject  to  review  by  the  general  court. 


On  July  8,  1663,  after  the  Restoration  in 
England,  a royal  charter  for  the  Narragansett 
settlements  was  obtained  by  John  Clarke.  The 
name  Providence  Plantations  was  changed  to 
Rhode  Island  and  Providence  Plantations.  The 
president  was  superseded  by  a governor  and 
deputy-governor.  The  number  of  assistants 
was  increased  from  four  to  ten.  The  general 
assembly  was  made  to  consist  of  the  governor 
(or  deputy -governor ) , the  assistants,  and  a 
body  of  deputies  to  be  chosen — six  from  New- 
port, four  each  from  Providence,  Portsmouth, 


Boundaries  op  the  State  op  Rhode  Island 


and  Warwick,  and  two  each  from  all  other 
towns.  The  court  of  trials  remained  un- 
changed, its  decisions  being  still  subject  to  re- 
view by  the  general  assembly,  and  the  charter 
provided:  “Noe  person  within  the  sayd  Col- 
onye  is  to  be  in  any  wise  molested,  punished, 
disquieted  or  called  in  question  for  any  dif- 
ferences in  opinion  in  matters  of  religion,  and 
doe  not  actually  disturbe  the  civil  peace.” 

Later  Constitutional  Conditions. — So  satis- 
factory was  the  charter  of  1663,  that  for  one 
hundred  and  eighty  years  Rhode  Island  found 
it  unnecessary  to  frame  for  itself  any  other 
fundamental  law.  In  February,  1778,  the 
state  adopted  the  Articles  of  Confederation 
submitted  by  Congress  in  November,  1777;  but 
adoption  of  the  Federal  Constitution  was  long 
delayed.  The  Federal  Convention  met  in  May, 


224 


RHODE  ISLAND  AND  PROVIDENCE  PLANTATIONS 


1787,  in  Philadelphia,  but  Rhode  Island  sent 
no  delegate,  and  on  the  submission  of  the  Con- 
stitution for  ratification,  the  state  referred  it 
to  the  towns,  and  by  them  ratification  was  re- 
fused. In  the  spring  of  1788  the  general  as- 
sembly was  repeatedly  petitioned  to  call  a 
ratification  convention,  but  the  proposal  was 
as  repeatedly  (some  seven  times)  rejected. 
Finally  Congress  passed  a tariff  act  in  which 
Rhode  Island  was  treated  as  a foreign  country, 
and  on  January  17,  1790,  the  general  as- 
sembly called  a convention  which  on  May  29 
ratified  the  Constitution  by  a majority  of  two 
votes. 

In  Rhode  Island  constitutional  history  the 
two  most  notable  facts  are  the  case  of  Trevett 
vs.  Weeden  (see),  decided  in  1786,  and  the 
Dorr  Rebellion  (see)  of  1842.  The  rebellion 
failed ; Dorr  was  convicted  of  treason  against 
the  state  and  imprisoned  (see  Suffrage  Par- 
ty). 

Constitution  of  1842. — A failure  in  itself,  the 
Dorr  Rebellion  compelled  the  general  assembly 
in  November,  1842,  to  submit  to  the  people  a 
constitution  to  replace  the  charter  of  1663, 
and  this  constitution  was  adopted  and  is  yet 
in  force.  Under  the  charter  the  right  to  vote 
had  been  restricted  to  adult  males  who  were 
owners  of  $134.00  worth  of  land,  and  to  the 
eldest  sons  of  such  owners.  Under  the  con- 
stitution the  right  to  vote  was  extended  to 
adult  males  who  were  native  Americans,  ex- 
cepting that  only  the  possessors  of  $134.00 
worth  of  land  might  vote  on  questions  of  taxa- 
tion. Under  the  charter  the  upper  house  of 
the  general  assembly  consisted  of  ten  mem- 
bers chosen  at  large.  Under  the  constitution 
the  upper  house  (senate)  was  made  to  consist 
of  one  member  for  each  town.  Under  the 
charter  representation  in  the  lower  house  had 
been  six  from  Newport;  four  each  from  Provi- 
dence, Portsmouth,  and  Warwick;  and  two 
from  each  of  the  other  towns.  Under  the  con- 
stitution representation  was  based  on  popu- 
lation, but  membership  of  the  house  might 
never  exceed  a total  of  seventy-two,  and  to  no 
single  town  was  there  to  be  accorded  member- 
ship in  excess  of  one-sixth  of  the  total.  Under 
the  charter  the  supreme  court  was  secondary 
to  the  legislature.  Under  the  constitution  the 
judges  (though  elected  by  the  general  assem- 
bly in  joint  session)  might  hold  office  during 
good  behavior  and  at  a fixed  minimum  re- 
muneration. Furthermore,  in  1905  the  su- 
preme court  was  made  distinctively  a court  of 
appeals,  and  there  was  created  a superior 
court  invested  with  equity  powers,  and  with 
jurisdiction  in  civil  and  criminal  cases  in- 
volving amounts  exceeding  $500,  or  imprison- 
ment exceeding  one  year.  There  were  created 
also  as  subordinate  to  the  superior  court 
twelve  district  courts. 

In  one  respect  the  constitution  of  1842  is 
less  liberal  than  the  charter  and  laws  which  it 
superseded.  It  can  only  be  amended  by  the 


vote  of  a three-fifths  majority  of  the  electors. 
In  consequence  it  was  not  till  1888  that  an 
amendment  was  secured  enfranchising  natural- 
ized citizens.  In  1886  an  amendment  was  car- 
ried prohibiting  the  manufacture  and  sale  of 
intoxicating  liquors  to  be  used  as  a beverage, 
but  it  was  annulled  in  1889.  In  1909  the  pro- 
vision limiting  the  membership  of  the  lower 
house  of  the  general  assembly  to  seventy-two, 
whereof  no  single  town  might  be  accorded  more 
than  one-sixth,  was  so  amended  that  the  lower 
house  must  consist  of  not  to  exceed  one  hun- 
dred, whereof  no  single  town  or  city  may  be 
accorded  more  than  one-fourth.  The  same  year 
the  governor,  who  by  the  constitution  of  1842 
was  president  of  the  senate  with  no  power  of 
veto  upon  legislation,  was  given  the  veto  pow- 
er subject  to  be  overridden  by  a three-fifths 
majority  in  each  house. 

The  distinctive  features  of  the  constitution 
of  1842  (which,  as  already  observed,  is  the 
constitution  yet  in  force  in  Rhode  Island)  are: 

(1)  that  only  the  possessors  of  $134.00  worth 
of  land  may  vote  on  questions  of  taxation; 

(2)  that  the  upper  house,  or  senate,  is  com- 
posed of  one  member  from  each  town  regardless 
of  population.  As  a result  of  the  composition 
of  the  senate,  Rhode  Island  is  much  in  the 
hands  of  a political  machine.  Many  of  the 
agricultural  towns  possess  but  a small  popu- 
lation, and  in  several  of  them  the  population 
is  declining.  Three  towns,  indeed,  have  today 
less  population  than  they  had  in  1790. 
Through  the  vote  of  towns  of  this  character  (a 
vote  easily  controlled),  the  machine  has  found 
its  opportunity.  The  constitutional  amend- 
ment of  1909,  which  gave  to  the  city  of  Prov- 
idence a possible  one-fourth  instead  of  a pos- 
sible one-sixth  of  the  total  membership  of  the 
house,  is  considered  a step  toward  reform. 

Rhode  Island  local  government  is  in  form 
that  of  the  New  England  town,  but  it  is  less 
firmly  knitted.  Generated  under  no  ecclesi- 
astical or  educational  system,  it  lacks  common 
interests,  common  action,  and  civic  pride.  In 
certain  of  the  towns  probate  functions  are  per- 
formed by  the  town  council,  and  new  towns 
are  formed  by  purely  arbitrary  process  as  in 
the  West. 

In  national  elections  the  state  is  usually 
Republican  by  majorities  ranging  from  five  to 
fifteen  thousand,  but  in  1912  the  Democractic 
candidate  received  the  five  electoral  votes. 
In  state  elections  it  is  occasionally  Democrat- 
ic. In  1790  the  population  was  68,825;  in 
1850  it  was  147,545;  and  in  1910  it  was  512,- 
610. 

See  Constitutions,  State,  Characteristics 
of;  State  Governments,  Characteristics 

OF. 

References:  S.  G.  Arnold,  Hist,  of  State  of 
Rhode  Island  and  Providence  Plantations, 
1636-1790  (4th  ed.,  1894);  I.  B.  Richman, 


Rhode  Island,  Its  Making  and  Its  Meaning 
(1902);  C.  S.  Brigham,  Rhode  Island  and 


RIDER— RIGHTS  AND  REMEDIES 


Providence  Plantations  (E.  Field,  Ed.,  1902), 
Rhode  Island,  a Study  in  Separatism  (1905)  ; 
F.  N.  Tliorpe,  Federal  and  State  Constitutions 
( 1909 ) , VI,  3205-3240.  Irving  B.  Richman. 

RIDER.  A rider  is  a bill,  order  or  resolu- 
tion which  is  attached  to  some  other  bill  or 
resolution  on  an  essentially  different  subject. 
Riders  are  most  frequently  attached  as  nom- 
inal amendments  to  appropriation  bills  which 
must  be  passed.  They  are  designed  to  force 
some  obnoxious  measure  upon  the  other  legis- 
lative house,  or  upon  the  executive,  especially 
during  the  closing  days  of  a session.  In  the 
national  government  the  rider  cannot  be  de- 
feated without  defeating  the  measure  to  which 
it  is  attached.  In  most  of  the  states  riders 
to  bills  are  forbidden  by  the  almost  universal 
constitutional  provision  that  no  bill  shall 
include  more  than  the  one  subject,  which  shall 
be  stated  in  the  title,  or  by  the  right  of  the 
governor  in  a majority  of  the  states  to  veto 
particular  items  in  appropriation  bills.  Riders 
to  general  appropriation  bills  are  forbidden  by 
the  rules  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  but 
the  rule  applies  only  to  general  appropriation 
bills,  and  does  not  forbid  the  attachment  of 
riders  which  create  new  laws.  In  addition  the 
rule  may  be  suspended  by  a two-thirds  vote. 
See  Bills  ; Rules  of  Congress  ; Rules  of 
Legislative  Bodies.  Reference:  Rules  of  the 
House  of  Reps.  (1910),  § 815.  R.  L.  A. 

RIDING.  A division  of  some  shires  in  Eng- 
land, as  in  Yorkshire.  At  the  first  organiza- 
tion of  county  government  in  the  province  of 
New  York,  there  were  created  three  ridings, 
each  with  the  organization  of  a county.  See 
Rural  Divisions,  Minor.  Reference:  G.  H. 
Howard,  Local  Const.  History  (1889),  I. 

J.  A.  F. 

RIGHT  OF  DEPOSIT.  The  treaty  signed 
in  Madrid,  October  27,  1795,  gave  citi- 

zens of  the  United  States  the  long  desired  priv- 
ilege of  depositing  their  merchandise  at  the 
port  of  New  Orleans  and  of  exporting  it 
thence  without  paying  duties.  Smuggling 
seems  to  have  been  practiced  by  some  of  the 
Americans  who  brought  down  boat  cargoes  to 
exchange  with  seagoing  ships;  and  as  the  priv- 
ilege was  not  perpetual,  in  1802  the  Spanish 
intendant  revoked  it.  Congress  declared  “an 
unalterable  determination  to  maintain  . . . 

the  rights  of  navigation  and  commerce  through 
the  River  Mississippi,”  and  Jefferson  was  eager 
for  redress,  even  if  war  or  an  English  alliance 
were  involved ; and  he  promptly  began  to  nego- 
tiate with  Napoleon  for  the  purchase  of  New 
Orleans.  The  Louisiana  Purchase  of  1803 
ended  the  deposit  controversy.  See  Louisiana 
Annexation;  Navigation  of  International 
Rivers;  Spain, _ Diplomatic  Relations  with. 
References:  H.  Adams,  Hist,  of  the  U.  S. 
1801-1S11  (1885),  I,  349;  J.  S.  Bassett,  Fed- 


eralist System  (1906),  70,  80-83;  G.  Tucker, 
Life  of  Thomas  Jefferson  (1837),  II,  131,  133- 
136;  J.  D.  Richardson,  Messages  and  Papers  of 
the  Presidents  (1899),  I,  251,  257,  358;  C.  L. 
Rives,  “Spain  and  the  U.  S.  in  1795”  in  Am. 
Hist.  Review,  IV  (1895),  68-79;  Am.  State 
Papers,  Foreign  (1832),  I,  53,  538,  541,  549. 

C.  G.  C. 

RIGHT  OF  SEARCH.  See  Right  of  Visit. 

RIGHT  OF  VISIT.  The  words  “visit”  and 
“search”  are  usually  coupled;  and  “visit  and 
search”  is  regarded  as  a single  act,  “This  is 
called  indifferently  the  right  of  search  or  the 
right  of  visit  and  search.”  The  right  of  visit 
and  search  of  a neutral  private  vessel  in  time 
of  war  is  not  merely  a belligerent  right  exer- 
cised to  determine  the  presence  of  contraband 
or  guilt  in  regard  to  blockade;  but  is  still 
more  essential  in  order  that  the  belligerent 
may  be  convinced  as  to  the  nature  and  char- 
acter of  the  vessel.  The  belligerent  has  a right 
to  learn  for  himself  whether  the  vessel  flying 
a neutral  flag  is  a properly  documented  neutral 
vessel.  The  right  of  visit  and  search  should 
be  exercised  in  accord  with  treaty  provisions  if 
such  exist.  The  general  rules  are  that  after 
causing  a vessel  to  lie  to,  it  may  be  visited 
by  an  officer  and  not  more  than  two  men,  who 
going  on  board  unarmed  may  examine  the 
vessel’s  papers  and  inquire  into  any  suspicious 
circumstances  in  regard  to  the  conduct  or 
character  of  the  vessel  or  of  those  on  board. 
In  case  of  doubt  as  to  its  bona  fide  neutrality, 
the  vessel  may  be  sent  in  to  a prize  court  for 
adjudication.  See  Blockade;  Impressment; 
Maritime  War;  Neutral  Trade.  References: 

U.  S.  Instructions  for  Blockading  Vessels  and 
Cruisers  (1898);  V.  S.  Foreign  Relations, 
1898,  781;  Henry  Wheaton,  Inquiry  into  the 
Validity  of  the  British  Claim  (1858). 

G.  G.  W. 

RIGHT  TO  LABOR.  This  phrase  is  popu- 
larly used  to  express  the  sentiment  that  any 
willing  man  ought  to  be  able  to  find  a job. 
The  “right  to  labor”  recognized  in  law,  how- 
ever, is  limited  by  the  equal  right  of  employ- 
ers to  refuse  to  give  work  to  any  man.  See 
Contract;  Labor  Organizations;  Open  and 
Closed  Shop;  Wages,  Regulation  of.  Refer- 
ence: “Right  to  Work”  (anonymous)  in  Edin- 
burgh Review,  CCXIII  (1911),  180-99. 

J.  R.  C. 

RIGHTS  AND  REMEDIES.  Interests— The 

legal  system  attains  its  ends  by  recognizing 
and  securing  certain  interests,  social,  public 
and  private.  Social  interests  are  secured:  (1) 
by  imposing  absolute  duties  defined  bv  criminal 
law;  (2)  by  recognition  of  private  interests, 
secured  by  private  rights;  (3)  by  recognition 
of  certain  interests  as  public,  i.  e.,  as  interests 
of  the  state;  (4)  by  denying  legal  protection 


226 


RIGHTS  AND  REMEDIES 


in  certain  cases  to  interests  ordinarily  secured, 
because  of  some  countervailing  social  interest. 
Public  interests  are  secured:  (1)  by  attrib- 
uting rights  to  the  state  or  to  some  public 
aggregate  on  the  analogy  of  private  rights; 
(2)  by  attributing  rights  to  the  state  as 
guardian  of  general  interests — at  common  law 
by  powers  recognized  in  the  Crown  as  parens 
patriae.  The  former  are  vindicated  by  private 
actions  by  or  on  behalf  of  the  state  or  public 
corporations  or,  in  America,  by  suits  of  tax- 
payers to  prevent  waste  of  public  funds.  The 
latter  are  vindicated  by  prerogative  writs,  by 
information  in  equity,  or  by  criminal  prosecu- 
tions. Private  interests  are  secured  by  rights 
conferred  upon  individuals  and  vindicated:  (1) 
by  private  actions;  (2)  by  affirmative  defences 
in  such  actions  where  it  becomes  necessary 
to  weigh  conflicting  interests.  In  general,  the 
interests  secured  are  personality,  that  is,  the 
individual  physical  and  spiritual  existence,  and 
substance,  that  is,  the  individual  economic  ex- 
istence. The  different  forms  of  these  interests 
which  it  is  held  the  law  should  recognize  and 
secure  are  called  “natural  rights.”  Those 
which  are  or  have  been  recognized  by  law  are: 
(1)  body  and  life,  the  individual  physical  ex- 
istence; (2)  the  family,  the  expanded  individu- 
al existence;  (3)  honor  or  reputation,  the  so- 
cial existence;  (4)  free  exercise  of  volition; 
(5)  freedom  of  opinion,  the  spiritual  exist- 
ence; (6)  property,  in  its  widest  sense,  includ- 
ing all  that  makes  up  one’s  substance.  Legal 
systems  differ  much  in  the  extent  and  manner 
of  recognizing  and  securing  these  interests. 

Rights. — To  secure  the  foregoing  interests, 
law  imposes  duties  and  confers  rights.  So 
far  as  practicable,  the  law  today  makes  moral 
duties  legal  duties  also.  Rut  there  are  limits 
to  effective  legal  action  in  this  respect.  Hence 
duties  may  be  moral  or  legal  or  both.  There 
is  a moral  duty  when  one  is  bound  to  act  or 
to  refrain  because  of  some  interest  recognized 
and  sanctioned  by  the  moral  sentiment  of  the 
community.  There  is  a legal  duty  when  one 
is  bound  to  act  or  to  refrain  because  of  some 
interest  which  the  law  endeavors  to  secure 
through  judicial  proceedings.  Legal  duties  are 
either  absolute  or  relative.  Absolute  duties 
are  imposed  to  secure  social  or  public  inter- 
ests, without  any  corresponding  public  or  pri- 
vate right,  and,  for  the  most  part,  are  enforced 
by  the  criminal  law,  although  the  absolute  du- 
ties incident  to  a public  calling  are  enforced 
by  prerogative  writs  or  by  private  actions. 
The  duties  enforced  on  the  civil  side  of  the 
courts  are  correlative  to  legal  rights,  public  or 
private.  In  other  words,  the  law  secures  most 
public  interests  and  all  private  interests  by 
defining  certain  capacities  in  persons  of  in- 
fluencing the  actions  of  others  and  imposing 
corresponding  duties  on  those  subjected  to  such 
influence.  These  capacities  are  given  effect  by 
protecting  those  upon  whom  they  are  conferred 
in  the  exercise  of  them,  by  enforcing  the  cor- 


responding duty  specifically,  or  by  some  form 
of  redress  when  such  enforcement  is  impossible 
or  inexpedient.  Capacities  of  influencing  the 
conduct  of  others  because  of  some  interest 
which  requires  others  to  act  or  not  to  act  in 
a particular  way  are  called  rights;  moral 
rights  if  they  have  behind  them  only  the  moral 
sentiment  of  the  community,  legal  rights  if 
they  are  recognized  by  law  so  that  the  force 
of  the  state  may  be  invoked  through  the  courts 
in  order  to  make  them  effective,  natural  rights 
when  we  think  they  ought  to  be  so  recognized 
and  made  effective. 

Scheme  of  Legal  Rights. — Legal  rights  fall 

into  two  well-defined  classes.  One  class  exists 
generally  against  everyone.  Rights  of  this 
class  have  as  correlatives  general  duties,  rest- 
ing upon  all  persons,  not  to  infringe  the  in- 
terests which  they  are  designed  to  secure. 
These  rights  are  called  rights  in  rem.  Another 
class  exists  and  is  available  only  against  one 
or  more  defined  individuals,  and  has,  as  cor- 
relatives, duties  of  definite  persons  to  do  or 
not  to  do  something.  These  rights  are  called 
rights  in  personam  and  the  relation  between 
the  parties  thereto  is  called  “obligation.”  The 
terms  “right  in  rem”  and  “right  in  personam” 
are  undoubtedly  open  to  objection  in  that 
“right  in  rem ” suggests  proprietary  rights, 
(rights  ad  rem)  and  also  suggests  the  distinc- 
tion between  proceedings  in  rem  and  in  per- 
sonam, which  is  another  matter.  But  long- 
settled  usage  justifies  them.  In  Anglo-Ameri- 
can law  we  may  recognize  the  following  rights : 

In  Rem. — (1)  Rights  securing  personality: 
(a)  personal  integrity;  the  right  not  to  be 
injured  in  body  or  mind  by  the  acts  or  negli- 
gence of  others;  (b)  personal  liberty;  the 
right  of  free  motion  and  locomotion  except  as 
restricted  by  law  and  restrained  by  the  proper 
officers,  acting  in  the  proper  way;  (c)  reputa- 
tion; (d)  immunity  from  abuse  of  legal  proc- 
ess; this  right  secures  both  personality  and 
substance;  (e)  privacy  (see).  The  existence 
of  such  a right  is  in  dispute. 

(2)  Rights  securing  substance:  (a)  private 
property;  (b)  immunity  from  injurious  fraud; 
(c)  advantage  of  profitable  relations  with  oth- 
ers. 

In  Personam. — 1.  Contractual.  Rights  at- 
tached by  law  to  promises  or  agreements.  2. 
Quasi-Contractual.  Rights  of  restitution  or 
compensation  for  a benefit  conferred  by  or  ob- 
tained in  fraud  of  complainant,  imposed  direct- 
ly by  law  to  prevent  unjust  enrichment  of  one 
at  the  expense  of  another.  3.  Fiduciary. 
Right  to  have  a trust  or  confidence  carried  out 
specifically  in  good  faith.  4.  Delictual.  Rights 
of  compensation  where  a preexisting  right  in 
rem  has  been  infringed. 

Remedies. — In  the  administration  of  justice, 
the  state  acts  in  three  ways : by  punishment, 
by  prevention,  by  redress.  Punishment  is  now 
relegated  almost  entirely  to  criminal  law.  The 
sole  exception  is  punitive  damages  in  case 


227 


RIGHTS,  CONSTITUTIONAL— RIPARIAN  RIGHTS 


of  wanton  and  malicious  injuries.  Prevention 
is  an  extraordinary  remedy  afforded  only  in 
equity.  Redress  is  of  two  kinds:  specific, 
granted  only  in  equity  as  an  extraordinary 
remedy  in  special  cases,  and  substitutional, 
i.  e.,  a money  equivalent  by  way  of  damages, 
which  is  the  ordinary  legal  remedy.  In  con- 
tinental Europe,  on  the  other  hand,  specific 
redress  is  the  normal  remedy. 

See  Jurisprudence;  Law. 

References:  J.  Austin,  Jurisprudence  (5th 
ed.,  1911),  Lectures  12,  14,  15,  16,  17;  T.  E. 
Holland,  Jurisprudence  (11th  ed.,  1910),  chs. 
vii,  viii;  J.  W.  Salmond,  Jurisprudence  (3d  ed., 
1910),  chs.  4,  10,  11;  N.  M.  Korkunov,  General 
Theory  of  Law  (transl.  by  Hastings,  1909), 
§§  27-30;  K.  Gareis,  Science  of  Law  (transl. 
by  Kocourek,  1911),  93-114;  J.  Kohler,  Ein- 
fiihrung  in  die  Rechtswissensclmft  (1902),  § 6. 

Roscoe  Pound. 

RIGHTS,  CONSTITUTIONAL.  See  Bills 
of  Rights;  Civil  Rights;  Liberty,  Civil. 

RING,  POLITICAL.  A term  applied  to  a 
combination  of  practical  politicians  who 
have  leagued  together  under  the  direction  of 
a leader  (boss)  for  the  purpose  of  “working 
the  political  machine”  and  controlling  the  or- 
gans of  government  for  their  mutual  advan- 
tage. The  ring  found  a favorable  field  for  ex- 
ploitation in  municipal  administration  under 
conditions  immediately  succeeding  the  Civil 
War.  See  Boss;  Canal  Ring;  Machine;  Or- 
ganization; Party;  Tammany.  0.  C.  H. 

RIOTS,  SUPPRESSION  OF.  Under  the  com- 
mon law  any  assemblage  with  disorderly  intent 
is  illegal,  and  subject  to  dispersal  by  military 
force.  A statute  of  1714  intended  to  give 
reasonable  notice  provides  that  the  act  shall 
be  read  to  the  riotous  assembly  as  a warning; 
and  thereafter  they  may  be  dispersed  by  force. 
This  brings  in  a delicate  question  on  the  rela- 
tion between  the  civil  and  military  authorities. 
Soldiers  who  killed  rioters  were  not  infrequent- 
ly put  on  trial  for  murder,  as  after  the  so- 
called  Boston  massacre  of  1770  when  John 
Adams  defended  the  soldiers.  In  the  Gordon 
riots  of  1780  the  Lord  Mayor  of  London  lacked 
courage,  and  the  troops  were  finally  instructed 
by  King  George  III  to  break  up  the  riots;  and 
great  numbers  of  people  were  killed  in  the 
street. 

In  the  United  States,  riots  usually  are  sup- 
pressed by  the  city  police;  though  where  they 
result  from  labor  strikes  the  police  may  be 
indifferent.  There  is  usually  no  legal  formal- 
ity in  the  United  States  necessary  before  break- 
ing up  a riot;  but  the  police  will  rarely  use 
firearms  on  rioters  unless  themselves  attacked. 

The  usual  dependence  for  suppressing  serious 
riots,  is  the  state  militia  (see)  which  cannot  be 
brought  to  the  scene  of  action  without  hours 
and  sometimes  days  of  delay.  It  is  a force 


ill  adapted  to  the  service;  made  up  of  men  who 
have  regular  occupations,  and  are  neither 
drilled  nor  provided  for  such  arduous  service. 
In  serious  difficulties,  they  may  be  kept  out 
for  weeks.  In  some  cases  the  militia  sym- 
pathizes with  the  rioters,  and  can  hardly  be 
brought  to  fire  into  a crowd;  in  all  cases  it 
is  not  adapted  to  the  service. 

One  state,  Pennsylvania,  has  a small  body 
of  mounted  state  police  (see  Constabulary, 
State)  which  is  a well-drilled  and  fearless 
body,  and  very  efficient,  both  in  preventing  and 
in  quelling  riots.  In  some  cases  where  the 
riots  spring  out  into  a series  of  outbreaks,  the 
state  governor  asks  for  United  States  troops, 
which  the  President  has  constitutional  author- 
ity to  grant;  but  it  is  an  unpopular  method 
(see  Order,  Maintenance  of).  On  the  other 
hand  the  President  may  call,  and  in  several 
recent  eases  has  called,  the  federal  troops  to 
suppress  riots  if  they  impede  interstate  com- 
merce, interrupt  the  carrying  of  the  mails,  or 
are  directed  against  the  laws  and  authority  of 
the  Union. 

See  Coercion  of  Individuals;  Constabu- 
lary, State;  Execution  of  Process;  Insur- 
rections; Mobs  and  Mob  Rule;  Order,  Main- 
tenance of. 

References:  “Federal  Aid  in  Domestic  Dis- 
turbances” in  Sen.  Docs.,  57  Cong.,  2 Sess.,  XV, 
No.  209  (1903)  ; A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Govern- 
ment (rev.  ed.,  1906),  § 251,  National  Ideals 
Historically  Traced  (1907),  ch.  xviii;  J.  A. 
Moos,  Riot  Duty  (1911)  ; bibliography  in  A.  B. 
Hart,  Manual  (1908),  229. 

Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

RIPARIAN  RIGHTS.  The  rights  of  the 
owner  of  property  abutting  on  a stream  or 
lake  or  on  tide  water,  to  the  use  of  the  water 
and  the  privileges  connected  with  it.  No  rights 
in  tide  water  extend  to  the  abutter  beyond 
low-water  mark ; and  in  some  states  as  New 
Jersey,  he  has  no  ownership  beyond  the  high- 
water  mark.  The  riparian  has  the  right  to 
construct  piers  and  other  approaches,  without 
interfering  with  the  navigability  of  the  stream 
or  other  water ; and  he  owns  the  surface  of 
the  ground  under  the  water  to  midstream  or 
other  point  defined  by  statute,  and  may  thus 
be  the  owner  of  oyster  beds  (see  Oyster  Com- 
missions). 

Of  late  years,  outside  of  questions  of  docks 
and  wharves  in  commercial  cities,  the  most 
important  riparian  question  is  that  of  the 
right  to  take  water  out  of  a stream  for  irri- 
gation and  other  purposes.  The  parts  of  the 
United  States  settled  previous  to  1850  had 
abundant  rainfall  and  hardly  knew  what  irri- 
gation was;  hence,  no  effort  was  made  to  re- 
serve the  streams  in  the  far  West  and  they 
fell  to  the  first  settlers  who  took  up  land 
along  them.  Canals  for  irrigation  were  at 
once  constructed  but  there  was  then  plenty  of 
water  all  along  the  streams.  As  time  went 


228 


RIPPER  BILLS— RIVERS,  JURISDICTION  AND  NAVIGATION  OVER 


on,  more  and  more  water  was  taken  out  of  tlie 
upper  portions  of  the  streams,  thus  depriving 
the  abutters  on  lower  reaches  from  filling  their 
canals.  Where  the  stream  took  its  rise  in  one 
state  ana  flowed  into  another,  an  opportunity 
was  presented  for  a suit  between  the  states. 
In  the  case  of  Kansas  vs.  Colorado  (206  U.  S. 
46),  decided  May  31,  1907,  it  was  held  the  Fed- 
eral Government  had  no  authority  to  control 
state  use  of  waters  within  its  boundaries,  ex- 
cept as  regards  navigation.  No  subject  is  more 
confused  than  the  law  and  practice  of  riparian 
rights  to  use  and  to  abstract  water.  The  issue 
brings  in  the  rights  of  mills  and  factories,  run 
by  water  power.  The  cities  also  reach  out 
for  water  supply  and  are  sometimes  accused  of 
cutting  off  the  rights  of  lower  riparian  owners 
by  abstracting  their  water. 

See  Conservation;  Irrigation  and  Irri- 
gated Lands;  Lakes,  Jurisdiction  and  Navi- 
gation of;  Public  Works,  National,  State 
and  Municipal;  Rivers,  Jurisdiction  and 
Navigation  of;  Water  Boundaries. 

A.  B.  H. 

RIPPER  BILLS.  A term  applied  to  acts  of 
state  legislatures  for  the  reorganization  of 
city  governments,  intended  to  turn  incumbents 
out  of  office,  and  to  put  in  a new  set  of 
officials.  The  most  striking  case  was  the  series 
of  statutes  passed  in  Pennsylvania  in  1901  and 
1902  by  which  the  governor  was  authorized 
forthwith  to  appoint  city  recorders  in  a group 
of  cities  in  place  of  the  elective  mayors  then 
in  office — the  governor  to  have  power  of  re- 
moval. Pittsburgh,  Allegheny  and  Scranton 
were  thus  reorganized;  the  real  purpose  being 
to  replace  the  mayors  belonging  to  one  faction 
by  executives  belonging  to  the  other.  This 
legislation  was  upheld  by  the  state  supreme 
court.  See  Charters,  Municipal;  City  and 
the  State.  References:  National  Municipal 
League,  Proceedings,  1901,  133,  1903,  145; 
C.  R.  Woodruff,  “Ripping  as  a Fine  Art”  in 
Independent,  LIV  (1902),  400.  A.  B.  H. 

RIVER  AND  HARBOR  BILLS.  The  name 
applied  since  about  1822  to  national  statutes 
for  the  improvement  of  natural  waterways,  in 
a few  cases  also  including  artificial  canals.  The 
name  practically  implies  a balance  of  appro- 
priations between  the  coast  states  and  the  in- 
terior states;  in  fact  such  bills  have  usually 
rested  upon  a wide  distribution  of  items  among 
congressional  districts,  so  as  to  secure  the 
necessary  majority.  Appropriations  for  in- 
ternal improvements  of  this  kind  and  for  pub- 
lic buildings  are  recognized  means  of  securing 
popularity  and  reelection  for  members  of  Con- 
gress, especially  in  the  House. 

River  and  harbor  bills  have  been  many  times 
vetoed,  particularly  prior  to  the  Civil  War. 
Jackson,  Tyler,  Polk  and  Pierce  all  doomed 
some  of  the  measures  that  reached  them,  and 
the  appropriations  were  kept  down  to  small 


amounts.  The  total  expenditure  of  the  govern- 
ment prior  to  1861  was  $14,541,342.92. 

About  1866  the  practice  of  passing  a river 
and  harbor  bill  arose  again,  and  though 
checked  by  some  vetoes,  especially  by  President 
Arthur,  there  has  been  usually  about  once  in 
two  years  a river  and  harbor  bill,  including 
large  appropriations  for  the  great  harbors  and 
rivers,  and  a multitude  of  small  items.  The 
bill  is  prepared  by  a special  committee  of  the 
House  on  rivers  and  harbors,  has  been  frequent- 
ly kept  in  limits  by  the  influence  of  the  Speak- 
er, and  presumably  the  greater  part  of  it  is 
for  the  public  welfare. 

River  and  harbor  bills  are  always  under 
suspicion  because  they  are  put  together  by  log 
rolling,  and  in  order  to  get  the  votes  from 
members  from  remote  districts,  small  and  un- 
necessary items  are  often  inserted.  Even  larg- 
er improvements,  backed  by  apparent  public 
necessity  sometimes  prove  worthless,  as  for 
instance,  the  canal  around  the  Mussel  Shells 
shoal  of  the  Tennessee  River,  and  the  canal 
from  the  sea  coast  to  Houston,  Texas.  In  1882 
President  Arthur  severely  criticized  river  and 
harbor  legislation,  and  backed  it  up  by  a report 
from  Robert  A.  Lincoln,  the  Secretary  of  War. 
Nevertheless  the  popular  demands  for  deep  and 
wide  water  communications  from  the  lakes  to 
the  Mississippi  and  thence  to  the  Gulf,  seem 
likely  to  stimulate  expenditures  of  this  kind. 

See  Canals  and  Other  Artificial  Water- 
ways; Harbor  Systems;  Inland  Waterways 
Commission  ; Mississippi  and  Missouri  River 
Commissions;  Public  Works,  National, 
State  and  Municipal;  Waterways,  Natur- 
al, Regulation  of. 

References:  E.  C.  Mason,  Veto  Power 
(1890),  §§  83-92;  A.  B.  Hart,  “Biography  of 
a River  and  Harbor  Bill”  in  his  Practical  Es- 
says in  Am.  Government  (1893),  No.  9;  E.  R. 
Johnson,  “River  and  Harbor  Bills”  in  Am. 
Acad.  Pol.  Soc.  Science,  Annals,  II  (1892); 
bibliography  in  A.  B.  Hart,  Manual  (1910), 
§ 120  (lect.  74).  Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

RIVERS,  JURISDICTION  AND  NAVIGA- 
TION OVER.  Jurisdiction  over  rivers  as  re- 
gards their  navigation  is  vested  in  Congress; 
thus  the  channel  of  a navigable  river  is  under 
the  control  of  the  United  States.  In  all  other 
matters  than  navigation,  the  states  have  con- 
trol over  rivers.  The  bed  of  the  stream  is  a 
part  of  the  territory  of  the  states  and  the  use 
of  the  flowing  water  for  power  and  municipal 
purposes  is  subject  to  state  law  (see  Water 
Boundaries  and  Jurisdiction). 

When  the  United  States  Government  im- 
proves a river  past  a city  or  town  located  upon 
a stream,  the  Secretary  of  War,  acting  through 
the  Corps  of  Engineers,  marks  the  navigable 
channel  and  establishes  the  pier-head  line  to 
which  wharves  may  be  constructed  from  the 
bank  into  the  stream.  No  state  may,  without 
the  approval  of  the  Secretary  of  War,  construct 


229 


ROAD  TAX— ROADS 


any  dam  in  a stream  or  any  bridge  over  it 
that  may  obstruct  the  use  of  the  river  for 
navigation.  The  authority  to  construct  a 
bridge  across  a river  forming  the  boundary  of 
two  states  must  be  secured  from  Congress. 

All  vessels  employed  upon  the  navigable 
waterways  of  the  United  States  must  be  regis- 
tered, enrolled,  or  licensed  by  the  United  States 
Government  (see  Registry  of  Shipping).  No 
vessel  documented  by  the  United  States  can 
be  required  to  take  out  a state  license 
or  to  pay  a fee  for  the  privilege  of  operating 
upon  the  navigable  waterways  within  any 
state. 

See  Lakes,  Jurisdiction  and  Navigation 
of;  Navigation,  Regulation  of;  Steamboat 
Inspection;  Water  Boundaries  and  Juris- 
diction. 

Reference;  T.  H.  Calvert,  Regulation  of  Com- 
merce under  the  Federal  Constitution  (1907), 
ch.  ix.  Emory  R.  Johnson. 


ROAD  TAX.  Formerly  it  was  the  common 
practice  in  country  towns  for  the  local  govern- 
ment to  levy  a special  road  or  highway  tax, 
and  to  permit  tax-payers  to  commute  the  same 
by  labor  upon  the  roads.  As  a separate  tax 
this  practice  has  now  become  uncommon.  In 
California,  road  districts  may  be  established 
by  the  county  supervisors  who  may  upon  au- 
thorization of  the  voters  collect  a special  road 
tax.  In  Illinois,  local  road  commissioners  are 
authorized  to  make  a list  of  all  able-bodied  men 
in  a town,  between  the  ages  of  21  and  50,  and 
assess  not  less  than  $1  nor  more  than  $2 
as  a poll  tax  for  highway  purposes.  The  tax 
may  be  worked  out  by  labor.  In  Michigan 
the  rate  is  based  upon  assessed  valuation,  and 
is  payable  in  labor  as  well  as  in  money. 
“Working  out  the  tax”  is  one  of  the  causes  of 
bad  roads  in  rural  regions.  See  Roads  ; Tax- 
ation, Constitutional  Basis  of;  Taxation, 
Subjects  of.  D.  R.  D. 


ROADS 


The  country  roads  of  the  United  States  have 
been  built  mainly  since  1800;  before  that  time 
the  “Old  York  Road”  between  New  York  and 
.Philadelphia  (1711),  the  “Lancaster  Turn- 
pike” between  Philadelphia  and  Lancaster 
(1792),  the  “Wilderness  Turnpike”  from  Vir- 
ginia to  Kentucky,  and  several  other  impor- 
tant roads  had  been  opened;  but  wagon  roads 
were  few,  the  chief  routes  were  trails,  and 
travel  was  slow  and  dangerous.  From  that 
time  until  the  introduction  of  railroads,  about 
1830,  there  was  great  activity  in  road  build- 
ing. The  betterment  of  the  common  roads  be- 
came one  of  the  vital  issues  in  national  politics. 
Hundreds  of  miles  of  important  roads  were 
built  by  aid  from  the  national  government,  and 
thousands  of  miles  by  the  turnpike  companies 
( see  Toll  Roads)  ; and  in  addition  the  towns 
greatly  increased  the  more  local  road  mileage. 

The  rapid  development  in  railroad  building, 
beginning  in  1830,  made  the  common  roads 
seem  unimportant;  both  public  and  private 
funds  were  largely  withdrawn  from  road  build- 
ing and  maintenance,  and  the  roads  greatly 
deteriorated.  That  the  railroads,  and  later  the 
electric  roads,  did  not  decrease  the  importance 
of  the  roads,  but  rather  enormously  increased 
road  traffic,  was  eventually  recognized.  Yet  for 
more  than  half  a century  after  the  introduction 
of  railroads  only  sporadic  attempts  at  road 
improvement  were  made,  following  closely  the 
periods  of  general  prosperity,  and  ceasing  in 
the  frequent  periods  of  depression.  About  1890 
an  organized  movement  to  secure  better  roads 
began,  which  in  public  and  private  activities 
has  grown  to  large  proportions,  and  has  al- 
ready produced  a marked  improvement  in  the 
roads.  The  public  roads  (outside  of  incorpo- 
rated cities  and  villages)  of  the  United  States, 


exclusive  of  Indian  Territory,  Alaska,  and  the 
island  possessions,  in  1909  numbered  2,199,64.5 
miles.  Of  these  102,870  miles  were  surfaced 
with  gravel,  59,237  with  broken  stone,  28,372 
with  brick,  sand-clay,  or  oil;  making  190,479 
miles  of  improved  roads,  which  is  only  8.66  per 
cent  of  the  total  mileage. 

Town  or  Township  Authority. — The  respon- 
sibility for  the  common  roads  has  throughout 
rested  primarily  with  the  towns  or  townships, 
and  to  a limited  extent  with  the  counties. 
In  colonial  times  roads  were  built  mainly  by 
volunteer  labor;  this  being  unsatisfactory,  the 
“forced-labor”  system,  inherited  from  Europe, 
was  established  first  by  town  ordinances,  and 
eventually  by  law  in  nearly  all  states.  Every 
able-bodied  citizen  of  stated  age  was  required 
to  work  on  the  roads  for  a given  number  of 
days  every  year  or  to  pay  a fine;  or  in  some 
cases  a road  tax  payable  in  labor  was  levied. 
Forced  labor  has  rarely  been  diligently  or  hon- 
estly performed.  The  workmen  themselves  did 
not  know  how  to  build  even  good  dirt  roads, 
and  the  “overseers”  and  “supervisors”  in 
charge  were  usually  of  their  own  number,  and 
not  skilled  roadbuilders.  As  the  citizens  could 
not  be  forced  to  work  except  in  the  road  dis- 
tricts where  they  resided,  the  building  of  long- 
er roads  between  distant  communities  was  diffi- 
cult. The  townships  or  towns  are  usually  di- 
vided into  road  districts  by  the  county  or  town 
officers,  or  elected  at  the  town  meetings;  but 
“supervisors”  who  are  appointed  by  the  county 
officers,  or  elected  at  the  town-meetings;  but 
except  under  well  managed  town  governments 
the  district  road  officers  are  to  all  intents  and 
purposes  not  responsible  to  higher  authority. 

County  Authority. — The  authority  for  lay- 
ing out  roads  commonly  rests  with  the  county 


230 


ROADS 


commissioners,  courts,  or  highway  boards;  in 
ten  states,  including  all  New  England,  with  the 
town  officers.  The  duties  of  the  county  officers 
are  mostly  limited  to  acting  upon  petitions  to 
legalize  new  roads,  building  important  bridges, 
and  where  money  is  available  building  county 
roads.  As  late  as  1889  only  fifteen  states  had 
made  provisions  enabling  the  counties  to  em- 
ploy surveyors  or  engineers  to  lay  out  roads, 
of  these  at  least  two  allowed  the  employment 
of  skilled  engineers  in  building  roads;  but  the 
provisions  were  usually  optional.  In  building 
and  maintaining  roads  the  counties  have  had 
in  general  small  mandatory  powers. 


Local  Responsibility. — Our  road  system  has 
thus  been  developed  from  the  standpoints  of 
local  interests,  and  not  located  to  serve  econom- 
ically the  needs  of  the  larger  territorial  units, 
nor  built  in  accordance  with  their  relative  im- 
portance. Roads  were  commonly  laid  out  along 
property  lines,  resulting  in  very  irregular 
alignment  in  the  older  communities,  and  square 
corners  where  the  roads  followed  the  quarter- 
section  lines  of  the  government  land  subdivi- 
sions; and  but  little  attention  was  given  to 
securing  low  grades.  The  road  builders,  al- 
though often  immigrants  from  countries  hav- 
ing good  roads,  had  no  knowledge  of  how  to 


231 


ROADS 


build  good  roads,  worked  without  skilled  super- 
vision, often  under  difficult  conditions,  and 
with  poor  materials  or  without  suitable  ma- 
chinery, and  largely  under  an  inefficient  system 
of  forced  labor. 

State  Aid. — The  states  have  not  until  re- 
cently given  substantial  systematic  aid  to  road 
building.  The  road  laws  have  been  gradually 
bettered  by  abolishing  forced  labor,  and  estab- 
lishing more  liberal  road  taxes  payable  only 
in  money ; by  authorizing  county  and  town- 
ship bond  issues  for  building  roads;  by  giving 
the  counties  more  power  to  build  important 
roads  under  contract,  and  to  secure  skilled 
engineers;  by  amending  the  convict  labor  laws; 
and  in  general  providing  for  the  enforcement 
of  existing  laws.  The  employment  of  state 
or  county  convicts  to  build  roads,  or  to  prepare 
broken  stone  which  is  sold  at  cost  for  road 
surfacing,  has  long  been  a prevailing  practice. 
While  the  prisoners  are  at  work  on  the  roads 
the  cost  of  keeping  and  guarding  them  is  paid 
out  of  the  road  funds.  Although  the  convict- 
labor  system  has  considerable  merit,  it  is  open 
to  certain  grave  objections,  and  is  opposed  by 
labor  unions.  The  practice  is  diminishing. 
Several  states  have  at  times  built  or  aided  in 
building  special  roads;  Ohio  early  passed  a 
cooperative  road  law  enabling  the  counties  to 
build  roads,  paying  half  the  cost  from  the 
proceeds  of  bond  issues,  and  assessing  half 
upon  the  property  owners  within  one  or  two 
miles ; but  for  nearly  a century  Kentucky  was 
almost  unique  in  its  organized  efforts  for  good 
roads.  In  1797  that  state  passed  a good  road 
law,  and  early  appropriated  large  sums,  and 
organized  lotteries,  for  road  purposes;  and  be- 
fore 1840  had  a permanent  state  highway  en- 
gineer corps  for  which  an  annual  appropriation 
of  $33,000  was  made.  In  1891  New  Jersey 
passed  the  first  modern  state-aid  law;  and  by 
1911  thirty-six  states  had  passed  laws  which 
in  addition  to  certain  general  improve- 
ments already  mentioned,  contained  provi- 
sions for  direct  aid  in  money,  skilled  superin- 
tendence, and  expert  advice  for  road  building. 
This  aid  is  administered  by  commissioners  or 
engineers  who  are  appointed  by  the  state  ex- 
ecutives, or  elected.  The  new  laws,  while  vary- 
ing in  scope  and  detail,  primarily  provide  for 
cooperation  between  the  states  and  the  local 
communities.  This  legislation  not  only  recog- 
nizes long  established  local  responsibility  but 
also  aims  to  increase  it,  and  to  stimulate  local 
efforts  by  education  and  demonstration,  and 
by  aid  in  money  when  the  local  demands  for 
better  roads  arise.  The  prevailing  form  of 
state  aid  leaves  the  actual  construction  and 
maintenance,  as  well  as  the  initiative  for  bet- 
terment to  the  counties  or  road  districts;  the 
states  pay  from  one-third  to  three-quarters  of 
the  cost  of  building  and  require  that  construc- 
tion shall  conform  to  certain  specified  stan- 
dards of  type  and  excellence.  In  Massachu- 
setts, on  the  other  hand,  the  state  highway 


commission  builds  and  maintains  the  state 
highways;  but  the  counties  are  required  to 
pay  one-fourth  of  the  cost  of  building,  col- 
lecting it  from  the  towns  in  proportion  to 
their  assessed  valuation.  Although  this 
commission  has  initiatory  powers  to  lay  out 
and  build  state  highways,  it  must  hold 
advertised  hearings  and  consider  public  ex- 
pressions of  opinion  before  proceeding.  In 
a few  states  the  only  important  functions 
of  the  state  highway  officers  are  investi- 
gating and  demonstrating  good  methods  of 
construction,  and  furnishing  expert  advice.  In 
recent  years  the  control  of  automobile  traffic 
and  of  certain  public  corporations  using  the 
roads  has  been  placed  in  the  hands  of  the  state- 
highway officers.  The  difficulties  of  administer- 
ing state  aid  arise  in  so  apportioning  funds,  or 
locating  roads  as  to  avoid  local  jealousies,  in 
getting  construction  to  conform  to  the  required 
standards,  and  in  determining  to  the  satisfac- 
tion of  local  authorities  whether  certain  types 
of  roads  are  sufficiently  permanent  to  warrant 
state  aid.  The  chief  defect  is  that  provisions 
for  maintenance  are  lacking  or  not  enforcible; 
and  this  question  is  enormously  complicated  by 
the  now  large  and  destructive  automobile  traf- 
fic. 

National  Aid. — National  aid  to  road  building 
was  an  important  issue  in  politics  during  the 
early  years  of  the  last  century,  and  had  power- 
ful partisans;  but  many  measures  failed  to 
pass,  or  were  vetoed  largely  because  of  oppo- 
sition based  on  the  belief  that  such  aid  was 
unconstitutional.  The  act  of  Congress  (1802) 
admitting  Ohio  included  a provision  which 
led  to  appropriating  five  per  cent  of  the  net 
proceeds  from  the  sale  of  public  lands  in  Ohio, 
for  building  roads  in  that  state  and  leading 
to  it;  such  roads  to  be  laid  out  under  authority 
of  Congress.  In  1806  the  first  appropriation 
was  made  under  this  act;  and  in  1811  the  first 
contract  was  let  for  ten  miles  of  the  “Cumber- 
land Road”  (see)  which  eventually  was  built 
from  Cumberland,  Maryland,  to  and  through 
Ohio,  and  to  St.  Louis,  Missouri,  chiefly  by 
appropriations  from  the  sale  of  public  lands, 
amounting  to  about  $7,000,000.  By  1853  every 
part  of  this  road  had  been  surrendered  to  the 
states  in  which  it  was  located.  From  similar 
funds  appropriations  for  roads  were  made  in 
other  states,  and,  while  the  Cumberland  Road 
was  building,  twelve  other  national  roads  were 
laid  out  in  various  parts  of  the  country,  and 
considerable  construction  work  was  done;  be- 
tween 1806  and  1845  about  $5,000,000  was  ap- 
propriated for  these  roads ; and  approximately 
$1,600,000  from  1845  to  1861,  chiefly  for  road's 
in  the  territories.  Since  then  (outside  of  the 
District  of  Columbia)  appropriations  have  been 
made  only  for  roads  leading  to  the  national 
cemeteries  from  nearby  towns.  In  1893  the 
“Office  of  Road  Inquiry”  later  named  the  “Of- 
fice of  Public  Roads”  was  established  under 
the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture 


232 


ROLLS  AND  LIBRARY,  BUREAU  OF— ROME,  INFLUENCE  OF 


(see).  This  office  collects  and  disseminates 
information  and  gives  expert  advice  concerning 
road  construction  and  administration;  con- 
ducts investigations  and  experiments  regarding 
road-building  materials,  and  methods  of  road 
construction;  makes  tests  of  road  materials; 
makes  demonstrations  of  methods  of  construc- 
tion, and  prepares  publications  on  these  sub- 
jects; and  gives  a course  of  instruction  for 
road  engineers.  The  appropriations  for  this 
office  exceed  $100,000;  and  its  laboratories  and 
organization  are  probably  unequalled  elsewhere. 
None  of  its  funds  are  available  for  actual  road 
building  except  for  purposes  of  research  01 
demonstration.  Through  its  various  activities 
this  office  has  been  one  of  the  most  potent  fac- 
tors in  the  present  movement  for  better  roads. 

Good  Roads  Movement. — “The  good  roads 
movement”  may  be  said  to  date  officially  from 
the  organization  of  the  National  Good  Roads 
Association  at  Chicago  in  1890,  the  result  of 
growing  public  opinion  demanding  better  roads, 
and  the  direct  efforts  of  a small  group  of  pub- 
lic-spirited citizens.  In  1891  the  New  Jersey 
state-aid  law  was  passed,  rapidly  followed  by 
similar  laws  in  thirty-five  other  states.  The 
establishment  of  the  Office  of  Public  Roads  was 
a result  of  organized  agitation.  Several  peri- 
odicals devoted  to  good  roads  and  having  large 
subscription  lists  are  published.  Many  of  the 
railroads  have  aided  good  road  building  in 
various  ways  but  chiefly  by  providing  cheap 
transportation  of  road  materials;  and  several 
of  the  great  railroads  have  at  their  own  ex- 
pense conducted  educational  campaigns  by 
sending  out  demonstration  trains  fitted  with 
road-making  machinery  in  charge  of  experts 
to  show  farmers  and  road  officials  how  to  build 
good  roads.  There  are  at  present  12  national, 
55  state,  and  155  local  associations  organized 
primarily  to  secure  good  roads;  and  more  than 
330  other  organizations  which  take  an  active 
interest  in  road  improvement.  The  activities 
of  all  these  varied  agencies  have  been  enor- 
mous, and  so  intimately  connected  that  it  is 
impossible  to  distinguish  cause  from  effect.  In 
a quarter  of  a century  the  status  of  public 
roads  has  completely  changed.  Although  the 
proportion  of  good  roads  in  the  whole  system 
is  yet  small,  the  actual  mileage  of  roads  im- 
proved is  very  large.  Ignorance  of  how  to 
build  good  roads  has  changed  to  a widespread 
knowledge  of  excellent  methods  of  construc- 
tion. And  public  opinion  has  reached  the  point 
where  good  roads  are  looked  upon  as  a neces- 
sity. 

See  Bridges,  Public;  Cumberland  Road; 
Ferries;  Good  Roads  Movement;  Parks  and 
Boulevards;  Pavements;  Streets;  Toll 
Roads. 

References;  J.  W.  Jenks,  “Road  Legislation 
for  the  American  State”  in  Am.  Econ.  Assoc., 
Publications,  IV  (1899),  153-227  and  App.  II; 
N.  S.  Shaler,  Am-.  Highways  (1896);  R. 
Stone,  New  Roads  and  Road  Laws  in  the  U.  S. 


(1894)  ; U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agric.,  Year  Booh,  1901, 
319-332;  1908,  144-150,  171-173,  590-596; 

1909,  147-150,  and  year  by  year;  Office  of 
Road  Inquiry,  Bulletins,  Nos.  13,  17,  18 

(1895),  No. 25  (1902),  No.  26  (1903)  ; Office  of 
Public  Roads;  Bulletin,  No.  41  (1912)  ; Un- 
published Statistics  (1911)  ; State  Highway 
Commissioners  and  Engineers,  Annual  Reports-, 
Am.  Year  Booh,  1910,  492,  and  year  by  year. 

Hector  J.  Hughes. 

ROLLS  AND  LIBRARY,  BUREAU  OF.  The 

Bureau  of  Rolls  and  Library  is  one  of  the 
bureaus  of  the  State  Department.  It  is 
charged  with  the  care  and  preservation  of  the 
official  rolls  and  library.  References:  Secre- 
tary of  State,  Annual  Reports-,  C.  H.  Van  Tyne 
and  W.  G.  Leland,  Guide  to  the  Archives  (2d. 
ed.,  1907),  32-54.  A.  N.  H. 

ROMAN  LAW.  See  Law,  Civil. 

ROME,  INFLUENCE  OF,  ON  MODERN 
GOVERNMENT.  The  political  organization 
of  the  Roman  Empire  comprised  three  im- 
portant elements — the  imperial  system,  the 
provincial  system  and  the  municipal  system. 
All  of  these  organic  features  have  formed,  in 
a greater  or  less  degree,  hereditary  factors  in 
the  evolution  of  modern  political  society. 

The  tendency  toward  political  centralization 
in  mediaeval  and  modern  times  has  its  histor- 
ical origin,  to  a large  extent,  in  the  persist- 
ence of  the  imperial  idea  after  the  disruption 
of  the  empire.  This  is  seen  in  the  disposition 
of  the  barbarian  kings  to  adopt  Roman  meth- 
ods of  government,  also  in  the  revival  of  the 
imperial  title  by  Charlemagne  and  the  German 
monarchs,  as  well  as  in  the  imperial  organiza- 
tion of  the  Roman  church,  and  in  many  of  the 
centralized  institutions  of  modern  states. 
Moreover,  the  royal  court  system  of  modern 
Europe  is  an  offspring  of  the  later  Roman  Em- 
pire. 

In  the  provincial  system  of  the  later  Roman 
Empire,  the  central  authority  was  exercised 
through  a body  of  appointive  territorial  offi- 
cials, witji  no  provision  for  local  autonomy  on 
the  part  of  the  province  itself.  This  system 
has  been  generally  adopted  by  modern  govern- 
ments in  the  control  of  subject  territory, 
and  especially  in  the  organization  of  colonial 
establishments,  the  chief  exceptions  being 
found  in  the  self-governing  colonies  of  Great 
Britain,  and  in  the  territorial  possessions  of 
the  United  States. 

With  the  exception  of  the  influence  of  the 
Roman  civil  law  (see  Law,  Civil),  the  most 
important  contribution  of  Rome  to  the  modern 
state  is  doubtless  the  idea  of  the  municipality 
as  a corporate  and  political  body,  vested  with 
certain  rights  of  local  self-government.  The 
Roman  municipium  was  an  incorporated  polit- 
ical community  with  local  rights  guaranteed 
by  a special  charter  or  by  a general  law  (lex 


233 


ROORBACK— ROOSTER,  DEMOCRATIC 


municipalis) . The  revival  and  enfranchise- 
ment of  European  cities  during  the  later  medi- 
aeval period  was  coincident  with  the  revival  of 
the  Roman  law.  Whatever  may  have  been  the 
diverse  origin  of  these  cities,  the  method  of 
their  legal  enfranchisement  by  the  granting  of 
charters  was  drawn  essentially  from  the  re- 
vived Roman  law  relating  to  corporations. 
This  idea  has  been  preserved  as  a basic  fea- 
ture in  the  modern  system  of  government  of 
cities. 

According  to  the  theory  of  the  Roman  law- 
yers, the  source  of  political  authority,  however 
centralized  it  may  be,  rests  ultimately  with 
the  people.  The  Roman  maxim  (which  is  too 
often  curtailed  when  quoted)  was,  “Whatever 
is  pleasing  to  the  prince  has  the  force  of  law, 
because  the  people  by  the  lex  regia  have  con- 
ferred upon  him  all  his  authority”  (Ulpian). 
Neither  the  ancient  nor  the  medieval  civilians 
ever  held  the  doctrine  of  “divine  right”,  this 
theory  being  first  formulated  by  the  Christian 
Fathers  from  interpretations  of  Scripture,  and 
afterwards  supported  by  the  mediaeval  canon- 
ists. Of  the  two  most  important  modern  the- 
ories of  government,  therefore- — that  of  “popu- 
lar sovereignty”  and  that  of  “divine  right” — 
the  former,  which  has  become  the  prevailing 
theory,  must  be  referred  primarily  to  the 
Roman  civilians. 

See  Law,  Civil. 

References:  J.  Bryce,  Holy  Roman  Empire 
(rev.,  1904);  W.  Smith,  Dictionary  of  Greek 
and  Roman  Antiquities,  “Imperium,”  “ Lex 
Regia,”  “Proinncia”  (3d  ed.,  1891);  W.  T. 
Arnold,  Roman  Provincial  Administration  (2d 
ed.,  1906),  eh.  viii;  R.  W.  and  A.  J.  Carlyle, 
Hist,  of  Mediceval  Political  Theory  in  the 
West  (1903)  ; J.  A.  Fairlie,  Municipal  Admin- 
istration (1910),  Pt.  I. 

William  C.  Morey. 

ROORBACK.  A term  signifying  a political 
forgery,  or  a false  report  issued  for  political 
purposes,  which  usually  reacts  upon  the 
promoter.  It  is  supposed  to  have  originated  in 
1844  from  the  publication,  for  party  pur- 
poses in  a Whig  newspaper,  the  Ithaca,  New 
York,  Chronicle,  of  alleged  extracts  from  a 
fictitious  work,  “Travels  of  Baron  Roorback.” 

O.  C.  H. 

ROOSEVELT  PARTY.  A term  applied  by 
the  newspapers  (particularly  the  Nation ) 
during  Roosevelt’s  administration,  to  that 
group  in  the  House  of  Representatives 
which  supported  the  “Roosevelt  measures”  es- 
pecially the  Philippine  tariff  measure.  Also 
sometimes  applied  during  President  Taft’s  ad- 
ministration to  that  group  of  Republicans, 
looking  to  Roosevelt  as  their  leader.  That 
group  later  became  a chief  element  in  the  Re- 
publican party.  See  Progressive  Party;  Re- 
publican Party;  Roosevelt,  Theodore. 

0.  C.  H. 


ROOSEVELT  POLICIES.  The  moral  and 
political  reform  policies,  such  as  conservation 
of  natural  resources,  curbing  of  the  “pluto- 
cratic domination”  and  the  elimination  of  the 
“menace  of  predatory  wealth,”  and  govern- 
mental control  of  railroads,  advocated  by 
Theodore  Roosevelt  (see)  during  his  presiden- 
cy. So  called  because  he  advocated  the  reforms 
upon  his  own  initiative  rather  than  as  carry- 
ing out  the  pledges  of  a party  platform.  The 
term  is  applied  also  to  the  principles  advocated 
in  “New  Nationalism”  (see).  O.  C.  H. 

ROOSEVELT,  THEODORE.  Theodore 

Roosevelt  (1858-  ),  twenty-sixth  President 

of  the  United  States,  was  born  at  New  York 
City,  October  27,  1858.  From  1882  to  1884 
he  was  a Republican  member  of  the  New  York 
assembly,  at  the  same  time  championing  the 
cause  of  civil  service  reform.  From  1889  to 
1895  he  was  a member  (eventually  chairman) 
of  the  United  States  Civil  Service  Commission; 
then  for  two  years  president  of  the  police 
board  of  New  York  City.  In  1897  he  became 
assistant  secretary  of  the  navy,  resigning  in 
1898  to  serve  in  the  war  with  Spain  as  com- 
mander of  the  “Rough  Riders.”  In  1899  he 
was  elected  governor  of  New  York,  and  the 
next  year  was  elected  Vice-President.  On 
the  assassination  of  McKinley,  in  1901,  he  suc- 
ceeded to  the  presidency,  and  in  1904  was 
elected  President,  receiving  336  electoral  votes 
against  140  for  Alton  B.  Parker,  the  Demo- 
cratic candidate.  His  career  was  characterized 
by  restless  interest  in  almost  every  phase  of 
American  life,  vigorous  and  reiterated  de- 
nunciation of  public  and  private  misconduct, 
and  an  energetic  foreign  policy  which  com- 
manded the  respect  of  the  world.  On  his  re- 
tirement from  the  presidency  he  hunted  in 
Africa,  and  on  his  return  visited  Europe,  where 
he  was  received  with  unprecedented  honor.  In 
March,  1912,  he  announced  himself  as  again 
a candidate  for  the  presidency;  but  did  not 
carry  the  Republican  national  convention.  He 
was  nominated  by  the  Progressive  party,  which 
came  into  existence  as  a separate  party  based 
on  his  policies,  and  received  88  electoral  votes 
in  the  November  election.  His  numerous  pub- 
lications include:  Naval  TFar  of  1812  (1882), 
lives  of  Thomas  H.  Benton  ( 1887 ) and  Gouver- 
neur  Morris  (1888),  and  The  Winning  of  the 
West  (4  vols.,  1889-1893) . See  Conservation  ; 
President,  Authority  and  Influence  of; 
Presidential  Elections;  Progressive  Party; 
Republican  Party.  References:  T.  Roosevelt, 
Works  (1903);  J.  M.  Miller,  Ed.,  The  Tri- 
umphant Life  of  Theodore  Roosevelt  (1904); 
F.  E.  Leupp,  The  Man  Roosevelt  (1904)  ; W. 
F.  Johnson,  Ed.,  Addresses  and  Papers  of 
Theodore  Roosevelt  (1909).  W.  MacD. 

ROOSTER,  DEMOCRATIC.  A Democratic 

party  emblem  printed  at  the  head  of  a column 
in  the  party  press  announcing  a party  victory; 
234 


ROOT,  ELIHU— ROTTEN  BOROUGHS 


in  some  states  placed  also  at  the  head  of  the 
Democratic  party  column  on  the  election  bal- 
lot. It  probably  originated  in  Indiana  in  1842, 
where  Chapman,  the  editor  of  the  Indianapolis 
Sentinel,  was  accused  of  crowing  prematurely. 
When  it  was  evident  that  the  Democrats  had 
won,  Chapman  printed  the  rooster  over  the  in- 
scription, “We  Crow.”  See  Party  Labels. 

0.  C.  H. 

ROOT,  ELIHU.  Elihu  Root  (1845-  ) was 
born  at  Clinton,  N.  Y.,  February  15,  1845.  He 
was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  1867,  and  from 
1883  to  1885  was  United  States  district  attor- 
ney for  the  southern  district  of  New  York. 
In  1894  he  was  a delegate  at  large  to  the  New 
York  constitutional  convention,  where  he 
served  as  chairman  of  the  judiciary  committee. 
He  had,  in  the  meantime,  risen  to  the  front 
rank  as  a corporation  lawyer,  and  was  influen- 
tial in  the  councils  of  the  Republican  party.  In 
1899  he  was  appointed  Secretary  of  War,  in 
which  office  he  achieved  the  creation  of  a gen- 
eral staff  and  the  reorganization  of  the  militia, 
and  for  a time  directed  the  administration  of 
Cuba  and  the  Philippines.  In  1903  he  was  a 
member  of  the  Alaska  boundary  tribunal.  He 
resigned  the  war  portfolio  in  February,  1904, 
was  temporary  chairman  of  the  Republican 
national  convention  at  Chicago  in  that  year, 
and  in  July,  1905,  was  appointed  Secretary  of 
State,  in  which  office  he  continued,  especially 
towards  Asia  and  South  America,  the  policy 
of  John  Hay.  In  November,  1907,  he  opened 
the  Central  American  peace  conference  at  Rio 
Janeiro.  He  resigned  the  secretaryship  Jan- 
uary 22,  1909,  to  accept  an  election  as  United 
States  Senator  from  New  York.  In  1910  he 
was  counsel  for  the  United  States  in  the  North 
Atlantic  fisheries  arbitration  at  The  Hague. 
In  1912  he  was  temporary  and  permanent 
chairman  of  the  Republican  convention. 
See  Pan  American  Congresses;  State,  De- 
partment of.  References:  J.  H.  Latan£,  Am. 
as  a World  Power  (1907);  Am.  Year  Book, 
1910,  and  year  by  year.  W.  MacD. 

ROTATION  IN  OFFICE.  This  principle,  de- 
signed to  prevent  the  growth  of  an  office-hold- 
ing aristocracy,  implies  short  terms  and  limita- 
tions upon  reeligibility.  Advocated  in  England 
during  the  Commonwealth  as  a remedy  for 
political  corruption  and  introduced  into  New 
Amsterdam  by  the  Dutch,  it  found  some  ac- 
ceptance in  colonial  New  England  and  was 
embodied  in  Penn’s  famous  “Frame  of  Gov- 
ernment.” The  earliest  state  constitutions 
provided  for  it  “in  order  to  prevent  those  who 
are  vested  with  authority  from  becoming  op- 
pressive” (Massachusetts,  1780).  By  1830  the 
principle  had  been  applied  to  the  office  of  gov- 
ernor in  fifteen  states  and  to  some  other  offi- 
ces in  nineteen.  In  this  way  political  leaders 
became  possessed  of  a great  deal  of  patronage, 
which  was  first  used  openly  and  continuously 
113 


for  partisan  purposes  in  New  York.  The  cen- 
tral government  was  not  immediately  affected 
by  this  tendency.  Under  the  first  six  Presi- 
dents, covering  a period  of  forty  years,  there 
were  only  73  removals.  Jackson  was  the  first 
President  to  carry  approval  of  rotation  be- 
yond abstract  political  philosophy.  According 
to  his  view  all  public  duties  were,  or  could  be 
made,  so  simple  that  intelligent  men  could 
readily  qualify  themselves;  and  long  occupa- 
tion of  public  office  was  apt  to  breed  feelings 
unfavorable  to  faithful  service  and  “a  habit 
of  looking  with  indifference  upon  the  public 
interests  and  of  tolerating  conduct  from  which 
an  unpractised  man  would  revolt.”  Acting  on 
this  view,  Jackson  swept  his  political  oppon- 
ents out  of  office.  The  spoils  system  (see)  was 
definitely  established.  Both  parties  accepted 
it.  When  the  Whigs  (see)  came  to  power  in 
1841  there  were  458  removals  out  of  a possible 
924;  and  Lincoln  made  a cleaner  sweep  than 
Jackson  or  any  other  President. 

According  to  the  arguments  of  those  who 
introduced  the  system  rotation  was  intended 
to  give  effect  to  the  democratic  ideal  of  equal- 
ity and  to  prevent  the  rise  of  an  arbitrary 
and  arrogant  official  class.  It  was  held  to 
equalize  the  burdens  of  office,  spread  political 
education  and  save  free  government  from  cor- 
ruption through  the  establishment  of  hered- 
itary tenure.  In  practice  it  has  been  one  of 
the  most  active  agents  in  debauching  political 
life.  In  the  municipal,  state  and  national 
governments,  except  where  the  merit  system 
(see)  has  been  applied,  each  change  in  party 
control  has  been  followed  by  something  like  a 
general  proscription  of  appointed  officials.  The 
tenure  of  office  (see)  depends  upon  success  at 
the  polls.  Hence  political  leaders  have  at  their 
command  an  army  of  mercenaries.  The  idea  of 
rotation  begot  the  spoils,  and  the  large  class 
of  professional  politicians  has  since  grown  up 
on  it.  Naturally  the  public  service  has  suffered, 
either  because  the  incumbents  are  inefficient  or 
inexperienced  or  because,  knowing  that  their 
positions  are  insecure  and  that  faithful  serv- 
ice will  not  protect  them  from  removal,  they 
make  the  most  of  their  uncertain  offices  while 
they  have  them.  Many  people,  seeing  the  evils, 
magnify  them,  and  come  to  regard  politics  al- 
most contemptuously  and  to  feel  something 
of  the  cynicism  which  prevails  among  the  pro- 
fessional politicians. 

References:  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Government 
and  Politics  (1910),  94,  Readings  in  Am.  Gov - 
ernment  and  Politics  (1911),  81-83;  J.  Bryce, 
Am.  Commonivealth  (ed.,  1911),  II,  ch.  lxv; 
C.  R.  Fish,  The  Civil  Service  and  the  Patron- 
age (1905),  chs.  iv-viii. 

Charles  A.  Beard. 

ROTTEN  BOROUGHS.  The  rotten  boroughs 
were  56  English  boroughs  which  lost  their 
representation  of  111  members  in  the  House  of 
Commons  by  the  Reform  Act  of  1832.  Most 


235 


ROUGH  RIDERS— RULES  OF  CONGRESS 


of  them  had  fewer  than  2000  inhabitants ; hut 
number  of  houses  and  amount  of  taxes  paid, 
as  well  as  population,  were  considered  before 
striking  a borough  off  the  parliamentary  role. 
The  representation  thus  taken  away  was  dis- 
tributed mainly  among  the  hitherto  unrepre- 
sented or  inadequately  represented,  large  manu- 
facturing towns,  such  as  Manchester  and  Leeds. 
The  grievance  against  the  rotten  borough 
members  was  twofold.  First,  they  were  elect- 
ed by  ridiculously  small  constituencies,  70  of 
them  being  returned  from  boroughs  with  scarce- 
ly any  electors.  Secondly,  they  were  the  choice, 
not  of  these  constituencies,  but  of  men  who 
controlled  the  voters  through  influence  or  out- 
right purchase.  Some  of  the  rotten  boroughs 
had  secured  a fairly  deserved  representation  in 
the  thirteenth  century  and  afterwards  deter- 
iorated. Others,  like  notorious  Old  Sarum, 
were  enfranchised  later,  merely  to  strengthen 
the  influence  of  the  monarchs  in  the  House 
through  members  easily  controlled.  See  House 
of  Commons;  Parliament.  References:  W. 
Heaton,  The  Three  Reforms  of  Parliament 
(1885),  1-113;  E.  A.  Freeman,  “Decayed  Bor- 
oughs” in  his  Historical  Essays,  4th  series 
(1892)  ; E.  Porrit,  Unreformed  House  of  Com- 
mons (1903).  H.  A.  Y. 

ROUGH  RIDERS.  A popular  designation 
given  the  First  United  States  Volunteer  Cav- 
alry organized  by  Leonard  Wood  and  Theodore 
Roosevelt  for  service  in  the  Spanisli-Ameriean 
War,  and  recruited  largely  from  the  cowboys 
of  the  western  plains.  Theodore  Roosevelt 
(see)  was  Lieutenant  Colonel  and  afterwards 
Colonel.  O.  C.  H. 

ROUNDER.  A term  denoting  a member  of 
an  undesirable  class  in  the  city,  'which  goes 
the  round  of  the  saloons  and  gambling  houses, 
or  goes  the  round  of  petty  crime,  imprisonment 
and  release.  The  term  has  political  signifi- 
cance in  that  such  a class  furnishes  material 
available  to  the  “political  workers.”  See 
Floaters;  Repeaters;  Voters,  Colonization 
of.  O.  C.  H. 


ROUSSEAU,  JEAN  JACQUES.  See  Politi- 
cal Theories  of  Continental  Publicists. 

RULE,  BRINGING  IN  A.  For  some  years 
prior  to  March  19,  1910,  the  rules  of  Congress 
had  been  so  construed  as  to  prevent  the  intro- 
duction of  any  rule  after  the  organization  of 
Congress  without  the  consent  of  the  standing 
committee  on  rules.  The  importance  of  the  pro- 
cedure for  bringing  in  a rule  lies  in  the  fact 
that  the  passage  of  legislation  through  the 
House  is  now  largely  dependent  either  upon 
the  securing  of  unanimous  consent  or  upon  the 
adoption  of  special  rules  by  which  the  consid- 
eration of  measures  and  voting  on  them  at 
definite  times  can  be  assured.  Originally  the 
House  had  dispensed  with  a standing  committee 
for  the  consideration  of  special  rules  by  lay- 
ing proposals  for  such  rules  on  the  table  for  a 
day,  and  then  taking  them  up  for  final  action. 
But  after  1880  the  practice  grew  up  of  refer- 
ring such  resolutions  to  a standing  committee 
on  rules.  This  practice  was  confirmed  by  rul- 
ings of  successive  Speakers,  that  a motion  to 
refer  a proposed  rule  to  a committee  other  than 
the  committee  on  rules  was  out  of  order,  that 
resolutions  concerning  special  rules  must  be 
referred  to  and  reported  by  the  committee  on 
rules  before  action  might  be  taken  by  the 
House,  and  that  the  committee  on  rules  might 
report  a special  order  that  had  not  previously 
been  committed  to  it.  Thus  the  exclusive  con- 
trol over  the  bringing  in  of  special  rules  and  of 
amendments  to  the  standing  rules  was  vested 
in  the  committee  on  rules.  On  March  17, 
1910,  however,  the  high  constitutional  priv- 
ilege of  any  member  to  bring  in  a proposal  re- 
lating to  the  rules  without  reference  to  the 
committee  on  rules  was  asserted  on  the  floor  of 
the  House;  and  on  March  19,  1910,  the  Speak- 
er’s ruling  to  the  contrary  was  overruled, 
upon  appeal,  by  the  House.  See  Insurgents 
in  Congress;  Rules  of  Congress. 

A.  N.  H. 

RULE  OF  1756.  See  Continuous  Voyages; 
Dependencies;  Neutral  Trade. 


RULES  OF  CONGRESS 


Evolution  of  the  Rules. — The  rules  of  Con- 
gress, like  the  rules  of  legislative  bodies  gen- 
erally in  the  United  States,  were  founded  origi- 
nally upon  the  procedure  of  the  English  House 
of  Commons,  subject  to  the  limitations  im- 
posed by  the  Federal  Constitution  ( see  Rules 
of  Legislative  Bodies).  The  early  rules  of 
both  houses  provided  for  a simple  and  regular 
order  of  business  and  imposed  no  limits  upon 
the  freedom  of  debate.  They  ignored  the  exist- 
ence of  political  parties,  and  extended  to  each 
member  the  same  right  to  the  attention  of  the 


house.  The  spirit  of  the  early  rules  was  equal 
opportunities  to  all  and  special  privileges  to 
none.  Procedure  in  the  Senate  is  yet  char- 
acterized by  this  early  simplicity  and  regular- 
ity, but  in  the  House  contemporary  procedure 
is  characterized  by  great  complexity  and  ir- 
regularity. The  effect  is  to  deprive  ordinary 
members,  and  especially  members  not  of  the 
majority  party,  of  the  same  opportunities  to 
influence  the  action  of  the  House  as  are  en- 
joyed by  a privileged  few.  The  essence  of  the 
change  has  been  the  concentration  of  control 


236 


RULES  OF  CONGRESS 


over  the  deliberations  of  the  House  in  the 
hands  of  the  Speaker  and  other  leaders  of  the 
majority  party. 

The  causes  of  this  change  have  been  two- 
fold: (1)  the  development  of  the  physical 

conditions  under  which  the  business  of  the 
House  must  be  transacted;  (2)  the  rise  of 
the  system  of  government  by  party.  The  lead- 
ing features  of  the  control  of  the  House  by 
the  majority  party  are:  (1)  the  classification 
of  business;  (2)  the  arrangement  of  the  or- 
der of  business;  (3)  the  assignment  of  special 
privileges  to  favored  classes  of  business  and 
to  favored  groups  of  members;  (4)  the  limita- 
tion of  debate;  (5)  the  development  of  party 
organization.  All  bills  and  resolutions  are 
now  divided  into  four  classes,  each  of  which  is 
placed  on  a separate  calendar  for  considera- 
tion in  regular  order,  subject  to  displacement 
by  special  orders  in  a manner  that  will  be  ex- 
plained. The  four  calendars  are:  (1)  the  union 
calendar,  on  which  are  placed  all  public  bills 
or  resolutions  relating  to  the  raising  or  ex- 
penditure of  public  money;  (2)  the  house  cal- 
endar, on  which  are  placed  all  other  public 
bills  or  resolutions;  (3)  the  private  calendar, 
on  which  are  placed  all  private  measures;  (4) 
the  calendar  for  unanimous  consent,  established 
in  1909,  to  which  non-contentious  measures 
may  be  transferred  from  tbe  other  calendars 
for  the  purpose  of  expediting  their  passage 
(see  Calendar  of  Legislative  Bodies;  Cal- 
endar Wednesday). 

The  regular  order  of  business,  first  definitely 
established  in  1811,  was  as  follows:  (1) 

prayer;  2)  reading  and  correction  of  the 
journal;  (3)  correction  of  reference  of  public 
bills;  (4)  disposal  of  business  on  the  Speaker’s 
table  (messages  from  the  President  and  Sen- 
ate, etc.)  ; (5)  unfinished  business;  (6)  morn- 
ing hour  for  consideration  of  bills  called  up 
by  committees  (see  Morning  Hour)  ; (7)  mo- 
tions to  go  into  committee  of  the  whole  house 
on  the  state  of  the  Union  (for  consideration  of 
business  on  the  union  calendar)  ; (8)  orders 
of  the  day.  Certain  days,  however,  were  event- 
ually set  aside  for  special  classes  of  business 
(see  Private  Bills  Day).  On  certain  other 
days  the  rules  were  regularly  subject  to  sus- 
pension for  the  transaction  of  business  by 
unanimous  consent;  and  on  any  day  busi- 
ness might  be  transacted  by  unanimous  con- 
sent, if  a member  could  secure  recognition  for 
the  purpose.  The  regular  order  of  business 
in  time  ceased  to  bind  the  House  to  a daily 
routine,  since  the  system  of  making  certain 
important  subjects  privileged  permitted  the 
interruption  of  the  regular  order  by  mat- 
ters which,  in  fact,  often  supplanted  it 
entirely  for  days  at  a time.  Indeed,  regular 
orders  of  the  day,  such  as  exist  for  example  in 
the  Massachusetts  House  of  Representatives 
( see  Rules  of  Legislative  Bodies),  have  long 
been  in  disuse  in  the  federal  House,  their  place 
being  taken  by  special  orders  of  business  de- 


vised and  accepted  by  the  House  for  special 
purposes. 

Privileged  Committees. — The  privilege  of  in- 
terrupting the  regular  order  of  business  was 
assigned:  (I)  to  certain  standing  committees; 
(2)  to  all  committees  dealing  with  certain 
classes  of  business;  (3)  to  all  committees  of 
conference  for  the  purpose  of  making  reports. 
The  last,  which  have  precedence  over  all  other 
business,  were  privileged  in  order  to  expedite 
the  final  passage  of  legislation,  which  had  pre- 
viously passed  both  House  and  Senate,  but  in 
different  form.  The  privileged  classes  of  busi- 
ness include  all  bills  and  resolutions  which 
have  to  do  with  the  raising  or  expenditure  of 
public  money. 

The  privileged  committees  are  now  twenty- 
one  in  number,  comprising  most  of  the  impor- 
tant standing  committees  of  the  House ; but  the 
key  to  the  contemporary  procedure  in  the  House 
is  to  be  found  in  the  unique  privileges  assigned 
to  the  committee  on  rules.  This  committee 
was  converted  from  a select  into  a standing 
committee  in  1880,  and,  although  the  Speaker 
had  regularly  served  thereon  since  1858,  it  was 
not  until  the  time  of  Speaker  Carlisle  (1883- 
1889)  that  it  began  to  assume  its  recent  im- 
portance. By  successive  rulings  of  the  Speak- 
er and  orders  of  the  House  this  committee  was 
gradually  invested  with  power  effectively  to 
control  the  order  of  business  by  means  of 
special  orders  for  special  purposes,  reported 
at  any  time  subject  to  the  assent  of  a major- 
ity. Such  high  privilege,  when  enjoyed  by  a 
committee  on  rules,  working  in  harmony  with 
a partisan  Speaker  ( see  Speaker  of  the 
House),  and  supported  by  a permanent  and 
compact  majority,  was  capable  of  converting 
the  House  of  Representatives  into  a mere  legis- 
lative machine  for  registering  and  making 
effective  the  will  of  that  majority. 

This  potentiality  of  partisan  control  was 
made  a reality  by  the  limitation  of  debate. 
By  the  use  of  the  hour  rule  (see)  and  the 
previous  question  (see),  a leader  of  the  House 
(see),  acting  under  a special  rule  reported  for 
the  purpose  by  the  committee  on  rules,  can 
control  debate  and  secure  a vote  at  its  termi- 
nation. Along  with  this  concentration  of  power 
in  the  majority  party,  went  a corresponding 
consolidation  of  party  organization.  Both  the 
Speaker  and  the  committee  on  rules  were  made 
responsible  to  the  majority  party  through  the 
instrumentality  of  the  party  caucus  (see  Legis- 
lative Caucus  for  Legislation  ) . Thereby  a 
partisan  majority  was  enabled  to  make  an 
effective  use  of  its  power.  The  exercise  of  the 
power  conferred  upon  the  Speaker  and  the 
committee  on  rules,  however,  eventually  gave 
rise  to  discontent,  culminating  in  the  year 
1909.  A minority  of  the  then  majority  party 
complained  that  their  advice  received  insuffi- 
cient consideration  by  the  party  leaders,  and 
that  through  the  mechanism  of  the  party  or- 
ganization and  its  control  of  the  House  their 


237 


RULES  OF  CONGRESS 


consent  to  the  official  party  policy  was  ren- 
dered superfluous.  The  minority  party  com- 
plained that  it  was  deprived  of  an  adequate 
opportunity  for  the  presentation  of  its  case 
against  the  measures  of  the  majority.  In- 
dividual members  of  all  parties  complained: 
( 1 ) that  the  Speaker  exercised  a mischievous 
influence  through  his  power  to  block  private 
and  local  bills,  usually  passed  by  unanimous 
consent,  by  refusing  recognition  to  the  mem- 
bers wishing  to  call  them  up;  (2)  that  priv- 
ileged business  too  frequently  interrupted  the 
consideration  of  non-partisan  measures;  (3) 
that  there  was  no  means  of  compelling  com- 
mittees to  report  measures  once  committed  to 
them  back  to  the  House. 

Recent  Reforms. — By  the  reform  of  the  rules 
in  1909-10  several  of  these  grievances  were 
redressed.  The  Speaker’s  power  to  block  legis- 
lation by  unanimous  consent  was  destroyed 
March  15,  1909,  by  the  establishment  of  a 
special  calendar  for  unanimous  consent,  upon 
which  bills  may  be  placed  without  the  previous 
consent  of  the  Speaker.  This  calendar  is  taken 
up  on  the  first  and  third  Mondays  of  each 
month  and  the  bills  thereon  are  called  in  order. 
Those  to  which  any  objection  is  made  are 
replaced  on  the  regular  calendars,  and  the 
others  are  proceeded  with  so  far  as  the  unani- 
mous consent  of  the  House  will  permit.  The 
vexatious  interruption  of  ordinary  by  privi- 
leged business  was  restricted  (March  1,  15, 
1909)  by  the  establishment  of  Calendar 
Wednesday  (see),  thus  giving  the  House  one 
day  a week  when  ordinary  business  might 
take  its  regular  course.  The  power  of  a com- 
mittee to  pigeon-hole  a popular  measure  was 
destroyed  (June  17,  1910)  by  a new  rule 
enabling  the  House  to  discharge  any  committee 
from  further  consideration  of  a bill  and  to 
give  to  such  a bill  priority  of  consideration 
over  any  other  bills  subsequently  reported  by 
the  same  committee.  The  opportunities  of  a 
minority  party  effectively  to  criticize  the  legis- 
lation of  a majority  were  enlarged  (March  15, 
1909)  by  providing  that,  after  the  previous 
question  is  ordered  on  the  passage  of  a hill 
or  joint  resolution,  one  motion  to  recommit 
shall  be  in  order,  when  the  Speaker  is  bound 
to  recognize  a representative  of  the  minority 
for  the  purpose  of  offering  a substitute  for 
the  measure  of  the  majority.  Finally  the 
speakership  was  separated  from  the  committee 
on  rules  (March  19,  1910),  and  by  the  action 
of  the  Democratic  caucus  stripped  of  the  power 
of  appointing  committees  (January  19,  1911). 
The  committee  on  rules  was  reorganized,  and 
doubled  in  size.  The  majority  of  the  new 
committee  on  rules,  however,  like  the  old, 
represented  the  majority  of  the  dominant  party 
to  the  exclusion  of  the  discontented  minority 
of  that  party,  and  the  latter  were  still  forced 
to  choose  between  abiding  by  the  decisions  of 
the  majority  in  the  party  caucus  or  going 
over  to  the  opposition. 


The  reorganized  committee  on  rules  exercises 
the  same  power  as  its  predecessor.  A speci- 
men of  its  special  orders  is  that  governing 
the  debate  on  the  final  passage  of  the  Postal 
Savings  Banks  Bill  (June  7,  1911). 

Resolved,  that  immediately  upon  the  adoption 
of  this  resolution,  it  shall  be  in  order  to  consider 
in  the  House  Senate  Bill  5876.  . . . Eight  hours 

shall  be  allowed  for  general  debate,  which  shall  be 
confined  to  the  bill,  one  half  of  said  time  to  be 
controlled  by  the  chairman  of  the  committee  on 
I’ostoffices  and  Post-roads,  and  one  half  by  the 
senior  minority  member  of  said  committee.  At  the 
conclusion  of  the  general  debate,  it  shall  be  in  or- 
der for  the  minority  to  offer  an  amendment  to 
strike  out  all  after  the  word  'that’  . . . and  in- 
sert a new  text.  Thereupon  the  previous  question 
shall  be  considered  as  ordered  on  the  minority’s 
amendment  . . . , and  on  the  bill  to  final  passage, 
without  delay,  intervening  motion,  or  appeal,  ex- 
cept a motion  to  recommit. 

In  tli is  instance  the  majority  party  declined 
to  permit  any  debate  under  the  five-minute 
rule  (see),  or  amendments  to  particular 
clauses  of  the  bill.  In  fact,  the  real  debate 
on  that  bill  took  place  in  the  caucus  of  the 
majority  party,  and  amendments  clause  by 
clause  were  made  there.  The  minority  party 
was  permitted  only  to  bring  forward  a com- 
plete alternative  bill  of  its  own,  and  the  de- 
bate was  confined  to  general  principles  in 
order  that  the  details  of  the  measure  as  de- 
termined in  the  majority  party  caucus  might 
not  be  altered.  Thus  the  recent  reform  of  the 
House  rules,  though  depriving  the  majority 
party,  acting  either  through  the  Speaker  or 
through  the  committee  on  rules,  of  the  power 
to  prevent  the  consideration  by  the  House  of 
non-contentious  business,  has  not  diminished 
its  power  to  control  the  action  of  the  House 
on  partisan  measures.  The  rules  still  provide 
special  privileges  for  party  leaders,  and  con- 
gressional government  remains  government 
through  parties.  It  was  expected  that  the 
rules  would  be  extensively  revised  by  the 
Democratic  Sixty-third  Congress  but  no  ma- 
terial changes  were  made  during  the  first 
two  sessions  (to  1914). 

See  Committee  System;  Congress;  House 
of  Representatives;  Insurgents  in  Con- 
gress ; Rules  of  Legislative  Bodies  ; 
Speaker. 

References:  Senate  Manual  (1909)  ; Pre- 
cedents of  the  Senate  (1909);  A.  C.  Hinds, 
Rules  of  the  House  of  Representatives  ivith  a 
Digest  of  the  Practice  (1909),  Parliamentary 
Precedents  of  the  House  of  Representatives 
(1909);  C.  A.  Beard,  American  Government 
and  Politics  (1910),  ch.  xiv;  A.  B.  Hart, 
Actual  Government  (1908),  ch.  xiv;  P.  S. 
Reinsch,  American  Legislatures  and  Legis- 
lative Methods  (1907),  ch.  ii;  Readings  on 
Am.  Fed.  Government  (1909),  ch.  vii;  L.  G. 
McConachie,  Congressional  Committees  (1898), 
ehs.  iv-vi;  M.  P.  Follett,  The  Speaker  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  (1896),  ehs.  vi-x; 
W.  Wilson,  Congressional  Government  (1st  ed., 
1885),  ehs.  ii,  iii;  Congressional  Record, 
passim.  A.  N.  Holcombe. 


238 


RULES  OF  LEGISLATIVE  BODIES 


RULES  OF  LEGISLATIVE  BODIES 


Purpose  of  Rules  of  Procedure. — The  federal 
and  state  constitutions  provide  that  each  house 
of  Congress  and  of  the  several  state  legis- 
latures shall  determine  the  rules  of  its  pro- 
ceedings. These  rules,  however,  are  subject 
to  limitations  imposed  by  the  several  con- 
stitutions, and  to  interpretation  by  the  pre- 
siding officers.  Hence  the  law  of  procedure 
in  American  legislative  bodies  is  composed  of 
constitutional  precepts,  legislative  regulations, 
and,  when  these  are  silent  or  of  doubtful  appli- 
cation, official  rulings.  These  last,  as  well  as 
many  of  the  formal  rules,  were  originally 
founded  upon  the  practice  of  the  English 
House  of  Commons,  “the  model,”  so  Jefferson 
tells  us  in  the  preface  to  his  Manual  of  Parlia- 
mentary Practice,  “which  we  have  all  studied.” 
“Its  rules,”  Jefferson  declared,  “are  probably 
as  wisely  constructed  for  governing  the  debates 
of  a deliberative  body,  and  obtaining  its  true 
sense,  as  any  which  can  become  known  to  us,” 
and  thereupon,  with  the  acquiescence  of  the 
United  States  Senate  over  which  Jefferson  then 
presided,  he  prepared  his  Manual,  “a  sketch, 
which  those  who  come  after  me  will  successive- 
ly correct  and  fill  up  till  a code  of  rules  shall 
be  formed  for  the  use  of  the  Senate,  the  effects 
of  which  may  be  accuracy  in  business,  economy 
of  time,  order,  uniformity,  and  impartiality.” 
This  is  the  best  statement  of  the  purpose  of 
rules  of  procedure  in  legislative  bodies.  Jef- 
ferson was  equally  alive  to  certain  other  ad- 
vantages of  orderly  rules  of  procedure,  ob- 
serving that  “these  forms  as  instituted  by  our 
ancestors,  operated  as  a check  and  control  on 
the  actions  of  the  majority,  and  were,  in  many 
instances,  a shelter  and  protection  to  the  min- 
ority . . . And  whether  these  forms  be  in  all 
cases  the  most  rational  or  not,  is  really  not 
of  so  great  importance.  It  is  much  more 
material  that  there  should  be  a rule  to  go 
by,  than  what  that  rule  is;  that  there  may 
be  uniformity  of  proceeding  in  business,  not 
subject  to  the  caprice  of  the  Speaker  or  cap- 
tiousness of  the  [majority  of]  members.” 

Jefferson’s  Manual  was  at  once  accepted  as 
the  standard  digest  of  parliamentary  law  in 
the  United  States.  It  has  always  remained 
the  chief  reliance  of  presiding  officers  in  the 
United  States  Senate,  and  long  served  as  a 
model  for  the  guidance  of  the  legislative 
bodies  of  the  states.  It  was  formally  adopted 
by  the  federal  House  of  Representatives  in 
1837,  but  has  never  been  closely  followed  by 
the  House  and  is  now  in  large  part  superseded 
(see  Rules  of  Congress).  In  American  legis- 
lative bodies  the  most  important  questions  of 
procedure  are  generally  determined  by  con- 
stitutional precepts.  These  may  be  convenient- 
ly found  in  F.  J.  Stimson,  Federal  and  State 


Constitutions  of  the  United  States  (1908). 
In  municipal  legislatures  similar  questions  are 
often  determined  by  the  municipal  charter 
or  general  statute  of  municipal  corporations. 
All  legislative  bodies,  however,  possess  a more 
or  less  extensive  set  of  rules  of  their  own. 
The  rules  of  the  Boston  city  council  (1911) 
are  thirty-two  in  number  and  deal  with  the 
president,  motions,  readings,  reconsideration, 
conduct  of  members,  standing  committees, 
order  of  business,  report  of  committees,  and 
some  minor  matters.  The  rules  of  the  Massa- 
chusetts House  of  Representatives  (1911)  are 
one  hundred  and  five  in  number  and  deal  with 
a somewhat  wider  range  of  topics.  The  former 
rules  imply,  and  the  latter  expressly  state  that 
“the  rules  of  parliamentary  practice  shall 
govern  ...  in  all  cases  to  which  they  are 
applicable,  and  in  which  they  are  not  incon- 
sistent with”  the  rules  of  the  house. 

Order  of  Business;  Conduct  of  Debate. — In 
practice  the  most  important  rules  of  legis- 
lative bodies  are  those  dealing  with  the  order 
of  business  and  the  conduct  of  debate.  The 
greater  the  number  of  members  in  a legislative 
body,  the  quantity  and  variety  of  business 
brought  before  it,  and  the  interest  of  the  pub- 
lic in  its  proceedings,  the  more  complicated 
does  the  order  of  business  become,  and  the  more 
restricted  the  privilege  of  debate.  In  the 
Boston  city  council,  with  nine  members  and 
fewer  powers  than  are  ordinarily  lodged  in 
municipal  councils,  there  are  no  restrictions 
upon  debate,  except  that  two-thirds  of  the 
members  may  at  any  time  suspend  the  rules 
and  then  terminate  a debate.  The  order  of 
business  is  as  follows:  (1)  communications 
from  the  mayor;  (2)  presentation  of  petitions, 
memorials,  and  remonstrances;  (3)  hearings; 

(4)  unfinished  business  of  preceding  meetings; 

(5)  orders  of  notice  of  hearings;  (6)  reports 
of  city  officers;  (7)  reports  of  committees; 
(8)  motions,  orders,  and  resolutions.  All 
business  can  be  easily  despatched  in  regular 
order,  and  each  member  has  an  equal  opportun- 
ity to  address  the  council  and  bring  business 
before  it. 

In  the  Massachusetts  House  of  Represent- 
atives, with  two  hundred  and  forty  members 
and  the  usual  powers  of  the  lower  house  of 
a state  legislature,  the  rules  are  more  compli- 
cated. No  member  may  speak  twice  to  the 
same  question  until  all  who  wish  to  speak 
once  have  done  so,  and  debate  may  he  closed 
either  immediately  or  at  a specified  time  by 
a majority  of  those  present.  In  practice,  how- 
ever, these  motions  are  not  often  used  for  par- 
tisan purposes,  and  the  absence  of  a limit  to 
the  duration  of  a session  permits  much  free- 
dom of  debate.  The  regular  order  of  business 


239 


RULES  OF  STATE  LEGISLATURES 


is:  (1)  the  consideration  of  petitions  and 

similar  papers;  (2)  the  reports  of  committees; 
(3)  the  orders  of  the  day.  There  is  no  class- 
ification of  business,  and  but  a single  calen- 
dar (see)  upon  which  all  bills  and  resolutions 
are  placed  in  order.  Those  to  which  there 
is  no  objection  are  first  disposed  of,  conten- 
tious matter  coming  next  in  order,  and  all  un- 
finished business  is  placed  at  the  head  of  the 
orders  for  the  next  day.  No  matter  which  has 
been  duly  placed  in  the  orders  of  the  day  may 
be  discharged  therefrom  or  considered  under 
the  rules  out  of  the  regular  order.  There  are 
no  privileged  committees,  and  the  rule  provid- 
ing for  a regular  order  may  not  be  changed 
without  the  consent  of  four-fifths  of  the  mem- 
bers present.  Thus  non-partisan  measures  are 
accorded  the  same  privileges  as  partisan  meas- 
ures; and  a partisan  majority  under  the 
rules  possesses  no  advantage  over  a minority 
except  that  of  limiting  debate,  a power  not 
often  employed  for  partisan  purposes.  In  the 
states  generally  there  are  similar  rules  of  pro- 
cedure which  in  practice  more  or  less  effective- 
ly secure  the  individual  members  against  “the 
caprice  of  the  Speaker  or  captiousness  of  the 
[majority  of]  members.”  In  some  states,  how- 
ever, as  in  New  York,  the  pressure  of  busi- 
ness and  the  conflict  of  parties  have  developed 
a more  complicated  procedure,  a development 
which  has  culminated  in  the  federal  House  of 
Representatives  (see  Rules  of  Congress). 

See  Calendar  of  Legislative  Bodies  ; 
Closure;  Congress;  House  of  Represent- 
atives ; Parliamentary  Law  ; Previous  Ques- 
tion; Rules  otf  Congress;  Speaker;  State 
Legislature. 

References:  T.  Jefferson,  Manual  of  Parlia- 
mentary Practice  (many  editions)  ; U.  S.  Sen- 
ate, Manual,  1909;  House,  Manual  (published 
by  each  Congress)  ; L.  S.  Cushing,  Lex  Parlia- 
mentary: The  Law  and  Practice  of  Legisla- 
tive Assemblies  (1874)  ; L.  S.  Cushing,  Rules 
of  Proceeding  in  Deliberative  Assemblies 
(1877)  ; H.  M.  Robert,  Pocket  Manual  of  Rules 
of  Order  for  Deliberative  Assemblies  (1876)  ; 
W.  S.  Robinson,  Warrington’s  Manual  for  the 
Information  of  Officers  and  Members  of  Legis- 
latures, Conventions,  Societies,  etc.  (1875); 
O.  M.  Wilson,  Digest  of  Parliamentary  Law 
(1869)  ; G.  T.  Fish,  American  Manual  of  Par- 
liamentary Law  ( 1880 ) . A.  N.  Holcombe. 

RULES  OF  STATE  LEGISLATURES.  The 

general  principle  in  states  as  in  Congress  is 
that  each  house  shall  make  rules  for  the  con- 
duct of  its  own  business;  but  the  state  legis- 
latures are  much  hedged  about  by  constitution- 
al provisions  intended  to  secure  deliberation, 
publicity  and  the  right  of  the  minority  to  be 
heard.  Most  states,  for  example,  provide  that 
the  subject  of  each  bill  shall  be  clearly  set 
forth  in  its  title;  and  that  no  bill  shall  be 
passed  till  after  a report  of  a committee. 
Similar  prescriptions  are  the  reading  of  bills 


in  full;  reading  on  several  different  days;  the 
call  of  ayes  and  nays  by  a stated  number  or 
proportion  of  the  members.  Precautions  are 
taken  to  be  sure  that  a bill  which  goes  upon 
the  statute  book  has  actually  passed  through 
both  houses  in  the  form  in  which  it  is  finally 
printed. 

Nevertheless  a large  field  for  local  discretion 
is  left,  and  codes  of  rules  grow  up  which  are 
perpetuated  from  year  to  year,  by  the  practice 
of  each  new  house  adopting  the  rules  of  the 
preceding  house  till  otherwise  ordered.  The 
rules  are  commonly  printed  in  a handbook,  to- 
gether with  other  information. 

All  American  legislative  bodies  except  the 
federal  Senate  have  a powerful  presiding 
officer:  the  speaker  in  the  lower  house  (in- 
variably chosen  by  that  house)  ; and  a presi- 
dent chosen  in  the  upper  house,  except  where 
the  lieutenant-governor  is  ex  officio  presiding 
officer  of  the  senate.  The  speaker  always,  and 
the  presiding  officer  of  the  senate  usually, 
appoints  the  committees.  In  most  legislatures 
the  rules  permit  the  committees  to  smother 
legislation  simply  by  failing  to  report  upon 
it.  The  chairmen  of  committees  are  apt  to 
exercise  their  own  discretion  about  calling 
committees  together  upon  critical  business. 

The  rules  are,  like  those  of  Congress,  an 
elaborate  and  complicated  code  nominally  in- 
tended to  provide  for  keeping  order,  giving 
members  a fair  chance  of  debate,  and  bringing 
up  for  decision  those  questions  in  which  the 
house  is  most  interested.  They  include  usually 
a limitation  on  the  length  or  number  of 
speeches  by  members,  and  provide  for  the  pre- 
vious question.  Under  this  system  the  speaker 
of  the  lower  house  has  practically  a veto  on 
all  bills  presented,  and  a combination  of  the 
chairmen  of  the  principal  committees  can  also 
hang  up  legislation.  Where  there  is  a state 
boss  of  the  party  dominant  in  a legislature,  he 
takes  part  and  decides  which  questions  shall  or 
shall  not  be  pressed;  but  his  hand,  and  that 
of  the  legislature  can  be  forced  in  many  cases 
by  a determined  governor,  who  appeals  to  the 
people  to  put  a pressure  on  their  legislature. 

The  rules  of  legislative  bodies  can  be  sus- 
pended by  an  easy  process,  such  as  a two- 
thirds  vote  of  members  present,  and  that 
method  is  adopted  for  rushing  legislation 
through  in  the  last  hours  of  a session.  In 
addition  the  rules  of  the  house  and  the  con- 
stitutional provisions  as  to  the  reading  of 
bills  and  other  details  can  be,  and  frequently 
are,  set  aside  by  the  principle  of  unanimous 
consent.  By  that  choice  it  is  assumed,  unless 
some  member  objects,  that  a quorum  is 
present;  that  a vote  has  been  taken;  that  a 
bill  has  been  read  in  full ; that  the  text  has 
been  perfected.  A combination  of  members 
who  despair  otherwise  of  passing  bills  in  which 
they  are  interested  (often  meritorious  bills)  is 
formed  to  discourage  any  objection  to  any 
one  of  a group  of  pending  measures. 


240 


RUM,  ROMANISM  AND  REBELLION-RURAL  DIVISIONS,  MINOR 


Rules  are  frequently  revised;  sometimes  to 
make  them  clearer,  quite  as  often  in  order  to 
give  larger  power  to  the  few  men  inside  the 
legislative  machinery  who  understand  and  con- 
trol it. 

See  Committee  System  in  the  United 
States;  Debates  in  Legislatures;  Expul- 
sion of  Members;  Filibustering  in  Legis- 
lation; Investigations,  Legislative;  Legis- 
lation; Legislature  and  Legislative  Re- 
form; Order  of  Business;  Reports  of  Com- 
mittees; State  Legislature. 

References:  P.  S.  Reinsch,  Am.  Legislatures 
(1907),  chs.  iv-vi;  F.  J.  Stimson,  Fed.  and 
State  Constitutions  (1908),  §§  300-304. 

A.  B.  Hart. 

RUM,  ROMANISM  AND  REBELLION.  A 

phrase  characterizing  the  Democratic  party, 
used  by  Rev.  Samuel  D.  Burcliard,  spokesman 
of  a delegation  of  Protestant  clergymen,  Oc- 
tober 30,  1884,  in  an  address  in  New  York 
City,  to  James  G.  Blaine  (see),  Republican 
presidential  candidate.  The  alliteration  was 
immediately  used  with  great  effect  by  Demo- 
crats to  win  back  the  Irish  supporters  from 
Mr.  Blaine.  0.  C.  H. 

RURAL  DISTRICT  COUNCIL.  By  the  Lo- 

cal Government  Act  of  1894  (57  and  58  Vic- 
toria, C.  73)  such  portions  of  each  English 
county  as  were  not  comprised  within  boroughs 
or  urban  districts  ( see  Local  Government  in 
England)  were  organized  into  rural  dis- 

tricts. These  rural  districts  are  made  up  of 
groups  of  parishes  (see  Parish  Council  in 
England)  and  are  usually  coterminous 

with  the  poor  law  unions  (see  Poor  Law 
Guardians  in  England).  There  are  at 
present  675  rural  districts  in  England  and 
Wales.  The  administrative  organ  of  the  rural 
district  is  an  unpaid  council,  the  size  of  which 
is  fixed  by  the  authorities  of  the  county,  and 
the  members  of  which  are  elected  for  a three- 
year  term,  one  third  retiring  annually  unless 
the  county  council  allows  the  whole  member- 
ship to  retire  every  third  year.  The  qualifi- 
cations for  voting  are  the  same  as  in  urban 
districts  (see  Ltrban  District  Council),  and 
women  are  eligible  to  election  as  rural  district 
councillors.  The  rural  district  council  has 
powers  which  relate  chiefly  to  highways  and 
sanitation;  but  its  authority  in  these  fields  is 
somewhat  more  restricted  than  that  of  the 
urban  district  council.  In  the  matter  of  high- 
ways it  exercises  jurisdiction  over  subsidiary 
roads  only;  main  thoroughfares  are  under  the 
control  of  the  county  council.  The  rural  dis- 
trict council  has,  however,  jurisdiction  over 
both  main  and  subsidiary  drainage;  it  has 
charge  of  rural  hospitals;  and  it  is  entrusted 
with  the  care  of  the  local  water  supply.  Some 
of  its  duties  may  be,  and  frequently  are,  dele- 
gated to  the  parish  councils  (see  Parish 
Council).  The  council  levies  no  special 


rate.  General  expenses  are  defrayed  out  of 
the  proceeds  of  the  poor  rate  (see  Poor  Law 
Guardians)  and  expenses  which  are  properly 
chargeable  to  individual  parishes  are  levied 
upon  them.  Rural  district  administration  is 
closely  supervised  by  the  County  Council  and 
the  Local  Government  Board.  By  concurrent 
action  of  these  two  authorities  a rural  dis- 
trict may  be  converted  into  an  urban  district 
and  the  jurisdiction  of  its  council  thereby 
augmented.  See  Districts,  Rural,  Adminis- 
trative; Local  Government  in  England; 
Villages.  References:  J.  Redlicli  and  F.  W. 
Hirst,  Local  Government  in  England  (1903), 
II,  119-144;  Robert  Donald,  Municipal  Year 
Book  of  the  United  Kingdom  (1910),  353-372; 
Local  Government  Board,  Annual  Reports. 

W.  B.  Munro. 

RURAL  DIVISIONS,  MINOR.  Counties  in 
the  southern  and  far  western  states  and  towns 
and  townships  in  the  north  Atlantic  and  north 
central  states  are  divided  into  smaller  dis- 
tricts for  special  purposes  of  local  administra- 
tion, such  as  schools,  roads,  elections  and  petty 
justice.  In  most  states,  school  districts,  are 
regularly  incorporated,  with  their  own  power 
of  taxation;  these  and  often  other  unincorpo- 
rated districts  elect  local  officials;  but  some 
districts  are  purely  administrative  subdivisions 
of  the  larger  areas.  In  southern  and  far  west- 
ern states  county  districts  are  generally  larg- 
er than  the  subdistricts  of  towns  or  town- 
ships in  other  states;  and  to  some  extent  take 
the  place  of  a system  of  township  government. 

School  Districts. — The  subdivision  of  towns 
and  townships  into  petty  school  districts  was 
formerly  the  general  rule  in  the  north  Atlantic 
and  north  central  states.  The  more  recent 
tendency  has  been  to  make  the  town  the  pri- 
mary unit  for  school  administration;  but  in 
Connecticut,  Rhode  Island,  New  York,  Michi- 
gan, Illinois,  Kansas  and  Nebraska  small 
school  districts  still  prevail;  and  in  Wisconsin, 
Minnesota,  and  North  and  South  Dakota  a 
school  district  may  be  either  an  entire  town- 
ship or  a subdivision  of  a township. 

In  the  southern  and  far  western  states,  coun- 
ties are  regularly  divided  into  school  districts ; 
and  in  most  cases  these  districts  are  distinct 
municipal  corporations.  But  in  the  southern 
states  bordering  on  the  Atlantic  and  in  Louis- 
iana, the  district  officers  are  appointed  by  the 
county  school  officials ; and  in  some  of  the  far 
western  states  (Colorado  and  California) 
school  taxes  are  levied  by  the  county  boards. 

Road  Districts. — Country  roads  in  the  United 
States  have  for  the  most  part  been  constructed 
and  repaired  by  a labor  or  poll  tax,  under  the 
direction  of  overseers  of  road  districts  into 
which  the  towns  and  counties  have  been  di- 
vided. These  district  overseers  have  often 
been  elected  by  the  road  districts;  but  with 
increased  attention  to  the  building  of  im- 
proved roads  the  tendency  is  to  use  larger 


241 


RURAL  FREE  DELIVERY— RUSSELL,  WILLIAM  EUSTIS 


areas.  In  most  of  the  north  Atlantic  and 
north  central  states  local  road  officials  are 
usually  town  officers,  in  some  states  district 
overseers  being  appointed  by  the  town;  and  in 
many  of  those  states,  the  more  important  roads 
are  now  looked  after  by  county  and  state  offi- 
cers. In  the  southern  and  far  western  states, 
district  road  officers  are  usually  appointed  by 
county  officials;  but  in  Idaho  and  Washing- 
ton road  overseers  are  elected  in  each  district. 

Judicial  Districts. — In  the  southern  and  far 
western  states  counties  are  regularly  divided 
into  districts  for  the  election  of  justices  of  the 
peace;  and  in  some  states  these  are  also  the 
districts  for  electing  members  of  the  county 
boards.  In  Virginia,  West  Virginia  and  Ken- 
tucky, districts  are  called  magisterial  districts ; 
in  Tennessee,  civil  districts;  in  California, 
judicial  townships. 

These  judicial  districts  are  sometimes  used 
as  election  precincts;  but  in  some  states  elec- 
tion precincts  are  separately  established.  Some 
of  the  large  towns  and  townships  of  the  north 
Atlantic  and  north  central  states  are  divided 
into  election  precincts,  usually  where  there 
are  two  or  more  villages  in  the  same  town. 

Rural  Districts  for  Other  Purposes. — These 
are  sometimes  established  in  particular  locali- 
ties, for  carrying  out  public  works  which  affect 
several  of  the  regular  local  districts.  Such 
are  drainage  districts  in  Illinois,  and  levee 
districts  in  the  southern  Mississippi  Valley 
states. 

See  Borough;  Districts,  Rural,  Adminis- 
trative; Finance,  Local  Systems  of;  Hun- 
dred; Riding;  School  District;  Villages, 
Incorporated. 

Reference:  J.  A.  Fairlie,  Government  in 
Counties,  Towns  and  Villages  (1906),  ch.  x. 

John  A.  Fairlie. 

RURAL  FREE  DELIVERY.  The  establish- 
ment of  a comprehensive  system  for  the  free 
delivery  of  mail  in  rural  districts  constitutes 
one  of  the  latest  and  most  important  efforts 
to  increase  the  facilities  and  extend  the  bene- 
fits of  the  postal  service.  Free  delivery  in  the 
cities  was  begun  in  1863  and  now  prevails  in 
all,  or  practically  all,  cities  and  towns  having 
postal  receipts  of  not  less  than  $10,000  annual- 
ly and  meeting  certain  other  conditions  in 
respect  to  paved  sidewalks  and  numbered 
houses.  Rural  free  delivery,  after  numerous 
experiments,  was  definitely  established  in  1902. 
The  system  was  begun  in  a small  way  but  has 
been  rapidly  extended  until,  according  to  the 
report  of  the  Postmaster  General  for  1910, 
this  service  had,  on  June  30  of  that  year,  in 
operation  on  41,079  routes,  required  the  serv- 
ices of  40,997  carriers  and  entailed  expend- 
itures during  the  preceding  year  of  $36,844,- 
965.61.  The  Postmaster  General  reports  that, 
next  to  the  low  postage  rate  on  second  class 
mail,  this  service  is  responsible  for  the  princi- 
pal inroad  into  the  profits  of  the  postal 


system.  He  adds,  however,  that  this  expense 
is  justifiable  on  account  of  the  undoubted 
services  rendered.  The  establishment  of 
routes  is  wholly  within  the  discretion  of  the 
Postmaster  General.  Action  is  usually  taken 
upon  application  made  to  him  by  persons 
interested  or  by  the  local  postmaster.  Such 
application  must  be  supported  by  a petition 
signed  by  at  least  150  persons  representing  at 
least  75  per  cent  of  the  families  living  on  the 
proposed  route.  The  rural  carriers  are  select- 
ed through  the  Civil  Service  Commission.  See 
Parcel  Post;  Postal  System  of  the  United 
States.  Reference:  U.  S.  Postmaster  General, 
Annual  Reports,  Official  Postal  Guide  (an- 
nual). W.  F.  Willoughby. 

RURAL  POLICE.  See  Police,  Rural. 

RUSH,  BENJAMIN.  Benjamin  Rush  (1745- 
1813)  was  born  at  Byberry,  Pa.,  December  24, 
1745.  He  studied  medicine  at  Philadelphia, 
and  in  1768  graduated  in  medicine  at  the 
University  of  Edinburgh.  He  returned  to  the 
United  States  in  1769  and  settled  at  Philadel- 
phia, eventually  taking  the  highest  rank  in  his 
profession.  He  took  an  active  part  in  the 
early  Revolutionary  movements,  was  a member 
of  the  provisional  congress  of  Pennsylvania, 
and  in  1775-76  surgeon  to  the  Pennsylvania 
navy.  In  July,  1776,  he  was  elected  to  Con- 
gress, and  signed  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence. In  1777  he  was  appointed  surgeon- 
general,  and  shortly  physician-general,  of  the 
middle  department,  and  saw  active  service,  but 
resigned  in  1778  on  account  of  some  difference 
with  Washington,  and  as  a protest  against  the 
management  of  hospital  stores.  He  interested 
himself  in  the  establishment  of  public  schools, 
and,  in  1783,  of  Dickinson  College.  He  was  a 
member  of  the  convention  that  ratified  the  Fed- 
eral Constitution  in  1787,  and  of  the  state  con- 
stitutional convention.  In  1790  he  succeeded 
Franklin  as  president  of  the  Pennsylvania  So- 
ciety for  the  Abolition  of  Slavery.  From  1799 
until  his  death  he  was  treasurer  of  the  United 
States  mint.  He  died  at  Philadelphia,  April 
19,  1813.  References:  “Excerpts  from  the  Pa- 
pers of  Dr.  Benjamin  Rush”  in  Penn.  Mag.  of 
Hist,  and  Biography,  XXIX  (1905)  ; M.  Far- 
rand,  Records  of  the  Federal  Convention 
(1911)  ; J.  T.  Scharf  and  T.  Westcott,  Hist,  of 
Philadelphia  (1884).  W.  MacD. 

RUSSELL,  WILLIAM  EUSTIS.  William  E. 
Russell  (1857-1896)  was  born  at  Cambridge, 
Massachusetts,  January  6,  1857.  In  1880  he 
was  admitted  to  the  bar,  and  the  next  year 
began  his  political  life  as  a member  of  the 
Cambridge  common  council,  going  on  in  1883- 
84  to  membership  in  the  board  of  aldermen. 
From  1885  to  1888  he  was  mayor  of  Cambridge. 
In  1888  and  1889  he  was  the  Democratic  can- 
didate for  governor,  but  was  defeated.  He  was 
elected  governor  in  1891,  however,  and  served 


242 


RUSSIA,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS  WITH 


three  years  with  marked  independence  and 
popularity,  taking  rank  as  one  of  the  ablest 
young  Democrats  in  the  country.  In  1894  he 
was  appointed  a member  of  the  United  States 
board  of  Indian  commissioners.  He  strongly 
opposed  the  free  silver  movement,  and  in  the 
Democratic  national  convention  of  1896  did  his 
utmost  to  secure  the  insertion  of  a gold  plank 
in  the  platform.  He  died  suddenly  at  Little 
Palos,  Quebec,  July  16,  1S96.  See  Democratic 
Party.  References:  C.  E.  Norton,  “Public 
Life  and  Service  of  William  E.  Russell”  in 
Harvard  Graduates?  Mag.,  V (1896),  177-194; 
C.  T.  Russell,  Jr.,  Speeches  and  Addresses  of 
'William  E.  Russell  (1894).  W.  MacD. 

RUSSIA,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS 
WITH.  Traditional  Friendship.— The  relations 
between  the  United  States  and  Russia  have 
been  in  the  main  cordial,  but  not  intimate; 
the  two  countries  have  had  little  to  hope  or 
fear  from  one  another;  their  mutual  interest 
has  been  platonic.  During  the  American  Revo- 
lution, the  Empress  Catherine  II  happened 
just  then  to  be  on  bad  terms  with  England, 
but  she  had  no  sympathy  with  rebels,  and 
let  the  first  American  envoy,  Francis  Dana, 
cool  his  heels  for  two  years  in  St.  Petersburg 
without  granting  him  an  audience.  Alexander 
I on  a number  of  occasions  showed  himself 
more  friendly,  and  he  exchanged  several  let- 
ters with  Thomas  Jefferson. 

The  progress  of  Russian  colonization  along 
the  northwestern  coast  of  North  America,  and 
particularly  the  edict  of  September  7,  1821, 
proclaiming  Russian  dominion  over  the  north 
Pacific,  excited  alarm  at  Washington,  which 
took  the  form  of  a vigorous  protest  and  was 
one  of  the  causes  that  led  to  the  enunciation 
of  the  Monroe  Doctrine  (see).  The  conventions 
of  1824  and  1825,  by  which  Russia  gave  up 
further  territorial  extension  in  this  region, 
may  be  attributed,  however,  to  English  rather 
than  to  American  opposition. 

The  abandonment  of  later  attempts  at  set- 
tlement in  Hawaii  and  at  Fort  Ross  in  Califor- 
nia removed  further  possible  sources  of  friction ; 
and,  by  the  sale  of  all  her  American  territory 
in  1867  Russia  withdrew  definitely  from  the 
western  hemisphere  (see  Alaska,  Annexa- 
tion of).  She  was  not  in  a position  where  she 
could  hope  to  defend  such  distant  possessions 
against  serious  attack,  or  to  develop  their 
resources  for  a long  time  to  come. 

For  a generation  after  the  Civil  War  the  re- 
lations between  Russia  and  the  United  States 
were  characterized  by  a friendship  that  became 
traditional.  From  the  beginning  of  the  strug- 
gle, Russia  adopted  an  attitude  of  unequivo- 
cal friendliness  towards  the  North.  Her  de- 
spatch of  a fleet  into  American  waters  in  1863, 
though  not,  necessarily,  with  the  determina- 
tion of  rendering  aid  in  case  of  need,  was  none 
the  less,  a significant  demonstration  of  good 
will.  Congress  recognized  this  good  will  by 


sending  Gustavus  V.  Fox  on  a special  embassy 
to  St.  Petersburg  in  1866,  to  congratulate 
Alexander  II  on  his  escape  from  an  attempt 
at  assassination. 

Treatment  of  Subjects. — In  the  last  decade 
of  the  nineteenth  century  American  sentiment 
towards  the  Russian  government,  underwent  a 
gradual  change.  The  harshness  of  the  Siberian 
exile  system,  the  increasingly  reactionary 
spirit  of  the  authorities,  the  severity  of  treat- 
ment, not  to  say  the  persecution,  of  the  Baltic 
Province  Germans,  the  Poles,  the  Finns,  and 
above  all  of  the  Jews  in  the  empire  was  sharply 
condemned  by  liberal  opinion  all  over  the  world 
(see  Jewish  Questions  in  Diplomacy). 
The  immigration  of  great  numbers  of  these 
people  into  the  United  States,  bringing  witli 
them  the  tale  of  their  woes,  affected  American 
public  opinion  as  did  the  growing  and  anti- 
Russian  influence  of  the  Jews  in  the  American 
press.  In  1903  the  massacre  of  Kishinev  led 
to  the  unusual  step  of  an  official  inquiry  from 
Washington  whether  the  government  at  St. 
Petersburg  would  consent  to  receive  a petition 
from  the  American  Jews.  This  was  of  course 
refused,  but,  by  the  publicity  thus  given  to  the 
whole  matter,  Secretary  Hay  accomplished  his 
object. 

Manchuria. — The  first  serious  divergence  of 
interests,  between  Russia  and  the  United  States 
was  brought  about  by  the  events  in  the  Far 
East.  The  threatened  break  up  of  China  elicit- 
ed from  Secretary  Hay  his  famous  circular  of 
September  6,  1899,  on  the  Open  Door  (sec) 
which,  though  received  with  qualified  assent 
at  St.  Petersburg,  was  regarded  as  being  in 
a great  measure  aimed  at  Russia.  Her  occupa- 
tion of  Manchuria  in  1900  did  not  appear  fav- 
orable to  American  trade  and  other  interests, 
for  by  this  time  she  too  had  become  a manu- 
facturing country  anxious  to  further  her  in- 
dustries and  ready  to  discriminate  in  their 
behalf  when  it  was  possible.  Although  these 
industries  were  not  yet,  save  in  the  exportation 
of  petroleum,  in  a position  to  compete  seriously 
with  those  of  America,  they  might  some  day, 
especially  if  favored  by  a tariff.  The  govern- 
ment at  Washington  therefore  politely  but  in- 
sistently reminded  St.  Petersburg  of  its 
promise  that  Marchuria  should  be  evacuated, 
with  the  result  of  keeping  the  question  open 
but  of  increasing  mutual  irritation. 

Japan. — When,  finally,  war  broke  out  be- 
tween Russia  and  Japan,  public  opinion  in  the 
United  States  expressed  itself  unmistakably  in 
favor  of  the  Japanese,  to  the  anger  and,  in- 
deed, to  the  astonishment  of  many  Russians 
who  remembered  the  former  traditions  of 
friendship  and  had  not  realized  how  much 
these  had  been  weakened  by  recent  events. 
Throughout  the  struggle  the  Americans  ap- 
plauded the  Japanese  victories,  and  the  ad- 
ministration at  Washington  sometimes  adopted 
a sharp  tone  with  St.  Petersburg  in  discussing 
questions  of  neutrality.  It  is  true  that 


243 


RUTLEDGE,  JOHN 


the  war  itself  was  never  popular  in  Russia, 
least  of  all  among  the  liberals,  and  the  bit- 
terness against  the  United  States  was  soon 
softened  by  the  successful  effort  of  President 
Roosevelt  to  bring  about  peace  between  the 
combatants. 

On  their  side,  the  Americans,  as  their  en- 
thusiasm about  Japan  cooled  down,  began  to 
take  a kindlier  view  of  the  Russians  whom 
they  no  longer  regarded  as  their  chief  rivals, 
not  to  say  opponents,  in  the  Far  East.  They 
sympathized  warmly  with  the  reform  and  even 
with  the  revolutionary  movements  of  the  next 
two  years  in  Russia,  although  they  were 
shocked  at  some  of  the  accompanying  excesses. 
For  the  most  part  they  condemned  the  con- 
servative reaction  that  followed,  but  were  not 
keenly  interested  in  Russian  internal  affairs. 

Causes  of  Friction. — Of  late,  also,  though 
there  has  been  no  open  clash  between  the  two 
countries  their  policies  in  the  Far  East 
have  again  been  divergent.  The  effect  of 
America’s  continued  interest  in  Manchuria, 
and  particularly  the  propositions  to  interna- 
tionalize the  railways  there  and  to  build  a new 
line  from  Chunghow  to  Aigun,  have  been  in- 
terpreted by  the  Russians  as  an  attempt  to 
oust  them  from  the  region.  This  has,  accord- 
ingly, led  them  to  draw  closer  to  Japan,  though 
Russian  liberals  would  have  preferred  an  agree- 
ment with  the  United  States.  The  Chinese 
revolution  of  1911,  by  endangering  the  integri- 
ty of  that  empire,  tends  to  facilitate  an  en- 
croachment on  the  part  of  Russia  in  Manchuria 
and  Mongolia  which  it  has  been  the  policy 
of  the  United  States  to  prevent  if  possible.  The 
note  of  Secretary  Knox  of  February  3,  1912, 
would  seem  to  be  chiefly  directed  at  Russia. 
In  another  part  of  Asia,  in  Persia,  though  most 
Americans  did  not  feel  that  their  government 
could  interfere  in  behalf  of  Commissioner  Shus- 
ter when,  in  1911,  he  came  into  conflict  with 
the  Russians  there  and  was  forced  by  them  to 
leave  the  country,  nevertheless  the  incident 
was  not  of  a nature  to  promote  good  feeling 
between  Washington  and  St.  Petersburg. 

American  Jews. — More  serious  still  is  the 
dispute  about  the  non-admission  of  American 
Jews  into  the  Russian  empire,  a quarrel  which 
after  simmering  for  many  years  led  finally  to 
the  abrogation  by  President  Taft  of  the  Rus- 
sian-American  commercial  treaty  of  1832. 
Russia  has  never  officially  abandoned  the 
theory  of  perpetual  allegiance  and  has  dis- 
liked permitting  naturalized  American  citizens 
who  were  born  her  subjects  to  return  even 
for  a short  visit  to  their  former  homes.  There 
have  been  many  discussions  between  the  two 
countries  on  this  point.  Also  Russia,  like  the 
United  States,  though  not  adopting  the  same 


standards,  has  claimed  and  exercised  the  right 
of  excluding  from  her  dominions  such  foreign- 
ers as  she  chooses.  The  issue  is  not  one  on 
which  the  two  disputants  are  at  all  likely  to 
come  to  blows,  but  it  is  not  one  that  lends 
itself  well  to  arbitration  or  is  easy  to  settle 
by  compromise;  nor  is  there  much  prospect 
that  either  party  will  soon  recede  from  its 
position.  In  1914  no  progress  had  been  made 
towards  the  drafting  of  another  treaty. 

See  Alaska,  Annexation  of;  Commercial 
Policy  of  the  United  States;  Jewish  Ques- 
tions if  Diplomacy;  Near  East;  Open  Door; 
Protection  to  American  Citizens  Abroad. 

References:  A.  C.  Coolidge,  U.  8.  as  a World 
Power  (1908),  eh.  xii;  J.  C.  Hildt,  Early  Dip- 
lomatic Negotiations  of  the  U.  8.  and  Russia 
(1908);  Henry  Bonfils,  Droit  International 
Public  (1898),  § 441;  Cong.  Record,  62  Cong., 
2 Sess.,  493  et  seq.  (Senate  debate  on  abrogation 
of  the  Treaty  of  1832)  ; J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of 
Int.  Law  (1906),  I,  891,  908,  II,  887,  III,  622, 
IV,  615,  V,  312,  842,  1004,  VI,  7. 

A.  C.  Coolidge. 

RUTLEDGE,  JOHN.  John  Rutledge  was 
born  in  Charleston,  S.  C.,  1739,  and  died  July 
23,  1800.  At  the  time  of  the  Stamp  Act  Con- 
gress, he  was  a noted  lawyer  in  his  native 
city  and  was  chosen  a delegate  to  that  Con- 
gress. In  New  York,  as  at  home,  he  fearlessly 
advocated  resistance  to  oppression  and  colonial 
union.  Largely  through  his  influence,  the 
South  Carolina  delegates  to  the  first  Contin- 
ental Congress  were  sent  without  definite  in- 
structions. In  that  assembly,  he  was  recog- 
nized for  his  ability  as  an  orator.  He  was 
chairman  of  the  committee  which  drafted  a 
constitution  for  South  Carolina  in  1776  and 
was  during  the  same  year  elected  governor. 
When  Charleston  was  captured  in  1780,  he 
joined  the  army  of  General  Greene.  In  1782, 
having  resigned  the  office  of  governor,  he  re- 
entered Congress.  As  a member  of  the  Federal 
Convention,  he  favored  the  assumption  of  state 
debts  by  the  national  government;  opposed  the 
prohibition  of  the  slave  trade  and  had  especial 
influence  on  the  plan  for  the  judiciary.  When 
the  new  government  was  organized  he  was 
nominated  one  of  the  judges  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  but  preferred  to  accept  the  office  of 
chief  justice  of  South  Carolina.  He  was  ap- 
pointed Chief  Justice  of  the  federal  Supreme 
Court  in  1795,  he  presided  at  one  session,  but 
the  Senate  rejected  the  nomination  when  it 
was  found  that  his  mental  powers  were  weak- 
ened. See  Continental  Congress;  Federal 
Convention;  South  Carolina.  Reference: 
Edward  McCready,  Hist,  of  South  Carolina 
(1901).  J.  A.  J. 


244 


SAFE  DEPOSIT  COMPANIES— ST.  LOUIS 


S 


SAFE  DEPOSIT  COMPANIES.  With  the 
growth  of  corporations  and  the  consequent  is- 
sue of  securities — stocks  and  bonds — held  by 
private  individuals,  there  has  been  an  increas- 
ing need  of  places  in  which  the  securities  may 
be  safely  kept.  As  national  banks  under  the 
limited  powers  granted  by  the  national  bank 
act  cannot  engage  in  this  business,  other  forms 
of  financial  institutions  have  undertaken  it. 
Companies  have  been  organized  with  this  sole 
object  in  view,  but  more  frequently  in  recent 
years  trust  companies  have  established  depart- 
ments with  safety  deposit  vaults  for  this  serv- 
ice. Valuables  of  all  kinds  are  received  and 
cared  for.  See  Trust  Companies.  Reference: 
A.  K.  Fiske,  Modem  Bank  (1905),  25J-260. 

D.  R.  D. 

ST.  CLAIR,  ARTHUR.  Arthur  St.  Clair 
( 1734 — 1818 ) was  born  at  Thurso,  Scotland,  in 
1734.  In  1757  he  entered  the  British  army, 
and  served  under  Amherst  at  Louisburg  in 
1758,  and  under  Wolfe  at  Quebec  in  1759.  In 
1762  he  resigned  his  commission,  and  in  1764 
settled  in  Pennsylvania.  In  the  course  of  the 
next  ten  years  he  held  a number  of  local  offices. 
In  July,  1775,  he  was  commissioned  a colonel 
in  the  American  army,  and  in  1776  served  with 
Sullivan’s  Canadian  expedition.  The  same  year 
he  was  made  brigadier-general,  served  under 
Washington  in  New  Jersey,  and  the  next  year, 
with  the  rank  of  major-general,  succeeded 
Gates  in  command  of  Ticonderoga.  On  the 
approach  of  Burgoyne  he  evacuated  the  fort 
without  attempt  at  resistance,  but  a court- 
martial  in  1778  acquitted  him  of  blame.  He 
remained  in  more  or  less  active  service  through- 
out the  war,  but  held  no  important  command. 
In  1783  he  became  a member  of  the  Pennsyl- 
vania council  of  censors,  and  from  1785  to 
1787  was  a delegate  in  Congress,  and  in  1787 
president  of  that  body.  In  1789  he  was  ap- 
pointed governor  of  the  Northwest  Territory, 
which  office  he  held  until  1802;  but  his  dis- 
astrous defeat  by  the  Indians,  November  4, 
1791,  was  a blow  to  his  military  reputation 
from  which  he  never  recovered.  He  quarreled 
with  the  people  of  the  territory  and  was  finally 
removed  by  Jefferson  in  1802.  He  died  at 
Greensburg,  Pa.,  August  31,  1818.  See 
Northwest  Territory.  References:  W.  H. 
Smith,  St.  Clair  Papers;  Life  and  Public 
Services  of  Arthur  St.  Clair  (1882)  ; 
J.  Burnet,  Early  Settlement  of  the  North- 
western Territory  (1847)  ; B.  A.  Hinsdale, 
Old  Northwest  (2d  ed.,  1899).  W.  MacD. 


ST.  LOUIS.  Establishment;  Charters. — St. 

Louis  was  settled  in  February,  1764.  It  was 
incorporated  November  9,  1809,  and  continued 
as  a town  until  December  9,  1822,  when  it  was 
incorporated  as  a city.  The  charter  granted 
in  1822  was  amended  by  the  legislature  in  1831, 
1833  and  1835.  In  the  latter  year  there  was 
created  a council  consisting  of  two  branches 
“the  aldermen  and  delegates.”  In  1859  the 
two-house  plan  was  abolished  and  a council 
consisting  of  two  members  from  each  of  the 
ten  wards  was  created,  which  continued  to  be 
the  legislative  body  until  1876  when  the  city 
and  county,  acting  under  authority  of  sections 
20  to  25  inclusive  of  Article  ix  of  the  consti- 
tution of  Missouri  of  1875,  adopted  “the  Scheme 
for  the  separation  of  the  Governments  of  St. 
Louis  City  and  County,”  reorganized  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  county  and  adjusted  the  rela- 
tions between  the  city  and  county  making  them 
independent  of  each  other,  greatly  enlarging 
the  territorial  limits  of  the  city.  Thus  St.  Louis 
became  what  is  unique  in  American  municipal 
government,  a separate  and  distinct  political 
division  of  the  state.  A board  of  thirteen 
freeholders  was  elected  who  submitted  to  the 
qualified  voters  of  the  city  a special  charter 
which,  with  amendments,  is  the  present  or- 
ganic law  of  St.  Louis,  subject,  however,  to 
the  laws  and  constitution  of  the  state. 

Character  of  Charters  (1875). — The  charter 
was  drafted  at  a time  when  the  attention  of 
the  whole  country  had  been  arrested  by  the 
shameful  and  extravagant  expenditure  of  pub- 
lic money,  and  the  reckless,  not  to  say  criminal, 
conduct  of  public  affairs,  and  the  then  condi- 
tion of  the  country  is  faithfully  reflected  in  the 
charter.  It  is  essentially  an  instrument  of 
“checks  and  balances,”  of  “appointment  and 
approval,”  of  “commission  and  confirmation,” 
and  it  can  be  broadly  stated  that  there  is  not 
an  important  act  to  be  performed  by  any  of- 
ficial that  does  not  require  the  approval  of 
some  other  official  to  make  that  act  opera- 
tive. The  charter  provided  for  a general 
election  to  be  held  on  the  first  Tuesday 
of  April,  1877,  and  every  four  years  there- 
after, divided  the  city  into  twenty-eight 
wards,  the  boundaries  of  which  can  only 
be  changed  at  intervals  of  five  years  by  the 
municipal  assembly,  created  the  municipal  as- 
sembly composed  of  a council  consisting  of 
twelve  members  and  a president  elected  at 
large  for  a term  of  four  years,  and  a house  of 
delegates  consisting  of  one  member  from  each 
ward  elected  for  two  years  by  the  voters  of  the 


SALARIES  OF  PUBLIC  OFFICIALS 


several  wards.  All  legislative  power  is  vested 
in  the  assembly  with  the  right  of  veto  power 
in  the  mayor.  The  assembly  is  also  vested  with 
the  power  “to  assess,  levy  and  collect  all  taxes 
for  general  and  special  purposes,”  “to  borrow 
and  appropriate  money,”  but  is  limited  in  its 
appropriations  to  the  taxes  collected  during 
any  one  fiscal  year,  “to  pass  all  such  ordi- 
nances, not  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of 
the  charter  or  the  laws  of  the  State,”  and  the 
council  may  remove  any  elected  officer  by 
a two-thirds  vote  of  all  the  members.  The 
charter  provides  for  the  election  of  the  fol- 
lowing officers,  all  of  whom  are  elected  for  .a 
term  of  four  years,  viz.:  mayor,  comptroller, 
auditor,  treasurer,  register,  inspector  of 
weights  and  measures,  marshal,  president  of 
board  of  public  improvements  and  president  of 
board  of  assessors,  and  also  the  following  of- 
ficers who,  by  virtue  of  legislative  enactment 
perform  state  as  well  as  city  functions,  col- 
lector, recorder  of  deeds,  sheriff,  coroner,  pub- 
lic administrator,  and  license  collector. 

Mayor. — The  mayor,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
third  year  of  his  term,  subject  to  confirmation 
by  the  council,  appoints  a large  number  of 
officers  “who  shall  hold  their  office  for  four 
years”:  Among  them  city  counsellor  and  as- 
sistants, ten  district  assessors,  health  com- 
missioner, five  members  of  the  hospital  board, 
superintendent  of  fire  and  police  telegraph, 
commissioner  of  supplies.  He  also  appoints  the 
following  commissioners  who  are  designated 
the  heads  of  their  several  departments,  viz. : 
a street  commissioner,  a sewer  commissioner, 
a harbor  and  wharf  commissioner,  a park  com- 
missioner, a water  commissioner,  who,  together 
with  the  president  of  the  board  of  public  im- 
provements, constitute  the  board  of  public  im- 
provements. The  mayor  is  charged  w’ith  execu- 
tive and  administrative  duties,  has  a general 
supervisory  control  of  the  city  and  all  depart- 
ments of  the  city  government.  Appointments 
made  by  heads  of  departments  are  subject  to 
his  approval,  and  he  can  remove  any  appoin- 
tive officer  or  subordinate  “for  cause.” 

Boards. — The  board  of  public  improvements 
has  executive  and  administrative  powers,  and 
the  president  of  the  board  has  general  super- 
vision over  the  departments  of  the  other  com- 
missioners constituting  the  board  of  public  im- 
provements. All  ordinances  for  the  prosecu- 
tion of  public  work  and  improvements  must 
originate  with  the  board,  the  Assembly  being 
prohibited  from  amending  such  ordinances  in 
any  way,  having  the  right,  however,  either  to 
adopt  or  reject  them. 

The  charter  provides  in  detail  for  a sinking 
fund  which  must  always  be  kept  separate  and 
distinct  from  other  funds;  provides  that  no 
salary  shall  exceed  the  sum  of  $5,000.00,  cre- 
ates a board  of  equalization  composed  of  the 
president  of  the  board  of  assessors  and  four 
members  appointed  by  the  judges  of  the  cir- 
cuit court  of  the  city  of  St.  Louis,  which  board 


has  power  “to  adjust,  correct  and  equalize  the 
valuation  of  all  property  in  the  city,”  provides 
for  the  payment  of  a metropolitan  system  of 
police  created  by  legislative  enactment.  The 
control  and  management  of  the  force  is  lodged 
in  a board  of  police  commissioners  composed 
of  five  members,  four  of  whom  are  appointed 
by  the  governor,  the  Mayor  being  ex  officio  a 
member. 

In  1893  the  legislature  created  the  office  of 
excise  commissioner  who  is  appointed  by  the 
governor,  and  who  has  arbitrary  power  in  the 
issuing  and  revoking  of  dram-shop  licenses. 

In  1895  the  Board  of  Election  Commissioners 
was  created. 

The  legislature  in  1897  created  the  board  of 
education,  which  is  a municipal  corporation 
separate  and  distinct  from  the  city  of  St. 
Louis  and  has  complete  control  of  the  public 
school  system  of  the  city. 

A board  of  freeholders  was  elected  in  April, 

1909,  to  draft  and  submit  a new  charter,  and 
after  eighteen  months  submitted  in  December, 

1910,  a charter  which  provided  for  a single 
house  of  legislation,  a limited  referendum,  re- 
call of  officials  after  two  years,  civil  service 
and  a consolidation  of  many  departments  which 
experience  had  demonstrated  should  be  con- 
solidated. This  charter  was  defeated  in  Jan- 
uary, 1911.  In  April,  1913,  a new  board  of  free- 
holders was  elected  to  prepare  and  submit  a 
charter,  which  board  has  not  yet  made  any  re- 
port. 

See  Charters,  Municipal;  Municipal  Gov- 
ernment. 

References:  D.  F.  Wilcox,  Great  Cities  in 
America  (1910),  308-345;  W.  F.  Woerner, 
Revised  Code  of  St.  Louis  (1907)  ; Proposed 
Charter  of  City  of  St.  Louis  (1910). 

Samuel  B.  McPheeters. 

SALARIES  OF  PUBLIC  OFFICIALS.  The 

term  salary  is  frequently,  although  incorrectly, 
applied  to  all  forms  of  financial  compensation 
provided  by  the  public  for  an  official ; but 
strictly  speaking,  a salary  should  be  distin- 
guished from  a per  diem  allowance  and  frcm 
fees.  A salary  is  a stated  sum  fixed  by  law 
to  be  paid  to  a public  officer  in  compensation 
for  his  services.  Acceptance  of  office  does  not 
in  itself  entitle  the  officer  to  compensation, 
for  public  service  is  not  necessarily  paid.  But 
if  the  law  attaches  a salary  to  an  office,  ac- 
ceptance of  that  office  entitles  the  holder  to 
whatever  compensation  is  provided.  Compen- 
sation may  be  in  the  form  of  a fixed  annual 
salary,  a per  diem  allowance,  or  fees  ( see  Fees 
and  Fee  System).  When  the  duties  of  an 
officer  are  reasonably  constant,  a salary  is  the 
fairest  means  of  remuneration  both  for  the  of- 
ficer and  for  the  public;  but  when  the  de- 
mands made  upon  him  vary  widely  at  different 
times,  a per  diem  allowance  or  a system  of 
fees  by  which  the  remuneration  is  propor- 
tioned to  the  work  involved  is  the  more  equit- 


246 


SALARIES,  TABLES  OF 


able.  The  Constitution  provides  that  the  Pres- 
ident, the  members  of  Congress  and  the  judges 
of  the  federal  courts  shall  receive  a compen- 
sation for  their  services,  but  under  different 
conditions.  The  President’s  compensation  may 
be  neither  increased  nor  diminished  during  the 
term  for  which  he  was  elected;  the  judges’ 
compensation  may  not  be  diminished  during 
their  continuance  in  office,  while  as  to  the  in- 
crease or  reduction  of  the  compensation  of 
members  of  Congress,  the  Constitution  is  silent 
(Art.  I,  Sec.  VI,  U 1,  2,  II,  Sec.  I,  If  7,  III, 
K 1).  The  latter  however  may  not  accept  any 
civil  office  which  has  been  created  or  the  emolu- 
ments of  which  have  been  increased  during  the 
term  for  which  they  were  elected.  A similar 
provision  is  found  in  the  laws  of  most  of  the 
states. 

In  many  countries  a large  part  of  the  work 
of  government  is  carried  on  by  officials  who 
are  not  paid.  Members  of  the  British  Parlia- 
ment served  without  pay ; but  a recent  act 
provides  for  the  payment  of  salaries  to  mem- 
bers of  the  Commons.  In  the  United  States 
payment  of  officers  is  almost  universal.  A few 
boards  such  as  the  federal  board  of  Indian 
Commissioners  and  the  school  boards  in  some 
cities  are  the  most  conspicuous  exceptions. 
While  payment  is  so  general,  the  amount  paid 
to  those  officials  upon  whom  the  greatest  re- 
sponsibilities are  placed  and  in  whom  the  great- 
est ability  is  required  is  notoriously  inade- 
quate, as  plainly  appears  when  compared  with 
the  amounts  paid  similar  officials  in  other  coun- 
tries or  earned  by  the  same  persons  when  in 
private  employment.  The  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  for  instance,  should  be  a financier  of 
repute  in  whose  judgment  the  great  business 
interests  can  have  confidence,  for  his  decisions 
may  have  far-reaching  effects  upon  the  credit 
of  the  government  and  the  commerce  of  the 
country.  He  is  paid  $12,000  annually.  The 
British  chancellor  of  the  exchequer  receives 
twice  that  amount,  an  official  residence,  and  a 
pension,  and  several  American  bank  presidents 
receive  salaries  six  or  eight  times  as  large  as 
that  of  the  head  of  the  Treasury  Department. 
The  salaries  of  the  federal  judges  present  an 
even  wider  discrepancy  as  compared  with  their 
earning  power  at  the  bar.  In  the  states  the 
meagreness  of  the  compensation  paid  the  mosb 


important  officials  is  glaiing.  The  earnings  of 
a bookkeeper  or  a salesman  are  larger  than 
the  salaries  of  several  of  the  governors.  As 
late  as  1897  the  people  of  the  rich  state  of 
Michigan  voted  that  $800  was  sufficient  com- 
pensation for  their  attorney  general. 

But  if  the  scale  of  salaries  of  the  most  re- 
sponsible officers  is  niggardly,  that  of  subordi- 
nate employees  is  extravagantly  generous.  The 
compensation  of  the  unskilled  laborers  and 
clerks  in  the  service  of  the  Federal  Government 
and  in  that  of  many  of  the  states  is  far  greater 
than  the  same  persons  could  earn  in  private 
employment,  and  the  number  of  such  persons  is 
so  great  that  the  total  charge  to  the  public  is 
enormous.  The  government  expends  enough 
money  in  salaries  to  command  the  services  of 
men  of  eminent  ability  in  all  responsible  posts, 
at  the  same  time  paying  adequate  salaries  to 
persons  in  merely  clerical  positions.  In  general 
it  has  been  able  to  enlist  the  services  of  able 
men,  but  they  have  often  accepted  office  at  a 
sacrifice,  and  unless  they  were  men  of  wealth, 
they  were  obliged  to  retire  after  a few  years. 
It  is  a matter  of  common  knowledge  that  cer- 
tain posts  especially  in  the  diplomatic  service 
entail  expenses  so  much  in  excess  of  the  salary 
paid  that  they  can  be  accepted  only  by  men  of 
wealth.  A recent  Secretary  of  State  who  did 
not  maintain  an  elaborate  establishment  said 
that  his  four  years  in  office  cost  him  $40,000 
in  excess  of  the  salary  which  he  received. 

There  is  a general  drift  toward  higher 
salaries,  but  the  people  still  regard  increases 
of  salary  with  suspicion.  It  is  a conspicuous 
fact  that  salaries  fixed  by  legislatures  are  high- 
er than  those  fixed  by  the  people  in  their  con- 
stitutions. Constitutional  amendments  pro- 
viding for  salary  increases  encounter  much  op- 
position and  are  quite  likely  to  be  defeated. 
In  the  decade  1899-1908,  31  such  amendments 
were  submitted,  24  of  which  were  rejected. 

See  Cost  of  Government  in  the  United 
States;  Expenditures,  Federal;  Expendi- 
tures, State  and  Local;  Fees  and  Fee 
System. 

References:  S.  E.  Baldwin,  Modern  Political 
Institutions  (1898),  eh.  xi;  Congressional  Rec- 
ord, XLII,  Pt.  6,  5575;  J.  Bryce,  American 
Commonwealth  (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  195-197. 

Lawrence  B.  Evans. 


SALARIES,  TABLES  OF 


National  Government:  Executive. — President 
of  the  United  States,  $75,000;  Vice-President, 
$12,000;  Secretary  to  the  President,  $6,000 
(statutory;  since  1911,  $7,500,  by  special 
appropriations  of  Congress). 

Department  of  State:  Secretary  of  State, 
$12,000;  Assistant  Secretary,  $5,000;  Second 
Assistant  Secretary,  $4,500;  Third  Assistant 


Secretary,  $4,500;  Resident  Diplomatic  Officer, 
$7,500;  Counselor,  $7,500;  Solicitor,  $5,000; 
Ambassadors  (10),  $17,500;  Ministers  (32), 
$3,500  to  $12,000;  Consuls  (303),  $2,000  to 
$12,000. 

Treasury  Department : Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  $12,000;  Assistant  Secretaries  (3), 
$5,000;  Treasurer  of  the  United  States,  $8,000; 


247 


SALARIES,  TABLES  OF 


Assistant  Treasurers,  Subtreasuries,  $4,300 
to  $8,000;  Comptroller  of  the  Treasury,  .$6,000; 
Comptroller  of  the  Currency,  $12,000;  Register 
of  the  Treasury,  $4,000;  Auditors  (6),  $4,000 
to  $5,000;  Supervising  Architect,  $5,000;  Chief, 
Secret  Service  Division,  $4,000;  Director  of 
Bureau  of  Engraving  and  Printing,  $6,000; 
Director  of  the  Mint,  $5,000;  Superintendent, 
Assay  Offices,  $5,000;  Commissioner,  Internal 
Revenue,  $6,000;  Collectors  of  Internal  Rev- 
enues (63),  from  $3,000  to  $4,500;  Collectors 
of  Customs,  from  $4,000  to  $12,000;  Superin- 
tendent, Life  Saving  Service,  $4,500;  Surgeon 
General,  Public  Health  Service,  $6,000;  Fed- 
eral Reserve  Board  (5),  $12,000. 

War  Department-.  Secretary  of  War,  $12,- 
000;  Assistant  Secretary,  $5,000;  Superinten- 
dent, United  States  Military  Academy,  $8,000; 
Lieutenant  General,  active,  $11,000,  retired, 
$8,250;  Major  General,  active,  $8,000,  re- 

tired, $6,000;  Brigadier  General,  active,  $6,- 
000  retired,  $4,500;  Colonel,  active,  $4,- 
000,  retired,  $3,000;  Lieutenant  Colonel,  ac- 
tive, $3,500,  retired,  $2,625;  Major,  active, 
$3,500,  retired,  $2,625 ; Major,  active, 

$3,000,  retired,  $2,250;  Captain,  active, 

$2,400,  retired,  $1,800;  First  Lieutenant, 

active,  $2,000,  retired,  $1,500;  Second 

Lieutenant,  active,  $1,700,  retired,  $1,275. 
Pay  of  officers  of  the  rank  of  colonel  and  under 
may  be  increased  through  length  of  service. 

Navy  Department : Secretary  of  the  Navy, 
$12,000;  Assistant  Secretary,  $5,000;  Admiral, 
$13,500;  Rear  Admiral,  1st  nine,  $8,000,  2nd 
nine,  $6,000;  Captain,  $4,000;  Commander, 
$3,500;  Lieutenant  Commander,  $3,000;  Lieu- 
tenant, $2,400;  Lieutenant,  junior  grade, 
$2,000;  Ensign,  $1,700.  “All  officers  on  sea 
duty  and  all  officers  on  shore  duty  beyond  the 
continental  limits  of  the  United  States  shall 
while  so  serving  receive  10  per  centum 
additional  of  their  salaries  and  increases 
as  above  provided”  (Act  of  May  13,  1908) 
“When  an  officer  of  the  Navy  has  been 
thirty  years  in  the  service  he  may  upon 
his  own  application,  in  the  discretion  of 
the  President,  be  retired  from  active  service 
and  placed  upon  the  retired  list  with  three- 
fourths  of  the  highest  pay  of  his  grade”  (Act 
of  May  13,  1908). 

Department  of  Justice-.  Attorney  General, 
$12,000;  Solicitor  General,  $10,000;  Assistant 
to  the  Attorney  General,  $7,000;  Assistant  At- 
torney General,  Customs  Division,  $8,000;  As- 
sistant Attorneys  General  (7),  $5,000;  Solici- 
tor of  the  Treasury,  $5,000;  Solicitor,  Dept. 
Commerce  and  Labor,  $5,000;  Solicitor  of  In- 
ternal Revenue,  $5,000;  District  Attorneys 
(86),  $2,000  to  $10,000;  U.  S.  Marshals  (86), 
$2,000  to  $5,000. 

Postoffice  Department : Postmaster  General, 
$12,000;  Assistant  Postmasters  General  (4), 
$5,000;  Purchasing  Agent,  $4,000;  Chief  In- 
spector, $4,000;  Postmasters  in  cities  of  over 
500,000  inhabitants,  $6,000  to  $8,000. 


Department  of  the  Interior : Secretary  of  the 
Interior,  $12,000;  First  Assistant  Secretary, 
$5,000;  Assistant  Secretary,  $4,500;  Commis- 
sioner of  the  (General)  Land  Office,  $5,000; 
Commissioner,  Indian  Affairs,  $5,000;  Commis- 
sioner of  Patents,  $5,000;  Commissioner  of 
Pensions,  $5,000;  Commissioner  of  Education, 
$5,000;  Director  of  Geological  Survey,  $6,000; 
Director,  Reclamation  Service,  $7,500 ; Chief 
Engineer,  Reclamation  Service,  $6,000;  Super- 
intendent of  the  Capitol,  $6,000;  Director, 
Bureau  of  Mines,  $6,000. 

Department  of  Agriculture : Secretary  of 
Agriculture,  $12,000;  Assistant  Secretary, 
$5,000;  Solicitor,  $5,000;  Chief  of  the  Weather 
Bureau,  $6,000;  Forester,  $5,000;  Director  of 
Experiment  Stations,  $4,500;  Chiefs  of  Bureaus 
(6),  $3,000  to  $5,000. 

Department  of  Commerce:  Secretary  of 
Commerce,  $12,000;  Assistant  Secretary,  $5,- 
000;  Chief,  Bureau  of  Foreign  and  Domestic 
Commerce,  $4,000;  Commissioner  of  Corpora- 
tions, $5,000;  Director  of  the  Census,  $7,000; 
Superintendent  Coast  and  Geodetic  Survey, 
$6,000 ; Inspector  General  of  Steamboat  Serv- 
ice, $4,000;  Commissioner  of  Fisheries,  $6,000; 
Commissioner  of  Navigation,  $4,000;  Director 
of  Bureau  of  Standards,  $6,000. 

Department  of  Labor:  Secretary  of  Labor, 
$12,000;  Assistant  Secretary,  $5,000;  Commis- 
sioner of  Labor  Statistics,  $5,000;  Commission- 
er General  of  Immigration,  $5,000;  Commis- 
sioners of  Immigration  (9),  $3,000  to  $6,500; 
Commissioners  of  Labor  Statistics,  $5,000; 
Chief,  Children’s  Bureau,  $5,000. 

Legislative. — - Senate:  Senators,  $7,500;  Ser- 
geant at  Arms,  $6,500 ; Secretary  of  Senate, 
$6,500;  Assistant  Secretary,  $5,000;  Clerk  to 
Committee  on  Appropriations,  $5,000;  Official 
Reporters  of  Debates  (6),  $5,000. 

House  of  Representatives:  Speaker,  $12,000; 
Representatives,  $7,500;  Sergeant  at  Arms, 
$6,500;  Clerk  of  the  House,  $6,500;  Clerk  to 
Committee  on  Appropriations,  $5,000 ; Post- 
master, $4,000;  Doorkeeper,  $5,000;  Cashier, 
$3,400;  Official  Reporters  and  Stenographers 
(10),  $5,000. 

Judiciary.—  Supreme  Court:  Chief  Justice, 
$15,000;  Associate  Justices  (8),  $14,500; 
Clerk,  $6,000;  Reporter,  $4,500;  Marshall, 
$4,500. 

Circuit  Court  of  Appeals:  Circuit  Judges 
(29),  $7,000;  Clerks  (9),  $3,500. 

District  Court:  Judges  (93),  $6,000;  4 in 
Alaska,  $7,500. 

Court  of  Claims:  Chief  Justice,  $6,500; 
Judges  (4),  $6,000;  Clerk.  $3,500. 

Court  of  Customs  Appeal:  Presiding  Judge, 
$7,000;  Associate  Judges  (4),  $7,000;  Clerk, 
$3,500. 

Independent  Commissions  and  Boards. — In- 
terstate Commerce  Commissioners  (7),  $10,- 
000;  Secretary  of  the  Commission,  $5,000; 
Solicitor,  $5,000;  Statistician  $5,000;  Chief  of 
Division  of  Tariffs,  $5,000;  President,  Civil 


248 


SALARY  GRAB— SALVADOR 


Service  Commission,  $4,500;  Civil  Service  Com- 
missioners (2),  $4,000;  Librarian,  Library  of 
Congress,  $6,000;  Register  of  Copyrights, 
$4,000;  Public  Printer,  $5,500;  Superintendent 
of  Documents,  $3,500. 

Territories  and  Dependencies. — The  Philip- 
pine Islands:  The  Governor  General,  $20,000; 
Commissioners  (8),  $7,500  to  $15,500. 

Porto  Rico:  Governor,  $8,000;  Treasurer, 
$5,000;  Secretary,  Auditor,  Commissioners  of 
Interior  and  of  Education,  Director  of  Health, 
Charities  and  Corrections,  each  $4,000. 

Isthmian  Canal  Zone:  Chairman  of  Commis- 
sion, $15,000;  Commissioners  (6),  $14,000; 
Chief  Quartermaster,  $10,000;  Subsistence  Of- 
ficer, $7,500;  Disbursing  Officer,  $7,200;  Ex- 
aminer of  Accounts,  $6,000;  Chief  Justice,  Su- 
preme Court,  $6,500;  Associate  Justices,  Su- 
preme Court,  $6,000. 

District  of  Columbia:  Commissioners  (3), 
$5,000;  Assessor,  Auditor,  Collector  of  Taxes, 
Health  Officer,  Superintendent  of  Police,  each, 
$4,000;  Chief  Justice,  Court  of  Appeal,  $7,500; 
Associate  Justices,  Court  of  Appeals,  $7,000; 
Chief  Justice  and  Associate  Justices  of  Su- 
preme Court  (6),  $6,000. 

Alaska:  Governor,  $7,000;  Secretary,  $4,000. 

Hawaii:  Governor,  $7,000;  Secretary,  $4,000. 

Governors  of  States. — The  salaries  of  gov- 
ernors run  from  $2,500  to  $12,000;  they  are 
as  follows: 


..  $5,000 

Nebraska  

. 2,500 

Arizona  

4,000 

Nevada  . - — 

4,000 

Arkansas  — - 

...  4,000 

New  Hampshire.. 

3,000 

California  - 

10,000 

New  Jersey  

10,000 

5,000 

5,000 

Connecticut 

....  4.000 

New  York  

10,000 

Delaware  

...  4,000 

North  Carolina  — 

5,000 

Florida  

. - 5,000 

North  Dakota 

5,000 

Georgia 

5,000 

Ohio  

10,000 

Idaho  

.—  5,000 

Oklahoma 

4,500 

Illinois 

....  12.000 

Oregon  

5,000 

Indiana 

....  8,000 

Pennsylvania  

10,000 

Iowa  

....  5,000 

Rhode  Island 

3,000 

Kansas  

..  . 5,000 

South  Carolina  .. 

3.000 

Kentucky 

....  6,500 

South  Dakota 

3,000 

5 non 

Tennessee  

4,000 

Maine  _ _ 

3,000 

Texas 

4,000 

Maryland  . 

....  4.500 

Utah  . . 

4,000 

Massachusetts  . 

....  8,000 

Vermont 

2,500 

Michigan  . .. 

....  5,000 

Virginia  . 

5,000 

Minnesota  

.—  7,000 

Washington  

6,000 

Mississippi 

.—  4,500 

West  Virginia  ... 

5,000 

Missouri 

„ 5,000 

5 000 

Montana 

. — 5,000 

Wyoming  

LOGO 

Lawrence  B.  Evans. 


SALARY  GRAB.  By  an  act  of  March  3, 
1873,  Congress  voted  an  increase  in  the  salary 
of  the  President,  Vice-President,  members  of 
the  Cabinet,  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
Speaker  of  the  House,  and  members  of  Con- 
gress. It  raised  the  salary  of  congressmen 
from  $5,000  to  $7,500.  In  the  case  of  the  other 
officers,  the  law  was  to  go  into  effect  on  and 
after  March  4,  1873 ; but  it  was  made  to  apply 
to  the  members  of  Congress  passing  the  meas- 
ure, who  thus  voted  themselves  retroactively 
$5,000  each.  The  same  retroactive  method  had 
been  followed  on  former  occasions,  when  con- 
gressional salaries  were  raised  (1816;  1818; 


1856;  1866)  ; but  the  “salary  grab”  or  “back 
pay  steal”  caused  much  indignation  in  the 
country.  Many  members  returned  to  tiie 
treasury  the  increased  pay,  and  in  1874  the 
bill  as  far  as  it  applied  to  congressmen  was 
repealed.  References:  Statutes  at  Large,  XVII 
(1873),  486;  J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  U.  S., 
VII  (1906),  20-21;  W.  A.  Dunning,  Recon- 
struction (1907),  233-235.  A.  C.  McL. 

SALT  LICKS  AND  LANDS.  National  lands 
containing  salines  have  long  been  subject  to 
special  legislation.  In  1796  all  sections  con- 
taining salt  springs  were  reserved  from  sale, 
and  from  1802  to  1894,  most  of  the  western 
states  received  some  or  all  their  salt  lands  on 
their  admission.  Thus  606,045  acres  were 
granted  to  thirteen  states.  Other  saline  lands 
within  their  limits  were,  after  1877,  open  to 
sale  at  $1.25  an  acre  minimum.  The  New 
Mexico  grant  of  1898  was  revoked  in  1910  and 
other  lands  substituted.  Saline  lands  were 
never  subject  to  preemption  or  homestead  en- 
try, and  since  1901  have  been  sold  as  mineral 
land.  See  Public  Lands,  Reservation  of. 
Reference:  Thomas  Donaldson,  Public  Domain 
(1884),  217-8,  696,  1247.  P.  J.  T. 

SALT  RIVER.  A mythical  political  stream 
up  which  a defeated  candidate  is  .said  to  have 
gone.  The  phrase  is  said  to  have  originated 
from  Salt  River,  a turbulent  tributary  of  the 
Ohio  river  on  the  Kentucky  side  up  which  rob- 
bers rowed  their  plunder  in  the  early  days  of 
American  expansion.  O.  C.  H. 

SALVADOR.  Salvador  (El  Salvador)  orig- 
inally part  of  the  captain  generalcy  of  Guate- 
mala, later  of  the  viceroyalty  of  New  Spain, 
declared  with  Central  America  (see)  indepen- 
dence from  Spain  in  1821,  and  withdrew  from 
that  confederation  in  1841.  The  republic  lies 
between  latitude  13°  12'  and  14°  28'  north, 
and  longitude  87°  37'  and  90°  6'  west  (Green- 
wich), with  an  area  of  7,225  square  miles,  the 
smallest  in  Latin  America,  and  a population 
of  1,707,000,  or  236  per  square  mile,  making 
it  the  most  thickly  populated  area  on  the  Amer- 
ican continents.  The  present  constitution 
(1886)  provides  for  a unicameral  legislative 
system,  the  chamber  of  deputies  ( Camara  de 
Diputados) , one  deputy  for  every  15,000  in- 
habitants, elected  by  popular  and  compulsory 
vote,  for  a term  of  only  one  year.  The  presi- 
dent and  vice-president  are  elected  by  popular 
vote  for  a term  of  four  years.  There  is  a 
cabinet  of  four  ministers;  of  foreign  affairs, 
justice  and  charities;  the  treasury  and  pub- 
lic credit;  interior,  promotion,  public  instruc- 
tion and  agriculture;  war  and  marine.  The  ju- 
dicial branch  is  a supreme  court  elected  by 
the  assembly  for  a term  of  two  years,  and  low- 
er courts.  The  republic  is  divided  politically 
into  14  departments,  something  like  territories. 
The  capital  is  the  city  of  San  Salvador.  State 


249 


SAMOA,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS  WITH— SAN  DOMINGO,  RELATIONS  WITH 


religion  is  Roman  Catholic.  Reference:  J.  I. 
Rodriguez,  Am.  Constitutions  (1905),  I,  259- 
298;  Pan  American  Union,  Bulletin.  A.  PI. 

SAMOA,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS  WITH. 

In  1878,  by  treaty  with  the  king  of  Samoa,  the 
United  States  obtained  permission  to  establish 
a naval  station  at  Pago-Pago.  The  following 
year  similar  privileges  in  other  ports  were 
granted  to  Great  Britain  and  Germany.  In 
1884,  the  German  consul  induced  the  king, 
Malietoa,  to  accept  a German-Samoan  council 
and  a German  adviser,  but  his  action  was  not 
sustained  because  of  a strong  protest  from  the 
United  States. 

In  1886,  the  American  consul,  in  compliance 
with  the  request  of  the  king,  declared  the  is- 
lands to  be  under  the  protection  of  the  Unit- 
ed States.  The  American  Government  dis- 
avowed this  action,  but  suggested  that  the 
British  and  German  ministers  at  Washington 
should  discuss  the  situation  with  the  Secre- 
tary of  State.  The  conference,  in  1887,  failed 
to  come  to  any  agreement.  Soon  thereafter 
Germany  drove  Malietoa  into  exile  and  ap- 
pointed another  king  under  a German  advisor. 
Armed  opposition  from  the  natives  followed, 
whereupon  the  President  ordered  Admiral  Kim- 
berly, who  was  in  command  of  the  American 
warships  then  in  Samoan  waters,  to  protest 
against  the  overthrow  of  the  native  govern- 
ment by  Germany. 

This  led,  in  1889,  to  an  Anglo-German- 
American  conference  at  Berlin,  which  estab- 
lished a joint  protectorate  over  the  islands. 
A commission  of  the  three  powers  sent  to  un- 
dertake the  government  found  such  a deplor- 
able condition  of  rivalry,  jealousy  and  civil 
war  that  it  was  deemed  best  to  partition  the 
islands.  Great  Britain  transferred  her  claims 
in  Samoa  to  Germany,  and  received  compensa- 
tion in  Africa  and  in  other  parts  of  the  Pacific; 
these  two  powers  then,  by  treaty,  December  2, 
1899,  renounced  in  favor  of  the  United  States 
all  of  their  rights  over  Tutuila  and  the  five 
other  southern  islands. 

See  Dependencies  of  the  United  States; 
Germany,  Diplomatic  Relations  with;  Pa- 
cific Islands. 

References:  J.  B.  Henderson,  Jr.,  Ain.  Dip- 
lomatic Questions  (1901),  205-286;  J.  W. 
Foster,  Am.  Diplomacy  in  the  Orient  (1903), 
ch.  xii;  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law,  I 
(1906),  536-554;  B.  Tripp,  My  Trip  to  Samoa 
(1911).  George  H.  Blakeslee. 

SANCTION  OF  THE  LAW.  In  a legal  sense, 
the  penalty,  punishment  or  other  method  pro- 
vided for  the  enforcement  of  obedience  to  the 
law.  In  jurisprudence,  the  term  denotes  that 
there  is  a sovereign  or  government  which  will 
intervene,  either  of  its  own  accord  or  when 
called  upon,  and  see  that  the  law  is  obeyed. 
The  potential  intervention  of  the  state,  then,  is 
the  sanction  of  the  law.  Thus  any  law  which 


commands  has  a sanction,  even  though  no  pen- 
alty or  punishment  is  expressly  provided.  On 
the  other  hand,  international  law  has  no  legal 
sanction,  for  there  is  no  sovereign  or  state  to 
enforce  it.  Reference:  T.  E.  Holland,  Ele- 
ments of  Jurisprudence  (9th  ed.,  1900),  22, 
29,  83.  H.  M.  B. 

SAN  DOMINGO,  DIPLOMATIC  RELA- 
TIONS WITH.  The  general  attitude  of  the 
United  States  toward  the  Dominican  Repub- 
lic prior  to  the  Civil  War  is  similar  to  that 
toward  Hayti  (see).  In  1861  the  Dominican 
Republic  was  overthrown  by  a force  of  Span- 
iards from  Cuba  and  the  Queen  of  Spain  was 
proclaimed.  Mr.  Seward  at  once  protested 
against  “the  assumption  or  exercise  of  Spanish 
authority”  in  the  island.  Owing  to  the  in- 
ability of  Spain  to  establish  order  and  the 
continued  opposition  of  the  inhabitants,  she 
abandoned  the  island  in  1865. 

During  the  winter  of  1866-1867  Mr.  Fred- 
erick W.  Seward,  Assistant  Secretary  of  State, 
and  Admiral  Porter  visited  San  Domingo  for 
the  purpose  of  securing  the  lease  of  Samana 
Bay  as  a naval  station.  Their  mission  was  not 
successful;  but  the  following  year  the  president 
of  the  Dominican  Republic  sent  an  agent  to 
Washington  proposing  annexation  and  request- 
ing the  United  States  to  occupy  Samana  Bay 
at  once.  In  his  annual  message  of  December 
8,  1868,  President  Johnson  advocated  the  an- 
nexation of  the  republic,  and  a joint  resolution 
to  that  effect  was  introduced  in  the  House, 
but  it  was  tabled  without  debate  by  a vote  of 
110  to  63. 

President  Grant  became  much  interested  in 
the  scheme  and  sent  one  of  his  private  secre- 
taries, General  Babcock,  to  the  island  in  1869 
to  report  on  the  condition  of  affairs.  Babcock 
negotiated  two  treaties,  one  for  the  annexation 
of  the  Dominican  Republic  and  the  other  for 
the  lease  of  Samana  Bay.  These  treaties  were 
submitted  to  the  Senate  in  January,  1S70, 
but  encountered  violent  opposition,  especially 
from  Sumner,  chairman  of  the  committee  on 
foreign  relations.  The  treaties  were  finally 
rejected  June  30  by  a vote  of  28  to  28,  two- 
thirds  being  necessary  to  ratify. 

Like  Hayti  the  Dominican  Republic  has  suf- 
fered from  frequent  revolutions.  After  the 
assassination  of  President  Heureux  in  1899  the 
finances  of  the  republic  fell  into  bad  shape, 
and  in  view  of  the  practical  bankruptcy  of 
the  government  certain  European  powers  inti- 
mated in  1904  that  unless  the  United  States 
would  take  charge  of  the  Dominican  customs 
and  guarantee  an  equitable  distribution  of  the 
revenue,  they  would  resort  to  measures  of 
coercion.  Accordingly  President  Roosevelt  con- 
cluded a protocol  with  San  Domingo  February 
4,  1905,  by  which  an  agent  appointed  by  the 
President  of  the  United  States  was  to  take 
charge  of  the  custom-houses  and  administer 
the  finances.  The  Senate  failed  to  ratify  this 


250 


SAN  FRANCISCO 


agreement  at  the  time,  but  President  Roose- 
velt persisted  in  his  course,  and  a revised 
treaty  was  finally  ratified  by  the  Senate  Feb- 
ruary 25,  1907.  Up  to  the  time  of  writing 
(1913)  American  financial  supervision  has 
worked  satisfactorily. 

See  Annexation,  Diplomatic  Principles 
of;  Monroe  Doctrine;  Protectorates. 

References:  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law 
(1906),  I,  163,  Y,  581,  VI,  509;  F.  Bancroft, 
William  H.  Seward  (1900),  II,  134,  157-159, 
486-489;  J.  H.  Latane,  America  as  a World 
Power  (1907),  279-281;  Foreign  Relations, 
1866,  I,  114^124,  1.895,  235-243,  397-401, 
1899,  242-255,  1907,  I,  307-360. 

John  H.  Latan£. 

SAN  FRANCISCO.  History.— When  the  in- 
flux of  gold  seekers  had  suddenly  replaced  the 
little  Mexican  town  of  San  Francisco  with  a 
flourishing  American  city,  the  first  legislature 
of  California  provided  it  on  April  15,  1850, 
with  the  familiar  American  scheme  of  city 
government  of  a mayor  and  a two  chamber 
council.  A second  charter,  extending  and 
making  more  definite  the  powers  of  the  city, 
followed  in  1851  and  a third  in  1855.  By  the 
Consolidation  Act  of  1856  a new  unit  of  local 
administration,  the  City  and  County  of  San 
Francisco  was  created.  Geographically  this 
unit  is  one  of  the  counties  of  the  state. 
Politically  it  is  a municipal  corporation,  except 
that  some  of  its  officers  for  example  the  district 
attorney,  sheriff  and  coroner,  are  for  certain 
purposes  county  officers.  This  act  provided  for 
a president  of  the  board  of  supervisors  en- 
dowed with  the  veto  power  and  most  of  the 
attributes  of  mayorship.  Seventeen  other 
executive  officers  were  elected  at  large,  seventy- 
two  by  wards,  and  the  legislative  power  was 
vested  in  a board  of  supervisors,  one  from 
each  of  twelve  wards.  While  specific  changes 
were  frequently  made  no  new  charter  was 
enacted  for  the  city  until  1880.  This  the 
supreme  court  promptly  abrogated  on  the 
ground  that  it  had  not  been  submitted  to  the 
people.  The  same  year  and  again  in  1883,  1887 
and  1895  charters  prepared  by  boards  of  free- 
holders were  defeated  at  the  polls.  Another 
prepared  in  1898  was  more  fortunate  and  went 
into  effect  on  January  1,  1900.  Substantially 
unamended  except  by  the  radical  work  of  the 
charter  convention  of  1910,  it  is  the  charter 
of  San  Francisco  today. 

Present  Charter. — The  principal  elective  of- 
ficers are:  eighteen  members  of  the  board  of 
supervisors  and  four  police  judges,  one  half 
of  whom  are  elected  for  four  year  terms  at 
each  biennial  city  election;  a mayor,  county 
clerk,  auditor,  district  attorney,  sheriff  and 
coroner  chosen  at  one  biennial  election  and  a 
tax  collector,  recorder,  city  attorney,  public 
administrator  and  treasurer  at  the  next,  all 
for  four  year  terms.  Up  to  1911  the  terms  of 
all  these  officers  except  justice  of  the  peace 
114 


were  two  years  and  they  were  all  elected  at 
the  same  time.  Aside  from  these  elective  au- 
thorities the  great  departments  of  city  adminis- 
tration are  in  charge  of  boards  appointed  by 
the  mayor,  the  members  of  which  generally 
serve  for  little  or  no  salary  and  in  turn 
select  the  personnel  of  the  active  professional 
service  below  them.  The  most  important  of 
these  boards  is  the  board  of  public  works.  Its 
members,  three  in  number,  are  appointed  for 
three  years,  one  retiring  each  year.  Subject 
to  the  ordinances  of  the  supervisors,  it  has 
jurisdiction  over  streets,  including  their  con- 
struction, cleaning,  lighting,  sprinkling,  ex- 
cavation and  repair,  the  construction  and 
maintenance  of  public  buildings,  sewers  and 
sewage  disposal,  the  collection  and  disposition 
of  garbage,  and  the  supervision  of  public  util- 
ities. It  appoints  the  city  engineers  and  heads 
of  the  numerous  departments  in  its  field.  In 
addition  to  these  powers,  street  improvements 
can  be  authorized  by  the  supervisors  only 
upon  its  recommendation.  The  board  of  police 
commissioners  consists  of  four  members  whose 
four  year  terms  expire  in  annual  rotation. 
They  not  only  appoint  the  chief  of  police  and 
the  other  members  of  that  department,  but  con- 
trol the  issuance  of  saloon  licenses.  An  exact- 
ly similar  board  administers  the  fire  depart- 
ment. The  department  of  health  is  directed 
by  an  .unpaid  board  of  seven  members,  i.  e., 
the  chief  of  police  and  the  president  of  the 
board  of  public  works  ex  officio  and  five 
physicians  named  by  the  mayor.  There  are 
five  election  commissioners,  whose  four  year 
terms  are  so  arranged  that  they  retire,  as 
near  as  may  be,  in  annual  rotation.  The 
park  board  consists  of  five  members  serving 
gratuitously,  one  of  whom  must  be  an  artist. 
Of  a slightly  different  character  are  the  board 
of  education  and  the  civil  service  commission. 
The  former  consists  of  four  school  directors,  ap- 
pointed by  the  mayor  for  four  years,  one  term 
expiring  each  year.  They  receive  a salary  of 
$4000  a year  and  must  give  their  full  time  to 
the  work  of  the  board.  In  this  case,  however, 
the  superintendent  of  schools,  who  should,  in 
the  natural  course  of  things,  be  their  subor- 
dinate, is  elected  by  the  people.  One  of  the 
three  members  of  the  civil  service  commission 
retires  each  year  and  its  function  is  the  famil- 
iar one  of  holding  examinations  and  certifying 
candidates  for  appointment. 

In  addition  to  the  considerable  appointing 
power  above  referred  to,  the  mayor  presides 
over  the  board  of  supervisors,  and  may  veto 
their  ordinances  which  require  fourteen  affirm- 
ative votes  to  become  law  without  his  approval. 
His  position  is  by  no  means  as  powerful,  rela- 
tively to  the  other  departments  of  the  city 
government  as  that  of  the  mayors  of  New  York 
or  Boston.  During  his  four  years  of  office  he 
can  change  the  whole  composition  of  any  of  the 
great  boards.  At  a given  moment,  however, 
his  control  of  them  is  very  incomplete. 


251 


SAXD  LOT— SANITARY  LAWS 


Public  Utilities  and  Municipal  Ownership. — 

Upon  application  for  a street  railway  or  elec- 
tric power  franchise,  notice  of  that  fact  with 
the  conditions  of  the  proposed  grant  are  ad- 
vertised and  the  franchise  awarded  to  the  ap- 
plicant offering  to  pay  the  highest  percentage 
of  gross  receipts  above  the  minimum  prescribed 
by  the  charter.  The  term  of  the  franchise  can- 
not exceed  twenty-five  years  at  the  expiration 
of  which  time  “the  roadtrack  and  bed  of  such 
railway  and  all  its  stationery  fixtures  upon 
the  public  streets  become  the  property  of  the 
city  and  county.”  A compulsory  referendum 
is  provided  on  all  “new  franchises  for  the  oper- 
ation of  any  public  utility  whose  franchise  has 
expired  or  is  about  to  expire.”  The  super- 
visors are  also  given  ample  power  to  regulate 
rates  and  the  character  of  service.  The  charter 
declares  it  to  be  the  intention  of  the  people  of 
San  Francisco  gradually  to  acquire  their  pub- 
lic utilities.  Propositions  to  this  end  may 
originate  with  the  supervisors  of  their  own 
volition  or  upon  the  petition  of  fifteen  per 
cent  of  the  qualified  electors.  The  mayor  may 
also  formulate  alternative  propositions.  These 
propositions  are  submitted  to  the  people.  If 
the  cost  can  be  met  from  current  revenue  a 
majority  vote  is  enough.  If  a bond  issue  is  in- 
volved, two-thirds  of  the  votes  cast  must  be  in 
the  affirmative.  Two  bond  issues  for  this  pur- 
pose have  been  voted  (both  in  1909),  one  for 
the  municipalization  of  the  Geary  Street  Rail- 
way, the  other  to  enable  the  city  to  carry  out 
the  vast  project  of  supplying  itself  with  water 
from  the  Hetch  Hetehy  valley.  The  municipal 
railway  has  been  successfully  operated  for  some 
years ; permission  to  impound  a water  supply 
in  Hetch  Hetehy  valley  was  obtained  from  the 
Federal  Government  only  in  1913. 

Amendments  of  1911.— The  amendments  of 
1911  provide  for  the  non-partisan  system  of 
nomination  and  election  made  familiar  by  the 
charters  of  Dallas  and  Berkeley.  Each  can- 
didate must  file  with  the  register  of  voters  a 
declaration  of  candidacy  supported  by  the 
sworn  certificates  of  not  less  than  ten  electors 
that  he  is  “fully  qualified”  for  the  office. 
This  is  sufficient  to  place  his  name  on  the  bal- 
lot at  the  first  or  primary  election  which 
takes  place  on  the  last  Tuesday  of  September. 
At  this  election  a majority  is  necessary  to 
elect.  If  no  one  receives  a majority,  the  con- 
test at  the  second  election  in  November  is 
confined  to  the  two  highest  on  the  primary  list. 
There  are  no  party  designations  on  the  ballot. 
The  names  of  the  candidates  for  each  office 
will  be  arranged  alphabetically  in  the  lowest 
numbered  assembly  district.  The  candidate 
last  named  in  that  district  will  head  the  list 
in  the  next  and  so  on  through  the  districts 
( see  Primary,  Direct). 

Ordinances  or  charter  amendments  may  be 
initiated  by  popular  petition  ( see  Iniative). 
If  the  proposition  is  to  be  submitted  to  a 


to  ten  per  cent,  if  to  a general  election,  four 
per  cent,  of  the  total  vote  for  mayor  at  the 
last  election  are  necessary.  The  referendum 
(see)  is  compulsory  on  measures  involving 
the  lease  or  sale  of  any  public  utility  or  the 
regranting  of  a franchise.  One  third  of  the 
supervisors  or  the  mayor  alone  may  refer  a 
measure  to  a general,  a majority  of  the  super- 
visors to  a special,  election.  Electors  to  the 
number  of  five  per  cent  of  the  last  mayoralty 
vote  can  force  a referendum  on  ordinances  au- 
thorizing the  lease  or  sale  of  lands  or  the 
purchase  of  lands  of  more  than  $50,000  value. 
The  measure  to  be  voted  on,  accompanied  by 
one  eight  page  argument  in  favor  and  as  many 
such  arguments  against  as  there  are  persons, 
committees  or  organizations  to  submit  them, 
must  be  sent  to  each  voter  at  the  public  ex- 
pense. The  recall  (see)  may  be  instituted 
against  any  elective  officer  by  a petition  of 
electors  equal  to  ten  per  cent  of  the  last  vote 
for  mayor.  At  the  resultant  election  the  in- 
cumbent is  ipso  facto  a candidate,  and  others 
are  nominated  and  the  election  conducted  in 
the  manner  described  above  for  regular  elec- 
tions, except  that  the  ballot  carries  three 
hundred  word  statements  for  and  against  the 
exercise  of  the  recall  in  the  particular  case. 
If  the  incumbent  is  reelected  he  is  reimbursed 
out  of  the  special  election  fund  for  all  his 
legitimate  expenses  and  double  the  number  of 
signatures  are  necessary  to  institute  a second 
recall  proceeding  against  him. 

See  Charters,  Municipal;  City  and  the 
State;  Municipal  Government  in  the  Unit- 
ed States. 

References:  W.  S.  Church,  Charter  of  San 
Francisco  Annotated  ( 1907 ) ; T.  H.  Reed, 
“Municipal  Home  Rule  in  California”  in  Nat. 
Municipal  Review,  Oct.,  1912;  B.  Moses,  “Es- 
tablishment of  Municipal  Government  in  San 
Francisco”  in  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.,  Studies, 
VII  (1889);  P.  V.  Long,  “Consolidated  City 
and  County  Government  of  San  Francisco”  in 
Amer.  Polit.  Sci.  Assn.,  Proceedings  ( 1912 ) . 

Thomas  H.  Reed. 

SAND  LOT.  A tract  of  vacant  land  in  cen- 
tral San  Francisco,  used  as  headquarters  for 
a time  by  Dennis  Kearney  where  he  addressed 
the  crowds  during  the  anti-Chinese  agitation 
1877-1889.  See  California;  Chinese  Immi- 
gration and  Exclusion;  Kearneyism. 

0.  C.  H. 

SANDWICH  ISLANDS.  See  Hawaii;  Ha- 
waiian Annexation. 

SANITARY  LAWS.  All  types  of  govern- 
ment in  the  United  States  have  authority  to 
deal  with  the  health  of  the  community  in  one 
way  or  in  another.  The  principal  fields  of 
legislation  so  far  are:  quarantine;  school  hy- 
giene; public  nursing  service;  inspection  and 
certification  of  food  and  drugs;  public  hos- 


special  election,  signatures  of  electors  equal 

252 


SASKATCHEWAN— SAVINGS  BANK  INSURANCE 


pitals;  nuisances;  tenement  houses;  garbage 
removal ; and  in  many  other  ways.  See  Abat- 
toirs; Baths,  Public;  Building  Laws;  Cem- 
eteries; Contagious  Diseases;  Dispensaries, 
Free;  Drainage;  Drugs,  Public  Regulation 
of;  Garbage  Removal;  Hospitals,  Public; 
Markets,  Regulation  of;  Meat  Inspection; 
Milk  Supply,  Regulation  of;  Nurses,  Dis- 
trict; Pure  Food;  Quarantine;  Water  Sup- 
ply. Reference:  see  under  Health,  Public, 
Regulation  of.  R.  C.  C. 

SASKATCHEWAN.  One  of  the  provinces 
of  western  Canada  (see)  created  September 
1,  1905,  by  act  of  the  Canadian  federal  Parlia- 
ment (4-5  Edward  VII,  C.  42).  It  comprises 
portions  of  what  were  formerly  the  organized 
territories  of  Saskatchewan  and  Assiniboia, 
together  with  some  hitherto  unorganized  north- 
west territory.  It  is  bounded  on  the  east 
by  the  province  of  Manitoba  and  the  district 
of  Keewatin;  on  the  north  by  the  district  of 
Mackenzie;  on  the  west  by  its  sister  province 
of  Alberta;  and  on  the  south  by  the  states  of 
Montana  and  North  Dakota.  It  has  an  area  of 
approximately  250,000  square  miles  and  in 
1911  its  population  was  officially  estimated  at 
492,432.  The  act  which  created  the  province 
of  Saskatchewan  gave  it  four  representatives 
in  the  Dominion  senate  and  in  the  year  fol- 
lowing it  was  alloted  a definite  quota  of  ten 
members  in  the  Dominion  house  of  commons. 
This  allotment  will  be  readjusted  and  in  all 
probability  increased  after  the  census  of  1911. 
The  provincial  government  consists  of  a lieu- 
tenant-governor appointed  for  a four-year  term 
by  the  governor  general  of  Canada,  an  execu- 
tive council  or  ministry  of  five  members,  and 
a single  elective  chamber  of  forty-one  members. 
All  official  acts  of  the  lieutenantvgovemor  must 
be  countersigned  by  a member  of  his  ministry, 
which  is,  in  turn,  responsible  to  the  legislative 
assembly.  In  general  the  relations  of  the  exe- 
cutive and  legislative  organs  of  provincial  gov- 
ernment, the  structure  and  functions  of  the 
judiciary,  and  the  organization  of  local  ad- 
ministration conform  to  that  of  the  other 
Canadian  provinces.  The  provincial  capital 
is  at  Regina.  See  Canadian  Provinces. 
References:  G.  M.  Adam,  The  Canadian  North- 
west (1885)  ; E.  B.  Osborne,  Greater  Canada 
(1900);  Beckles  Wilson,  The  Great  Company, 

( 1900 ) ; Canadian  Annual  Review  of  Public 
Affairs.  W.  B.  M. 

SATIRISTS,  POLITICAL.  Political  satirists 
have  always  played  a considerable  part  in 
English  politics  since  the  beginning  of  the 
Stuart  period.  They  also  appeared  in  colonial 
affairs,  as  in  the  quips  of  John  Joscelyn,  and 
the  acrid  complaints  of  John  Ward  “the  cob- 
ler  of  Agawams”  upon  the  Massachusetts  Bay 
government.  The  political  writing  of  the  Revo- 
lution was  fierce  and  polemical.  The  only 
genial  writer  of  that  period  was  Francis  Hop- 


kinson.  Cobbett  (“Peter  Porcupine”),  Calen- 
der and  Cooper,  were  types  of  the  personal 
journalist  of  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
century. 

The  first  writer  to  satirize  the  politics  of  his 
time  in  a good  natured  way  was  Washington 
Irving  in  his  Knickerbocker  History  of  New 
York.  Later  the  two  writers,  Seba  Smith,  and 
Charles  A.  Davis,  who  wrote  independently 
each  under  the  name  of  Jack  Downing,  were 
much  enjoyed  by  Andrew  Jackson,  especially 
when  they  satirized  the  Vice-President,  Van 
Buren. 

During  the  Civil  War,  “Artemus  Ward”  (C 
A.  Browne),  “Orpheus  C.  Kerr”  (R.  H.  New- 
ell) and  “Petroleum  V.  Nasby”  (D.  R.  Locke) 
attracted  popular  attention  by  their  comments 
on  public  affairs,  most  of  them  disguised  by 
impossible  spelling.  They  were  followed  by 
E.  L.  Godkin,  the  editor  of  the  Nation,  an 
unterrified  dissector  of  his  opponents  for  many 
years.  Since  1890  the  field  has  been  taken  by 
Wallace  Irwin,  chiefly  in  genial  and  amusing 
verse;  and  by  “Mr.  Dooley”  (F.  P.  Dunne), 
who  writes  trenchantly  on  political  and  social 
topics. 

Like  the  cartoonists,  the  satirists  have  been 
allowed  free  play.  By  the  short  lived  Sedition 
Act  of  1798  prosecutions  were  authorized 
against  those  who  sought  to  arouse  their 
readers  to  hatred  of  public  officials  or  of  their 
government.  A Pennsylvania  governor  from 
1903  to  1907  tried  to  secure  a law  for  the  pun- 
ishment of  those  who  too  much  assailed  or 
threw  ridicule  upon  public  officials.  No  state, 
however,  has  ever  passed  such  a regulatory  law, 
and  the  political  satirists  are  considered  to 
have  their  place  in  calling  popular  attention  to 
the  defects  »n  their  government,  and  the  de- 
ficiencies in  their  rulers. 

See  Alien  and  Sedition  Acts  ; Freedom 
of  Speech. 

References:  M.  C.  Tyler,  Hist,  of  Am.  Liter- 
ature during  the  Colonial  Time  (1897),  Liter- 
ary Hist,  of  the  Am.  Revolution  (1897);  R. 
Ogden,  Life  and  Letters  of  Edwin  Lawrence 
Godkin  (1907)  ; text  of  the  Sedition  Act  in 
Am.  Hist.  Leaflets,  No.  15  (1894).  A.  B.  H. 

SAVINGS  BANK  INSURANCE.  The  inge- 
nious plan  of  using  the  machinery  of  savings 
banks  for  insurance  and  annuities  owes  its 
origin  to  Mr.  L.  D.  Brandeis,  and  has  been 
tried  in  Massachusetts  (Acts  of  1907,  cli.  561) 
which  authorizes  any  savings  bank  to  estab- 
lish under  proper  safeguards  an  insurance  de- 
partment for  the  issue  to  residents  of  Massa- 
chusetts of  legal  reserve  life  insurance  limited 
to  $500,  and  annuities  limited  to  $200  a year 
on  any  one  life.  Persons  may  take  out  life 
insurance  and  annuities,  however,  in  more 
than  one  bank.  The  purpose  of  this  legislation 
is  to  give  wage-earners  an  opportunity  to 
secure  safe  life  insurance,  and  to  make  provi- 
sion for  their  old  age  by  the  purchase  of  an- 


253 


SAVINGS  BANKS— SCHOOL  DISTRICT 


nuities  out  of  current  earnings  at  the  lowest 
possible  cost.  This  is  to  be  accomplished  by 
(1)  eliminating  the  paid  solicitor  of  insur- 
ance and  the  collector  of  premiums  whose  serv- 
ices make  industrial  insurance  so  costly;  (2) 
eliminating  the  cost  of  actuarial  services  and 
general  medical  supervision,  by  requiring  the 
state  actuary  and  state  medical  director  to 
do  this  work  for  all  savings  insurance  banks 
without  charge  to  the  bank;  (3)  utilizing  the 
high  net  earning  capacity  of  savings  banks 
for  investing  funds;  (4)  substituting  for  the 
paid  solicitor  and  collector  numerous  unpaid 
agencies  through  which  applications  for  in- 
surance and  annuities  may  be  paid  and  at 
which  premiums  may  be  paid.  The  effect  of 
this  at  once  was  to  reduce  the  charges  for  in- 
dustrial insurance  made  by  private  companies. 
Four  banks  qualified  to  write  the  new  insur- 
ance, and  had  issued  in  the  year  ending  Oct. 
31,  1912,  2,590  policies  representing  $924,505 
of  insurance,  being  a net  gain  of  566  policies 
and  $562,099  of  insurance  for  the  year,  leav- 
ing a total  of  6,652  policies  and  $2,528,809  of 
insurance  in  force  in  all  four  banks  on  Oct. 
31,  1912.  See  Insurance  and  Social  Wel- 
fare; Insurance,  Industrial;  Old  Age  Pen- 
sions and  Insurance;  Workingmen’s  Insur- 
ance. References:  L.  D.  Brandeis,  “Massachu- 
setts Savings  Bank  Insurance  and  Pension 
System”  in  Am.  Statist.  Assoc.,  Publications, 
XI  (1908,  1909),  409;  S.  M.  Harrison,  “Mass- 
achusetts Scheme  of  Savings  Bank  Insurance” 
in  Survey,  XXIV  (1910),  237.  S.  McC.  L. 

SAVINGS  BANKS.  See  Banks,  Savings. 

SCAB.  “Scab”  is  the  term  the  members  of 
labor  unions  apply  to  non-union  workmen,  par- 
ticularly to  those  who  take  the  places  of  strik- 
ers. See  Boycotts;  Labor  Organizations; 
Picketing;  Strikes.  J.  R.  C. 

SCALAWAGS.  A term  opprobiously  ap- 
plied in  the  South  during  the  reconstruction 
(see)  period,  to  southern-born  men  who  joined 
with  the  “carpet-baggers”  (see)  to  control  the 
government  and  to  share  the  spoils  of  office  se- 
cured by  freedmen’s  votes.  0.  C.  H. 

SCHEDULE.  That  portion  of  a state  con- 
stitution which  is  intended  to  be  of  a tem- 
.porary  character,  marking  out  the  procedure 
to  be  followed  in  bringing  the  constitution  and 
the  government  which  is  provided  for  into  full 
being  and  effect.  Such  provisions  are  needful 
in  the  change  from  one  constitution  to  another 
or  when  a territory  is  being  established  as  a 
state  in  the  Pinion.  The  schedule  is  provided 
“that  no  inconvenience  may  arise  from  the 
adoption  of  this  constitution”  (Constitution  of 
Virginia,  1902)  or  “that  no  inconvenience  may 
arise  from  a change  of  the  territorial  govern- 
ment to  a permanent  State  government”  (Con- 
stitution of  Washington,  1889).  Among  other 


things  it  provides  for  the  continuation  and 
validity  of  laws  and  of  legal  processes  and 
rights.  See  Constitutions,  State. 

A.  C.  McL. 

SCHOOL  BOARDS.  See  Education,  Board 

OF. 

SCHOOL  BUILDINGS.  It  is  the  duty  of 

every  school  district  to  provide  adequate 
buildings  for  the  instruction  of  its  pupils. 
School  directors  or  trustees  can  rent  other 
buildings  in  which  to  conduct  a school  in  the 
absence  of  a regular  building.  School  houses 
are  usually  erected  upon  the  authorization  of 
the  voters  of  the  district,  while  their  main- 
tenance is  in  charge  of  the  proper  officials 
without  special  authority.  The  site  of  the 
building  in  some  instances  is  left  to  the  vote 
of  the  district  in  others  to  the  special  officers. 
Land  may  be  taken  from  a private  estate  with- 
out the  owner’s  consent  if  damages  are  paid 
therefor.  See  School  Finance;  School  Prop- 
erty. References:  F.  A.  Burke,  Treatise  on 
the  Law  of  Public  Schools  (1880),  154;  U.  S. 
Department  of  Education,  Reports  (1888- 
1889),  I,  579-87;  “Sites”  in  ibid.  J.  V.  B. 

SCHOOL  COMMITTEES.  See  Education, 
Board  of. 

SCHOOL  DIRECTORS.  School  directors  in 
general  manage  and  control  the  schools,  build- 
ings and  the  school  property.  They  have  the 
power  to  employ  teachers  and  purchase  sup- 
plies. Their  contracts  are  binding  upon  the 
district.  The  directors  are  usually  elected  and 
serve  in  accordance  with  the  laws  in  each  parti- 
cular state.  See  Educational  Administra- 
tion. J.  V.  B. 

SCHOOL  DISTRICT.  The  school  district  is 
any  area  set  apart  as  the  unit  of  organization 
for  the  local  control  and  administration  of 
school  affairs.  The  election  of  officers,  the  au- 
thorizing of  tax  levies  for  buildings  and  in- 
struction, the  adjustment  of  boundaries  of  sub- 
divisions, or  in  some  instances  the  readjust- 
ment of  independent  district  boundaries  are 
some  of  the  powers  granted  to  the  electors 
residing  therein. 

The  township  as  a district  for  the  organiza- 
tion of  schools  usually  coincides  geographical- 
ly with  the  civil  township.  It  is,  however, 
under  the  separate  control  of  a board  chosen 
for  that  purpose,  who  may  or  may  not  be  com- 
posed of  directors  chosen  by  each  subdistrict. 
It  is  usually  provided  that  independent  dis- 
tricts may  be  formed  in  townships  which  con- 
stitute a school  district;  or,  all  of  the  sub- 
districts  of  the  township  may  by  vote  become 
independent  school  districts.  Consequently  in 
the  same  counties  one  may  sometimes  find 
townships  having  only  subdistricts,  or  only 
independent  districts,  or  a combination  of  both. 


254 


SCHOOL  EXTENSION— SCHOOL  FINANCE 


The  officers  chosen  in  the  township  district 
may  include  a president  or  chairman,  a secre- 
tary, and  a treasurer;  or  the  civil  township 
officers  may  perform  the  duties  of  the  two  last 
mentioned.  When,  however,  independent  dis- 
tricts exist  they  elect  their  own  board — which 
consists  usually  of  three  members,  except  in 
village  or  city  district. 

The  independent  school  districts  were  first 
established  in  Massachusetts  in  1789.  Their 
organization  is  said  to  have  marked  the  farth- 
est remove  from  a central  administration  in 
the  history  of  the  United  States.  These  dis- 
tricts were  finally  abolished  in  Massachusetts 
in  1882;  and  the  tendency  at  present  in  other 
states  is  toward  the  consolidation  of  the  rural 
districts,  where  a single  director  and  a single 
teacher  may  represent  the  controlling  element 
in  educational  affairs. 

Where  the  township  has  not  been  fully  estab- 
lished, as  in  the  southern  states,  the  school 
district  must  be  established  by  county  au- 
thorities. In  some  few  instances  the  county 
school  officers  appoint  the  officers  of  the  dis- 
trict. The  district,  which  may  coincide  with 
the  civil  or  magisterial  district,  may  elect  its 
own  trustees  as  does  the  township  in  the 
North.  Again,  in  the  far  western  states  the 
county  boards  or  the  county  superintendent 
of  schools  may  determine  the  districts,  but  the 
local  authority  is  represented  in  the  selection 
of  trustees  and  the  control  of  tax  levies  for 
school  purposes. 

See  Education  as  a Function  of  Govern- 
ment; Education,  Board  of;  Rural  Divi- 
sions, Minor. 

References:  G.  E.  Howard,  Local  Constitu- 
tional History  (1889),  I,  234;  E.  W.  Bemis, 
“Local  Government  in  Michigan  and  the  North- 
west” in  Johns  Hopkins  University,  Studies 
(1883),  I,  No.  v;  B.  J.  Ramage,  “Local  Gov- 
ernment and  Free  Schools  in  South  Carolina” 
in  ibid,  I,  No.  xii ; H.  W.  Foght,  Am.  Rural 
School  (1910);  J.  A.  Fairlie,  Local  Govern- 
ment (1906),  161,  190;  F.  A.  Burke,  Treatise 
on  the  Law  of  Public  Schools  (1880),  154; 
state  statutes  and  school  codes. 

Benjamin  F.  Shambaugh. 

SCHOOL  EXTENSION.  School  extension  is 
the  attempt  to  utilize  the  school  plant  for 
more  than  the  mere  routine  school  courses. 
The  public  schools  are  institutions  organized 
for  the  benefit  of  the  respective  communities 
in  which  they  exist.  Some  school  administra- 
tors have  found  that  the  school  property  can 
be  used  more  to  benefit  the  district  in  other 
respects  than  the  mere  instruction  of  pupils 
of  school  age.  Evening  schools  for  adults, 
lectures,  special  instruction,  can  be  organized 
with  the  consent  of  the  community.  So  far 
none  of  this  extension  has  become  an  integral 
part  of  public  instruction.  See  School  Build- 
ings ; Schools,  Public,  System  and  Prob- 
lems. 


SCHOOL  FINANCE.  The  sources  from 
which  a public  school  draws  its  ordinary  rev- 
enues are,  in  varying  proportions:  local  taxa- 
tion, state  taxation,  state  school  funds  arising 
from  the  sale  or  lease  of  school  lands  (see 
School  Funds,  State),  fines,  licenses,  gifts, 
and  fees  from  students.  For  special  purposes 
revenue  from  bond  issues,  particularly  for  the 
purchase  of  land  or  the  erection  of  buildings, 
may  constitute  a large  occasional  item.  The 
total  revenue  arising  from  all  sources  for  the 
common  schools  of  the  United  States  in  19  iO 
was  in  round  numbers,  $433,000,000.  The 
largest  item  in  this  vast  amount  came  from 
local  taxation  in  district,  town,  city,  and 
county,  being  $312,000,000,  an  increase  of  91 
per  cent  in  ten  years. 

In  certain  states  from  80  per  cent  to  90  per 
cent  of  the  money  raised  for  school  purposes 
comes  from  local  taxation,  e.  g.,  Massachusetts 
(which  raises  annually  about  $19,000,000  in 
cities  and  towns),  Illinois,  Kansas,  and  Ore- 
gon. In  all  but  10  states  such  revenue  consti- 
tutes not  less  than  50  per  cent  of  the  total. 
In  about  15  states  no  state  tax,  or  a very  small 
one,  is  levied  for  common  schools.  Some  states 
levy  a mill  tax  or  similar  tax,  e.  g.,  Maine  (3 
mills),  Ohio  (.335  mills),  Nevada  (1  mill), 
and  Indiana  (13.6  cents  on  the  $100)  ; others 
appropriate  a lump  sum  from  the  general 
revenue  (Illinois,  $3,000,000)  or  a certain 
proportion  pf  the  total  income  of  the  state 
( Tennessee,  one-fourth ) . 

The  distribution  of  the  school  fund  of  a 
district  or  even  of  a city,  is  a comparatively 
simple  matter  usually  regulated  in  large  de- 
gree by  state  law.  Payments  fall  under  three 
general  headings.  In  the  first  class  are  cur- 
rent expenses : ( 1 ) the  salaries  of  superin- 

tendents, principals,  teachers,  truant  officers, 
and  business  officers,  being  about  60  per  cent 
of  the  total  expenditure  in  1909;  (2)  wages  of 
janitors,  engineers,  etc.;  (3)  fuel,  water,  light, 
power,  etc. ; ( 4 ) text-books,  stationery,  school 
supplies;  (5)  auxiliary  agencies  like  libraries, 
playgrounds,  medical  inspection,  school  nurses, 
transportation  of  pupils;  (6)  repairs,  insur- 
ance, and  other  upkeep  expenses.  In  the  sec- 
ond class  are  capital  outlays,  occasional  rather 
than  regular,  for  sites,  new  buildings  and  ex- 
tension or  large  alterations.  In  the  third 
class  are  payments  of  debts,  interest,  rents, 
etc. 

The  proper  basis  of  the  distribution  of  the 
state  school  moneys,  however,  is  one  of  the 
most  difficult  problems  in  educational  finance, 
whether  the  money  is  distributed  to  the  coun- 
ties, to  the  districts,  or  to  the  districts  through 
the  counties.  In  several  southern  states  the 
county  school  boards  under  state  laws  dis- 
tribute school  moneys  practically  in  their  dis- 
cretion. Illustrations  of  other  methods  are: 
Pennsylvania,  in  which  one-third  of  the  state 
school  revenue  is  apportioned  according  to  the 
number  of  teachers  employed  by  the  district, 


J.  V.  B. 

255 


SCHOOL  FUNDS,  STATE 


one-third  according  to  the  number  of  children 
of  school  age,  and  one-third  according  to  the 
number  of  taxabies;  Minnesota,  in  which  the 
basis  is  the  school  enrollment.  Nearly  all  the 
north  central  states  distribute  state  school 
funds  in  strict  accord  with  figures  of  the  cen- 
sus of  school  population  (educable  children) 
or  of  total  population,  notwithstanding  certain 
acknowledged  inequalities  arising  from  this 
method. 

See  Budgets,  State  and  Local;  Cost  of 
Government  in  United  States;  Expendi- 
tures, State  and  Local;  Purchase  of  Pub- 
lic Supplies;  School  Funds,  State;  School 
Property. 

References:  Dutton  and  Snedden,  Adminis- 
tration of  Public  Education  in  the  United 
States  (1908),  ch.  x;  E.  C.  Elliott,  “State 
School  Systems”  in  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Education, 
Bulletin,  1908,  No.  7,  1910,  No.  2. 

Kendric  C.  Babcock. 

SCHOOL  FUNDS,  STATE.  Definition.— The 

term,  public  school  fund,  state  school  fund,  and 
several  others,  are  used  to  designate  either: 

( 1 ) permanent  funds  of  several  classes  and 
forms  whose  income  is  for  the  support  of  the 
public  schools;  or  (2)  the  total  annual  cur- 
rent revenue  paid  into  the  state  treasury  from 
all  sources  and  available  for  maintenance  of 
the  public  school  system,  whether  it  arises 
from  state  taxation,  interest,  leases,  or  mis- 
cellaneous sources  (see  School  Finance).  The 
discussion  here  is  confined  to  the  former  mean- 
ing of  the  term. 

Every  state  in  the  Union  except  Georgia  and 
Pennsylvania  has  a permanent  school  fund  of 
one  kind  or  another,  and  several  states  have 
three  or  four  separate  funds.  These  funds  have 
been  accumulated  by  various  processes,  have 
come  through  various  vicissitudes,  and  are 
managed  in  different  ways.  Some  of  the  states 
made  beginnings  of  such  funds  in  colonial 
days,  but  the  greater  part  of  those  now  exist- 
ing have  come  from  the  following  sources: 

(1)  Land  Grants  from  the  United  States  to 
the  States  for  Educational  Purposes. — The 
states  admitted  between  1802  and  1848,  except 
Texas,  received  the  16th  section  in  each  sur- 
veyed township  of  public  domain;  the  states 
admitted  since  1848,  with  a few  exceptions, 
have  received  the  16th  and  36th  sections,  in 
some  cases  two  more,  in  each  surveyed  town- 
ship. Out  of  these  grants  certain  states  saved 
little  or  nothing,  while  others  have  provided 
enormous  funds.  Minnesota  had  in  1911  an  in- 
vested principal  of  nearly  $20,000,000,  with 
an  estimated  increase,  through  leases  and  sales 
of  iron  lands,  ultimately  to  more  than  $100,- 
000,000.  South  Dakota  has  already  about  $5,- 
000,000  invested,  with  prospective  increase  to 
$33,000,000. 

(2)  Federal  Grants  of  Land  to  the  States 
not  Specifically  for  Schools. — The  proceeds  of 
these  grants  have  in  many  cases  been  devoted 


wholly  or  in  part  to  the  school  fund.  Twelve 
states  have  thus  used  the  swamp  lands  grant- 
ed to  them,  Oregon,  for  example,  giving  10 
per  cent  of  the  proceeds.  Salt  lands,  special 
grants,  certain  military  and  university  lands, 
and  the  internal  improvement  lands  given  in 
1841,  have  also  gone  to  swell  the  school  fund. 

(3)  Federal  Money  Given,  Loaned,  Deposited 
or  Returned  to  the  States. — A percentage  of 
the  sales  of  public  lands  in  some  states,  e.  g., 
5 per  cent  in  21  states,  is  paid  to  the  states 
by  the  terms  of  the  act  of  Congress  admitting 
them  into  the  Union,  and  devoted  by  them  to 
the  public  school  fund.  Five  states  used  all 
of  their  quotas  of  the  Surplus  Revenue  Loan  of 
1837,  practically  a gift  to  the  states,  amount- 
ing to  $28,000,000,  to  increase  their  school 
funds;  and  all  but  four  so  used  some  part  of 
their  shares.  New  York’s  share  thus  set  apart 
was  $4,014,520.  Oklahoma  received  at  the 
time  of  the  admission  of  the  state  a cash 
grant  from  the  federal  treasury  of  $5,000,000. 

In  1891  the  United  States  returned  to  the 
states  their  payments  of  the  direct  taxes  lev- 
ied in  1861,  and  this  also  was  added  to  the 
school  fund  by  some  states,  e.  g.,  Kentucky, 
which  received  $606,641.03.  A similar  use  was 
made  by  Vermont  of  $240,000  with  which  that 
state  was  reimbursed  for  expenditures  during 
the  Spanish-American  war. 

(4)  State  Appropriation  of  the  Proceeds  of 
State  Lands. — The  earliest  example  is  that  of 
the  Connecticut  Western  Reserve  lands.  Texas 
retained  all  public  lands  at  the  time  of  admis- 
sion to  the  Union;  38,000,000  acres  were  used 
to  establish  a state  school  fund,  and  more 
than  4,000,000  acres  for  county  school  funds. 

(5)  State  Money  Reservation  and  Appropri- 
ations.— These  have  arison  from  fines,  bank 
taxes,  fees,  escheats,  gifts,  etc.,  covering  a 
wide  range,  and  from  direct  appropriation  to 
the  capital  of  the  fund,  as  in  Massachusetts, 
where  provision  was  made  in  1894  for  transfer 
of  $100,000  to  the  school  fund  annually  until 
it  reached  $5,000,000  (1907). 

Administration. — The  management  of  these 
vast  permanent  school  funds  running  from 
about  $60,000  in  New  Hampshire  to  more  than 
$75,000,000  (including  county  funds)  in  Tex- 
as, varies  in  method  and  in  efficiency.  Full 
control  by  the  state  rather  than  by  the  county 
or  the  township  has  become  the  general  rule, 
and  every  state  admitted  since  1858  manages 
the  16th  and  36th  sections  funds,  thus  secur- 
ing uniformity  and  unity.  Direct  control  is 
vested  in  the  state  controller,  as  in  New  York 
and  Texas,  or  in  a board  or  commission,  fre- 
quently made  up  of  ex  officio  members  already 
heavily  burdened  with  other  duties,  as  in  Min- 
nesota, Nebraska,  and  Montana.  Some  state 
constitutions  have  fixed  a minimum  price  for 
the  public  school  lands — Nebraska,  $5  in 
1867  and  $7  in  1875,  North  Dakota,  South 
Dakota,  and  Washington,  $10 — and  require  the 
sales  to  be  public.  Losses  of  school  funds 
256 


SCHOOL  HYGIENE— SCHOOL  PROPERTY 


amounting  in  total  to  about  $28,000,000  have 
occurred  through  mismanagement,  dishonesty, 
war,  and  misappropriation,  but  these  belong 
for  the  major  part  in  the  period  before  1870. 
Broadly  speaking,  the  management  since  that 
date  has  been  good. 

Advantages. — Expenditures  from  the  income 
from  the  school  fund  in  different  states  under 
the  general  term  “maintenance  of  a system  of 
free  schools”  are  made  for  wages  of  trained 
and  legally  qualified  teachers,  supervision  (lo- 
cal and  state),  care  of  buildings,  textbooks, 
equipment,  transportation  of  pupils,  etc. 

The  benefits  arising  from  the  system  of  pub- 
lic school  funds  in  the  states  have  been  many, 
positive,  and  cumulative,  increasing  with  the 
development  of  the  states.  It  is  safe  to  saj 
that  such  funds  made  the  free  public  school 
system  possible,  by  overcoming  early  indiffer- 
ence to  a state-supported  system,  and  tiding 
the  free  school  over  the  period  of  contempt 
and  suspicion  which  it  met  in  some  sections. 
The  lessening  of  local  taxation  in  new  and 
poor  counties  was  a real  and  deserved  relief 
at  a critical  period  in  many  states.  The  ap- 
portionment of  the  income  from  these  funds, 
on  whatever  basis  it  is  made,  is  still  a lever- 
age for  moving  the  local  school  authorities  to 
maintain  a longer  term  and  to  improve  the 
standard  of  equipment,  courses,  and  attend- 
ance. 

See  Educational  Administration;  Educa- 
tional Land  Grants;  Educational  Statis- 
tics; School  Finance;  School  Property. 

References:  F.  H.  Swift,  Hist,  of  Public 
Permanent  Common  School  Funds  in  the  V. 
S.,  1195-1905  (1911)  ; U.  S.  Commr.  of  Educ., 
Reports  (1905-1911)  ; state  treasurers  and 
superintendents  of  public  instruction,  Reports-, 
E.  P.  Cubberly,  School  Funds  and  their  Ap- 
portionment (1905). 

Kendric  C.  Babcock. 

SCHOOL  HYGIENE.  Municipal  authorities 
through  their  school  committees  and  boards  of 
health,  have  recently  begun  to  realize  the  very 
serious  responsibility,  and  to  utilize  tbe  huge 
and  fruitful  opportunity  presented  by  the  com- 
pulsory aggregation  of  children  in  school- 
rooms under  compulsory  school  laws.  Statis- 
tics show  that  the  contagious  diseases  of  chil- 
dren become  more  frequent  during  the  months 
of  school  attendance,  and  fall  off  suddenly  as 
soon  as  the  children  are  separated  by  the 
summer  vacation.  Compulsory  education  thus 
involves  a certain  amount  of  compulsory  dis- 
ease and  makes  it  necessary  for  the  municipal- 
ities to  do  everything  in  their  power  in  order 
that  the  results  of  the  compulsory  school  law 
shall  not  involve  definite  harm  along  with  its 
good. 

Health  work  in  the  schools  has  been  taken 
up  from  three  main  motives:  (1)  to  insure 
that  the  child  receive  no  physical  harm  in  the 
course  of  his  studies;  (2)  to  remove  any  physi- 


cal obstacles  which  interfere  with  his  getting 
an  education;  (3)  to  include  play  and  the 
regulation  of  play  within  the  educational  du- 
ties of  the  city. 

The  prevention  of  physical  harm  was  the 
earliest  of  these  motives,  and  proceeded  out 
of  the  long  recognized  obligation  of  the  state 
to  prevent,  wherever  possible,  the  spread  of 
contagious  disease.  In  November,  1894,  Dr. 
Samuel  H.  Durgin  of  the  Boston  Board  of 
Health,  started  the  first  medical  inspection  of 
schools  in  the  United  States.  This  service  has 
increased  rapidly  both  in  the  frequency  and  in 
the  thoroughness  of  examination  given  to  eacli 
child;  yet  up  to  the  present  time  it  exists 
rather  on  paper  than  in  fact.  The  larger  cities 
of  the  country,  such  as  New  York  and  Boston, 
are  supposed  to  give  each  child  a thorough 
physical  examination  at  least  once  a year,  and 
to  see  that  the  defects  so  discovered  are  rem- 
edied. In  practice  very  little  has  been  accom- 
plished as  yet. 

Besides  medical  inspection  a good  deal  of 
thought  and  expense  have  been  put  into  more 
sanitary  arrangement  of  the  school  buildings 
as  regards  drainage,  ventilation,  light  and  pub- 
lic drinking  fountains. 

The  supervision  of  athletics  and  physical 
training  within  the  schools  is  also  a part  of 
school  hygiene  imperfectly  performed,  in  most 
places,  by  committees  of  the  school  board. 

The  teaching  of  hygiene  as  part  of  the  cur- 
riculum is  beginning  to  assume  importance, 
and  to  dissociate  itself  from  the  thraldom  of 
temperance  agitation  which,  until  recently,  has 
much  hampered  its  efficiency. 

See  District  Nurses;  Education  as  a 
Function  of  Government;  Health,  Public, 
Regulation  of. 

References:  D.  S.  Snedden  and  W.  H.  Allen, 

School  Reports  and  School  Efficiency  (1908); 
E.  B.  Hoag,  Health  Index  of  Children  (1910)  ; 
W.  F.  Barry,  Hygiene  of  the  Schoolroom 
(1909);  Am.  Year  Book,  1911,  809,  and  year 
by  year.  Richard  C.  Cabot. 

SCHOOL  PROPERTY.  The  diversification 
of  the  forms  of  school  property  as  compared 
with  fifty  years  ago  is  indicative  of  the  wi- 
dened scope  of  education.  To  the  buildings 
and  sites,  and  the  usual  furniture  of  desks, 
chairs,  tables,  etc.,  must  be  added  apparatus 
in  the  form  of  charts,  maps,  libraries,  supple- 
mental books,  casts,  and  pictures;  the  equip- 
ment of  laboratories  for  chemistry,  physics, 
biology,  geography,  domestic  science,  and  mu- 
sic; machinery  for  manual  training  and  me- 
chanic arts,  agriculture,  typewriting,  sewing; 
gymnasiums  and  athletic  fields  and  play- 
grounds; and  fields  for  gardening  and  farm- 
ing. Textbooks,  when  these  are  furnished  free, 
and  school  supplies  of  all  sorts,  constitute  a 
large  item  in  certain  localities.  In  great  cities 
like  New  York,  whole  buildings  are  required 
for  administrative  offices  for  the  school  system. 


257 


SCHOOLS,  COMMON— SCHOOLS,  CORRESPONDENCE 


The  money  for  these  forms  of  property  of 
the  public  schools  is  usually  derived  from 
public  taxation  of  the  locality  (see  School 
Finance),  or  from  the  sale  of  bonds  or  the 
sale  of  lands  and  buildings  in  the  case  of 
removals;  state  appropriation;  occasional  pri- 
vate gift,  or  donations  by  corporations.  The 
titles  to  the  public  school  property,  and  its 
management,  are  usually  in  the  hands  of  a 
local  board  of  trustees  which  is  a body  corpo- 
rate and  politic  representing  the  people  of  the 
local  unit,  and  which  acts  under  state  law. 
The  sale  of  public  school  property  and  the 
issue  of  bonds  usually  require  special  action 
by  the  voters  of  the  locality,  except  in  the 
larger  cities. 

The  property  of  the  private  schools  does  not 
differ  very  much  in  form  from  that  of  the 
public  school,  except  that  many  private  schools 
have  endowments,  some  of  which  are  very 
large,  e.  g.,  Girard  College  (manual  arts 
school)  of  Philadelphia,  which  reports  “in- 
vested assets”  of  about  $30,000,000.  It  might 
be  noted  that  the  public  school  system,  rather 
than  individual  public  schools,  has  a vast 
endowment  in  the  form  of  state  school  funds 
(see) . 

The  total  valuation  of  all  public  school 
property  used  for  public  school  purposes  in 
the  United  States  as  reported  to  the  United 
States  Bureau  of  Education  in  1910,  excluding 
public  colleges,  universities,  normal  schools, 
and  special  schools,  was  in  round  numbers 
$1,100,000,000,  representing  about  258,000 
school  houses.  To  this  might  be  added  about 
$96,000,000  (excluding  endowment  of  $20,000,- 
000),  for  private  schools  and  academies; 
$38,000,000  (excluding  endowment  of  $45,000,- 
000)  for  manual  and  industrial  training 
schools;  and  $70,000,000  (excluding  endow- 
ment of  $9,000,000)  for  special  schools,  usual- 
ly public,  for  the  blind,  deaf,  feeble-minded  and 
delinquent. 

See  Budgets,  State  and  Local;  Education- 
al Land  Grants;  School  Finance;  School 
Funds,  State. 

Reference:  U.  S.  Comm’r.  of  Educ.,  Annual 
Report,  1910,  II,  1911,  II. 

Kendric  C.  Babcock. 

SCHOOLS,  COMMON.  Common  schools, 
mean  ordinarily  the  public  schools  below  the 
high  school.  See  Schools,  Primary. 

G.  E.  F. 

SCHOOLS,  CONTINUATION.  A compara- 
tively new  feature  of  public  education  is  the 
provision  of  evening  and  Sunday  classes  for 
people  who  are  engaged  during  the  day  in 
their  vocations.  In  England  and  Germany 
there  is  a great  variety  of  such  schools  where 
the  chief  purpose  is  to  give  vocational  train- 
ing. In  Germany  employers  are  compelled  by 
law  to  allow  a certain  number  of  hours  per 
week  to  their  immature  employees  to  attend 


continuation  schools.  Some  of  these  schools 
are  held  during  work  hours.  In  America  there 
are  three  classes  of  persons  who  attend  even- 
ing continuation  schools:  (1)  illiterates  who 
are  obliged  to  work  and  who  voluntarily,  or 
compelled  by  law,  endeavor  to  master  the  ele- 
mentary studies;  (2)  those  who  desire  to  pur- 
sue, in  evening  high  schools,  studies  in  ad- 
vance of  their  previous  acquirements;  (3) 
those  who  seek  vocational  training.  In  all 
these  continuation  schools  men  and  boys  far 
outnumber  the  women  and  girls.  According 
to  the  Commissioner’s  Report  (1912)  205  cit- 
ies in  the  United  States  maintain  evening 
schools  with  10,506  teachers  and  419,981  pupils. 
See  Education,  Recent  Tendencies  in; 
Schools,  Correspondence;  Schools,  Public, 
Professional;  Schools,  Public,  System  and 
Problems  of.  References:  T.  Balliet,  “Organi- 
zation of  a System  of  Evening  Schools”  in 
Nat.  Education  Assoc.,  Proceedings,  1904,  278; 
M.  Sadler,  Continuation  Schools  ( 1907 ) ; 
“True  Function  of  Evening  High  School”  in 
School  Review,  Sept.,  1904;  Harper’s  Weekly, 
CV  (Sept.  23,  1911),  19.  G.  E.  F. 

SCHOOLS,  CORRESPONDENCE.  The  first 
organized  instruction  by  correspondence  in 
the  United  States  began  in  1873  under  the  aus- 
pices of  a “Society  to  Encourage  Studies  at 
Home,”  founded  by  Anna  Eliot  Ticknor,  in- 
spired by  an  English  organization  with  a sim- 
ilar name.  Miss  Ticknor  retained  active  man- 
agement until  her  death  in  1896.  The  work 
was  open  to  women  only,  and  in  the  twenty- 
four  years  of  its  existence  there  were  7086 
students  on  its  rolls.  In  1897  the  organiza- 
tion was  voluntarily  dissolved  by  its  officers, 
partly  because,  after  the  death  of  Miss  Tick- 
nor, no  one  seemed  available  to  replace  her, 
and  partly  because  other  agencies,  such  as  the 
Chautauqua  Literary  and  Scientific  Circle  and 
the  International  Correspondence  Schools  ap- 
peared to  be  occupying  the  field. 

William  R.  Harper,  later  President  of  the 
University  of  Chicago,  while  an  instructor  in 
the  Chautauqua  summer  school  (1879)  began 
by  correspondence  to  continue  with  individuals 
the  work  begun  in  his  classes  there.  The  idea 
was  taken  up  by  the  Chautauqua  management 
and  instruction  upon  a vast  scale  was  planned, 
culminating  in  1883  in  the  “Chautauqua  Uni- 
versity” organized  on  the  basis  of  correspon- 
dence instruction.  In  spite  of  the  fact  that 
the  small  fees  exacted  were  not  sufficient  prop- 
erly to  compensate  instructors  and  officers,  the 
scheme  was  continued  with  success  until  1900. 

Correspondence  instruction  in  connection 
with  a regularly  established  institution  of  uni- 
versity grade  was  first  begun  at  the  University 
of  Chicago  at  its  opening  in  1892.  Dr.  Harper, 
the  president,  emphasized  the  correspondence 
work  by  organizing  it  as  a regular  division  of 
the  university.  Thousands  of  students  have 
been  enrolled  and  many  of  them  gain  the  stip- 


258 


SCHOOLS  FOR  SOCIAL  WORKERS— SCHOOLS,  HIGH,  COMMERCIAL 


ulated  amount  of  credit  which  is  allowed  to  ac- 
cumulate toward  a degree,  provided  the  student 
later  spends  a certain  time  in  residence.  A 
considerable  number  of  other  reputable  institu- 
tions have  successfully  made  use  of  corres- 
pondence instruction,  and  within  five  years  a 
large  percentage  of  the  state  universities  and 
agricultural  colleges  have  exerted  themselves 
to  promote  correspondence  study,  largely  in 
agricultural  lines. 

The  most  important  move  in  correspondence 
study  by  any  public  agency  has  been  made  by 
the  University  of  Wisconsin  through  one  de- 
partment of  its  extension  division.  The  work, 
begun  in  October,  1906,  with  two  students,  in- 
creased regularly  and  rapidly  till  in  January, 
1912,  there  were  5,936,  37  teachers  giving 
their  entire  time  to  correspondence  instruc- 
tion and  27  additional  members  of  the  uni- 
versity faculty  giving  part  of  their  time.  The 
legislature  makes  large  annual  appropriations 
specifically  for  this  work.  Other  state  legis- 
latures have  made  considerable  appropriations 
for  this  and  other  kinds  of  extension  work  but 
no  state  has  so  fully  as  Wisconsin  assumed  it 
to  be  a regular  function  of  the  state  univer- 
sity. 

There  is  another  class  of  correspondence 
schools  which  are  purely  business  enterprises, 
in  which  students  are  solicited  by  agents  and 
advertisements.  Almost  every  conceivable  sub- 
ject is  offered  for  study.  Many  of  these 
“schools”  are  unworthy  of  consideration  but 
one  at  least  has  had  a marvellous  growth  and 
has  powerfully  influenced  hundreds  of  thous- 
ands of  young  men  who  would  not  otherwise 
have  undertaken  systematic  study  of  any  kind. 
The  subjects  pursued  are,  in  the  main,  of  a 
technical  or  trade  nature. 

See  Schools,  Public,  Professional;  State 
Universities. 

References:  E.  G.  Dexter,  Hist,  of  Education 
in  the  U.  8.  (1906)  ; University  of  Wisconsin, 
Bulletin,  No.  285  ( 1909 ) ; Society  to  Encourage 
Studies  at  Home,  Memorial  (1897);  U.  S. 
Commissioner  of  Education,  Report,  1903, 
1069;  W.  D.  P.  Bliss,  New  Encylopedia  of  So- 
cial Reform  (1908),  566.  G.  E.  Fellows. 

SCHOOLS  FOR  SOCIAL  WORKERS.  In  1912 

there  were  five  special  schools  for  social  work- 
ers in  the  United  States:  (1)  The  New  York 
School  of  Philanthropy,  organized  in  1898  and 
conducted  by  the  New  York  Charity  Organ- 
ization and  affiliated  with  Columbia  Univer- 
sity. The  school  has  an  endowment  of  $1,000,- 
000  given  by  the  will  of  John  S.  Kennedy.  Its 
purpose  is  to  fit  men  and  women  for  social 
service  in  either  professional  or  volunteer  work. 
(2)  The  Chicago  Institute  of  Civics  and  Phil- 
anthropy organized  in  1903.  It  emphasizes  the 
civic  and  industrial  features  of  training  equal- 
ly with  those  concerning  the  more  distinctive 
philanthropic  agencies,  institutions  and  move- 
ments. The  school  has  no  endowment  but 


is  maintained  by  tuition  fees  and  individual 
gifts.  It  is  governed  by  a board  of  twenty-five 
members,  ten  of  whom  are  connected  with  uni- 
versities of  the  central  west.  ( 3 ) The  Boston 
School  for  Social  Workers,  organized  in  1904, 
is  maintained  by  Simmons  College  and  Har- 
vard University.  There  is  opportunity  for  get- 
ting special  knowledge  and  technique  by  field 
work  and  special  reports,  but  all  students  take 
the  same  topics  of  study.  (4)  The  St.  Louis 
School  of  Social  Economy,  organized  in  1907. 
The  school  is  closely  affiliated  with  Washington 
University.  Work  in  the  school  earns  credits 
toward  degrees  in  Washington  University. 
(5)  The  Philadelphia  Training  School  for  So- 
cial Workers,  organized  in  1910.  This  school 
is  under  the  auspices  of  the  philanthropic  or- 
ganizations in  Philadelphia  and  its  faculty  is 
drawn  from  the  social  workers  and  educators 
of  Philadelphia.  Several  of  the  large  uni- 
versities have  courses  and  combine  them  with 
practical  work;  thus  furnishing  training  for 
social  workers.  See  Social  Reform  Problems; 
Sociology;  University  Extension. 

H.  H.  H. 

SCHOOLS,  GRAMMAR,  AND  THE  GRADES. 

By  grammar  schools  or  grades  is  ordinarily 
meant  the  grades  from  the  fourth  to  the  eighth 
inclusive;  children  from  nine  to  thirteen  years 
old.  In  some  schools  there  are  nine  grades. 
See  Schools,  Primary;  Schools,  Public, 
System  and  Problems  of.  G.  E.  F. 

SCHOOLS,  HIGH.  Schools  of  secondary 
grade  usually  offering  a four  years’  course  of 
study.  Most  pupils  enter  the  high  schools  at 
fourteen  to  sixteen  years  of  age.  See  Educa- 
tion, Industrial;  Educational  Statistics; 
Schools,  High,  Commercial;  Schools,  Pub- 
lic, System  and  Problems  of.  Reference: 
H.  A.  Hollister,  High  School  Administration 
(1909).  G.  E.  F. 

SCHOOLS,  HIGH,  COMMERCIAL.  The 

leading  cities  in  the  United  States  are  pro- 
viding special  high  school  courses,  and  even 
special  high  schools,  for  boys  and  girls  who 
intend  to  enter  business.  These  courses  in- 
clude not  only  practical  training  in  stenog- 
raphy, typewriting,  bookkeeping,  and  account- 
ancy, but  also  English,  mathematics,  a modern 
language,  and  natural  and  social  sciences.  A 
good  command  of  clear,  direct  English  is  em- 
phasized. Commercial  arithmetic  replaces  ad- 
vanced mathematics,  though  algebra  and  plane 
geometry  are  usually  retained.  A working 
knowledge  of  a modern  language  is  sought; 
instruction  in  science  includes  the  commercial 
and  industrial  applications  of  the  subject;  and 
as  a part  of  secondary  education  appear  certain 
vital  courses  in  social  sciences,  such  as  indus- 
trial history,  commercial  geography,  economics, 
and  the  study  of  local  institutions  and  indus- 
tries. 


259 


SCHOOLS,  HIGH,  MECHANIC  ARTS— SCHOOLS,  INDUSTRIAL 


Some  schools  offer  both  a four  years’  and  a 
two  years’  course,  and  provide  for  transfers 
from  the  shorter  to  the  longer  course.  The 
graduates  of  the  four  years’  courses  are  in- 
creasing in  numbers,  entering  higher  schools 
of  finance,  commerce,  and  accountancy,  and 
occasionally  colleges  of  liberal  arts. 

At  least  nine  cities  in  the  United  States 
maintain  each  one  special  high  school  of  com- 
merce: Atlanta,  Boston,  Cleveland,  Columbus, 
Louisville,  New  York,  San  Francisco,  and 
Washington.  Many  others  have  strong  com- 
mercial departments  in  regular  high  schools. 
In  1912,  1,913  public  schools  reported  128,977 
pupils  studying  commercial  branches. 

See  Education  as  a Function  of  Govern- 
ment; Manual  Training;  Schools,  High, 
Mechanic  Arts;  Schools,  Practical  Arts. 

References:  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Educa- 
tion, Annual  Reports;  C.  A.  Herrick,  Meaning 
and  Practice  of  Commercial  Education  ( 1904 ) ; 
F.  V.  Thompson,  “Commercial  High  School 
and  the  Business  Community”  in  School  Re- 
view, XVIII  (1910),  1-11. 

C.  D.  Kingsley. 

SCHOOLS,  HIGH,  MECHANIC  ARTS.  The 

first  provision  in  the  United  States  for  in- 
struction in  the  use  of  tools  was  made  in  1865, 
when  John  Boynton  of  Templeton,  Massachu- 
setts gave  $100,000  for  the  establishment  of 
the  Worcester  Free  Institute.  This  institute 
was  opened  in  1868  as  a technical  school  of 
college  grade,  and  shop  instruction  was  lim- 
ited to  students  of  mechanical  engineering. 
The  first  public  mechanic  arts  high  school  in 
the  United  States  was  opened  in  Baltimore  in 
1883.  In  rapid  succession  other  cities  estab- 
lished similar  schools. 

The  better  mechanic  arts  high  schools  teach 
shop  work  and  drawing  throughout  the  four 
years  and  are  equipped  for  joinery,  wood-turn- 
ing, pattern-making,  forging,  and  machine  shop 
practice;  a few  are  provided  with  foundries, 
so  that  the  entire  process  of  designing  and 
making  ordinary  machinery  may  be  executed 
by  the  students  themselves.  The  curriculum 
includes,  also,  English,  mathematics,  history, 
and  science  of  the  same  general  grade  as  that 
found  in  other  high  schools,  the  practical  ap- 
plications of  mathematics  and  the  sciences  be- 
ing emphasized.  Foreign  language  study  is 
required  in  some  of  these  high  schools  and  is 
optional  in  others,  Latin  being  offered  in  the 
most  of  them  and  the  modern  languages  in  all. 


A large  proportion  of  the  mechanic  arts  high 
schools  are  coeducational,  shops  being  provided 
for  sewing,  cooking,  millinery,  and  dressmak- 
ing. The  elements  of  nursing,  household  deco- 
ration, dietetics,  and  kindred  subjects  are  be- 
ing added,  and  the  physical  and  biological 
sciences  are  being  correlated  with  domestic 
science. 

The  pioneers  in  manual  training  emphasized 
the  educational  value  of  the  tool  work.  This 
being  conceded,  the  new  movement  stresses  the 
underlying  principles;  and  at  the  same  time 
produces  in  the  shop  articles  of  greater  utility 
than  did  manual  training. 

The  special  success  of  these  schools  lies  in 
developing  mechanical  and  mathematical  power 
without  neglecting  the  elements  of  a liberal 
education.  Consequently  some  of  the  graduates 
enter  minor  engineering  positions,  a few  enter 
the  trades,  and  many  continue  their  education 
in  technical  schools  of  engineering,  architec- 
ture, and  agriculture,  while  a considerable  num- 
ber enter  colleges  of  liberal  arts. 

The  Commissioner  of  Education  states  that 
each  of  425  public  high  schools  in  the  United 
States  in  1911  reported  twenty  or  more  manual 
training  students.  In  these  schools  27,178 
boys  and  15,948  girls  were  receiving  manual 
and  technical  instruction. 

See  Education,  Industrial;  Schools,  Prac- 
tical Arts. 

References:  W.  Sargent,  “Place  of  Manual 
Arts  in  the  Secondary  Schools”  in  School 
Review,  XVIIII  (1910),  99-107;  A.  H.  Cham- 
berlain, Bibliography  of  the  Manual  Arts 
(1902)  ; C.  D.  Larkins,  “Manual  Training 
High  School,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y.”  in  School  Re- 
view, XIII  (1905),  741-757;  Committee  on 
Articulation  of  High  School  and  College,  “Re- 
port” in  Nat.  Educ.  Assoc.,  Proceedings,  1911, 
559-567.  C.  D.  Kingsley. 

SCHOOLS,  HIGH,  TOWNSHIP.  The  town- 
ship high  school  has  been  organized  to  bring 
secondary  education  nearer  to  all  pupils  of 
the  public  schools.  A township  trustee  or 
board  of  directors  may  establish  such  a school 
if  in  the  opinion  of  the  citizens  it  is  justifi- 
able. In  some  states  where  a high  school  is 
not  maintained  in  the  township,  it  must  stand 
the  tuition  expenses  in  another  place  that  is 
satisfactory.  See  Educational  Administra- 
tion. References:  H.  A.  Hollister.  High  School 
Administration  (1909);  J.  F.  Brown,  Amer- 
ican High  School  (1909).  J.  V.  B. 


SCHOOLS,  INDUSTRIAL 


Juvenile  reformatories  under  the  names  of 
industrial  schools,  now  exist  in  every  state 
in  the  Union  except  Arkansas,  Idaho,  Missis- 
sippi, Nevada,  New  Mexico,  North  Carolina, 
South  Carolina  and  Wyoming. 


Genesis. — The  first  juvenile  reformatory  in 
the  United  States  was  the  New  York  House  of 
Refuge  established  in  1824.  The  original  law 
provided:  “That  the  said  managers  shall  have 
power  in  their  discretion  to  receive  and  take 


260 


SCHOOLS,  INDUSTRIAL 


into  the  House  of  Refuge  to  be  established  by 
them,  all  such  children  as  shall  be  taken  up  or 
committed;”  and  also,  “the  said  managers  shall 
have  power  to  place  the  said  children  commit- 
ted to  their  care  during  the  minority  of  such 
children.”  This  law  was  intended  to  establish 
a different  code  of  treatment  for  boys  from 
that  found  in  convict  prisons,  and  to  establish 
the  placing  out  system. 

Names. — The  juvenile  reformatory  idea  looks 
upon  the  delinquent  boy,  not  as  a criminal  to 
be  punished,  but  as  a ward  of  the  state,  to  be 
trained  and  developed  in  the  right  direction. 
There  has  been  an  interesting  evolution  in  the 
names  of  these  institutions.  The  name 
“house  of  refuge”  soon  became  opprobrious 
and  the  name  “reform  school”  was  substi- 
tuted; but  that  also  came  to  have  an 
unsavory  flavor  and  the  name  “industrial 
schools”  was  substituted.  Then  the  industrial 
schools  not  intended  for  delinquent  children 
had  to  change  their  names  in  order  to  avoid 
suspicion.  The  very  appropriate  name  cf 
“training  school”  was  adopted  by  several  insti- 
tutions. Then  schools  were  named  after  in- 
dividuals, like  the  Lyman  School  for  Boys  in 
Northampton,  Massachusetts,  and  the  John 
Worthy  School  for  Boys  in  Chicago.  The  name 
“agricultural  and  industrial  school”  has  been 
applied  to  the  new  institution  at  Industry,  N. 
Y.  In  other  cases  a school  has  been  named 
simply  after  the  community  in  which  it  was 
located,  as  the  Glen  Mills  School  for  Boys  in 
Pennsylvania  and  the  St.  Charles  School  for 
Boys  in  Illinois. 

Difficulties. — The  work  of  the  juvenile  re- 
formatory is  exceedingly  difficult.  When  the 
home,  the  church,  the  Sunday  school,  the  day 
school,  the  boys’  club,  failed  and  the  boy  be- 
came delinquent,  formerly  he  was  sent  to  the 
juvenile  reformatory.  Now  he  is  taken  to  the 
juvenile  court  and  if  his  case  seems  promising 
he  is  placed  on  probation  in  charge  of  a pro- 
bation officer  and  he  may  be  replaced  on  pro- 
bation once  or  twice.  A large  proportion  of 
the  children  placed  on  probation  do  well  and 
are  never  sent  to  an  institution;  but  those  who 
prove  incorrigible  after  repeated  probations 
are  sent  to  the  juvenile  reformatory,  older  and 
more  depraved  than  those  who  were  formerly 
committed. 

The  difficulty  of  the  task  is  increased  by  the 
fact  recently  discovered  by  psychological 
tests,  that  probably  a fourth  of  all  of  the 
children  committed  to  juvenile  reformatories 
are  really  feeble  minded,  and  are  not  amenable 
to  reformatory  treatment  because  they  have 
not  the  mental  foundation  on  which  to  build 
character. 

Location. — The  task  of  reformation  requires 
a suitable  equipment  and  the  institution  is 
usually  located  on  a farm  in  order  to  control 
the  environment  and  to  secure  opportunity  for 
free  action,  pure  air  and  suitable  employment 
and  vocational  training.  In  two  of  the  newest 


reformatories,  one  at  Industry,  N.  Y.,  and  the 
other  at  Warrendale,  l’a.,  a large  farm  of  from 
•S00  to  1000  acres  is  subdivided  into  small 
farms  of  from  twenty  to  forty  acres,  on  each 
of  which  is  a cottage  for  twenty  boys  with  its 
own  stable,  team,  cows,  chickens,  dog,  garden, 
etc.  At  a convenient  central  point  is  an  ad- 
ministration building  with  officers’  headquar- 
ters and  a group  of  cottages  forming  a village 
for  those  boys  who  are  to  receive  industrial 
training  by  shop  instruction. 

Personnel.— In  the  best  reformatories  em- 
ployees are  selected  with  great  care  with  ref- 
erence to  their  character,  habits,  language,  be- 
havior, and  their  special  adaptability  for  the 
task  committed  to  their  charge.  This  is  neces- 
sary because  the  boys  receive  their  intellectual 
and  spiritual  impressions  from  those  with, 
whom  they  are  in  daily  contact.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  cultivate  high  standards  of  living 
unless  such  standards  are  maintained  by  those 
with  whom  they  must  associate.  The  super- 
intendent, the  physician,  the  head  teacher,  must 
be  competent  to  reach  a clear  understanding 
of  the  physical  and  mental  capabilities  of  the 
boy  in  order  to  apply  an  effective  method.  The 
house  fathers  and  house  mothers  must  be  in 
sympathy  with  boy  life,  must  know  how  to 
appeal  to  the  best  there  is  in  the  boys  and  how 
to  maintain  discipline  without  perpetual  nag- 
ging or  undue  severity.  The  teachers,  usually 
women,  must  be  able  .to  inspire  ambition  and 
application  in  the  dull  and  discouraged  boys, 
and  awake  dormant  faculties.  A wise  weman 
in  the  capacity  of  house  mother  or  teacher 
Darns  to  appeal  successfully  to  the  instinct 
of  chivalry  which  exists  in  the  heart  of  every 
normal  boy. 

Parole. — All  efficient  juvenile  reformatories 
now  maintain  a parole  agency  consisting  of 
from  one  to  seven  agents,  whose  duty  it  is,  first 
to  discover  whether  the  home  of  the  boy’s  par- 
ents is  a suitable  place  for  him;  and  if  not, 
to  locate  him  in  a well  selected  foster  home 
where  he  continues  under  the  guardianship  and 
supervision  of  the  agency.  The  parole  agents 
must  be  people  who  can  inspire  the  confidence 
of  the  boy  and  can  command  the  respect  and 
goodwill  of  the  foster  parents. 

Length  of  Stay.— The  average  stay  of  boys 
in  juvenile  reformatories  is  usually  about 
eighteen  months.  The  superintendents  plead 
for  a longer  stay  in  order  to  give  opportunity 
for  fixing  character  and  completing  vocational 
training;  but  the  limited  facilities  of  the  pub- 
lic institutions  compel  a rapid  movement  of 
the  population.  There  is  a difference  of  opin- 
ion between  experts  as  to  the  proper  time  limit, 
as  to  whether  the  boy  should  be  retained  for 
the  sake  of  vocational  training  or  whether  he 
should  be  sent  out  as  soon  as  he  has  established 
a reasonable  state  of  character. 

City  Institutions. — Juvenile  reformatories 
for  boys  are  usually  state  institutions  main- 
tained and  governed  by  state  boards  of  trus- 


261 


SCHOOLS,  MEDICAL  INSPECTION  OF— SCHOOLS,  NIGHT 


tees.  City  or  county  institutions  for  delin- 
quent boys  are  maintained  by  Boston,  New 
York,  Baltimore,  Pittsburg,  Cincinnati,  Cleve- 
land, St.  Louis,  New  Orleans.  Examples  of 
juvenile  reformatories  under  private  control 
are  the  Catholic  Protectory  and  the  Jewish 
Protectory  near  New  York,  and  the  Glen  Mills 
School  near  Philadelphia. 

Industrial  Schools  for  Girls. — Formerly 
delinquent  boys  and  girls  were  dealt  with 
in  the  same  reform  schools,  but  gradually 
these  institutions  have  been  divided  until  sep- 
arate institutions  for  girls  exist  in  most  of 
the  states  where  juvenile  reformatories  exist. 
A very  few  states  still  have  joint  institutions 
for  boys  and  girls. 

It  is  generally  recognized  that  the  problem 
of  the  delinquent  girl  is  different  from  and 
more  difficult  than  the  problem  of  the  delin- 
quent boy.  Both  buildings  and  administration 
for  delinquent  girls  are  more  expensive  than 
those  for  delinquent  boys.  There  has  been  a 
rapid  growth  of  public  sentiment  in  favor  of 
abolishing  the  dormitory  system  and  providing 
a separate  room  for  each  girl.  This  requires 
greater  supervision  than  the  dormitory  system. 
Another  important  change  is  the  provision  of 
small  cottages  holding  from  15  to  25  girls; 
each  cottage  being  a separate  domestic  unit 
with  its  own  kitchen,  dining  room,  sewing 
room,  living  room  and  outdoor  playground. 
The  tendency  is  in  favor  of  individual  study 
and  treatment.  Great  advances  have  been 
made  in  the  efficiency  of  domestic  and  industri- 
al training  with  the  employment  of  special 
teachers  of  domestic  science,  sewing,  dress- 
making, millinery,  typewriting,  shorthand,  etc., 
with  a view  to  meeting  the  needs  of  girls  of 
differing  temperaments,  mental  endowment, 
and  general  capability. 

Feeble  Minded  Girls. — Very  recently  the  psy- 
chological study  of  girls  has  been  introduced 
in  several  important  schools,  and  has  revealed 
surprising  facts  which  have  heretofore  been 
overlooked.  It  appears  that  from  one-fifth  to 
one-third  of  the  delinquent  girls  in  industrial 
schools  are  properly  classed  as  feeble  minded, 
not  having  sufficient  mental  endowment  to  en- 
able them  to  earn  their  own  way  and  safe- 
guard their  own  lives.  These  poor  girls  con- 
tribute largely  to  swell  the  population  of 
houses  of  ill-fame.  The  conviction  is  rap- 
idly growing  that  when  such  a girl  comes  into 
public  custody  she  should  be  permanently  seg- 
regated, both  for  her  own  protection  and  for 
the  protection  of  society;  that  her  life  should 
be  made  as  normal  and  comfortable  as  pos- 
sible, but  that  such  precautions  should  be 
taken  as  to  make  it  certain  that  she  will  not 
become  a mother. 

See  Charities,  Public  Agencies  for; 
Children,  Dependent,  Public  Care  of; 
Court,  Juvenile;  Reformatories. 

References:  S.  P.  Breckinridge  and  Edith 
Abbott,  Delinquent  Child  and  the  Home  (1912)  ; 


Homer  Folks,  The  Care  of  Destitute,  Neglected 
and  Delinquent  Children  (1902)  ; W.  R. 
George,  The  Junior  Republic,  Its  History  and 
Ideals  (1909)  ; H.  H.  Hart,  Cottage  and  Con- 
gregate Institutions  (1910),  Ed.,  Preventive 
Treatment  of  Neglected  Children  (1910);  In- 
dustrial and  Reform  Schools,  Annual  Reports 
(for  list  see  U.  S.  Census,  Volume,  Prisoners 
and  Juvenile  Delinquents  in  Institutions 
[1904],  252  et  seq .)  ; W.  D.  Morrison,  Jiwenile 
Offenders  (1897);  Thomas  Travis,  The  Young 
Malefactor;  a Study  in  Jiwenile  Delinquency, 
Its  Cause  and  Treatment  (1908);  Proceedings 
of  the  White  House  Conference  on  the  Care 
of  Dependent  Children  ( 1909 ) ; C.  E.  B.  Rus- 
sell, The  Making  of  the  Criminal  (1906); 
F.  H.  Wines,  Punishment  and  Reformation 
(1910)  ; D.  S.  Snedden,  Administration  of  Ju- 
venile Reform  Schools  in  America  (1907); 
Am.  Prison  Assoc,  (formerly  Nat.  Prison 
Assoc.),  Reports  (1810  to  date);  Am.  Year 
Boole,  1910,  and  year  by  year. 

Hastings  H.  Hart. 

SCHOOLS,  MEDICAL  INSPECTION  OF. 

Medical  inspection  of  schools  in  the  United 
States  began  in  Boston  in  1894,  tardily  follow- 
ing European  practice.  Eleven  cities  had 
adopted  it  by  1900,  77  by  1906,  and  443  by 
1911.  The  state  of  Massachusetts  has  state- 
wide compulsory  medical  inspection  for  all 
cities  and  towns.  The  agencies  for  inspection 
are,  singly  or  in  combination,  the  teachers, 
who  examine  chiefly  for  defective  sight  and 
hearing;  school  nurses,  who  observe  and  treat 
minor  contagious  diseases,  reporting  serious 
cases,  and  follow  up  cases  in  the  pupils’ 
homes ; and  physicians,  who  regularly  make 
partial  inspection,  as  for  defective  sight  or  for 
contagious  diseases,  or  thorough  physical  ex- 
aminations with  a view  to  discovering  defects 
or  organic  diseases  and  suggesting  treatment. 
The  administration  of  medical  inspection,  re- 
versing its  early  tendency,  is  now  chiefly  con- 
trolled by  boards  of  education  through  their 
own  paid  physicians,  rather  than  by  boards 
of  health.  Out  of  443  cities  reporting,  337 
have  the  former  system,  106  the  latter;  the 
total  force  of  physicians  employed  is  reported 
as  1,415,  chiefly  in  the  north  Atlantic  and 
north  central  states;  69  cities  have  dental  in- 
spection by  dentists ; in  some  cities  dental 
associations  maintain  free  dental  clinics  for 
school  children.  See  Health,  Public,  Regu- 
lation of;  Nurses,  District;  School  Hy- 
giene. References:  L.  H.  Gulick,  and  L.  P. 
Ayres,  Medical  Inspection  of  Schools  (1908)  ; 
“What  American  Cities  are  doing  for  the 
Health  of  School  Children”  in  Russell  Sage 
Foundation,  Dept,  of  Hygiene,  Bulletin  No. 
101,  1911.  ' K.  C.  B. 

SCHOOLS,  NIGHT.  Night  schools  to  the 
number  of  nearly  1,000  have  been  organized  to 
meet  the  needs  of  boys  and  girls  who  are  corn- 


262 


SCHOOLS,  OPEN  AIR— SCHOOLS,  PRIMARY 


pelled  to  work  during  the  day,  of  persons  past 
the  school  age  and  regularly  employed,  and  es- 
pecially of  foreigners  who  wish  to  learn  Eng- 
lish and  the  ways  of  American  citizenship. 
They  are  maintained  as  a part  of  the  regular 
public  school  system  in  more  than  200  cities 
of  8,000  population  or  over  in  the  United 
States.  They  are  open  and  free  to  all  with- 
out limitation  as  to  age  or  sex  or  nationality, 
and  with  sessions  of  two  or  two  and  one-half 
hours,  three  to  five  evenings  per  week,  from 
three  to  seven  months  in  the  year. 

Beginning  about  1835  in  the  United  States, 
these  night  schools  in  1909-10  enrolled  374,- 
364  pupils  (about  65  per  cent  males)  with  an 
average  attendance  of  145,193.  In  28  cities  of 
New  York  102,812  out  of  a total  enrollment 
of  125,086  were  above  sixteen  years  of  age. 
60  per  cent  were  in  the  elementary  classes  in 
English,  arithmetic,  writing,  etc.  Night  high 
schools  were  carried  on  in  67  cities  and  voca- 
tional night  schools  in  66,  enrolling  respective- 
ly 81,229  and  37,994.  In  subject,  material, 
and  method  of  instruction,  which  is  individual- 
ized to  an  unusual  degree,  far  greater  latitude 
is  allowed  than  in  the  day  schools. 

Frequently  large  and  efficient  night  schools 
of  high  grade  are  conducted  by  associations 
and  corporate  agencies  such  as  Cooper  Union 
in  New  York  City,  Drexel  Institute  in  Phila- 
delphia, and  the  Young  Men’s  Christian  Asso- 
ciations in  nearly  all  the  great  cities.  These 
institutions  usually  charge  a tuition  fee,  and 
emphasize  vocational,  business,  and  technical 
courses.  Certain  strong  institutions  like  New 
York  University,  the  University  of  Minnesota, 
Georgetown  University,  and  Armour  Institute 
of  Technology  of  Chicago  give  excellent  evening 
session  courses  in  law  and  in  subjects  especial- 
ly related  to  commerce  and  business,  which 
may  be  counted  towards  a regular  degree. 

See  Education,  Recent  Tendencies  in  ; 
Schools,  Continuation. 

References:  E.  G.  Dexter,  Hist,  of  Education 
in  the  U.  S.  (1906),  541-545;  Dutton  and 
Snedden,  Administration  of  Public  Education 
in  the  U.  S.  (1908),  ch.  xxvi. 

Kendric  C.  Babcock. 

SCHOOLS,  OPEN-AIR.  Open-air  schools 
(known  in  Germany  as  open-air-recovery,  or 
forest,  schools)  are  recently  devised  schools  for 
frail,  poorly-nourished,  or  diseased  children,  in 
which  regular  teachers  cooperate  with  physi- 
cians and  nurses  to  carry  on  part  or  all  of  the 
regular  school  course,  with  small  classes,  under 
conditions  combining  instruction  in  the  open 
air,  or  in  rooms  one  side  of  which  is  open  to 
the  fresh  air,  with  careful  provisions  for  abun- 
dant nourishing  food,  suitable  clothing,  the 
strictest  cleanliness  (including  baths),  out- 
door play,  and  enforced  periods  of  sleep  or  rest. 
The  first  experiments  were  made  in  1904  in 
Charlottenburg,  Germany,  with  backward  and 
physically  deficient  children  rather  than  those 


who  were  diseased  or  subnormal.  These  "chil- 
dren in  most  cases  showed  marked  improvement 
in  weight,  vigor  of  mind  and  body,  disposition 
toward  work  and  play,  and  capacity  to  carry 
on  their  school  work  under  the  new  conditions, 
even  surpassing  their  fellows  in  the  regular 
schools.  Other  German  cities,  London  and 
others  in  England,  and  in  the  United  States 
Providence,  Boston,  New  York  City  (which  at 
first  used  four  abandoned  ferry-boats  for  its 
open  air  schools),  Chicago,  Hartford,  Roches- 
ter and  Pittsburg  established  similar  schools 
with  like  success,  during  the  next  five  yeai'3. 

American  open-air  schools  have  thus  far 
aimed  primarily  at  the  tubercular  child  in  the 
early  stages  of  the  disease.  They  have  been 
carried  on  in  almost  every  case  by  an  alliance 
— probably  soon  to  be  outgrown — between  the 
school  authorities  and  some  anti-tuberculosis 
association,  the  former  providing  the  buildings 
or  remodeled  rooms,  the  educational  equip- 
ment, the  teachers,  and,  sometimes,  the  physi- 
cians, and  the  latter  providing  the  food,  special 
clothing,  a nurse,  and  transportation  where 
needed.  Open-air  schools  are  held  in  winter 
as  well  as  in  summer  and  autumn,  with  provi- 
sion for  keeping  the  temperature  for  the  child 
at  least  above  40  degrees.  Children  are  ad- 
mitted and  discharged  on  the  recommendation 
of  principal  and  physician. 

See  Education,  Recent  Tendencies  in. 

References:  L.  P.  Ayres,  Open-Air  Schools 
(1910);  Boston  School  Committee,  “Report 
of  Commission  to  Investigate  the  Problem  of 
Tuberculosis  among  School  Children”  in 
School  Documents,  No.  2,  1909 ; S.  C.  Kings- 
ley, Open-Air  Crusaders  (1910). 

Kendeic  C.  Babcock. 

SCHOOLS,  PRACTICAL  ARTS.  A type  of 
industrial  and  manual  training  school  intended 
for  girls  and  based  upon  the  effort  to  teach 
them  things  that  will  be  useful  to  housewives 
and  mothers,  such  as  cooking,  dressmaking, 
millinery,  and  a knowledge  of  the  construction 
and  proper  use  of  houses;  along  with  academic 
training  in  history  and  government,  and  eco- 
nomics. See  Schools,  High;  Manual  Train- 
ing. A.  B.  H. 

SCHOOLS,  PRIMARY.  Even  under  the  best 
conditions  a great  majority  of  the  children  will 
not  remain  in  school  long  enough  to  go  to  col- 
lege or  even  to  finish  the  high  school  course; 
hence  it  is  extremely  important  that  the  great- 
est effort  he  put  forth  by  governmental  agen- 
cies to  make  the  lower  schools  efficient.  If 
any  school  must  be  neglected,  it  cannot  be  that 
for  children  between  the  ages  of  six  and  ten. 
If  compulsory  education  is  to  be  effective  the 
most  thought  and  the  richest  content  should  be, 
put  into  the  elementary  school. 

The  development  of  the  elementary  school  in 
the  United  States  was  slow  until  well  into  the 
nineteenth  century.  The  “district  school”  sys- 


263 


SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC,  RIGHTS  OF  TEACHERS  IN— SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC,  NORMAL 


tem  put  pupils  in  all  stages  of  advancement 
under  the  care  of  a single  teacher,  who  was 
expected  to  satisfy  the  needs  of  all  from  A B 
C to  the  sixth  reader.  There  were  no  grades; 
no  two  schools  were  alike,  and  each  was  a law 
unto  itself. 

In  the  colonies  during  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury reading,  writing,  and  the  capital  laws 
were  taught  in  obedience  to  legislative  enact- 
ment. Spelling  and  arithmetic  were  not  men- 
tioned though  undoubtedly  taught.  In  the 
eighteenth  century  arithmetic  was  officially 
added,  but  not  generally  in  New  England  until 
the  latter  half  of  the  century.  Spelling  and 
grammar  were  not  differentiated  from  reading 
until  shortly  before  1800,  when  Dilwortlis 
Speller  became  a popular  text.  The  beginning 
of  grades  came  when  in  the  more  thickly  pop- 
ulated places  it  was  found  to  be  cheaper  to 
build  school  houses  with  several  rooms,  and 
more  convenient  to  give  smaller  pupils  to  one 
teacher  and  larger  ones  to  another,  with  little 
or  no  thought  as  to  pedagogical  propriety. 

About  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century 
definite  efforts  at  grading  became  general, 
and  were  aided  by  the  appointment  of  city 
superintendents  which  began  about  1840.  Now 
no  town  of  any  importance  is  without  its  grad- 
ed schools  and  superintendent.  With  the  in- 
troduction of  grades  came  the  terms  “primary” 
and  “intermediate,”  indicating  approximately 
though  not  sharply  the  first  and  second  halves 
of  the  elementary  school  period.  The  funda- 
mental studies  of  the  first  three  or  four  grades, 
continued  through  the  whole  period  of  the 
elementary  school  are  reading,  writing  and 
arithmetic,  because  of  their  relation  to  lan- 
guage, literature  and  art.  The  most  respected 
educational  authorities  hold  that  reading 
should  not  be  taught  as  an  end,  but  that  the 
child’s  reading  vocabulary  should  grow  from 
the  necessity  of  self-expression  in  the  activities 
of  the  school.  There  is  a great  variety  of 
opinion  among  acknowledged  leaders  as  to  the 
content  of  the  first  three  years  of  school  work 
Perhaps  the  best  digested  opinion  is  to  be 
found  in  the  course  of  study  for  a fully  graded 
school  as  recommended  by  the  committee  of 
the  National  Education  Association  on  ele- 
mentary education. 

Reading,  10  lessons  per  week,  first  two  years ; 5 
per  week  next  six  years. 

Writing,  10  lessons  per  week,  first  two  years,  5 
per  week  for  two  years,  3 for  two  years. 

Spelling  lists,  4 lessons  per  week,  fourth  to  sixth 
year. 

Grammar  and  composition,  5 lessons  per  week, 
oral,  to  sixth  year ; 5 per  week  with  text,  sixth  to 
eighth  year. 

Arithmetic,  oral,  GO  minutes  per  week  for  two 
and  a half  years  ; 5 per  week  to  seventh  year. 

Algebra,  5 lessons  per  week,  seventh  and  eighth 
years. 

Geography,  60  minutes  per  week,  two  and  a half 
years;  5 per  week  to  seventh  year. 

Natural  science  and  hygiene,  60  minutes  per 
week,  all  eight  years. 

IT.  S.  history,  5 lessons  per  week  in  seventh  year 
and  half  of  eighth  year. 

General  history,  oral,  60  minutes  per  week,  all 
eight  years. 


Physical  culture,  60  minutes  per  week,  all  eight 
years. 

Vocal  music,  60  minutes  per  week,  all  eight  years. 

Drawing,  60  minutes  per  week,  all  eight  years. 

Manual  training,  cookery  or  sewing,  a half  day 
each  week  in  seventh  and  eighth  years  ; periods  of 
recitation,  first  and  second  years,  15  minutes  ; third 
and  fourth  years,  20  minutes  ; fifth  and  sixth  years, 
25  minutes  ; seventh  and  eighth  years,  30  minutes. 

See  Education  as  a Function  of  Govern- 
ment; Education,  Recent  Tendencies  in; 
Educational  Statistics;  Schools,  Grammar, 
and  Grades;  Teachers,  Legal  Qualifica- 
tions OF. 

References;  E.  E.  Brown,  “What  Are  the 
Essentials  in  the  Elementary  School  Course?” 
in  Nat.  Educational  Assoc.,  Proceedings, 
1907 ; Jane  Addams,  “Foreign  Born  Children 
in  Primary  Grades”  in  ibid,  1897,  104;  E.  G. 
Dexter,  Hist,  of  Education  in  the  U.  S. 
(1906);  Ellen  Key,  Education  of  the  Child 
(1910);  A.  C.  Perry,  Problems  of  the  Ele- 
mentary School  (1910)  ; H.  Miinsterberg,  Psy- 
chology and  the  Teacher  (1909)  ; G.  Stanley 
Hall,  Adolescence,  Educational  Problems 
(1911).  G.  E.  Fellows. 

SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC,  LEGAL  RIGHTS  OF 
TEACHERS  IN.  A teacher  in  the  public 
schools  must  have  an  official  certificate  showing 
that  he  has  the  qualifications  required  in  the 
state  in  which  he  expects  to  teach.  A contract 
is  generally  void  without  the  possession  of 
such  a certificate.  A superintendent  or  other 
proper  authority  can  revoke  a license  only  for 
proper  cause  such  as  immorality,  negligence,  or 
criminal  offense.  If  a school  teacher  is  dis- 
charged without  cause  he  may  recover  compen- 
sation. The  teacher  must  perform  the  ordi- 
nary duties  pertaining  to  his  office  and  such 
other  duties  as  may  be  stated  in  his  contract 
together  with  the  duties  imposed  by  the  stat- 
utes of  the  state.  A teacher  need  not  prove 
that  the  school  corporation  or  township  has 
funds  in  order  to  recover  his  salary.  Contracts 
to  teach  going  beyond  the  term  of  office  of  the 
directors  are  valid  if  in  making  them  the 
teacher  does  not  knowingly  enter  into  it  with 
the  intention  to  forestall  successors.  The  aboli- 
tion of  the  school  does  not  annul  the  contract. 
If  a certificate  is  withheld  maliciously  without 
reason  the  officer  withholding  the  certificate 
is  liable  in  damages.  In  general,  teachers  are 
employed  by  school  directors,  boards,  or  trus- 
tees. Individuals  composing  the  board  have  no 
power  to  bind  the  district  except  when  they 
are  convened  as  a board.  See  Teachers,  Legal 
Qualifications  of.  References:  C.  W.  Bar- 
deen, Common  School  Law  (1878),  ch.  lvii,  95; 
IT.  LTpdegraff,  “Teacher’s  Certificates”  in  U.  S. 
Bulletin  of  Education,  No.  18,  1911;  O.  B. 
Willcox,  Am.  and  Eng.  Encyclopedia  of  Law 
(W.  M.  McKinney,  Ed.,  1909).  J.  V.  B. 

SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC,  NORMAL.  Definition.— 

An  institution  for  the  professional  training  of 
teachers.  Since  the  growth  of  schools  of  edu- 


264 


SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC,  PROFESSIONAL 


cation  in  connection  with  the  universities  of 
this  country  the  term  “normal  school”  is  often 
used  in  a special  sense  designating  a school  for 
the  training  of  elementary  school  teachers. 

History. — It  seems  that  the  earliest  normal 
school  was  founded  by  La  Salle  in  1685  at 
Rheims,  France.  In  1704  August  Hermann 
Franke  established  a normal  school  at  Halle 
which  still  bears  his  name.  He  there  intro- 
duced professional  training  in  Germany  whence 
it  has  been  largely  copied  in  America.  Most 
of  the  early  professional  teachers  in  America 
received  their  training  largely  in  the  acade- 
mies. The  training  of  teachers  was  one  of  the 
aims  of  the  academy  and  charitable  schools 
founded  in  1749  through  the  efforts  of  Benja- 
min Franklin.  The  first  typical  normal  schools 
of  America  were  founded  in  Massachusetts  in 
1839  and  1840  at  Lexington,  Barre  and  Bridge- 
water.  They  were  the  result  of  the  combined 
efforts  of  Charles  Brooks,  Henry  Barnard  and 
Edmund  Dwight  in  trying  to  secure  higher 
qualification  among  teachers.  James  G.  Car- 
ter has  often  been  called  the  “Father  of  Amer- 
ican Normal  Schools”  because  he  had  opened 
a private  school  for  the  training  of  teachers 
as  early  as  1827.  In  1844  New  York  estab- 
lished its  first  Normal  at  Albany  and  contin- 
ued to  subsidize  academies  for  the  training  of 
teachers  for  a period  of  thirty  years.  Every 
state  now  supports  normal  schools  except  Dela- 
ware, Nevada  and  Wyoming,  which  have  pro- 
vision for  teacher’s  training  in  other  institu- 
tions. 

The  270  public  and  private  normal  schools 
now  claim  an  enrollment  of  approximately 
80,000.  A teaching  force  of  over  3,000,  an  in- 
come of  eight  and  a half  million  dollars,  and 
(1910)  15,430  graduates  were  reported. 

In  their  libraries,  1,331,705  volumes  are  re- 
ported having  an  estimated  value  of  $1,627,801. 

The  public  normal  schools  fall  into  two  class- 
es, state  and  city.  The  state  normal  schools 
are  governed  often  by  the  state  board  of  edu- 
cation; in  some  states  by  a special  board  of 
trustees  or  regents.  In  Indiana,  Iowa,  Louisi- 
ana and  Rhode  Island  a single  central  state 
normal  school  is  maintained.  Other  states 
maintain  two  or  more  such  schools  in  various 
parts  of  the  state;  Michigan  and  Wisconsin 
having  one  in  nearly  every  county.  Normal 
departments  are  often  a part  of  colleges  and 
universities.  Some  of  the  universities  make  the 
training  of  teachers  an  essential  part  of  their 
work,  as  Ohio  University  at  Athens,  and  Val- 
paraiso University,  Indiana.  Requirements 
for  admission  vary  widely.  Many  schools  ad- 
mit applicants  as  students  who  have  success- 
fully completed  the  studies  of  the  eight  ele- 
mentary grades.  Some  of  the  schools  that  offer 
a two  year  course  for  graduation  require  the 
students  to  have  had  a two  year  high  school 
course  or  its  equivalent.  An  increasing  num- 
ber of  public  normal  schools  require  a four 
year  high  school  course  for  admission.  Such 


schools  are  considered  to  be  of  collegiate 
grade  and  confer  degrees.  The  courses  usually 
include  a thorough  review  of  the  elementary 
school  branches  with  the  methods  for  their 
teaching;  a high  school  course,  which  can  be 
completed  in  the  normal ; and  courses  in  pro- 
fessional studies,  such  as  child  psychology, 
school  sanitation  and  hygiene,  observation  and 
practice  teaching,  school  management,  class 
room  method,  science  and  history  of  education. 
Many  of  the  schools  also  offer  work  in  psy- 
chology, philosophy  of  education  and  pedagogy. 
Recently  the  normal  schools  have  had  to  supply 
special  teachers  in  manual  arts,  domestic  sci- 
ence, agriculture,  popular  science,  home  arts, 
etc.  One  hundred  and  fifty-five  public  normal 
schools  now  offer  instruction  in  one  or  all  of 
these  subjects.  Public  normal  schools  are 
found  in  many  of  the  larger  cities  as  an  in- 
tegral part  of  the  city  school  system  to  pro- 
vide necessary  instruction  for  the  local  teach- 
ers. Private  normal  schools  have  flourished  in 
the  middle  and  western  states,  their  enroll- 
ment in  1911  was  about  9,500.  They  furnish 
opportunities  for  review  and  study  in  special 
subjects.  In  some  states,  as  in  Indiana,  ■ if 
their  work  is  up  to  certain  standards  they 
receive  the  recognition  of  the  state  board  of 
education.  Many  of  these  private  normals  are 
supported  by  tuition  alone. 

In  states  like  Colorado  and  Kansas  tempo- 
rary public  normal  schools  are  established  in 
various  sections  of  the  state  during  the  sum- 
mer months,  known  as  Normal  Institutes. 
Some  of  the  churches,  notably  the  Roman 
Catholic  and  Lutheran,  maintain  normals  to 
train  teachers  for  their  parochial  schools. 
Schools  of  special  method  in  kindergarten  work, 
manual  training,  teaching  of  defectives,  etc., 
should  also  be  noted  in  any  study  of  teachers’ 
training  schools. 

See  Education  as  a Function  of  Govern- 
ment; Educational  Statistics;  Schools, 
Public,  System  and  Problems  of;  State  Ex- 
aminers; Teachers,  Legal  Qualifications 
of. 

References;  W.  F.  Gordy,  Rise  and  Growth 
of  the  Normal  School  Idea  in  the  U.  S.  (1891)  ; 
U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Education,  Reports 
(1891  to  date)  ; S.  S.  Laurie,  Training  of  the 
Teachers  (1901);  C.  J.  Merriam,  Normal 
School  Education  and  Efficiency  in  Teaching 
(1905).  J.  V.  Breitwieser. 

SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC,  PROFESSIONAL.  Def- 
inition.— There  is  wide  diversity  of  opinion  re- 
garding the  classes  of  instruction  which  should 
be  considered  professional.  The  reports  of  the 
United  States  Commissioner  of  Education  in- 
clude in  the  classification,  schools  of  theology, 
law,  medicine,  pharmacy,  dentistry  and  veteri- 
nary science;  and  omit  engineering,  agricul- 
ture, education  and  commerce,  which  comprise 
some  of  the  most  interesting  activities  of  our 
public  universities  and  schools. 


265 


SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC,  PROFESSIONAL 


Organization. — Public  professional  schools 
are  controlled  by  the  state,  divisions  of  the 
state,  or  by  the  national  government ; they  no- 
where include  theological  schools  because  of 
the  doctrine  of  complete  separation  of  church. 
These  schools  are  coeducational  ( see  Educa- 
tion, Coordinate  and  Coeducational)  in  the 
West  and  Middle  West.  In  all  professional  de- 
partments, except  education,  the  men  far  out- 
number the  women.  A great  weakness  in  many 
state  systems  is  the  duplication  of  courses 
caused  by  the  separation  of  the  college  of 
agriculture  and  mechanics  arts  from  the  state 
university  and  the  consequent  rivalry  which 
ensues. 

Some  of  the  western  states  also  support  sep- 
arate schools  of  mines,  which  results  in  fur- 
ther duplication  and  weakness.  There  is  much 
talk  of  consolidation,  but  at  the  present  time 
it  has  been  without  practical  result.  In  the 
southern  states  separate  schools  are  main- 
tained for  the  instruction  of  negroes  in  agri- 
culture and  mechanics  arts. 

Financial  Support. — The  support  of  profes- 
sional schools  other  than  agricultural  colleges 
and  some  engineering  schools  is  usually  from 
the  funds  of  the  state  universities  or  through 
special  endowments.  The  agricultural  and  me- 
chanic arts  schools  are  supported  mainly  by 
the  federal  Land  Grant  Act  of  1862  and  federal 
annual  money  gifts  of  $40,000  to  each  of  the 
land  grant  schools  besides  appropriations  for 
experimental  stations. 

Law  Schools. — Of  the  114  law  schools  re- 
porting to  the  Commissioner  of  Education  in 

1910,  5,449  men  and  30  women  were  enrolled 
in  the  34  public  schools,  each  one  of  which, 
with  the  exception  of  Howard  University, 
Washington,  D.  C.,  was  affiliated  with  a state 
university.  The  usual  course  in  a public  law 
school  covers  three  years  in  the  North  and 
West,  and  two  years  in  the  South.  A col- 
legiate degree  is  not  required  in  most  of 
these  schools,  but  the  necessity  for  a higher 
standard  of  preparation  is  felt.  Beginning  in 

1911,  two  years  of  college  work  have  been  re- 
quired by  Minnesota  and  Missouri;  one  year 
by  California,  Illinois,  Kentucky  and  Nebras- 
ka. From  1912-1913,  California  and  Colorado 
have  required  two  years  of  preliminary  work, 
and  Kansas  and  Michigan  one  year  each. 

The  southern  schools  do  not  as  yet  think 
they  are  able  to  make  similar  requirements. 

Medical  Schools. — In  1910,  30  public  medical 
schools,  2 of  them  homeopathic,  reported  to 
the  United  States  Commissioner  of  Education 
out  of  a total  of  129  medical  schools.  They 
had  enrolled  3,745  men  and  130  women.  The 
admission  requirement  for  medical  schools  is 
on  the  whole  more  rigid  than  that  for  law 
schools.  In  the  University  of  Mississippi  a 
complete  medical  course  of  four  years  is  re- 
quired. Many  demand  two  years’  college  work 
previous  to  matriculation.  In  some  of  the 
state  universities  a premedical  course  of  two 


years’  work  is  necessary,  studies  so  arranged 
that  the  student  is  prepared  to  begin  his  pro- 
fessional education  at  the  expiration  of  this 
time. 

Dental  Schools. — 792  men  and  20  women 
from  eight  public  dental  schools  out  of  a total 
of  18  reported  to  the  Commissioner  of  Edu- 
cation in  1910.  The  course  is  three  years  and 
no  previous  collegiate  attendance  is  required. 

Schools  of  Pharmacy. — Twenty-three  public 
schools  from  a total  of  79  are  reported  (1910). 
The  usual  course  is  two  years. 

Veterinary  Medicine. — Six  public  schools 
from  a total  of  20  having  a registration  of 
428  men  and  one  woman  were  reported  in  1910. 
The  usual  course  is  three  years. 

Normal  Schools. — While  some  of  the  state 
universities  support  departments  of  education 
for  training  of  teachers,  most  of  this  work  is 
done  by  public  normal  schools  of  which  nearly 
every  state  supports  one  or  more.  In  1909- 
1910  there  were  196  normal  schools  reporting 
a total  of  3,185  instructors  and  79,546  students. 
There  were  17,096  men  and  62,450  women.  The 
public  schools,  both  in  numbers  and  attendance 
far  exceed  the  private  schools.  Requirements 
for  admission  differ  widely  in  the  various 
states.  Some  require  merely  the  eight  grades 
of  the  elementary  schools  to  be  completed, 
others,  two  years  of  high  school;  still  others 
exact  the  completion  of  a four  year  high  school 
course,  or  its  equivalent.  They  offer  four  year 
degree  courses  which  are  cultural  as  well  as 
professional  and  parallel  to  the  regular  col- 
lege courses  and  several  of  them  confer  the 
degree  of  A.  B.  They  also  provide  for  special- 
ization in  manual  arts,  domestic  economy,  ag- 
riculture and  domestic  science. 

Agricultural  and  Mechanical  Colleges. — The 
“Land  Grant”  colleges  show  marked  increase 
in  the  number  of  students  and  instructors,  and 
an  improvement  in  equipment.  Short  courses, 
and  extension  work  for  the  farmers,  and  sum- 
mer courses  for  public  school  teachers,  have 
been  among  the  more  recent  activities.  The 
total  number  of  students  enrolled  during  the 
year  ending  June  30,  1910,  was  80,646.  The 
subjects  taught  cover  a wide  field.  Agricul- 
ture, horticulture,  forestry,  veterinary  science, 
household  economy,  mechanical  engineering, 
civil  engineering,  electrical  engineering,  mining 
engineering,  chemical  engineering,  sanitary  en- 
gineering. textile  engineering,  architecture, 
chemistry,  pharmacy  and  general  science. 

Engineering  Schools. — In  most  of  the  state 
universities  engineering  is  taught  and  the  dup- 
lication of  courses  with  the  agricultural  col- 
leges and  school  of  mines  in  the  same  state, 
is  a source  of  weakness  to  these  departments. 
The  usual  course  is  four  years  and  a prior 
collegiate  training  is  not  required. 

Schools  of  Commerce. — These  have  been  or- 
ganized rapidly  within  recent  years  especially 
in  the  state  universities  of  Wisconsin,  Cali- 
fornia and  Illinois.  Their  purpose  is  to  in- 


266 


SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC,  REQUIRED  SUBJECTS  IK— SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC,  SYSTEM  OF 


struct  students  in  economics  and  business  tech- 
nique. 

Schools  of  Journalism. — Journalism  is  the 
latest  pursuit  to  be  recognized  as  a profession 
by  the  establishment  of  professional  courses  of 
instruction.  In  a number  of  state  universities, 
schools  of  journalism  have  been  established, 
those  of  the  University  of  Wisconsin  and  of 
Columbia  University  being  especially  note- 
worthy. 

Tendencies. — Public  professional  schools  have 
shown  a large  growth  in  the  last  decade,  with 
a healthy  tendency  to  link  the  schools  closely 
to  the  life  of  the  people  of  the  state.  This 
has  resulted  in  widening  their  scope  and  has 
disposed  the  people  of  the  state  to  be  more 
liberal  to  this  type  of  education. 

See  Degrees,  Academic;  Education,  Agri- 
cultural; Education  as  a Function  of  Gov- 
ernment; Education,  Industrial;  Educa- 
tion, Technical;  Schools,  Trade;  State 
Universities. 

References:  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Educa- 
tion, Annual  Reports-,  N.  M.  Butler,  Mono- 
graphs in  Education  in  the  U.  S.  (issued  by 


Louisiana  Purchase  Exposition,  1904)  ; C.  F. 
Tlnving,  History  of  Higher  Education  in  Amer- 
ica (1906)  ; E.  E.  Slosson,  Great  American 
Universities  ( 1910 ) . 

William  Frederick  Slocum. 

SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC,  REQUIRED  SUBJECTS 

IN.  In  some  of  the  states  certain  courses  of 
study  are  prescribed  for  all  schools.  There  is 
a wide  agreement  on  the  fundamental  subjects 
that  must  be  taught  and  studied.  By  special 
enactment  certain  studies  such  as  scientific 
temperance,  hygiene,  agriculture  in  the  rural 
schools,  etc.,  may  be  prescribed.  The  refusal, 
on  the  part  of  a pupil  to  pursue  a prescribed 
study  may  lead  to  his  expulsion  except  in  ex- 
tenuating circumstances.  Wherever  compul- 
sory education  laws  are  operative  private 
schools  must  also  maintain  instruction  in  re- 
quired subjects  during  the  compulsory  ages. 
See  Educational  Administration;  Schools, 
Public,  System  and  Problems  of.  References: 
state  statutes  and  school  codes;  0.  B.  Will- 
cox,  American  and  English  Encyclopedia  of 
Law  (1909).  J.  V.  B. 


SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC,  SYSTEM  AND  PROBLEMS  OF 


The  people  of  the  United  States  take  pride 
in  their  public  schools.  So  deep  seated  is  the 
idea  that  public  schools  are  necessary  to  the 
general  prosperity  of  the  nation  that  it  is 
assumed  that  the  schools  are  as  good  as  any 
in  the  world.  This  ideal  is  unfortunately  not 
yet  realized;  there  is  no  national  system  of 
schools;  the  states  all  have  their  own  systems 
and  no  two  are  exactly  alike,  yet  there  is 
enough  similarity  so  that  a foreigner  visiting 
this  country  would  probably  at  first  glance  see 
the  likenesses  rather  than  the  differences. 

Purpose. — The  essential  feature  of  the  public 
schools  is  free  instruction  for  all  children, 
from  about  the  age  of  five  or  six,  for  twelve 
or  more  years.  The  widest  differences  are  to 
be  found  in  the  manner  in  which  this  general 
purpose  is  carried  out,  as,  for  instance,  in  a 
poor  rural  district  as  compared  with  a wealthy 
urban  community.  The  general  purpose  is  the 
same.  The  great  problem  is  not  necessarily 
uniformity,  but  to  see  how  the  best  possible 
results  can  be  secured  for  all  children  in  their 
surroundings  and  to  prepare  them  for  any 
circumstances  in  which  they  may  find  them- 
selves. In  this  the  cities  have  had  the  ad- 
vantage, in  that  larger  amounts  of  property 
are  available  for  school  taxation  and  the  den- 
sity of  the  population  makes  organization  and 
cooperation  easier.  In  so  far  as  the  carrying 
out  of  the  official  program  indicates  success, 
many  cities  accomplish  this  so  well  that  there 
is  little  more  to  be  desired;  but  whether  the 
content  of  the  course  of  study  is  nearly  perfect 
115 


is  another  question.  The  course  of  study  has 
changed  from  decade  to  decade.  The  acquiring 
of  information  from  text-books  has  largely 
given  way  to  the  intent  to  inspire  original 
thinking,  to  secure  first  hand  contact  with  na- 
ture and  art.  Whatever  the  method,  the  end 
sought  is  to  make  efficient,  self-respecting,  self- 
supporting,  public-spirited  citizens.  How  this 
may  be  accomplished  with  the  schools  as  they 
are,  or  how  the  schools  should  be  changed  so 
as  to  accomplish  it,  is  the  problem  before  those 
in  charge  of  the  administration  of  the  schools. 

It  has  been  estimated  that  only  about  one 
out  of  120  of  the  population  ever  reaches  col- 
lege, and  one  out  of  20  gets  to  high  school, 
and  that  only  from  17  per  cent  to  25  per  cent 
finish  the  usual  eight  grades.  The  inferences 
are  obvious — if  any  large  proportion  of  chil- 
dren leave  school  before  the  age  of  fourteen, 
either  the  schools  do  not  offer  sufficiently  at- 
tractive programs  or  else  dire  necessity  com- 
pels them  to  leave  school  for  work. 

Grading. — What  are  known  as  the  common 
schools  have,  except  in  some  rural  regions,  been 
divided  into  eight  grades  (a  few  localities  have 
nine  and  a few  seven).  These  are  quite  uni- 
form in  villages  and  cities,  but  in  rural  com- 
munities where  schools  are  small  the  grading 
is  irregular.  The  concensus  of  opinion  of  edu- 
cators is  in  favor  of  so  altering  the  conditions 
in  the  country  by  consolidation  of  schools  as  to 
make  grading  feasible.  Much  good  has  come  out 
of  the  old  fashioned  district  school  taught  by 
a single  teacher  who  had  pupils  at  all  stages 


267 


SCHOOLS,  PUBLIC,  SYSTEM  AND  PROBLEMS  OF 


of  advancement  from  the  primary  up  to,  and 
including  some,  high  school  studies,  but  modern 
progress  finds  the  rural  district  school  waste- 
ful and  less  effective  on  the  whole  than  the 
graded  school. 

Rural  Schools. — The  country  schools  present 
the  most  important  educational  problem  of 
the  time.  Undoubtedly,  the  general  welfare 
of  the  people  is  more  affected  by  the  country 
school  than  by  the  city  systems,  since  more 
than  one  half  of  the  people  live  outside  of 
cities.  In  many  states  85  per  cent  of  the  chil- 
dren never  attend  any  other  than  the  district 
school  near  their  own  home,  hence  what  shall 
be  taught  in  that  school  is  all  important.  If 
the  schools  remain  as  one-room,  one-teacher 
schools  there  seems  to  be  no  solution.  Consol- 
idation of  several  small  country  schools  into 
one,  with  a high  school  for  each  county  seems 
to  offer  the  most  promise.  In  these  there  can 
be  a course  of  study  related  to  rural  life  and 
interests.  The  United  States  Commissioner 
in  his  1910  Report  says:  “The  most  important 
movement  affecting  the  public  schools  of  the 
country  at  the  present  time  has  to  do  with 
economic  conditions.  It  has  taken  two  direc- 
tions— one  agricultural  in  its  aim,  the  other 
industrial ; or  rather  the  one  rural,  the  other 
urban.”  The  great  arguments  in  favor  of  con- 
solidation (already  successful  in  several  states, 
notably  Ohio  and  Indiana)  are  that  there  can 
be  secured  better  teachers,  longer  tenure  of 
office,  better  salaries,  longer  school  year,  and 
financial  saving.  With  consolidation  the  chil- 
dren are  transported  in  public  vehicles  special- 
ly provided. 

Vocational  Instruction. — Of  the  24,000,000 
children  between  5 and  18  years  of  age  but 
few  more  than  500,000  are  receiving  instruction 
leading  toward  any  vocation,  and  these  include 
clergy,  lawyers,  doctors,  engineers,  teachers 
and  nurses.  The  strong  trend  of  educational 
opinion  now  is  that,  beginning  with  the  sixth 
grade,  there  should  be  an  opportunity  for  pu- 
pils to  have  instruction  leading  toward  some 
vocation.  Where  this  has  been  accomplished  the 
pupils  show  a greater  tendency  to  remain 
through  all  the  grades  and  the  high  school. 
School  statistics  show  that  practically  all  chil- 
dren attend  through  the  first  three  grades, 
about  ten  per  cent  are  lost  between  the  third 
and  fourth  grades,  and  more  are  lost  each  year 
after  that,  so  that  the  last  two  grades  of  the 
common  school,  and  the  high  school,  seem  to 
serve  only  the  select  few.  It  would  seem  that 
a democratic  government  should  find  some  way 
to  prepare  its  citizens  better  than  by  the 
little  reading,  writing  and  arithmetic  that  can 
be  acquired  in  the  three  or  four  grades  which 
are  attended  by  all  children.  It  is  coming  to 
be  believed  that  the  use  of  hand  work  and 
studies  which  are  the  foundation  for  vocations 
will  accomplish  the  double  purpose  of  inducing 
children  to  remain  longer  in  the  public  schools, 
and  of  better  fitting  them  for  self-support  and 


good  citizenship.  In  many  cities  the  first  has 
been  clearly  demonstrated.  The  second  is  as 
yet  somewhat  problematical,  that  is,  as  yet 
the  public  schools  have  not  generally  offered 
enough  vocational  work  fully  to  test  the  plan; 
but  in  a few  places  the  results  have  been  very 
satisfactory. 

The  argument  for  vocational  work  in  the  pub- 
lic schools  is:  “A  self-governing  people  must 
be  self-reliant  and  of  responsible  character.  It 
is  well  known  that  the  majority  of  the  in- 
mates of  prisons  and  jails  are  those  without 
regular  occupation,  and  unskilled  in  any  art 
or  craft.  If  the  public  schools  can  insure 
sufficient  foundation  for  pupils  to  become 
skilled  workmen  and  self-supporting  citizens 
then  there  is  likely  to  be  less  of  crime  and  a 
higher  grade  of  citizenship.”  Such  results 
would  amply  warrant  any  necessary  expense 
in  equipment  and  maintenance  of  the  schools. 
Where  manual  training  has  been  fully  intro- 
duced it  has  never  been  dropped,  but  rather 
there  has  been  a tendency  to  carry  it  further 
toward  instruction  in  trades.  This  indicates 
public  need  and  desire.  Again  there  is  nothing 
but  tradition  to  support  the  practice  of  schools 
offering  intellectual  training  only. 

Foreigners  in  Schools. — The  public  school 
problem  has  been  much  complicated,  especially 
in  the  large  cities,  by  the  presence  in  great 
numbers  of  the  children  of  immigrants  who 
are  at  first  unacquainted  with  the  English 
language,  and  whose  home  surroundings  are 
not  in  accord  with  American  ideals.  In  some 
parts  of  several  states  the  work  of  the  public 
schools  is  actually  conducted  in  a foreign 
language.  In  spite  of  the  difficulties  some  re- 
markable results  have  been  accomplished,  not- 
ably on  the  east  side  in  New  York. 

The  graded  system  undoubtedly  offers  much 
to  criticize,  especially  that  it  has  a tendency 
to  stamp  out  individuality,  to  hold  back  the 
bright  children,  to  wait  for  the  dull  ones,  and 
cater  to  mediocrity.  These  difficulties  have  to 
be  solved  by  skilled  teachers  and  wise  super- 
vision, for  it  is  manifestly  impossible  to  ar- 
range for  the  ideal  instruction  for  the  in- 
dividual in  cities  where  there  are  thousands 
of  children  in  single  school  houses,  or  indeed 
anywhere,  if  more  than  a score  of  children 
arc  under  the  care  of  a single  teacher. 

Too  Few  Teachers. — There  has  never  been  a 
supply  of  well  trained  teachers  equal  to  the 
demand.  Still  more  difficult  will  it  be,  at  least 
for  a time,  to  find  enough  teachers  if  the  public 
schools  generally  take  up  vocational  training. 
“The  fact  that  so  many  Normal  School 
students  have  always  taught  before  entering 
upon  their  professional  courses  indicates  a 
lamentable  lack  of  standard,  more  especially 
in  the  rural  districts.  As  a matter  of  fact,  we 
are  not  training  enough  teachers  to  take  the 
places  of  those  who  drop  out  each  year.  Teach- 
ing must  be  made  more  attractive  by  higher 
' salaries  before  we  can  hope  to  recruit  enough 


268 


SCHOOLS,  PUPILS  IN,  LEGAL  RIGHTS  OF— SCHOOLS,  SUMMER 


students  for  our  normal  and  training  schools 
to  insure  trained  teachers  in  the  grade 
schools  ” (United  States  Commissioner  Report, 
1910,  II,  26). 

Compulsory  Education  Laws  have  so  increased 
the  school  attendance  as  further  to  complicate 
the  problem.  In  some  states  they  have  been 
effective  in  bringing  into  school  practically  all 
children  subject  to  the  provisions  of  the  laws. 
Although  this  reduces  the  number  of  teachers 
proportionally  to  pupils,  it  also  indicates  prog- 
ress in  public  education.  Other  indications 
of  progress  in  recent  years  are  the  remarkable 
growth  of  high  schools,  and  the  increased  num- 
ber of  elementary  schools  with  the  full  eight 
grades.  The  transportation  of  children  to 
school  at  public  expense  has  spread  in  many 
states  and,  through  consolidation  of  schools, 
has  not  only  been  the  means  of  improving  in- 
struction, but  also  of  bringing  children  to 
school  at  an  earlier  age. 

Few  communities  no  matter  how  remote  or 
sparsely  settled  in  the  whole  country  are  now 
without  school  privileges.  In  one  state  there 
are  2,000  schools  each  having  less  than  ten 
pupils,  but  these  very  schools  are  the  ones 
that  most  need  attention  and  assistance.  So 
much  more  are  the  rural  schools  in  need  than 
those  in  cities  that  the  National  Education 
Association  at  the  annual  session  of  1911  ap- 
pointed a large  committee  of  prominent  edu- 
cators to  conduct  a thorough  investigation  of 
all  the  conditions  affecting  them.  The  purpose 
is  to  bring  about  if  possible  a system  of  stand- 
ardization, closer  supervision,  better  trained 
teachers,  better  teachers’  salaries,  better  high 
school  privileges,  and  vocational  instruction 
for  the  rural  districts. 

Attitude  of  the  Public. — The  attitude  of  the 
public  toward  expenditure  for  educational  pur- 
poses is  rapidly  changing.  Not  only  have  peo- 
ple, in  general,  ceased  objecting  to  expenditure 
for  what  are  regarded  as  necessities  in  the 
schools,  but  they  recognize  that  the  sphere 
of  public  education  is  constantly  widening. 
What  was  necessary  yesterday  is  not  enough 
for  today  and  tomorrow  and  next  year.  In 
a democracy  the  public  schools  reflect  social 
progress,  so  that  the  schools  are  now  rapidly 
accepting  responsibility  for  public  health  (see) 
by  means  of  medical  care  for  children.  It  is 
now  known  that  much  that  has  been  called 
stupidity  or  backwardness  in  children  is  at- 
tributable to  defective  eyes,  ears  or  throat,  so 
the  most  progressive  of  the  city  systems  em- 
ploy medical  examiners  for  the  schools.  Other 
directions  in  which  public  education  is  pro- 
gressing are  toward : corrective  and  therapeutic 
physical  education  in  properly  equipped  gym- 
nasiums; provision  for  bathing  in  schools  and 
instruction  in  this  respect  that  will  reach 
through  the  schools  to  the  homes;  the  preven- 
tion of  disease  by  providing  sanatorium  schools 
for  those  affected  by  tuberculosis;  the  feeding 
of  children;  establishment  of  public  super- 


vised playgrounds;  practical  work  in  domestic 
science  and  domestic  art;  cooperation  of  the 
public  libraries  with  the  schools  in  cities  and 
establishment  of  travelling  libraries  for  small 
towns  and  the  country;  provision  for  school 
gardens;  vacation  schools  of  vocational  nature; 
encouraging  village  improvement  and  tree 
planting  organization,  etc. 

The  common  schools  are  by  no  means  the 
same  in  all  the  states  nor  in  all  parts  of  the 
same  state,  but  as  a definite  statement  of 
what  many  schools  are  and  what  educational 
leaders  think  all  schools  should  be  see  the 
program  for  a fully  graded  system  at  end  of 
article  on  Primary  School. 

See  Text  Book  Laws;  and  under  Educa- 
tion; School;  Schools. 

References:  A.  S.  Draper,  Supervision  of 
Country  Schools  (1904);  E.  G.  Dexter,  Hist, 
of  Education  in  the  U.  S.  (1906);  A.  Gove, 
“Rise  of  the  Superintendent”  in  Educational 
Revieio,  XIX  (1900),  519;  “School  Law,  Di- 
gest of  State  Systems”  in  U.  S.  Education 
Report,  1904,  I,  249-518;  O.  B.  Willcox, 
“Schools”  in  American  and  English  Encyclo- 
pedia of  Law  (1909);  Am.  Yea/r  Book,  1911, 
805-808,  ibid,  1912.  G.  E.  Fellows. 

SCHOOLS,  PUPILS  IN,  LEGAL  RIGHTS  OF. 

See  Pupils  in  Schools,  Legal  Rights  of. 

SCHOOLS,  REFORM.  See  Schools,  In- 
dustrial. 

SCHOOLS,  SUMMER.  The  summer  school 
is  now  a recognized  and  integral  part  of  the 
permanent  educational  organization  of  the 
country,  whether  privately  managed  or  sup- 
ported wholly  or  largely  from  state  or  local 
funds.  Its  development  falls  within  the  last 
forty  years,  but  the  first  five  years  of  this 
period  saw  the  rise  of  summer  schools  typical 
of  practically  all  those  which  have  followed — 
the  specialized  schools,  like  the  Anderson,  or 
Agassiz  School  for  the  study  of  biology,  on 
Penikese  Island,  Massachusetts  (1873),  and 
the  Concord  School  of  Philosophy  (1879)  ; the 
Sunday  School  Assembly  at  Chautauqua  Lake, 
NT  Y.  (1874)  ; the  Martha’s  Vineyard  Summer 
Institute  (1878)  ; and  the  college  or  university 
summer  schools  at  Amherst  College  and  the 
University  of  Virginia  (1876). 

Since  1900  summer  schools  have  multiplied 
rapidly.  At  the  present  time  their  best 
development  seems  to  be  through  intimate 
or  organic  connection  with  universities,  col- 
leges, normal  schools,  and  similar  recognized 
agencies  whose  standing  and  reputation  for 
wise  and  unmercenary  services  are  guarantees 
of  sound  instruction  and  practical  organization. 

In  1911  summer  schools  totalling  477  were 
listed  by  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Educa- 
tion. The  sessions  varied  from  three  weeks 
to  twelve  weeks,  the  greater  number  running 
for  six  weeks.  The  extent  of  the  influence  of 


269 


SCHOOLS,  SUPERINTENDENTS  OF— SCHOOLS,  TRADE 


some  of  these  may  be  estimated  from  the 
figures  for  enrolment:  Columbia  University, 
2,973;  University  of  Chicago  (one  of  the  four 
regular  quarters  of  the  year),  3,249;  the  Sum- 
mer School  of  the  South  (held  at  the  Univer- 
sity of  Tennessee),  2,480;  Harvard  University, 
1,031;  University  of  California,  1,950. 

The  faculties  of  summer  schools  are  usu- 
ally made  up  largely  from  the  teachers  of  the 
regular  staff  of  the  institutions  conducting 
them,  supplemented  by  distinguished  teachers 
and  lecturers  from  other  parts  of  the  country 
or  from  abroad.  Tuition  is  usually  charged, 
even  in  the  schools  supported  mainly  by  the 
state,  but  the  fees  are  never  large.  Very  few 
summer  schools  have  specific,  rigid,  or  high 
entrance  requirements,  though  many  of  the 
schools  connected  with  higher  educational  in- 
stitutions insist  on  regular  entrance  require- 
ments for  persons  who  ask  for  credit  toward 
a degree  for  their  work. 

The  scope  of  the  work  in  these  schools  varies 
greatly,  from  coaching  for  teachers’  examina- 
tions of  the  lowest  grade  to  the  highest  scien- 
tific research.  In  1893,  88  per  cent  were  of 
the  general  or  Chautauqua  type,  and  6 per 
cent  of  the  pedagogical  type;  by  1900  the  pro- 
portions were  respectively  27  and  19  per  cent. 
While  nearly  all  summer  schools  lay  special 
emphasis  upon  courses  for  teachers,  those 
maintained  by  scores  of  colleges  and  univer- 
sities usually  offer  also  many  regular  college 
courses  which  are  taken  by  regular  students 
in  large  numbers  for  removal  of  deficiencies,  or 
for  accumulating  additional  credits  with  which 
to  shorten  the  time  for  completing  the  regular 
four  years’  college  course. 

Besides  meeting  a real  demand  from  a great 
and  earnest  constituency,  many  institutions 
are  impelled  to  maintain  summer  schools 
through  a desire  to  make  their  expensive  ed- 
ucational plants  do  service  for  a much  greater 
portion  of  the  year  than  the  usual  nine  or  ten 
months. 

•See  Education,  Recent  Tendencies  in  ; 
University  Extension. 

References:  U.  S.  Corarar.  of  Education, 
Annual  Reports  (1899-1900),  320-324,  ( 19ip — 
191 1 ) ; E.  G.  Dexter,  Hist,  of  Education  in  the 
V.  8.  (1906),  ch.  xxvii. 

Kendric  C.  Babcock. 

SCHOOLS,  SUPERINTENDENTS  OF.  The 

title  superintendent  of  schools  is  much  used  to 
designate  the  chief  school  officer  of  a county  or 
a city.  The  county  superintendent  of  schools, 
sometimes  called  commissioner  of  schools,  is 
usually  elected  for  a term  varying  from  one 
to  five  years;  two  in  about  25  states.  In 
a few  states  he  is  an  appointee  of  the 
state  superintendent  of  public  instruction  or 
the  state  board  of  education.  In  New  York, 
Virginia,  and  Nevada  his  jurisdiction  is  a dis- 
trict not  coextensive  with  a county.  Con- 
necticut, Maine,  Massachusetts,  New  Hamp- 


shire, Ohio,  and  Rhode  Island  have  no  county 
superintendents  but  only  town  or  township 
supervisors. 

The  qualifications,  other  than  political  avail- 
ability, for  the  office  of  county  superintendent 
are  fixed  by  law,  and  include,  as  a rule,  at 
least  one  year  of  experience  as  a teacher  and 
the  holding  of  a specified  grade  of  teacher’s 
license  or  a diploma  from  a normal  school  or 
college;  exceptions  occur  in  weak  counties 
where  the  office  is  combined  with  some  other 
county  office,  e.  g.,  probate  judge.  The  wide 
range  of  salaries  is  shown  in  figures  for  several 
typical  states:  California,  $400  to  $4,800;  Illi- 
nois, $1,250  to  $7,500  (Cook  County  or  Chi- 
cago) ; Mississippi,  $800  to  $1,800;  and  Penn- 
sylvania, $1,000  to  $2,000. 

The  duties  of  the  county  superintendent 
usually  include:  visiting  all  rural  and  village 
schools  once  or  twice  a year ; examination  and 
certification  of  teachers,  independently  or  in 
cooperation  with  state  authorities;  enforce- 
ment of  compulsory  education  laws  and  uni- 
form courses  of  study  for  the  county;  appor- 
tionment of  state  and  county  school  moneys 
among  the  districts;  supervision  of  teachers’ 
institutes;  making  an  annual  report  to  a state 
education  office. 

The  city  superintendent  of  schools  is  usually 
chosen  by  a city  board  of  education  yearly, 
sometimes  for  a term,  occasionally  for  an  in- 
definite period.  LYilike  the  county  officer  he 
need  not  be  a resident  of  the  locality,  and  fre- 
quently he  is  called  from  another  city  or  an- 
other state.  His  duties  include  the  direct 
supervision  of  the  curriculum,  instruction,  ad- 
ministration, and  discipline  of  the  city  schools; 
the  recommendation  of  teachers  to  the  board 
for  appointment,  promotion,  discipline,  or  dis- 
missal; the  upkeep  of  the  buildings  and 
grounds,  and  plans  for  extensions;  and  the 
presentation  of  annual  reports  to  the  board 
and  to  the  state  officers  of  education.  Salaries 
range  from  about  $750  to  $10,000  (Chicago 
and  New  York  City).  The  average  is  slightly 
above  $2,000. 

See  Education,  Recent  Tendencies  in:  and 
under  Schools,  Public. 

References:  8tate  Statutes  and  School  Codes ; 
Supt.  of  Public  Inst,  of  Illinois,  “The  County 
Superintendent”  in  28th  Biennial  Report, 
1908-1910,  296-320.  K C.  Babcock. 

SCHOOLS,  TRADE.  Development. — Trade 

schools  are  of  comparatively  recent  origin 
in  the  United  States:  all  such  institutions  in 
existence  here  have  been  established  within 
the  last  half  century.  The  necessity  for  them 
arose  out  of  the  passing  of  the  older  appren- 
ticeship system.  When  the  old-time  master 
workman  who  trained  the  apprentice  in  all 
branches  of  his  trade,  gave  place  to  the  large 
American  industry  with  its  complex  machinery 
and  wide  division  of  labor  some  new  means  of 
developing  all  round  skilled  workers  became 


270 


SCHOOLS,  TRADE 


necessary,  and  the  trade  school  followed  to 
fill  this  need. 

No  common  standard  has  been  fixed  for  trade 
schools  and  for  this  reason  they  cannot  be 
closely  classified.  In  general,  however,  there 
may  be  said  to  be  four  types,  according  as  they 
are:  (1)  conducted  as  a part  of  the  public 
school  system;  (2)  supported  by  endowment 
or  private  benevolence;  (3)  operated  by  busi- 
ness corporations  as  a part  of  their  system  of 
apprenticeship;  (4)  dependent  upon  tuition 
fees  and  usually  operated  for  profit. 

In  1910  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Educa- 
tion listed  and  tentatively  classified  142  schools 
for  white  persons  in  the  United  States  which 
give  either  complete  trade  training,  preap- 
prentice trade  training  or  supplemental  in- 
dustrial instruction.  In  addition  a list  of 
fifty- three  schools  for  negroes  was  published, 
but  no  attempt  was  made  at  classification 
further  than  to  indicate  the  trades  in  which 
some  instruction  is  offered.  Twenty-two  In- 
dian schools  and  twenty-eight  technical  high 
schools  were  also  added. 

The  report  of  the  United  States  Commis- 
sioner of  Labor  for  1910  describes  the  work  of 
197  schools  which  offer  trade  training.  These 
include  both  day  and  evening  schools  of  all 
types,  for  all  races,  and  for  both  sexes.  Many 
of  these  are  primarily  academic  in  aim,  but 
trade  training  has  been  added  to  meet  the  de- 
mand for  a more  practical  education. 

Public. — Four  states  have  provided  for  state- 
aided  schools  offering  trade  training,  the  sub- 
sidies being  conditioned  upon  approval  of  the 
course  of  study  by  the  state  authorities.  Some 
others  have  enacted  laws  authorizing  school 
districts  to  establish  trade  schools.  In  Massa- 
chusetts fifteen  independent  industrial  schools 
bad  been  approved  prior  to  Oct.  1,  1911.  The 
instruction  given  in  these  schools  is  more  in 
the  nature  of  preapprentice  training.  In  New 
York  vocational  or  “factory”  schools  are  con- 
ducted in  which  a part  of  the  time  is  devoted 
to  study  and  the  remainder  to  factory  or  shop 
work.  In  1910  Connecticut  established  two 
schools  to  be  supported  entirely  by  state  funds. 
The  law  in  New  Jersey  grants  aid  to  the  maxi- 
mum limit  of  $7,000  to  industrial  schools,  pro- 
vided the  local  authorities  expend  an  equal 
amount  not  to  be  less  than  $3,000. 

The  Milwaukee  School  of  Trades,  organized 
as  a private  school  in  1906  and  taken  into  the 
public  school  system  in  1907,  is  an  example  of 
the  public  trade  school.  Both  day  and  evening 
classes  are  conducted  and  a department  for 
girls  has  been  added.  The  school  is  under  the 
control  of  the  city  board  of  school  directors 
and  an  advisory  committee  composed  of  five 
representative  employers  of  the  city.  Appli- 
cants for  admission  must  be  at  least  sixteen 
years  of  age  and  able  to  read  and  write  English 
and  do  simple  problems  in  arithmetic.  Tuition 
is  free  except  to  non-residents.  In  the  day 
school  for  boys  thirty-six  hours  a week  is  de- 


voted to  actual  practice  work  and  about  eight 
hours  to  study  of  cognate  academic  subjects. 
Two-year  courses  are  offered  in  pattern  making, 
machine  operation  and  tool  making,  and  car- 
pentry and  woodwork ; the  course  in  plumbing 
and  gas  fitting  is  one  year  in  length.  The 
School  of  Trades  for  Girls  offers  courses  in 
dressmaking  and  millinery. 

Endowed. — The  Williamson  Free  School  of 
Mechanical  Trades  opened  at  Williamson 
School  near  Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania,  in 
1891,  is  a trade  school  of  the  philanthropic,  or 
endowed,  type.  It  provides  free  support  and 
instruction  and  attempts  to  develop  skilled 
workers  capable  of  doing  journeymen’s  work. 
Trades  taught  are  bricklaying,  carpentry,  sta- 
tionary engineering,  machine  operation,  and 
pattern-making.  In  the  admission  of  candi- 
dates, who  must  be  over  16  and  under  18  years 
of  age,  preference  is  shown  to  Philadelphia  and 
other  parts  of  Pennsylvania.  The  course  for 
each  trade  covers  three  years.  A part  of  the 
time  each  year  is  devoted  to  school  and  a part 
to  shop-work.  A diploma  is  given  upon  the 
completion  of  the  course  and  effort  is  made 
to  secure  employment  for  graduates. 

Business  Concerns. — The  apprenticeship 
school  of  R.  Hoe  and  Company,  printing  press 
manufacturers  of  New  York,  is  representative 
of  industrial  schools  operated  by  business  cor- 
porations. This  school  was  established  in  1872 
and  is  one  of  the  oldest  of  its  kind  in  the 
country.  Academic  classes  are  conducted  from 
October  to  June  and  instruction  is  given  every 
day  in  the  week  from  5:20  to  6:45  p.  m.  En- 
tering apprentices  must  be  between  the  ages 
of  16  and  18  and  must  have  had  at  least  four 
years  of  previous  schooling.  The  course  is  of 
three  and  one-half  years  duration  and  attend- 
ance of  all  apprentices  is  compulsory.  In  ad- 
dition to  trades,  English,  arithmetic,  geometry, 
mechanics,  and  freehand  and  mechanical  draw- 
ing are  taught.  In  some  other  schools  of  this 
type  academic  instruction  is  offered  during  reg- 
ular work  hours,  and  the  apprentice  is  paid 
for  attendance  as  for  the  performance  of  his 
other  duties. 

Tuition  Schools. — Schools  depending  upon 
tuition  fees  usually  offer  short-term  courses, 
and  confine  their  efforts  to  the  more  easily 
learned  occupations  such  as  watch-making  and 
plumbing  for  boys,  and  millinery  and  dress- 
making for  girls. 

See  Education,  Technical;  Schools,  High, 
Commercial;  Schools,  High,  Mechanic 
Arts;  Schools,  Public,  Professional. 

References:  A.  D.  Dean,  Worker  and  the 
State  (1910),  147-317;  U.  S.  Comm’r.  of  Educ., 
Annual  Reports,  1910,  223-253;  U.  S.  Comm’r. 
of  Labor,  Annual  Reports,  1902,  1910;  National 
Society  for  the  Promotion  of  Industrial  Educ., 
Bulletin  No.  11,  1910;  Mass.  Commission  on 
Industrial  Educ.,  Reports  (1906-1908);  N.  Y. 
State  Dept,  of  Labor,  Bureau  of  Labor  Statis- 
tics, Annual  Report,  1908.  K.  C.  Babcock. 


271 


SCHURZ,  CARL— SCIENCE,  PUBLIC 


SCHURZ,  CARL.  Carl  Scliurz  (1829-1906) 
was  born  at  Liblar,  Rhenish  Prussia,  March 
2,  1829.  For  his  participation  in  the  revolu- 
tion of  1848-49  lie  was  obliged  to  leave  Ger- 
many, and  lived  for  a time  in  Switzerland, 
Paris,  and  London.  In  1852  he  came  to  Amer- 
ica, and  in  1857  was  an  unsuccessful  Republi- 
can candidate  for  lieutenant-governor  of  Wis- 
consin. He  was  a delegate  to  the  Republican 
national  convention  of  1860,  and  the  next  year 
was  appointed  minister  to  Spain,  but  resigned 
to  enter  the  Union  array,  where  he  rose  to 
the  rank  of  major-general.  After  the  war  he 
entered  journalism,  serving  as  Washington, 
correspondent  of  the  New  York  Tribune,  estab- 
lishing the  Detroit  Post,  and  editing  the  St. 
Louis  Westliche  Post.  From  1869  to  1875  he 
was  United  States  Senator  from  Missouri.  He 
was  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  Liberal  Republi- 
can movement  in  1872,  but  returned  to  regular 
party  allegiance  in  1876  and  supported  Hayes. 
He  was  rewarded  with  the  office  of  Secretary 
of  the  Interior,  which  he  held  throughout  the 
Hayes’  administration.  From  1881  to  1884  he 
was  one  of  the  editors  of  the  New  York  Evening 
Post.  In  1884  he  became  an  Independent  and 
supported  Cleveland.  He  was  an  earnest  cham- 
pion of  civil  service  reform,  and  from  1892 
to  1901  was  president  of  the  National  Civil 
Service  Reform  League.  He  died  in  New  York 
on  May  14,  1906.  He  wrote  Henry  Clay,  2 
vols.  (rev.  ed.,  1899),  and  Abraham  Lincoln 
(1891).  See  Reconstruction;  Republican 
Party.  References:  Carl  Scliurz,  Reminis- 
cences (1907)  ; J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  the  U. 
S.  (1893-1905);  National  Civil  Service  Re- 
form League,  Reports  (1892-1901). 

W.  MacD. 

SCIENCE,  PUBLIC.  Outside  of  the  military 
art,  the  American  colonies  felt  no  governmental 
responsibility  for  the  advance  of  knowledge 
about  the  physical  universe  except  indirectly 
through  colonial  aid  to  colleges  in  which  as- 
tronomy was  a branch  of  study. 

Federal. — Under  the  Federal  Government, 
however,  scientific  departments  were  early 
established;  first  by  the  designation  of  Hutch- 
ins as  geographer  as  early  as  1785  who  was 
employed  to  survey  the  boundary  lines  of  the 
United  States;  later,  in  all  the  boundary  com- 
missions, experts  in  astronomy  and  surveying 
were  used. 

In  1807  was  provided,  and  in  1817  was  estab- 
lished, the  Coast  Survey  (see)  intended  for  the 
practical  purpose  of  aiding  navigation,  and  re- 
quiring trained  scientific  men.  After  a period 
of  quiescence  it  was  reorganized  in  1832.  In 
1802  was  also  established  the  Academy  at  West 
Point  which  is  essentially  a government  tech- 
nical school.  By  the  bequest  of  James  Smith- 
son  in  1856  the  LTnited  States  acquired  a fund 
out  of  which  was  constructed  the  Smith- 
sonian Institution  (see),  which  is  an  institute 
of  research.  In  1844  was  established  the  Naval 


Observatory  (see),  nominally  to  assist  in  pre- 
paring data  for  navigators,  practically  as  a 
scientific  concern.  In  the  fifties  the  Patent 
Office  published  a series  of  volumes  describing 
improved  live  stock.  In  1862  Congress  made 
a great  appropriation  of  government  land  for 
agricultural  colleges  throughout  the  union. 
(see  Morrill  Land  Grant)  ; later  followed  the 
Hatch  Act  of  March  2,  1887,  the  first  appro- 
priation for  agricultural  experiment  stations, 
which  in  most  states  have  been  united  with 
the  agricultural  colleges.  The  creation  of  a 
bureau  of  agriculture  in  1862  which  in  1889 
was  made  an  executive  department,  marks 
the  beginning  of  scientific  efforts  to  improve 
the  husbandry  of  the  country. 

In  1886  a division  of  forestry  was  created, 
and  organized  as  the  bureau  of  forestry  in 
1902;  in  1880  came  a division  of  foods,  which 
in  1902  became  the  bureau  of  chemistry.  The 
creation  of  the  Tariff  Commission  (see)  in 
1909  was  intended  to  provide  for  a scientific 
study  of  conditions  of  manufacturing  abroad. 
Scientific  tests  are  used  by  the  custom-houses 
in  the  valuation  of  imported  sugar.  The  gov- 
ernment gives  facilities  for  medical  investiga- 
tion, and  keeps  up  a medical  museum  in  Wash- 
ington. A large  corps  of  scientific  experts  is 
employed  in  the  patent  office  and  trained  en- 
gineers in  the  reclamation  (see)  projects  and 
conservation  (see)  projects.  The  army  and 
navy  engineers  are  constantly  engaged  in  the 
scientific  study  of  the  implements  and  methods 
of  warfare.  In  these  and  other  ways  the  Fed- 
eral Government  has  subsidized  and  promoted 
science. 

State. — The  states  have  made  themselves  re- 
sponsible for  scientific  training  and  investiga- 
tion principally  through  the  state  universities 
and  experiment  stations,  supplemented  by  spe- 
cial schools  of  mining  and  agriculture.  These 
necessarily  include  scientific  research ; the  de- 
velopment of  the  public  regulation  of  health 
has  also  made  necessary  the  appointment  of 
trained  scientific  medical  men.  Many  of  the 
states  have  supported,  alone  or  in  cooperation 
with  the  Federal  Government,  geological  sur- 
veys intended  to  reveal  the  wealth  of  mineral 
and  soil. 

Municipal. — Municipal  and  local  governments 
have  made  use  of  science  in  the  public  service 
chiefly  in  the  public  health  departments.  Ser- 
ums for  preventing  smallpox,  diphtheria,  ty- 
phoid fever,  and  other  diseases  are  prepared 
under  the  direction  of  state  or  local  officials. 

See  Education  as  a Function  of  Govern- 
ment; Health,  Public,  Regulation  of;  Ob- 
servations, Public. 

References:  Annual  Reports,  Geological 

Survey;  Bureau  of  Weights  and  Measures; 
Coast  Survey;  Geological  Survey;  Academy 
of  West  Point;  Naval  Academy;  Smithsonian 
Institute;  Naval  Observatory;  Patent  Office; 
Bureau  of  Education;  Bureau  of  Forestry; 
Bureau  of  Chemistry;  Department  of  Agricul- 


272 


SCIENTIFIC  MANAGEMENT  OF  BUSINESS— SCOTT,  WINFIELD 


ture;  State  Universities;  Secretary  of  the  In- 
terior; Secretary  of  Agriculture;  Technical 
Schools;  Statistical  Abstract;  U.  S.  Census 
Bureau;  Statistics  of  Cities  Having  a Popula- 
tion of  over  30,000  (1902  to  date)  ; J.  S.  Mor- 
rill, TJ.  S.  Naval  Observatory  (1903)  ; R.  Rath- 
bun,  U.  S.  National  Museum  (1905);  U.  S. 
Marine  Hospital  Service,  Yellow  Fever  Insti- 
tute (1902)  ; li.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture, 
Experiment  Station  Work,  Annual  Reports 
(1890  to  date).  Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

SCIENTIFIC  MANAGEMENT  OF  BUSI- 
NESS. Scientific  management  of  business  en- 
deavors to  substitute  science  for  rule  of  thumb, 
harmony  for  discord,  and  cooperation  for  in- 
dividualism, in  all  the  relations  between  labor- 
ers, foremen,  department  heads  and  any  other 
divisions  in  which  the  particular  business  may 
be  divided.  Its  purpose  is  to  secure  the  maxi- 
mum output  from  the  forces  of  men  or  power 
used.  The  system  is  based  on  the  following 
principles.  (1)  A prime  necessity  is  to  do 
away  with  “soldiering”  or  “hanging  it  out” 
by  eliminating  the  reasons  therefor,  and  by 
finding  the  one  best  method  and  the  one  best 
implement  which  the  laborers  should  use.  To 
find  these  out  requires  accurate  and  minute 
studies  in  motions,  in  methods  of  work  and  in 
the  efficacy  of  different  types  of  implements. 
Every  single  act  of  every  workman  is  reduced 
to  a science,  be  his  work  that  of  shoveling, 
brick  laying,  carrying  pig  iron  or  any  other 
common  laborer’s  task. 

(2)  The  workingman  must  be  selected  by 
picking  out  from  the  ordinary  men  those  who 
are  specially  fitted  to  a particular  type  of  work. 
This  must  be  preceded  by  a scientific  study  of 
the  pull  or  push  on  the  man’s  arms,  or  other 
fatiguing  elements  entering  into  his  work,  in 
order  to  find  out  what  percentage  of  the  day 
a man  must  work  and  what  percentage  of  the 
day  he  must  rest  in  order  to  produce  his  maxi- 
mum output.  These  studies  have  frequently 
led  to  a definite  shortening  of  the  hours  of 
work,  and  to  requiring  the  laborer  to  take 
the  proper  periods  of  rest  in  the  proper  se- 
quence to  periods  of  work. 

(3)  The  workingmen  being  selected  for  def- 
inite tasks,  another  essential  is  to  secure,  with 
absolute  uniformity,  their  good  will,  their 
ingenuity  and  their  hard  work  through  inti- 
mate friendly  cooperation  between  the  manage- 
ment and  the  men. 

(4)  The  weaker  must  then  be  scientifically 
educated  and  developed  through  the  friendly 
assistance  of  those  over  him,  neither  coercing 
him  nor  leaving  him  to  his  own  unaided  de- 
vices. Upon  the  management  is  placed  the 
burden  not  only  of  developing  a science  for 
each  element  of  the  man’s  work  but  of  plan- 
ning his  work  carefully.  This  involves  a plan- 
ning room  with  ample  records. 

(5)  The  whole  leads  up  to  the  entire  re- 
organization of  the  work  of  the  business,  so 


as  to  make  the  organization  wholly  functional, 
that  is,  to  place  each  man  at  a definite  task 
for  which  he  has  been  carefully  and  thoroughly 
prepared. 

Significant  results  have  already  been  secured 
by  the  adoption  of  science  in  business.  There 
are  now  in  the  United  States  at  least  50,000 
workmen  in  shops  so  organized  at  salaries 
ranging  from  30  per  cent  to  100  per  cent  higher 
than  before;  and  in  these  shops  the  output 
per  man  and  machine  has  been  practically 
doubled.  A few  men  in  government  positions 
also  are  endeavoring  to  apply  these  principles 
of  business  science  to  governmental  matters. 

See  Business,  Government  Restriction  OF; 
Labor  and  Wages. 

References;  F.  W.  Taylor,  Principles  of  Sci- 
entific Management  (1911);  Shop  Manage- 
mont  (1911);  F.  B.  Gilbreth,  Primer  of  Sci- 
entific Management  (1912);  “Scientific  Man- 
agement” in  Dartmouth  College,  Tuck  School 
Conference  (1912);  W.  D.  Scott,  Increasing 
Human  Efficiency  in  Business  (1911);  Jose- 
phine Goldmark,  Fatigue  and  Efficiency  ( 1912) . 

Clyde  L.  King. 

SCIOTO  COMPANY.  An  informal  and  spec- 
ulative organization,  composed  of  prominent 
Americans,  which  attempted  (1787-92)  to  dis- 
pose of  5,000,000  acres  of  land  covered  by  an 
option  of  the  Ohio  Company  (see).  Joel  Bar- 
low,  its  agent  in  Paris,  sold  the  right  to  pur- 
chase 3,000,000  acres  to  a French  subsidiary 
company,  which  then  sold  large  tracts  to  roy- 
alist emigrants.  Several  hundred  of  these 
reached  the  Ohio  late  in  1790  and  settled  at 
Gallipolis.  Indian  wars  hindered  their  settle- 
ment and  meanwhile  the  American  organization 
failed.  As  no  money  had  been  paid  by  the 
Scioto  Company  the  emigrants  could  not  se- 
cure titles,  but  Congress  came  to  their  relief 
and  made  a donation  of  25,200  acres.  See 
Northwest  Territory;  Ohio  Company;  Pub- 
lic Lands  and  Public  Land  Policy.  Refer- 
ences: “Centennial  Anniversary  of  the  City 
of  Gallipolis”  in  Ohio  Archaelogical  and 
Hist.  Quart.,  1891;  J.  B.  McMaster,  History 
of  the  U.  S.  (1907),  II,  146-151.  P.  J.  T. 

SCOTT,  WINFIELD.  Winfield  Scott  (1786- 
1866)  was  born  in  Virginia,  June  13,  1786.  He 
was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  1806,  but  in  1808 
entered  the  army,  and  in  the  War  of  1812 
served  in  Canada.  In  1814  he  was  made  briga- 
dier-general, and  after  the  close  of  the  war 
major-general.  In  1832  he  was  in  command 
of  the  federal  troops  at  Charleston,  S.  C.,  dur- 
ing the  nullification  excitement;  from  1835 
to  1837  he  was  engaged  in  the  Seminole  War; 
and  in  1839  secured  a peaceful  adjustment  of 
the  “Aroostook  War”  in  Maine.  He  was  a 
Whig  candidate  for  the  presidential  nomi- 
nation in  1839.  In  1841  he  became  command- 
ing general  of  the  army.  His  success  in  the 
Mexican  War  made  him  a popular  hero,  but 


273 


SCRATCHING— SEAL  FISHERIES 


with  President  Polk  lie  was  not  on  good  terms ; 
and  Polk  not  only  hesitated  to  send  him  to  the 
front,  but  interfered  with  the  plans  of  the 
campaign,  and  was  more  than  once  on  the 
point  of  removing  him.  In  1852  he  was  nomi- 
nated for  President  by  the  Whigs,  but  was 
defeated,  receiving  42  electoral  votes  against 
254  for  Pierce.  In  1 855  he  was  brevetted 
lieutenant-general.  He  loyally  stood  by  the 
Union  in  1861,  but  retired  from  the  army  in 
October,  1861,  and  died  at  West  Point,  N.  Y., 
May  29,  18C6.  See  Wars  of  the  United 
States;  Whig  Party.  References:  Winfield 
Scott,  Memoirs  (1864);  E.  D.  Mansfield,  Life 
of  Gen.  Winfield  Scott  (1846);  M.  J.  Wright, 
General  Scott  (1894).  W.  MacD. 

SCRATCHING.  A term  signifying  the  act 
of  a member  of  a political  party  who  with- 
holds his  vote  from  one  or  more  of  the  regular 
party  candidates  while  voting  for  the  remain- 
der of  the  ticket.  See  Ballot;  Cut  Ticket. 

0.  C.  H. 

SCRIP.  In  case  a corporation  has  used  its 
surplus  profits  in  improving  its  property,  and 
the  directors  desire  to  pay  a dividend  in 
rights  to  be  realized  in  the  future,  such  a 
resolution  as  the  following  may  be  passed  by 
the  directors: 

Whereas,  this  company  has  expended  out  of  its 
earnings  for  the  purpose  of  construction  and 
equipment,  in  the  purchase  of  real  estate  and  other 
properties,  amounting  to  a sum  equal  to  a ten  per 
cent  dividend  upon  the  capital  stock  of  the  corpo- 
ration. Now,  therefore,  it  is  resolved  that  a cer- 
tificate signed  by  the  President  and  Treasurer  of 
this  company  be  issued  to  the  stockholders,  serial- 
ly, declaring  that  such  stockholder  is  entitled  to 
ten  per  cent  of  the  amount  of  the  capital  stock  on 
the  shares  held  by  him,  payable  at  the  option  of 
the  company  out  of  its  future  earnings,  or  con- 
vertible into  stock  of  the  company  whenever  the 
company  shall  be  authorized  to  increase  its  capital 
stock. 

Negotiable  certificates  when  issued  in  ac- 
cordance with  such  a resolution  as  the  above 
are  known  as  scrip.  They  can  be  listed  on  the 
stock  exchanges  and  dealt  in  like  ordinary 
shares  of  stock.  Their  value  will  depend  on 
their  prospects  of  redemption  in  cash  or  stock. 

See  Exchanges,  Business;  Securities,  Fed- 
eral Commission  on;  Stocks  and  Bonds. 

References:  E.  S.  Mead,  Corporation  Fi- 
nance (1912)  ; W.  W.  Cooke,  Treatise  on  Stock 
and  Stockholders,  Bonds,  Mortgages  and  Gen- 
eral Corporation  Law  (1894),  II,  ch.  xxxii; 
A.  W.  Machen,  Jr.,  A Treatise  on  the  Modern 
Law  of  Corporations  (1908),  II,  1348,  1356. 

E.  S.  Mead. 

SCRUB  RACE  FOR  THE  PRESIDENCY.  A 

derisive  phrase  applied  to  the  personal  contest 
for  the  presidency  in  1824-5,  between  John 
Quincy  Adams,  Henry  Clay,  Andrew  Jack- 
son,  and  William  H.  Crawford,  in  which  regu- 
larly organized  parties  were  lacking.  The 
electors  failing  to  make  a choice,  the  House  of 


Representatives  chose  Adams.  See  Demo- 
cratic Party;  Presidential  Elections. 

0.  C.  H. 

SEA  POWER.  A term  long  current  but 
made  classic  by  the  book  of  Admiral  Mahan  on 
Influence  of  Sea  Bower,  published  in  1890. 
His  thesis  is  that  in  war  among  maritime 
powers  victory  is  reached  not  by  picking  up 
colonies  or  ports,  but  by  destroying  the  enemy’s 
main  fleet;  after  which  the  colonies  must  in- 
evitably fall.  The  book  was  adorned  by  a 
wealth  of  illustrations  from  naval  history  and 
was  a powerful  influence  in  inducing  England, 
Germany,  and  the  United  States  to  enter  on 
plans  of  naval  expansion.  The  principle  of 
sea  power  is  becoming  more  important  for 
the  United  States  because  it  includes  the  ques- 
tion of  the  future  control  of  the  Pacific  Ocean. 
See  Coast  Defense;  Maritime  War;  Mili- 
tarism; Naval  Vessels;  War,  Carrying  cn; 
Wars  of  the  United  States.  References: 
A.  T.  Mahan,  Influence  of  Sea  Power  upon 
History,  1660-1783  (1890),  Influence  of  Sea 
Power  upon  the  French  Revolution  and  Empire, 
1793-1812  (1892),  Interest  of  America  in  Sea 
Power,  Present  and  Future  ( 1897 ) . 

A.  B.  H. 

SEAL  FISHERIES.  In  1870  the  American 
government  granted  to  the  Alaskan  Commer- 
cial Company  a monopoly  right  to  take  male 
seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  during  the 
breeding  season.  Finding  that  the  increasing 
value  of  the  fur  attracted  outside  adventurers 
who  claimed  the  right  to  kill  seal  outside  the 
three-mile  limit,  the  government  (in  1881  by 
treasury  regulation,  and  in  1886  through 
directions  of  Secretary  Manning)  claimed  juris- 
diction over  Bering  Sea  and  power  to  protect 
the  seals  outside  the  three-mile  limit.  In 
1886  it  began  seizure  of  Canadian  ships  en- 
gaged in  killing  seal. 

Diplomatic  negotiations,  opened  by  Secretary 
Bayard  in  1887,  to  secure  an  international 
agreement  for  cooperation,  or  concerted  action 
for  international  protection  of  seals,  were  sus- 
pended in  1888  at  the  request  of  the  Canadian 
government. 

When  James  G.  Blaine  became  Secretary  of 
State  under  Harrison,  in  April,  1889,  he  took 
up  the  question  with  great  vigor,  asserting 
special  jurisdiction  under  the  treaties  of  1867 ; 
declaring  that  the  destruction  of  the  seals  was 
contra  bonos  mores ; and  asserting  that  Bering 
Sea  was  not  part  of  the  Pacific  Ocean. 

Congress  by  statute  treated  Bering  Sea 
as  a mare  clausum,  authorizing  further  cap- 
tures, which  were  followed  by  renewed  pro- 
tests and  a lively  and  increasingly  irritating 
diplomatic  discussion. 

Meantime,  by  suggestion  of  Secretary  Blaine, 
a modus  vivendi  was  arranged  restricting  seal- 
ing, pending  results  of  an  arbitration  (June 


15,  1891). 
274 


SEALER  OF  WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES— SEAMEN,  STATUS  OF 


Negotiations  for  arbitration  resulted  in  a 
treaty,  signed  February  29,  1892,  and  approved 
by  the  Senate  a month  later,  providing  for 
submitting  the  dispute  to  a tribunal  of  seven 
arbitrators — jurists  of  distinguished  repu- 
tation” and,  if  possible,  acquainted  with  the 
English  language — two  chosen  by  the  American 
President,  two  by  the  British  Queen,  and  one 
each  by  the  President  of  France,  the  King  of 
Italy  and  the  King  of  Sweden  and  Norway. 

This  tribunal  met  in  1893  at  Paris,  Baron 
de  Courcel,  the  French  arbitrator  presiding. 
It  decided  that  the  United  States  had  no  prop- 
erty rights  in  fur  seals  outside  the  three-mile 
limit,  recommended  international  regulations 
governing  the  fisheries,  and  assessed  damages 
against  the  United  States  for  seizure  of  Cana- 
dian vessels. 

In  addition  to  its  judicial  decision,  the  com- 
mission under  the  terms  of  the  treaty  pre- 
scribed regulations  for  protection  of  the  fur 
seals  for  five  years  by  joint  action — including 
the  establishment  of  a close  sea  north  of  35° 
from  May  1 to  July  31,  and  prohibiting  pelagic 
sealing  within  sixty  miles  of  the  Pribilof  group. 
On  April  6,  1894,  legislation  of  Congress  was 
approved  for  executing  these  regulations. 

The  British  claims  for  seizures  were  finally 
adjusted  by  a mixed  commission  of  two,  ap- 
pointed under  convention  of  February  8,  1896, 
and  sitting  at  Victoria.  It  reached  a decision 
December  17,  1897,  without  resort  to  an  umpire. 
The  awards,  amounting  to  $473,151.26,  were 
paid  from  an  appropriation  approved  June  15, 
1898. 

The  inefficiency  of  the  restrictive  regulations 
provided  by  the  tribunal  of  1893,  led  to  an  ar- 
rangement for  a meeting  of  experts  November, 
1897.  The  whole  question  was  referred  to 
the  Anglo-American  commission  of  1898,  which 
adjourned  in  February,  1899,  without  any 
definite  action. 

A convention  concluded  at  Washington  on 
July  7,  1911,  between  the  United  States,  Russia, 
Great  Britain  and  Japan,  primarily  aiming  to 
protect  the  seals  in  Bering  Sea,  prohibits  to 
the  subjects  of  those  four  powers  pelagic  seal- 
ing in  the  Pacific  north  of  30°  for  fifteen  years. 

See  Alaska;  Arbitrations,  American; 
Fisheries,  International;  Great  Britain, 
Diplomatic  Relations  with;  Water  Bound- 
aries. 

References:  D.  R.  Dewey,  National  Problems 
(1907),  ch.  xiii;  John  W.  Foster,  Dipl.  Mem- 
oirs (1909),  II,  20-50;  J.  B.  Henderson,  Am. 
Dipl.  Questions  (1901),  3-29;  J.  B.  Moore,  Am. 
Diplomacy  (1905),  97-104,  Int.  Arbitrations 
(1898),  I,  755-961,  III,  2123-2131,  V,  4759, 
4763,  5067,  Digest  of  Int.  Law  (1906),  I,  i 70- 
o 73;  J.  D.  Richardson,  Messages  (1898),  IX, 
474-498,  691-693;  F.  Snow,  Am.  Dipl.  (1894), 
471-509;  S.  B.  Stanton,  Behring  Sea  Contro- 
versy (1892),  ch.  vi;  Am.  Annual  Cyc.,  1891, 
834-836,  1893,  79-86;  Am.  Hist.  Leaflets,  No.  6 
(1894-1901);  Am.  Jour,  Int.  Law,  I (1897), 


742-748;  Harper’s  Mag.,  LXXXII  (1891),  766- 
774;  Nat.  Geog.  Mag.,  X (1899),  425;  No.  Am. 
Rev.,  CLXI  (1895);  693;  Sen.  Ex.  Doc.,  53 
Cong.,  2 Sess.,  No.  177  (1894),  VII;  bibliogra- 
phy in  A.  B.  Hart,  Manual  (1908),  § 193. 

J.  M.  Callahan. 

SEALER  OF  WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES. 

An  official  appointed,  by  the  city,  usually  in 
accordance  with  the  terms  of  a state  law,  one 
whose  duty  it  is  to  test  all  weights,  scales, 
steelyards,  and  measures  used  in  the  munic- 
ipality. He  is  appointed  for  two  or  more 
years ; sometimes  he  is  paid  a salary  and  some- 
times derives  his  remuneration  from  fees.  He 
has  power  to  confiscate  and  to  destroy  all 
weights  and  measures  which  do  not  conform 
to  the  standards  prescribed  by  law.  See  Busi- 
ness, Government  Restriction  of;  Weights 
and  Measures.  W.  B.  M. 

SEALS,  PUBLIC.  Every  government  has  a 
“great  seal”  for  the  authentication  of  its  acts, 
records  and  other  important  instruments.  The 
great  seal  of  the  United  States  was  adopted 
in  1782  and  is  in  the  custody  of  the  Depart- 
ment of  State.  It  is  affixed  to  the  more  im- 
portant acts,  commissions,  and  letters  of  cere- 
mony issued  by  the  President.  There  is  also  a 
seal  for  each  of  the  executive  departments. 
Each  of  the  states  likewise  has  its  great  seal 
and  many  of  its  officers,  particularly  those 
whose  duties  are  of  a notarial  character,  are 
required  to  affix  seals  to  certain  documents  and 
legal  instruments.  In  England  there  are  three 
seals  which  are  used  for  the  authentication 
of  documents  issued  in  the  name  of  the  sov- 
ereign; the  great  seal,  the  privy  seal  and  the 
signet.  The  effect  of  affixing  the  seal  to  an 
act  is  to  prove  and  authenticate  its  official 
character.  The  courts  of  one  country  take 
judicial  notice  of  the  great  seal  of  other  gov- 
ernments; likewise,  those  of  one  state  of  the 
American  Union  take  notice  of  the  seals  of 
other  states.  J.  W.  G. 

SEAMEN,  STATUS  OF.  It  is  necessary 
that  the  rights  and  duties  of  seamen  be  most 
carefully  defined  by  legislation.  Whether 
afloat  at  sea,  or  on  shore  on  leave  of  absence, 
or  at  home,  the  sailor  is  in  peculiar  need  of 
protection,  and  is  also  subject  to  exceptional 
temptations  to  disregard  his  obligations.  For 
long  periods  he  is  out  of  the  reach  of  the 
ordinary  machinery  of  law;  he  is  subject  to 
duress  to  secure  specific  performance  of  a labor 
contract;  and  the  authority  of  the  ship’s  mas- 
ter is  absolute  in  cases  of  emergency. 

Pilots  and  mariners  are  exempted  from  mili- 
tary duty.  Foreign  seamen  on  American  ships 
may  become  American  citizens  three  years 
after  a declaration  of  intention. 

United  States  shipping  commissioners  ( see 
Navigation,  Regulation  of)  are  stationed 
at  every  important  American  port  to  as- 
275 


SEARCHES  AND  SEIZURES— SECESSION  CONTROVERSY 


sist  seamen  in  securing  employment,  and  to 
aid  masters  in  obtaining  crews.  There  must  be 
a written  agreement  between  the  master  and 
each  seamen  employed,  and  the  points  to  be 
covered  by  the  contract  are  enumerated  in  the 
statutes. 

Every  vessel  must  be  kept  adequately 
manned.  Every  master  must  keep  a complete 
and  accurate  crew  list.  A copy  of  this  list 
must  be  filed  with  the  collector  of  the  port 
upon  entering  an  American  port.  When  a ves- 
sel sails  for  a foreign  port  the  master  must 
take  with  him  a crew  list  certified  as  correct 
by  the  collector  of  the  customs.  The  conditions 
under  which  men  may  be  discharged  in  a for- 
eign country  are  set  forth. 

The  law  is  especially  specific  as  regards  the 
payment  of  seamen’s  wages,  and  the  circum- 
stances under  which  wages  may  be  held  back 
by  the  master.  Neither  wages  nor  clothing 
of  seamen  may  be  attached  by  creditors.  The 
law  does  not  allow  the  seamen  to  contract  with 
the  master  to  pay  the  wages  to  any  third  party 
except  “grandparents,  parents,  wife,  sister  or 
children.” 

Offenses  and  punishments  of  seamen  are 
carefully  defined.  The  offenses  enumerated  are 


desertion,  refusal  or  neglect  to  join  the  vessel, 
quitting  a vessel  upon  its  arrival  at  a port  be- 
fore it  has  been  placed  in  security,  wilful  dis- 
obedience to  a lawful  command  of  an  officer, 
assault  upon  a master  or  mate,  damaging  the 
vessel,  and  smuggling.  There  is  a specified 
penalty  for  each  offense;  but  “flogging  and  all 
other  forms  of  corporal  punishment”  are  pro- 
hibited. 

The  law  contains  a “scale  of  provisions  to 
be  allowed  and  served  to  crew  during  the 
voyage.”  Sick  and  disabled  seamen  receive 
free  care  in  the  United  States  Marine  Hospital. 

The  requirements  of  the  navigation  laws  of 
the  United  States,  as  well  as  the  higher  wages 
paid  in  this  country,  make  the  operation  of 
vessels  more  expensive  under  the  American 
Hag  than  under  a foreign  ensign. 

See  Labor,  Freedom  of;  Shipping,  Regu- 
lation of. 

References:  Commissioner  of  Navigation, 
Navigation  Laws  of  the  United  States  (pub- 
lished at  intervals  of  three  or  four  years). 

Emory  R.  Johnson. 

SEARCHES  AND  SEIZURES.  See  War- 
rants. 


SECESSION  CONTROVERSY 


Antecedents  of  Secession. — The  subject  of 
secession  of  one  or  more  states  from  the  Ameri- 
can Union  was  a matter  of  discussion  at  var- 
ious times  from  the  adoption  of  the  Consti- 
tution (1789)  to  the  time  when  the  southern 
states,  acting  upon  a supposed  and  asserted 
right,  sought  to  retire  from  the  LTnion  and  to 
set  up  a separate  confederacy  ( see  Confeder- 
ate States).  There  is  no  space  here  to  men- 
tion the  various  threats  of  secession.  Many  in- 
stances are  cited  and  the  most  is  made  of 
them  in  Stephens’  War  between  the  States,  the 
ablest  defense  of  secession.  At  the  time  of  the 
nullification  (see)  trouble  in  South  Carolina 
distinct  principles  of  state  sovereignty  were 
set  forth  and  with  them  the  right  of  secession, 
and  from  that  time  the  possibility  of  an  at- 
tempt to  break  up  the  Union  was  never  long 
absent  from  men’s  minds.  The  danger  became 
more  real  and  acute  after  the  annexation  of 
Texas  (1845),  and  especially  when  the  ques- 
tion concerning  slavery  in  the  territories  arose 
and  became  a practical  question.  Lincoln’s 
election  (1860)  by  a party  whose  cardinal 
principle  was  opposition  to  slavery  extension 
into  the  territories  was  the  signal  for  action 
(see  Ivansas-Nebraska  Struggle;  Republi- 
can Party;  Slavery  Controversy). 

We  may  well  notice  that  disruption  of  var- 
ious national  organizations  had  already  taken 
place.  As  early  as  1845  the  southern  Baptist 
convention  was  formed  to  take  charge  of  the 


mission  work  of  the  southern  Baptist  churches. 
In  the  same  year  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  South  was  established  as  a separate 
organization.  The  Presbyterians  were  in  part 
disorganized  as  early  as  in  1858,  though  not 
actually  broken  in  two.  The  cause  in  each  in- 
stance was  difference  of  opinion  on  the  slavery 
question.  The  cleavage  in  the  ranks  of  the 
Democratic  party  in  1860  was  evidence  that 
the  formal  union  of  states  could  not  last  long. 
The  party  was  a national  institution  that  had 
a strong  hold  on  the  loyalty  and  affection  of 
its  members;  possibly  it  is  fair  to  say  that 
it  had  a stronger  hold  and  was  more  of  a 
vital  reality  than  the  Union  itself.  And  in- 
deed it  did  not  wholly  go  to  pieces,  but  after 
the  war  stood  once  again  in  national  propor- 
tions. 

A convention  in  South  Carolina  on  December 
20,  1860,  unanimously  adopted  a resolution 
declaring  that  “the  union  now  subsisting  be- 
tween South  Carolina  and  other  states  under 
the  name  of  ‘The  United  States  of  America’ 
is  hereby  dissolved.”  Similar  action  was  soon 
taken  by  the  more  southern  slave  states  early 
in  1861.  By  the  early  summer  eleven  slave 
states  had  joined  the  southern  confederacy 
( see  Confederate  States ) . 

Justification  of  Secession. — The  South  justi- 
fied secession  on  several  grounds.  ( 1 ) Some 
of  the  northern  states  had  passed  personal 
liberty  laws  intended  to  prevent  the  execution 


276 


SECESSION  CONTROVERSY 


of  the  fugitive  slave  law.  (2)  Fugitive  slaves 
had  in  some  instances  been  released  by  force, 
and  the  southern  people  knew  that  a large 
element  at  the  north  opposed  the  law;  they 
believed  therefore  that  the  North  was  guilty 
of  violating  the  distinct  constitutional  rights 
of  the  South.  (3)  The  southern  leaders 
claimed  that  they  had  a right  to  go  into  the 
territorities  with  their  slaves,  and  there  hold 
their  slaves  as  property  (see  Deed  Scott 
Case),  and  that  the  success  of  the  Republican 
party  was  a distinct  denial  of  this  constitution- 
al right.  (4)  The  John  Brown  raid  was  looked 
upon  as  evidence  of  the  real  desires  and  pur- 
poses of  northern  anti-slavery  men. 

Jefferson  Davis,  in  his  message  to  the  Con- 
federate Congress  (April  29,  1861),  summed 
up  the  bases  of  secession  as  a right  and  gave 
the  reasons  for  the  step.  A condensed  state- 
ment of  his  position  may  be  given  as  follows : 

First.  The  Constitution  was  a compact  between 
independent  states  ; but  there  had  gradually  arisen 
at  the  north  a political  school  which  had  persistent- 
ly claimed  that  the  Government  was  a National 
Government.  Second,  “The  people  of  the  southern 
states.  . . . early  perceived  a tendency  in  the 
northern  States  to  render  the  common  govern- 
ment subservient  to  their  own  purposes  by  impos- 
ing burdens  on  commerce  as  a protection  to  their 
manufacturing  and  shipping  interests.”  Third,  "In 
addition  to  the  long-continued  and  deep-seated  re- 
sentment felt  by  the  southern  States  at  the  per- 
sistent abuse  of  the  powers  they  had  delegated  to 
the  Congress,”  there  had  existed  for  nearly  half  a 
century  “another  subject  of  discord.”  At  the  for- 
mation of  the  Constitution  slavery  existed  in  all 
but  one  of  the  thirteen  states,  but  for  economic 
reasons  it  gradually  disappeared  at  t lie  North:  “as 
soon,  however,  as  the  northern  States  that  pro- 
hibited African  slavery  within  their  limits  had 
reached  a number  sufficient  to  give  their  repre- 
sentation a controlling  voice  in  the  Congress,  a 
persistent  and  organized  system  of  hostile  measures 
against  the  rights  of  the  owners  of  slaves  in  the 
southern  States  was  inaugurated  and  gradually 
extended.  . . . Fanatical  organizations  . . . 

were  assiduously  engaged  in  exciting  amongst  the 
slaves  a spirit  of  discontent  and  revolt. 

Men  were  taught  that  it  was  a merit  to  elude, 
disobey,  and  violently  oppose  the  execution  of  the 
laws  enacted  to  secure  the  performance  of  the 
promise  contained  in  the  constitutional  compact.” 
Men  were  sent  to  Congress  "whose  chief  title  to 
distinction  consisted  in  the  display  of  a spirit  of 
ultra  fanaticism,  and  whose  business  was  not  'to 
promote  the  general  welfare  or  insure  domestic 
tranquillity’  ” : but  “to  awaken  the  bitterest  hatred 
against  citizens  of  sister  states  by  violent  denunci- 
ation of  their  institutions.”  . . . “Finally  a great 
party  was  organized  . . . with  the  avowed  ob- 

ject of  using  its  power  for  the  total  exclusion  of 
the  slave  States  from  all  participation  in  the  bene- 
fits of  the  public  domain  acquired  by  all  the  States 
in  common,  ...  of  surrounding  them  entirely 
by  States  in  which  slavery  should  be  prohibited  ; 
of  thus  rendering  the  property  in  slaves  so  insecure 
as  to  be  comparatively  worthless,  and  thereby 
annihilating  in  effect  property  worth  thousands  of 
millions  of  dollars.” 

This  is  probably  the  strongest  justification 
of  secession  that  can  be  presented  in  a few 
words.  It  is  not  entirely  satisfactory  to  the 
student  of  history.  Even  if  one  should  accept 
the  state  sovereignty  doctrine,  he  could  not 
accept  the  statement  that  the  North  had  plotted 
to  distort  the  Constitution  against  the  persist- 
ent objection  of  the  South.  The  North  in  fact 
might  more  justly  have  asserted  that  ’ from 
the  beginning  the  Government  had  been  a large 
part  of  the  time  in  the  bands  of  southern  men 


and  had  been  solicitous  for  southern  interests. 
The  charges  against  the  northern  states  that 
they  had  passed  personal  liberty  laws  and 
impeded  the  enforcement  of  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Law  were  in  large  measure  just,  and  it  was 
also  true  that  the  Republican  party  was  de- 
termined that  slavery  should  be  confined  within 
the  limits  of  the  states  where  it  existed.  If 
these  facts  were  enough  to  justify  secession, 
then  secession  was  justified.  But  the  Republi- 
cans had  no  intention  of  interfering  with  slav- 
ery within  the  states,  and  it  is  difficult  to  see 
what  the  southern  states  could  hope  to  get, 
when  outside  of  the  Union,  which  they  could 
not  obtain  as  members  of  it.  Slavery  would 
certainly  not  be  safer  after  secession  than  be- 
fore. The  truth  is  that  by  1860  the  resentment 
at  the  South,  because  of  northern  objection  to 
slavery  on  moral  grounds,  had  reached  a point 
where  cool  reason  was  almost  impossible;  prop- 
erty worth  billions  of  dollars  demanded  se- 
curity and  property  owners  seemed  to  think 
that  they  could  achieve  security  by  independ- 
ence. Extremists  in  the  South  had  come  to  the 
point  of  defending  slavery  as  a positive  good 
and  as  a great  moral  institution,  the  best  in- 
stitution on  which  to  rear  a high  and  fine 
civilization;  the  southern  people  insisted  now 
on  a separate  national  existence  uncontami- 
nated by  association  with  men  who  were  con- 
tinually casting  reflections  on  their  chosen 
form  of  civilization.  Even  those  who  did  not 
assert  that  slavery  was  in  itself  good,  con- 
tended that  they  were  under  obligations  to 
hold  and  protect  the  slaves  in  their  charge. 

Doctrine  of  Secession. — The  doctrine  of  se- 
cession, the  doctrine  of  the  legal  right  to  secede, 
was  commonly  based  on  the  principle  of  un- 
alloyed and  undiminished  state  sovereignty 
(see).  Each  state  had  as  good  a right  to  with- 
draw from  the  Union  as  had  England  or  France 
to  refuse  to  be  bound  by  a treaty  or  conven- 
tion. It  should  be  noticed  that  in  any  such 
argument  a declaration  that  other  states  had 
broken  the  compact  is  quite  beside  the  mark; 
a sovereign  state  may  look  for  justification,  it 
does  not  need  to  seek  legal  grounds  for  action; 
a sovereign  state  is  entitled  to  act  at  any  time 
upon  any  ground  that  it  deems  sufficient. 
There  always  has  been,  however,  more  or  less 
confusion  of  thinking  on  this  matter. 

Besides  this  doctrine  of  unimpaired  state 
sovereignty  as  the  basis  of  secession  there  ap- 
pear to  have  been  two  other  motions.  First, 
there  was  the  theory  that  the  Union  was  a 
compact  by  which  certain  portions  of  sovereign- 
ty were  surrendered  and  others  retained,  and 
that,  when  the  reserved  powers  were  encroached 
upon  or  the  compact  broken,  a member  com- 
plaining of  the  breach  might  retire  from  the 
Union.  This  was  probably  the  basis  of  declara- 
tions of  the  right  to  secede,  or  of  threats  of 
secession,  in  the  earlier  days  and  was  some- 
times used  at  a later  time;  it  rests  on  the 
idea  of  divided  sovereignty.  Second,  there  was 


277 


SECOND  CLASvS  MAIL  MATTER 


the  general  principle  that  the  government  of 
the  Union  was  a government  but  that  men 
always  have  the  sacred  right  to  better  their 
condition,  if  they  can,  by  rising  up  against 
government  and  overthrowing  it.  This  “right” 
to  resist  oppression  was  in  all  probability  the 
only  “right”  that  men  had  in  mind  on  some 
occasions  when  secession  was  threatened  or  dis- 
cussed. (Notice  for  example  Lincoln’s  speech 
in  1848  cited  in  Stephens’  War  between  the 
states,  I,  520.) 

Coercion. — When  the  states  issued  their  ordi- 
nances of  secession  (1800-1801)  there  was 
much  discussion  on  the  question  of  the  right 
to  coerce  a state.  Bucljanan  in  his  message 
of  early  December  (1800)  had  declared  that 
a state  had  no  constitutional  right  to  secede; 
but  he  could  find  no  constitutional  right  to 
coerce  a state  and  therefore  apparently  no 
right  to  prevent  secession.  Those  that  favored 
secession  made  much  of  the  fact  that  the  Fed- 
eral Convention  did  not  provide  for  coercion 
of  states  but,  on  the  contrary,  decided-  not  to 
include  the  power  in  the  Constitution.  As 
a matter  of  fact  this  power  was  not  included, 
because  a government  over  people  was  estab- 
lished and  to  it  was  given  the  right  to  enforce 
laws  on  persons;  a provision  for  coercion  of 
states  would  have  been  appropriate  in  a union 
of  sovereignties,  where  war  upon  the  states 
would  have  been  the  suitable  means  of  en- 
forcing obligations;  it  was  inappropriate  in  a 
system  which  provided  for  a government  im- 
mediately over  men  who  were  subject  directly 
to  the  commands  of  the  government.  Anything 
done  by  a state  government,  contrary  to  the 
essential  duties  of  the  state  as  a member  of 
the  Union  is  illegal;  all  officers  that  carry 
out  unconstitutional  legislation  are  not  prop- 
erly state  officers  at  all;  people  cannot  legally 
perform  illegal  acts. 

The  Republican  leaders,  such  men  as  Lin- 
coln and  Lyman  Trumbull,  had  no  great  diffi- 
culty in  escaping  the  fallacies  that  were 
cunningly  woven  about  the  word  “coercion.” 
Lincoln  saw,  as  had  Jackson,  that  it  was  his 
duty  to  enforce  the  law.  Lyman  Trumbull, 
Dec.  29,  1860,  said:  (Gong.  Globe,  36  Cong., 
2 Sess.,  Pt.  I,  156) 

If  there  is  anybody  in  this  Senate,  or  in  this 
country,  who  ever  talked  of  the  United  States  de- 
claring war  against  one  of  its  States,  or  of  coercing 
one  of  its  States,  or  ever  entertained  such  a notion, 
T know  not  who  it  is.  I have  never  seen  him. 
This  phrase,  “coerce  a State,”  is  a phrase  calculat- 
to  mislead  the  public  mind.  . . . Nobody  pro- 

poses to  declare  war  against  a State.  That  would 
admit  at  once  that  the  State  was  out  of  the  Union 
— a foreign  Government.  Of  course,  we  cannot  de- 
clare war  against  a State.  Nobody  proposes  to 
coerce  a State,  or  to  convict  a State  of  treason. 
You  cannot  arraign  a State  for  trial : you  cannot 
convict  it  or  punish  it ; hut  you  can  punish  indi- 
viduals. 

See  Democratic  Party  ; Nullification 
Controversy;  Republican  Party;  State 
Sovereignty;  Virginia  and  Kentucky  Reso- 
lutions. 


References:  A.  H.  Stephens,  Constitutional 
View  of  the  Late  War  between  the  States 
(1868),  I;  J.  Davis,  Rise  and  Fall  of 
the  Confederate  Government  (1881),  I,  1- 
258;  J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (1893- 
1906),  II,  III;  E.  McPherson,  Pol.  Hist,  of 
the  Rebellion  (4th  ed.,  1882),  1-90;  W.  E. 
Dodd,  Jefferson  Davis  (1907),  174-214. 

A.  C.  McLaughlin. 

SECOND  CLASS  MAIL  MATTER.  Of  all 

measures  of  reform  now  under  consideration 
for  the  improvement  of  the  postal  service,  that 
affecting  the  rates,  conditions  of  service  and 
transportation  of  second  class  matter  is  be- 
lieved to  be  the  most  important.  This  is  due 
to  the  fact  that  this  class  constitutes  the  great 
bulk  of  mail  matter  handled ; that  the  expense 
entailed  in  handling  it  far  exceeds  the  revenue 
it  produces;  that  the  payments  made  to  the 
railroads  for  transporting  it  are  believed  by 
many  to  be  exeeessive;  and  that  the  loss  en- 
tailed in  doing  this  part  of  the  business  of  the 
postal  service  stands  in  the  way  of  making 
extensions  of  the  service  and  reduction  in  other 
rates  that  are  highly  desirable.  The  feeling 
prevails  widely  that  the  handling  of  this  class 
of  mail  matter  at  a great  loss  to  the  govern- 
ment represents  an  unbusinesslike  policy;  that 
the  virtual  subsidy  of  the  press  in  this  way 
cannot  be  justified;  and  that  a thoroughgoing 
reform  should  be  immediately  effected. 

The  questions  here  involved  have  been  re- 
peatedly investigated,  but  no  practical  results 
of  importance  have  followed.  By  Act  of  March 
4,  1911,  the  President  was  authorized  to  ap- 
point three  competent  and  impartial  persons 
to: 

examine  the  reports  of  the  Postoffiee  Department 
and  any  of  its  officers,  agents  or  employees,  and 
the  existing  evidence  in  respect  to  the  cost  to  the 
Government  of  the  transportation  and  handling  of 
all  classes  of  second-class  mail  matter  which  may 
be  submitted  to  them,  and  such  evidence  as  may 
be  presented  to  them  by  persons  having  an  in- 
terest in  the  rates  to  be  fixed  for  second-class 
mail  matter:  to  make  a finding  of  what  is  the  cost 
of  transporting  and  handling  different  classes 
of  such  second-class  mail  matter  to  the  Govern- 
ment, and  what  in  their  judgment  should  be  the 
rate  for  the  different  classes  of  second-class  postal 
matter  in  order  to  meet  and  reimburse  the  Gov- 
ernment for  the  expense  to  -which  it  is  put  in  the 
transportation  and  handling  of  such  matter. 

An  appropriation  of  $50,000  to  meet  the  ex- 
penses of  this  investigation  was  made.  The 
report  of  this  Commission,  of  which  Mr.  Jus- 
tice Hughes  of  the  Supreme  Court  is  chairman, 
should  furnish  material  that  will  lead  to  an 
adjustment  in  part  at  least  of  this  vexed  ques- 
tion. 

See  Po'stal  System  of  the  United  States. 

References:  U.  S.  Postmaster  General,  An- 
nual Reports;  Official  Postal  Guide  (an- 
nual) ; Commission  on  Second  Class  Mail 
Matter,  “Report”  in  House  Doc.,  62  Cong.,  2 
Sess.,  No.  559  (1912)  ; Postal  Commission,  “Re- 
port” in  House  Doc.,  59  Cong.,  2 Sess..  No.  60S 
(1907).  W.  F.  Willoughby. 


SECRET  SERVICE— SECRETARY  OF  STATE  IN  STATES 


SECRET  SERVICE.  During  the  Civil  War 
Col.  Baker’s  corps  of  secret  service  agents  was 
utilized  in  a limited  way  in  the  detection  and 
prosecution  of  counterfeiters.  At  the  close  of 
hostilities  a portion  of  the  Baker  force  was 
transferred  to  the  Treasury  Department,  and 
under  the  direction  of  its  famous  leader  under- 
took the  suppression  of  counterfeiting.  Out  of 
this  grew  the  secret  service  as  it  exists  today. 
Each  year  since  1865,  when  the  first  formal 
appropriation  of  $100,000  was  made,  there  has 
been  included  in  the  sundry  civil  appropria- 
tion act  a sum  to  be  used  by  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  in  the  protection  of  the  currency, 
and  the  secret  service  is  supported  by  this 
fund.  Notwithstanding  .slight  changes  in  the 
phraseology  of  the  act,  in  the  main  its  activi- 
ties have  been  confined  to  the  suppression  of 
counterfeiting.  During  the  Spanish-American 
War  an  auxiliary  force  operating  in  conjunc- 
tion with  the  service  disclosed  the  activities  of 
the  confidential  agents  of  Spain  and  secured 
the  expulsion  from  Canada  of  members  of  the 
Spanish  legation  who  were  maintaining  a spy 
service.  Later  its  investigation  of  the  great 
land  frauds  resulted  in  the  recovery  of  vast 
tracts  of  the  public  domain  and  the  punish- 
ment of  scores  of  offenders.  After  the  assas- 
sination of  President  McKinley  it  was  charged 
with  the  protection  of  the  President,  and  this 
is  now  its  gravest  responsibility.  Its  organi- 
zation and  methods  are  simple  and  efficient. 
There  are  thirty  districts  in  the  United  States, 
each  with  an  operative  in  charge  and  as  many 
assistants  as  may  be  necessary,  all  under  the 
immediate  direction  of  the  chief  of  the  service, 
whose  office  is  in  the  Treasury  Department  at 
Washington.  The  mobility  of  the  force  is 
such  that  its  strength  at  a given  point  may  be 
increased  instantly  to  meet  any  emergency  that 
may  arise.  The  arrests  for  violations  of  the 
counterfeiting  statutes  number  approximately 
500  annually.  See  Police  in  American  Cit- 
ies; Treasury  Department.  Reference:  L. 
C.  Baker,  Hist,  of  the  V.  S.  Secret  Service 
(1868).  A.  Piatt  Andrew. 

SECRET  SESSION.  Secret  sessions  may  be 
held  by  any  legislative  body,  but  are  rare  ex- 
cept in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States.  The 
national  House  of  Representatives  still  pro- 
vides by  rule  for  secret  sessions  on  executive 
or  other  confidential  business,  but  the  rule  has 
been  in  abeyance  since  1830.  The  Senate  pro- 
vides by  rule  that  all  communications  from 
the  President  and  other  confidential  business 
shall  be  in  secret  session,  unless  the  Senate 
provides  for  an  open  executive  session.  In 
secret  session  all  outsiders  are  excluded  and 
all  Senators  and  officers  are  sworn  to  secrecy. 
From  1789  to  1799  all  sessions  of  the  Senate 
were  secret.  See  Senate;  Session  of  Legisla- 
tive Bodies.  References:  Senate  Rules  (1909), 
XXXVI-XXXVIII ; D.  B.  Eaton,  Secret  Ses- 
sions of  the  Senate  (1886). 


SECRETARIES,  HEADS  OF  DEPART- 
MENTS. The  government  began,  in  1789,  with 
three  executive  departments,  State,  War,  and 
Treasury;  at  the  head  of  each  was  a secretary. 
For  administrative  purposes,  there  were  also 
a postmaster  general  and  an  attorney  general. 
The  Navy  Department  was  created  in  1798,  the 
Interior  Department  in  1849,  the  Department 
of  Justice  in  1870,  the  Post  Office  Department 
in  1872,  the  Department  of  Agriculture  in  1889, 
and  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor  in 
1902.  This  last  was  divided  in  1913  to  make 
two  separate  departments,  those  of  Commerce 
and  of  Labor.  The  Postmaster  General  first 
became  a member  of  the  President’s  Cabinet 
during  Jackson’s  administration.  The  Attor- 
ney General  was  one  of  the  President’s  counsel- 
lers when  the  first  Cabinet  was  evolved  under 
Washington;  the  secretaries  have  been  mem- 
bers of  the  Cabinet  from  the  creation  of  their 
respective  departments.  The  annual  salary  of 
the  head  of  a department  is  $12,000.  See 
Cabinet  of  the  President  ; Executive  De- 
partment; Salaries;  and  Departments  by 
name.  References:  H.  B.  Learned,  The  Presi- 
dent’s Cabinet  (1911);  Sen.  Rep.,  57  Cong., 
No.  82  (1902);  U.  S.  Statutes  creating  the 
departments.  C.  M. 

SECRETARIES  OF  DEPARTMENTS.  See 

Departments  by  name. 

SECRETARY  OF  LEGATION.  Till  1905  it 
was  customary  for  the  President  to  fill  the 
office  of  secretary  of  American  embassies  and 
legations  without  necessary  reference  to  fitness 
of  the  appointee.  Since  that  time  by  virtue 
of  several  executive  orders  the  system  of  choice 
from  candidates  who  have  been  subjected  to 
examination,  or  who  have  had  previous  experi- 
ence, has  been  adopted.  This  step  is  in  the 
direction  of  giving  the  service  greater  stability. 
Tire  first  or  second  secretary  of  an  embassy 
or  legation  becomes  in  the  absence  of  his  chief 
the  charge  d’affaires  ad  interim  and  should 
therefore  not  merely  have  control  of  the  cleri- 
cal duties  of  the  embassy,  but  should  also  have 
a full  knowledge  of  the  policy  and  plans  of 
his  chief  and  of  the  means  by  which  these  can 
be  realized.  The  secretary’s  acquaintance  with 
official  and  other  prominent  men  should  there- 
fore be  large  and  he  should  be  otherwise  pre- 
pared as  fully  as  possible  to  take  up  the  work 
of  the  head  of  the  mission  in  case  of  necessity. 
The  second,  third  and  other  secretaries  are  in 
general  not  allowed,  without  special  authoriza- 
tion, to  undertake  the  duties,  which  fall  to  the 
secretary.  The  duties  of  the  secretaries  of  the 
lower  grades  are  more  strictly  clerical.  See 
Diplomatic  Service  of  the  United  States; 
Promotions.  Reference:  J.  W.  Foster,  Prac- 
tice of  Diplomacy  (1906),  10,  206.  G.  G.  W. 

SECRETARY  OF  STATE  IN  STATES.  In 

every  state  of  the  Union  there  is  an  official  who 


R.  L.  A. 

279 


SECRETARY  TO  THE  PRESIDENT — SECTIONALISM  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 


bears  this  title,  and  whose  functions  commonly 
are  to  keep  the  authentic  copies  of  public  acts; 
to  act  as  the  record  officer  of  the  state,  and 
by  his  seal  and  signature  to  authenticate  stat- 
utes and  other  documents.  He  is  often  a mem- 
ber of  state  commissions  ex  officio.  In  all  cases 
it  is  an  elective  office,  the  term  varying  from 
one  to  four  years.  In  some  commonwealths, 
as  in  Massachusetts,  he  is  likely  to  be  reelected 
for  several  terms.  See  Civil  Service,  State; 
State  Departments,  Heads  of;  State  Execu- 
tive ; State  Governments,  Characteristics 
of.  Reference:  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Government 
and,  Politics  (1910),  499.  A.  B.  H. 

SECRETARY  TO  THE  PRESIDENT.  When 
Washington  became  President,  Tobias  Lear  was 
made  his  private  secretary ; and  probably  every 
President  since  has  had  near  him  a confidential 
clerk  or  friend  to  write  letters  and  make  in- 
i quiries  for  his  chief.  Meriwether  Lewis,  pri- 
vate secretary  for  Jefferson,  was  designated  to 
lead,  with  William  Clark,  an  expedition  to 
Oregon  in  1803. 

In  1861  provision  was  made  by  Congress  for 
the  salary  of  a messenger,  steward  and  private 
secretary.  The  first  incumbents  of  the  office  to 
attract  much  popular  attention  were  John  Hay 
and  John  G.  Nicolay,  both  private  secretaries 
for  President  Lincoln ; and  their  place  in  the 
public  mind  is  largely  due  to  the  elaborate 
biography  of  Lincoln  which  they  later  pub- 
lished. President  Cleveland’s  private  secretary 
in  his  first  administration,  1885-89,  was  Daniel 


Lamont,  whose  services  were  so  significant  that 
when  Cleveland  returned  to  office  in  1893  he 
made  Lamont  Secretary  of  War.  A similar 
distinction  came  to  George  B.  Cortelyou,  pri- 
vate secretary  for  President  McKinley,  who 
held  three  Cabinet  offices;  William  Loeb,  Roose- 
velt’s secretary,  was  made  collector  of  the  port 
of  New  York  upon  the  accession  of  President 
Taft  in  1909. 

In  1897  by  statute,  the  title  of  this  office  was 
made  Secretary  to  the  President,  and  the  salary 
was  fixed  at  $6,000.  In  1911  the  salary  was 
raised  temporarily  to  $7,500,  and  it  has  since 
been  maintained  at  this  figure  by  annual 
appropriations.  The  President’s  secretary  is 
now  recognized  as  a man  of  much  signifi- 
cance in  every  administration.  He  stands  be- 
tween the  President  and  the  public  and  re- 
porters. As  an  administrative  official,  he  is 
head  of  the  employees  in  the  office  at  the  White 
House  and  assigns  their  work.  On  the  public 
side,  he  is  one  of  the  antennae  of  the  Presi- 
dent, in  realizing  public  opinion;  he  is  a point 
of  connection  with  the  leaders  of  the  Presi- 
dent’s party;  he  drafts  important  documents, 
and  is,  on  many  questions  relating  to  the  un- 
written powers  of  the  President,  a sort  of  un- 
official Vice-President. 

See  Influence  in  Government;  President, 
Authority  and  Influence  of. 

References:  J.  G.  Nicolay  and  J.  Hay,  Abra- 
ham Lincoln  (1910);  Gideon  Welles,  Diary 
(1911);  Benjamin  Harrison,  This  Country  of 
Ours  (1897).  A.  B.  H. 


SECTIONALISM  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 


Sectional  Divergence. — The  United  States, 
exclusive  of  its  non-contiguous  dependencies, 
occupies  a territory  comparable  to  Europe  in 
size,  resources,  and  variety  of  geographic 
provinces.  The  history  of  the  settlement  of 
this  territory  is  the  history  of  the  occupation 
of  successive  geographic  sections,  each  capa- 
ble of  constituting  the  physical  basis  of  a na- 
tion. It  is  natural,  therefore,  that  in  these 
various  sections  particular  interests  and  social 
types  have  arisen.  National  statesmen  have 
achieved  leadership  by  voicing  the  aspirations 
and  convictions  of  their  own  section,  and  ef- 
fecting combinations  of  sections  in  a national 
policy  by  such  compromises  and  accommoda- 
tions as  proved  necessary. 

Complication  through  Federal  Government. — 
In  spite  of  the  nationalizing  influence  of  party 
ties,  sectional  groupings  have  been  common  in 
votes  in  Congress  and  presidential  elections, 
as  well  as  in  the  party  organizations  them- 
selves. In  economic  and  social  activity  they 
are  equally  evident.  The  peculiar  constitu- 
tional organization,  under  the  federal  form  of 
states  within  a nation,  has  somewhat  obscured 


the  sectional  phenomena.  Most  historians, 
whether  engaged  upon  the  history  of  states,  or 
of  the  nation,  have  given  too  little  considera- 
tion to  the  play  of  sectional  forces. 

If  the  actual  influence  and  processes  in 
American  life  are  considered,  rather  than  the 
formal  organs  of  their  expression,  sectionalism 
is  found  to  be  one  of  the  most  serious  of  the 
fundamental  facts  in  American  history.  Even 
the  much  discussed  state  sovereignty  {see)  was 
primarily  the  constitutional  shield  raised  in 
protection  of  threatened  sectional  interests. 
Ir.  the  actual  operations  of  government  is  vis- 
ible a federal  relationship  of  sections  and  na- 
tion as  well  as  of  states  and  nation.  The 
national  spirit  and  its  expression  in  literature 
is  the  composite  result  of  the  psychology  and 
literature  of  the  different  sections. 

The  Sections. — Popularly  considered,  sections 
are  groups  of  states.  The  census  office  maps 
the  nation  into  such  groups,  naming  them 
North  Atlantic,  South  Atlantic,  North  Central, 
South  Central,  and  Western.  In  popular 
speech  the  nation  is  divided  into:  (1)  New 
England  (see)  ; (2)  the  Middle  States  (see)  ; 


280 


SECTIONALISM  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 


the  two  together  are  called  the  Northeast,  or 
simply  the  East,  and  correspond  to  the  Nortli 
Atlantic  group  of  the  Census;  (3)  the  Soutli 
(see)  ; (4)  the  old  Northwest,  between  the 

Mississippi,  the  Ohio  and  the  Great  Lakes;  (5) 
the  Middle  West  (see),  commonly  meaning 
that  part  of  the  north  central  division  which 
lies  west  of  the  Mississippi,  but  sometimes 
used  to  designate  the  whole  division  west  of 
Pennsylvania;  (6)  the  Pacific  Northwest,  or 
new  Northwest,  or  simply  Northwest;  (6)  the 
Pacific  Coast;  (7)  lower  South,  roughly  South 
Central,  or  the  Gulf  States ; (8)  the  Southwest. 
Other  names  are  in  common  use,  Ohio  Valley, 
Inland  Empire,  Rocky  Mountain  States,  Cot- 
ton States,  Corn  Belt,  Arid  America,  etc. 

The  most  obvious  example  of  sectionalism  is 
the  struggle  between  the  North  and  South  over 
slavery  (see  Slavery  Controversy)  which  cul- 
minated in  the  Civil  War.  Sectionalism  still 
exists  as  to  the  negro  question,  creating  a 
mutual  distrust  between  these  sections.  North 
and  South  are  ordinarily  set  apart  by  Mason 
and  Dixon’s  line — the  boundary  between  Mary- 
land and  Pennsylvania — continued  by  the  Ohio 
River  and  the  Missouri  Compromise  line  (see)  ; 
but  within  the  South  the  Border  States  are 
distinguished  from  Georgia  and  the  Lower 
South  or  Cotton  States,  and  the  Gulf  States. 
In  a narrow  sense,  the  Border  States  include 
only  Delaware,  Maryland,  West  Virginia,  Ken- 
tucky, and  Missouri.  To  the  latter  group 
might  be  added  the  southern  counties  of  Ohio, 
Indiana,  and  Illinois,  which  were  largely  set- 
tled from  the  South  and  influenced  by  Border 
State  sentiment.  But  there  are  other  im- 
portant examples  of  sectionalism,  which 
frequently  cut  across  state  boundaries. 
The  North,  for  example,  is  not  only  made 
up  of  several  sections,  but  each  of  these 
separate  groups  of  states  is  made  up  of  dis- 
tinct subdivisions,  often  interstate  in  their 
area.  Every  state  shows  within  itself  certain 
groups  of  towns  or  counties  which  habitually, 
sometimes  for  several  generations,  have  act- 
ed in  political,  economic  and  social  life  in  a 
manner  different  from  the  other  areas  of  the 
same  state.  The  attitude  of  the  section  con- 
sidered as  a group  of  states  is,  therefore,  the 
resultant  of  the  interplay  of  these  sectional 
subdivisions.  An  example  of  state  subdivision 
is  exhibited  in  the  counties  known  as  the  West- 
ern Reserve  in  northern  Ohio.  Another  is  the 
historic  opposition  of  the  interior  counties  of 
the  south  Atlantic  states  to  the  controlling 
tidewater  counties  (see  West  as  a Factor  in 
American  Politics).  In  Virginia  this  culmi- 
nated in  the  erection  of  the  separate  state  of 
West  Virginia.  From  the  middle  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century  to  about  1830,  the  Piedmont,  or 
upland,  portion  of  these  southern  states  con- 
stituted a distinct  section  in  normal  opposition 
to  the  seaboard  area. 

Causes  of  Sections. — Physical  geography  and 
the  stocks  from  which  the  settlers  sprang  are 


the  two  most  important  factors  in  creating 
sectional  characteristics.  The  former  has  had 
funuamental  effects  upon  the  economic  life,  and 
even  upon  the  social  organization  and  psycho- 
logical traits  of  the  people  ( see  American 
Government  and  Geography).  The  influence 
of  the  social  and  political  habits  and 
ideals  of  the  original  settlers,  however,  has 
also  been  important  and  persistent.  Usually 
the  two  factors  have  been  combined  by  the 
natural  selection  by  the  settlers  of  an  en- 
vironment suited  to  their  habits  and  traits. 

West  and  East. — One  phase  of  section- 
alism especially  characteristic  of  the  United 
States  has  been  the  opposition  of  East  and 
West.  Owing  to  the  movement  of  the  frontier 
(see  Frontier  in  American  Development) 
the  settled  area  has  been  continually  advancing 
to  the  former  sparsely  occupied  western  region. 
Although  American  democracy  has  been  com- 
pelled to  deal  with  the  problems  of  a single 
nation,  it  has  combined  at  each  period  of  its 
life  a primitive  and  a highly  developed  society, 
with  contrasting  interests.  Successive  stages 
of  density  of  settlement  have  been  exhibited 
decade  after  decade  in  successive  areas  from 
east  to  west. 

Each  zone  of  economic  and  social  develop- 
ment has  tended  to  express  its  particular  in- 
terests, and  in  this  fact  lies  the  explanation 
of  a movable  western  sectionalism  which  has 
continually  recurred  in  American  politics,  as 
in  the  era  of  Bacon’s  Rebellion  (see);  the 
Regulator  movement  (see),  culminating  in  the 
Battle  of  the  Alamance  in  1771;  the  Separatist 
movement  and  the  demand  for  self-government 
exhibited  by  the  trans- Alleghany  states,  the 
“men  of  the  western  world”  as  they  called 
themselves,  in  the  Revolutionary  period ; the 
western  demands  for  annexation  of  new  terri- 
tory in  successive  periods  from  that  era  on- 
ward; the  support  of  the  West  for  expansion 
of  the  currency,  freer  disposal  of  the  public 
lands,  internal  improvements,  a home  mar- 
ket under  a protective  tariff  in  the  earlier  pe- 
riod, and  afterwards  for  tariff  reduction. 

The  moving  West,  with  its  free  lands,  its 
lack  of  social  stratification,  its  individualism, 
its  freedom  of  opportunity,  has  been  the  most 
persistent  force  in  behalf  of  democracy,  ex- 
emplified by  the  Populists  (see)  and  by  the 
wing  of  the  Democratic  party  led  by  William 
■Tennings  Bryan  (see).  The  Insurgent  move- 
ment in  the  Republican  party  leading  to  the 
Progressive  (see)  movement,  was  influenced  by 
the  same  sectional  tendency,  although  the 
economic  transformations  of  our  time  are 
drawing  the  section  away  from  individualism 
to  national  control  under  the  principles  of 
collectivism. 

Areas  which  at  one  time  were  the  West  have 
become  in  succeeding  periods  a part  of  the 
East.  As  the  westward  progress  of  denser  set- 
tlement, more  highly  organized  agriculture, 
manufacturing,  city  life,  and  accumulated  cap- 


281 


SECTIONALISM  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 


ital  goes  on,  some  of  the  basis  of  this  sectional 
difference  disappears.  Nevertheless  transmit- 
ted habits  and  ideals  still  remain  as  powerful 
sectional  influences,  so  that  this  western  sec- 
tionalism has,  up  to  the  present,  survived  in 
spite  of  the  economic  transformations  which 
tend  to  its  extinction. 

Colonial  Sections. — Turning  to  the  manifesta- 
tions of  fixed  geographic  sectionalism,  we  find 
them  exhibited  from  early  times,  too  various 
and  often  too  subtle  for  presentation  in  a brief 
resume.  But  the  main  tendencies  may  be  il- 
lustrated by  some  examples. 

In  the  colonial  era  the  different  circumstan- 
ces of  settlement,  together  with  the  various 
geographical  conditions,  led  to  the  recognition 
of  three  coastal  sections,  New  England,  the 
Middle  Colonies,  and  the  South,  each  with  a 
considerable  community  of  institutions  and 
ideals  as  well  as  economic  interests.  These 
facts  led  to  occasional  proposals  of  sectional 
colonial  unions,  as  well  as  to  partial  recogni- 
tion in  the  jurisdiction  of  colonial  governors 
over  more  than  one  colony.  The  sections  were 
also  bases  of  military  organization  and  Indian 
administration. 

Toward  the  close  of  the  colonial  period  the 
West  had  also  begun  to  appear  as  a separate 
section.  In  the  Revolutionary  era  and  the 
period  of  the  formation  of  the  Federal  Consti- 
tution sectional  jealousies  appear  clearly  in  the 
votes  recorded  in  the  journals  of  the  Continen- 
tal Congress  and  the  constitutional  convention. 
They  were  exhibited  in  both  domestic  and  for- 
eign policy,  although  modified  in  their  influ- 
ence by  the  opposition  between  large  and 
small  states. 

New  England’s  sectional  particularism  was 
based  in  part  upon  the  physical  conditions 
which  subordinated  agricultural  interests  to 
commercial  and  navigating  interests;  and  after 
the  embargo  (see)  and  the  War  of  1812,  to 
manufacturing  interests  based  upon  her  water 
powers  and  the  traits  of  the  people.  In  part, 
also,  this  sectionalism  was  the  manifestation 
of  tire  separate  political  institutions  (such 
as  the  town),  manners,  customs,  and  ideals 
which  were  characteristic  of  the  domination  of 
Puritanism.  An  early  recognition  of  these  sec- 
tional interests  was  exhibited  by  the  New  Eng- 
land Confederacy  of  1643  (see). 

The  Colonial  South  found  its  special  inter- 
ests in  staple  production  for  export  by  means 
of  slave  labor.  The  climate,  soil  and  river 
systems  of  the  South  promoted  this  develop- 
ment, and  the  absence  of  cities  (except  Charles- 
ton) gave  freer  play  to  the  agricultural  inter- 
est. 

The  Middle  Colonies  had  characteristics  both 
of  New  England  and  the  South,  the  East  and 
the  West.  The  region  was  in  some  respects  a 
zone  of  transition,  a pivotal  and  mediating 
group.  But  its  variety  of  industries,  and  race 
stocks  ( including  particularly  Germans,  Dutch, 
and  Scotch-Irish) , multiplicity  of  religious 


sects,  mixed  political  institutions  and  customs 
placed  it  in  contrast  with  Puritan  New  Eng- 
land and  the  slave-holding  South  so  that  it 
constituted  a section  rather  than  a mere  per- 
iphery of  the  other  two  coastal  sections.  Lack- 
ing homogeneity  and  self-consciousness,  how- 
ever, it  never  exhibited  the  same  sectional  ac- 
tivity as  did  its  neighbors. 

Commerce  against  Agriculture. — In  the  rat- 
ifying conventions  in  the  various  states  which 
adopted  the  Federal  Constitution  the  votes, 
when  mapped,  reveal  the  success  of  the  com- 
promises of  the  framers  in  avoiding  the  sec- 
tional opposition  of  New  England  and  the 
South.  They  show,  also,  a different  sectional- 
ism in  the  support  of  the  Constitution  by  the 
inhabitants  of  the  areas  of  commerce  and  in- 
tercourse, chiefly  along  the  seaboard,  and  in 
the  important  river  courses  and  mountain  val- 
leys, against  the  opposition  of  those  of  the 
rural  areas  which  suffered  from  debt  and  de- 
sired relief  in  paper  money  legislation  for- 
bidden by  the  Constitution  (Art.  I,  Sec.  x, 
If  1).  They  also  exhibited  the  opposition  by 
the  country  population  to  strong  government 
in  that  era,  and  the  dependence  of  the  commer- 
cial sections  upon  more  effective  regulation  of 
interstate  commerce,  taxation  and  currency. 

Jeffersonian  Democracy  placed  its  main  re- 
liance upon  the  country  districts  which  had 
opposed  the  Constitution,  but  was  recruited 
also  from  the  democracy  of  the  larger  towns. 
Commercial  New  England  became  alarmed  as 
the  union  of  southern  and  western  agricultural 
interests  increased  their  prospective  power  in 
the  nation;  while  the  purchase  of  Louisiana 
(see)  threatened  to  place  New  England  in  a 
position  of  helpless  minority  in  the  Union  by 
the  addition  of  the  raw  material  for  new 
agricultural  states.  Her  resentment  exhibited 
over  this  annexation  was  increased  by  the  em- 
bargo legislation  and  the  War  of  1812,  by 
which  New  England’s  commerce  was  sacrificed 
to  the  policy  of  the  West  and  South.  The  re- 
sult was  a series  of  proposals  by  Federalist 
leaders  in  New  England  for  combining  that 
section  with  parts  of  the  Middle  States  or  of 
the  old  thirteen  Atlantic  States  in  a new  union, 
or  at  least  in  a coercive  opposition  to  the  gov- 
ernment policy.  The  culmination  of  this  oppo- 
sition in  the  Hartford  Convention  (see),  with 
its  proposals  for  segregation  of  taxes  for  sec- 
tional defense,  marked  also  the  downfall  of 
New  England  federalism  as  an  effective  sec- 
tional force. 

The  national  spirit  received  new  strength 
by  the  outcome  of  the  war;  and  sectionalism 
found  its  expression  in  the  following  period, 
in  the  grouping  of  congressional  votes  on  such 
topics  as  tariff,  internal  improvement,  the  pub- 
lic lands  and  currency  and  banking;  until,  bv 
the  development  of  cotton  cultivation,  with  its 
stronghold  in  the  cotton  kingdom  of  the  lower 
South,  slavery  became  the  dominant  sectional- 
izing  influence. 


282 


SECTIONALISM  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 


Slavery. — The  influence  of  slavery  was,  how- 
ever, an  indirect  factor  in  much  of  this  legis- 
lation, particularly  after  the  period  of  the  Mis- 
souri Compromise  (see)  when  North  and  South 
were  clearly  seen  as  opposing  sections.  The 
attempted  nullification  of  the  tariff  of  1832 
by  South  Carolina  was  only  resolved  upon  by 
that  state  after  vain  attempts  to  bring  the 
slave-holding  section  together  in  support  of  a 
combined  policy.  Many  who  refused  to  go 
with  Calhoun  in  favor  of  state  nullification 
were  ready  to  support  sectional  resistance 
under  the  right  of  revolution.  But  at  that 
time  the  lower  South  was  rather  the  southern 
West,  or  lower  Mississippi  Valley,  not  yet 
dominated  by  south  Atlantic  slave  interests, 
but  rather  finding  its  sectional  connections 
under  the  leadership  of  Tennessee,  in  the  pi- 
oneer WTest. 

Early  Mississippi  Valley. — The  sectional  in- 
fluence of  the  Mississippi  Valley  was  marked 
from  about  1830  to  about  1850.  In  1790  the 
Mississippi  Valley  had  a population  of  about 
one-fortieth  of  that  of  the  United  States  as  a 
whole;  in  1840  it  had  over  one-third.  Its  po- 
litical power  grew  with  its  numerical  increase 
and  as  new  states  were  added  with  equal  power 
in  the  Senate  to  the  old. 

Between  the  beginning  of  the  Revolution  and 
the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century,  the  pio- 
neers of  the  southern  Piedmont  region,  together 
with  the  similar  people  of  western  Pennsyl- 
vania, had  crossed  the  Alleghanies  and  occupied 
the  Tennessee  and  Ohio  valleys,  spread  up  the 
lower  Missouri  and  descended  into  the  Gulf 
plains.  This  stock,  the  upland  southerners, 
became  in  the  era  of  their  great  representative, 
Andrew  Jackson,  the  most  significant  influence 
in  the  political  history  of  the  time.  They  were, 
for  the  most  part,  a backwoods  democracy, 
responsive  to  emotional  leadership.  As  they 
came  to  produce  a surplus  for  export,  they 
were  in  need  of  free  use  of  the  Mississippi 
River  and  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  the  piercing  of 
the  Alleghany  barriers  by  roads  and  canals, 
the  development  of  a home  market,  cheap  pub- 
lic lands,  and  an  abundant  currency  to  satisfy 
their  optimistic  economic  interests  and  to  en- 
able them  to  pay  the  indebtedness  incurred  in 
opening  the  country.  Their  growing  power  in 
the  Union  led  the  Northeast  and  the  old  South 
to  bid  for  their  support  by  concessions  to  spe- 
cial western  interests.  Much  of  the  policy  of 
such  leaders  as  Calhoun,  Clay,  John  Quincy 
Adams,  Van  Buren,  Polk  and  Benton  is  ex- 
plained by  the  interplay  of  sectional  policy. 

Political  Rivalries  in  the  Section. — The  West 
also  was  the  stronghold  of  the  rural  democracy 
which  supported  Jackson,  and  from  which  the 
candidacy  of  W.  H.  Harrison,  although  he  was 
a Whig,  won  much  support;  both  were  regarded 
as  exponents  of  democratic  simplicity  in  gov- 
ernment. 

The  division  of  the  Mississippi  Valley,  how- 
ever, was  also  becoming  apparent  in  these 
116 


years.  The  Ohio  Valley  with  its  more  numer- 
ous and  important  commercial  centers,  and  its 
business  interests  generally,  tended  to  follow 
Henry  Clay  in  a combination  with  New  Eng- 
land upon  such  subjects  as  the  tariff.  Already 
a northern  political  zone  was  forming  under 
the  Whig  party.  It  found  support  among  the 
slave  holding  planters  of  the  black  belt,  or 
region  of  denser  negro  population  which  ex- 
tended across  central  Georgia  and  southern  Al- 
abama, and  occupied  the  alluvial  area  of  Mis- 
sissippi and  Tennessee,  and  the  good  soils  of 
central  and  eastern  Tennessee.  Economic  and 
social  considerations  attracted  these  planters 
to  the  Whig  party,  for  their  cotton  planting, 
which  was  carried  on  by  advances  of  credit 
from  banks,  demanded  that  they  oppose  the 
democratic  attacks  upon  credit  currency.  Their 
society  also  contrasted  with  the  “poor  white” 
democracy  which  occupied  the  less  fertile  soils 
of  the  northern  parts  of  the  Gulf  Basin  and  the 
sandy  lands  of  the  southern  portion. 

Subdivision  of  the  West. — The  stream  of 
population  from  New  York  and  New  England, 
Germany  and  Scandianvia  in  the  generation 
prior  to  the  Civil  War  entered  the  area  of  the 
prairies  and  the  Great  Lakes  of  the  old  North- 
west, tended  to  espouse  northern  political  prin- 
ciples, and,  as  the  slavery  question  arose  to 
controlling  importance,  this  connection  became 
more  intimate. 

Thus,  in  1850,  there  stretched  across  the  Mis- 
sissippi Valley  four  fairly  well  marked  sec- 
tions: (1)  The  area  of  the  New  York-New 

England-German  settlers,  which  increasingly 
broadened  relations  in  business  and  ideals  be- 
tween the  coast  and  the  Northeast.  The  rail- 
road development  of  the  era  promoted  this 
connection.  (2)  The  area  of  the  southern 
uplanders,  embracing  both  sides  of  the  Ohio 
Valley  together  with  Missouri,  which  consti- 
tuted a border-land  between  North  and  South. 
It  was  a region  of  compromise  on  the  slavery 
question,  although  slavery  elsewhere  existed 
only  south  of  the  Ohio.  Clay’s  compromises  and 
Crittenden’s  compromise  came  naturally  from 
this  region;  Douglas  found  in  it  much  of  his 
support;  and  President  Lincoln  adapted  his 
policy  to  the  need  of  conciliating  its  prejudices 
(see  Boeder  States).  To  the  east  it  had  close 
relations  with  West  Virginia  and  Maryland. 
(3)  The  zone  of  the  northern  and  less  fertile 
areas  of  the  gulf  plains,  or  Lower  South,  which 
had  close  relations  to  the  previously  described 
section,  in  that  it  was  an  area  of  small  slave- 
holders and  non-slaveholders,  but  which  was 
more  southern  in  its  sympathies.  (4)  The 
Black  Belt,  which  was  the  stronghold  of  the 
southern  Whigs,  and  later  of  the  Constitution- 
al Union  party,  and  was  the  home  of  the 
planting  aristocracy. 

Mountain  Region. — Each  of  these  zones  had 
areas  of  opposition  in  its  midst,  and  there 
was,  in  particular,  a survival  of  the  older  sec- 
tional entity  of  the  Alleghany  Mountains  area, 


283 


SECTIONALISM  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 


thrust  down  like  a peninsula  from  Pennsylva- 
nia into  the  South.  This  section  including 
counties  of  the  adjoining  states  to  the  east 
and  west  of  the  mountains,  was  the  stronghold 
of  the  Unionists  of  whom  Andrew  Johnson 
was  an  exponent,  and  was  afterwards  an  out- 
lying area  of  the  Republican  party,  tending, 
as  its  industries,  based  on  coal,  iron,  and  water 
power,  were  developed  after  the  war,  to  affilia- 
tion with  corresponding  parts  of  the  North. 

South  and  West. — The  cotton  planting 
states,  from  the  middle  of  the  century  showed 
marked  sectional  tendencies.  A series  of  com- 
mercial conventions  of  these  states,  continuing 
almost  annually  to  the  Civil  War,  gave  oppor- 
tunity for  exchange  of  plans  for  remedying 
sectional  grievances,  and  developing  sectional 
self-consciousness.  One  of  the  most  celebrated 
of  these  sectional  conventions  was  the  Nash- 
ville Convention  (see)  at  the  time  of  the  crisis 
which  resulted  in  the  Compromise  of  1850. 
But  a counter  sectional  consciousness  was  al- 
ready appearing  in  the  Northwest  which  is  il- 
lustrated by  the  Chicago  River  and  Harbor 
Convention  which  met  in  1847,  and  had  as  its 
rival  the  Memphis  convention  of  1845,  and  later 
conventions  on  the  lower  Mississippi.  Even 
in  the  church  organizations  sectional  divisions 
had  broken  down  national  unity,  as  Calhoun 
made  clear  in  his  last  public  utterance  in  the 
debate  of  1850. 

North  Against  South. — The  sectional  aspects 
of  the  slavery  struggle,  the  Civil  War,  and 
reconstruction  are  interwoven  with  general 
American  history.  The  division  into  northern, 
border,  and  southern  states  were  illustrated 
at  every  stage  of  the  period.  In  general,  the 
important  fact  to  be  borne  in  mind  is  that 
the  contest  was  not  a solid  impact  of  a united 
North  against  a united  South,  but  that  each 
of  these  main  sections  had  subdivisions,  the 
attitude  of  which  affected  the  policy  and  ac- 
tions of  the  larger  sections. 

Influence  on  Post-Bellum  Politics. — Since  the 
Civil  War,  sections  have  appeared  in  the  discus- 
sions and  votes  in  such  issues  as  the  Granger 
movement  (see),  and  the  greenback  movement 
(see),  both  of  which  showed  opposition  be- 
tween the  northeastern  creditor  sections,  and 
the  western  and  southern  debtor  sections.  In 
the  Senate  votes  on  monetary  issues  the  old 
northeastern  Federalist  area  against  a general- 
ly opposing  South  and  West  occasionally  re- 
appears in  political  mapping;  while  the  Gran- 
ger areas  were  chiefly  the  wheat  raising  states 
of  the  Middle  West.  In  general  the  regions  of 
accumulated  capital  have  acted  together.  The 
Populist  movement  (see)  found  its  stronghold 
in  the  prairie  and  silver  mining  states  of  the 
West;  and  the  Democratic  party  under  Bryan 
from  1896  fell  under  the  leadership  of  the 
same  section,  with  its  sympathizers  among 
eastern  laborers. 

In  these  issues  the  old  Northwest  became  the 
new  middle  region  holding  the  balance  of  power 


between  the  capitalistic  northeast  and  the  pop- 
ulistic west.  The  movements  from  1910  to 
1912  for  popular  power  in  politics,  which  ex- 
pressed themselves  in  demands  for  primary 
election,  initiative  (see),  referendum  (see), 
recall  (see),  direct  election  of  United  States 
Senators  (see  Seventeenth  Amendment), 
income  tax  (see  Sixteenth  Amendment),  low- 
er tariff,  etc.,  culminating  in  the  division  of 
the  Republican  party  and  the  organization  of 
the  Progressives  (see),  were  most  strongly  evi- 
dent west  of  the  Alleghany  mountains,  and 
more  gradually  in  the  Northeast,  generally 
speaking.  In  the  campaign  for  the  Republican 
nomination  for  the  presidency  in  1912,  a sec- 
tional tendency  was  obvious  in  the  alliances 
between  the  Pacific  Coast  and  the  Middle  West 
(north  central  states)  on  the  one  hand  and 
the  Northeast  and  the  Rocky  Mountain  states 
on  the  other,  a possible  indication  of  the  con- 
nection between  the  vested  interests  of  the 
Northeast  and  the  regions  of  its  investments  of 
mining  capital. 

Commercial  Influences. — The  mapping  of 
votes  in  presidential  elections  since  the  Civil 
War  shows  the  most  obvious  sectionalism  in 
party  politics  to  be  still  that  between  North 
and  South,  arising  over  southern  apprehension 
on  the  “negro  question.”  But  this  sectionalism 
should  not  conceal  the  fact  that  the  North  is 
still  composed  of  conflicting  economic  sections, 
whose  differences  at  times,  are  shown  to  be 
fundamental,  and  that  into  the  South  is  be- 
ing projected  (especially  along  the  line  of  the 
Appalachians)  the  northern  industrial  type 
and  interests.  This  process  is  already  pro- 
ducing a rearrangement  of  sectionalism  in  the 
South.  The  relation  of  the  Pacific  Coast  to 
Asia  and  the  problems  of  Asiatic  immigration 
have  from  time  to  time  exhibited  strong  sec- 
tional tendencies  in  that  region. 

Official  Sections. — In  economic  and  social  af- 
fairs sectionalism  has  found  constant  recog- 
nition on  the  part  of  the  different  departments 
of  the  Federal  Government  which  map  the  Unit- 
ed States  into  sections  according  to  the  par- 
ticular interests  of  the  department  concerned. 
The  Geological  Survey,  Agricultural  Depart- 
ment, Forestry  Service,  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission,  etc.,  as  well  as  the  Census  Bureau, 
all  divide  the  United  States  into  more  or  less 
varying  sections  in  the  maps  classifying  their 
work.  In  the  business  world  and  in  social 
activity,  the  fact  of  sectionalism  in  the  United 
States  finds  expression  in  the  organization  of 
the  territory,  in  sectional  societies  and  conven- 
tions. Pronounced  sectional  consciousness  is 
exhibited  by  such  areas  as  the  “Inland  Em- 
pire” (see)  composed  of  interior  fragments  of 
the  far  Northwest,  west  of  the  Rocky  Moun- 
tains, and  roughly  corresponding  to  the  Co- 
lumbia Plateau.  Such  sections,  embracing 
fragments  of  various  states,  often  have  more 
homogeneity  and  community  of  interest  than 
exists  within  the  state  itself.  They  constitute 


284 


SECURITIES,  FEDERAL  COMMISSION  ON— SEEDS,  PUBLIC  DISTRIBUTION  OF 


possible  bases  for  future  new  divisions  of  the 
United  States  in  case  the  state  should  continue 
to  lose  vitality  as  a political  unit. 

See  American  Government  and  Geogra- 
phy; Boundaries  of  the  United  States,  In- 
terior; Far  West;  Frontier  in  American 
Development  ; Interstate  Commerce  Legisla- 
tion; Negro  Problem;  New  England;  Paper 
Money  in  U.  S. ; Public  Lands  and  Public 
Land  Policy;  Silver  Coinage  Controversy; 
South;  State  Sovereignty;  United  States 
as  a Federal  State;  West  as  a Factor  in 
American  Politics. 

References;  A.  B.  Hart,  Southern  South 
(1910),  National  Ideals  (1907),  chs.  ii,  iii; 
F.  H.  Giddings,  Inductive  Sociology  ( 1901 ) , 
285,  293,  “Nature  of  Political  Majorities”  in 
Pol.  Sci.  Quart.,  VII  (1892),  116;  S.  N. 
Patten,  “Decay  of  State  and  Local  Govern- 
ment” in  Am.  Acad,  of  Pol.  and  Soc.  Sci., 
Annals,  I (1890),  27;  A.  L.  Lowell,  in  Am. 
Hist.  Assoc.,  Report,  1901,  1,  321;  A. 

W.  Small,  General  Sociology  (1905),  209, 
243,  280,  282,  305,  307 ; J.  Royce,  “Provincial- 
ism” in  Race  Questions  (1908);  for  discus- 
sions of  separate  sections,  H.  Adams,  New  Eng- 
land Federalism  (1877)  ; S.  E.  Morison,  Har- 
rison Gray  Otis  (1913),  South  in  the  Building 
of  the  Nation  (1909-10)  ; W.  G.  Brown,  Lower 
South  (1902)  ; E.  Ingle,  Southern  Side  Lights 
(1896);  W.  E.  Dodd,  Statesmen  of  the  Old 
South  (1911)  ; E.  G.  Murphy,  Problems  of  the 
Present  South  (1904),  Basis  of  Ascendency 
(1909);  L.  C.  Willcox,  “The  South  in  Fic- 
tion” in  Bookman,  XXXIII,  44 ; E.  A.  Aider- 
man,  “Growing  South”  in  World’s  Work,  XVI 
(1908),  10373;  F.  J.  Turner,  References  in 
the  History  of  the  West  (1913),  “Old  West” 
in  Wisconsin  Hist.  Soc.,  Proceedings,  1908, 
184,  “Ohio  Valley  in  Am.  Hist.”  in  Hist. 
Teacher’s  Magazine,  II  (1910),  147,  “Sig- 
nificance of  Mississippi  Valley  in  History”  in 
Miss.  Valley  Hist.  Assoc.,  Report,  1909-10,  159, 

‘ Middle  West”  in  International  Monthly,  IV 
(1901),  808,  Rise  of  the  New  West  (1906), 
chs.  i-viii;  E.  A.  Ross,  Changing  America 
(1912)  ; D.  S.  Jordan,  California  and  Califor- 
nians (1899)  ; F.  H.  Newell,  Irrigation  (1902)  ; 
W.  E.  Smythe,  Conquest  of  Arid  America 
(1911)  ; G.  E.  Woodberry,  America  in  Litera- 
ture (1903),  205-253;  B.  Wendell,  Literary 
Hist,  of  America  (1900),  514-530;  for  refer- 
ences to  histories  and  descriptions  of  special 
sections,  Channing,  Hart  and  Turner,  Guide  to 
Am.  Hist.  (1912),  §§  96,  146,  149,  162,  165, 
192,  193,  200-202,  209,  230,  242,  245,  248, 
250,  259,  260,  261,  264,  273,  274;  for  sectional 
struggle  on  slavery,  ibid,  H.  V.  Ames,  State 
Documents  on  Federal  Relations,  1789-1861 
(1911)  ; for  sectionalism  within  individual 
states  and  irrespective  of  state  lines,  F. 
J.  Turner,  “Is  Sectionalism  in  America 
Dying  Away?”  in  Am.  Jour,  of  Sociology, 
XIII  (1908),  661;  0.  G.  Libby,  Distribu- 
tion of  the  Vote  on  the  Ratification  of  the 


Federal  Constitution  (1894);  W.  A.  Scliaper, 
“Sectionalism  in  South  Carolina”  in  Am.  Hist. 
Assoc.,  Report,  1900,  I,  237 ; U.  B.  Phillips, 
“Georgia  and  State  Rights”  in  ibid,  1901, 
II ; C.  McCarthy  “Anti-Masonic  Party”  in 
ibid,  1902,  I,  365;  C.  H.  Ambler,  Sectional- 
ism in  Virginia  (1910);  for  geographic  basis 
of  sectionalism,  J.  W.  Powell,  “Physiographic 
Regions  of  U.  S.”  in  Nat.  Geog.  Monographs,  I, 
No.  3 (1895);  I.  Bowman,  Forest  Physiog- 
raphy ( 1911 ) ; E.  C.  Semple,  Am.  Hist,  audits 
Geographic  Conditions  (1903),  Influences  of 
Geographic  Environment  (1911);  A.  B.  Brig- 
ham, Geographic  Influences  in  American  His- 
tory (1903)  ; C.  R.  Van  Hise,  Conservation 
(1910);  F.  V.  Emerson,  “Geographic  Influ- 
ences in  American  Slavery”  in  Am.  Geo.  Soc., 
Bulletin,  XLIII  (1911)  ; Channing,  Hart  and 
Turner,  Guide  to  Am.  nist.  (1912),  § 31. 

Frederick  Jackson  Turner. 

SECURITIES,  FEDERAL  COMMISSION  ON. 

The  act  of  Congress  creating  the  Commerce 
Court,  approved  June  18,  1910,  provided  for 
the  appointment  by  the  President  of  a com- 
mission to  investigate  questions  pertaining 
to  the  issuance  of  stocks  and  bonds  by  railroad 
corporations,  and  the  power  of  Congress  to 
regulate  such  securities.  The  reasons  for  ade- 
quate regulation  of  these  securities  are:  (1) 
the  close  relation  between  capitalization  and 
rates  and  service;  (2)  to  give  adequate  pro- 
tection to  investors;  (3)  as  a groundwork  for 
any  federal  incorporation  law,  a method  of 
regulation  now  advocated  by  many  in  all  parts 
of  the  country;  (4)  the  inexpediency  of  allow- 
ing the  officers  and  directors  (who  are  prob- 
ably the  best  judges  as  to  the  amount  of  debts 
a railroad  should  assume)  to  be  the  only 
judges  on  that  point,  inasmuch  as  dividends, 
profits,  rates,  service  and  other  elements  affect- 
ing the  public  are  involved;  (5)  the  conflict 
of  jurisdiction  between  the  statutes  of  all  the 
various  states  and  the  statutes  of  the  Federal 
Government  as  to  construction,  operation  and 
financing  of  railroads,  often  resulting  in  in- 
adequate regulation. 

The  main  recommendations  of  the  commis- 
sion were  (1)  stringent  provisions  regard- 
ing the  publicity  of  stock  and  bond  issues; 
(2)  the  enactment  of  a statute  stating  the 
conditions  under  which  the  directors  of  such 
concerns  should  issue  their  securities  and  be 
held  responsible  for  their  proper  issue;  (3) 
that  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  be 
given  broad  powers  and  adequate  means  for 
the  valuation  of  railroad  physical  property. 

See  Franchises,  Corporation;  Labor,  Re- 
lation of  the  State  to;  Publicity  of  Cor- 
porate Accounts  ; Stocks  and  Bonds. 

Reference:  House  Doc.,  62  Cong.,  2 Sess., 
No.  256  (1911).  Clyde  L.  King. 

SEEDS,  PUBLIC  DISTRIBUTION  OF.  In 

1839  Congress  made  an  appropriation  of  $1000, 


285 


SEIGNIORAGE— SELECTMEN 


authorizing  the  commissioner  of  patents  to  col- 
lect and  distribute  seeds,  conduct  agricultural 
investigations  and  procure  agricultural  statis- 
tics. In  1840  the  systematic  distribution  of 
seeds  was  begun  by  the  government.  At  first 
this  distribution  proceeded  mainly  on  the  idea 
of  securing  new  and  valuable  seeds  and  plants 
from  foreign  countries  for  the  general  better- 
ment of  American  agriculture.  For  many 
years,  however,  the  general  distribution  of 
seeds  has  been  confined  mostly  to  standard 
varieties  sent  by  members  of  Congress  to  their 
constituents.  The  patronage  feature  of  the 
congressional  free  seed  distribution  has  been 
strongly  condemned  for  many  years  by  a large 
section  of  the  public,  and  efforts  have  been 
made  to  discontinue  it;  but  the  distribution 
seems  to  be  firmly  established  as  a congression- 
al policy.  In  1904  the  appropriation  was  $290,- 
000;  in  1912,  $237,130,  the  decrease  represent- 
ing improved  administrative  methods  and  the 
introduction  of  automatic  packeting  machinery. 

The  free-seed  distribution  of  which  the  De- 
partment of  Agriculture  is  made  the  agent 
cannot  be  understood  or  judged  as  a separate 
or  single  question.  Since  1840  the  formal 
governmental  work  for  agriculture  has  evolved 
in  the  United  States,  and  the  seed  distribu- 
tion, which  was  once  a leading  motive,  is  now 
relatively  but  a small  part  of  the  entire  enter- 
prise. Although  it  is  questionable  whether 
Congress  should  give  away  seeds  that  can  be 
regularly  purchased  in  the  market,  other  feat- 
ures of  the  distribution  are  properly  within  the 
office  of  government.  About  70  per  cent  of 
these  seeds  are  grown  under  contract  with  the 
Department  of  Agriculture,  the  remainder  by 
bids  under  strict  conditions  of  inspection  and 
test.  Effort  is  made  to  direct  the  distribution 
of  these  seeds  to  localities  and  regions  to 
which  they  are  adapted.  These  seeds  represent 
the  staple  varieties  of  garden  vegetables  and 
flowers.  An  annual  distribution  of  Dutch  bulbs 
is  made  in  autumn,  and  in  1908  a bulb  gar- 
den was  established  in  the  State  of  Washing- 
ton primarily  for  the  purpose  of  propagating 
the  bulbs  for  the  congressional  distribution. 

The  intent  of  the  original  act  has  recently 
been  revived  by  the  establishment  of  an  Office 
of  Foreign  Seed  and  Plant  Introduction.  A 
separate  appropriation  of  $20,000  for  this  work 
was  made  by  Congress  in  1897;  and  for  1912 
the  amount  is  $65,630.  This  office  has  estab- 
lished a very  large  connection  with  explorers, 
travelers,  consuls,  missionaries  and  others 
throughout  the  world,  and  it  has  made  about 
34,000  importations,  some  of  them  having  al- 
ready proved  to  be  of  much  value. 

A third  form  of  seed  distribution  consists  in 
distributing  limited  quantities  of  new  or  little 
known  kinds  of  crop  seeds,  and  breeding  them 
for  particular  purposes,  as  varieties  of  cotton, 
forage  crops,  sugar  beets,  tobacco,  and  others. 

See  Agriculture,  Relations  of  Govern- 
ment to. 


References:  The  Congressional  Record, 

No.  73,  XLVIII  (March  7,  1912),  3059- 
3066;  Pieter,  “Business  of  Seed  and  Plant  In- 
troduction and  Distribution”  in  U.  S.  Dept,  of 
Agriculture,  Report,  1905,  291-306;  L.  H. 
Bailey,  Cyclopedia  of  Am,.  Agric.  (1907-09), 
II,  70-80;  Office  of  Foreign  Seed  and  Plant 
introduction,  Inventories.  L.  H.  Bailey. 

SEIGNIORAGE.  Originally  this  term  re- 
ferred to  the  charge  made  by  a lord  or  seign- 
ieur  for  coining;  it  now  refers  to  the  difference 
between  the  market  value  and  the  coining  value 
of  bullion  which  passes  through  the  sovereign’s 
mint.  This  constitutes  a profit  to  the  govern- 
ment. In  1910  the  seigniorage  in  the  United 
States  Mints  on  subsidiary  silver  was  $2,469,- 
000,  on  a total  coinage  of  $4,298,000.  The  net 
seigniorage  on  all  silver  (including  dollars) 
coined  since  July  1,  1878,  to  1910  inclusive 
was  $160,000,000.  The  seigniorage  on  minor 
coin  (one  and  five  cent  pieces)  in  1910  was 
$1,917,000  on  a coinage  of  $2,339,000.  See 
Coinage  and  Specie  Currency  in  the  United 
States;  Mint  of  the  United  States. 
References:  Director  of  the  U.  S.  Mint,  Annual 
Report-,  W.  M.  Scott,  Money  and  Banking 
(1903),  78-73.  D.  R.  D. 

SELECTMEN.  Selectmen  are  found  only  in 
the  New  England  states.  They  are  officers  of 
the  town  who  manage  its  local  affairs  outside 
of  the  town  meeting.  They  may  be  chosen  an- 
nually or  for  three  years  with  mandates  ex- 
piring at  different  periods.  The  number  of  such 
officers  in  each  town  is  variously  given  as 
three,  five,  seven,  or  nine.  Some  of  the  duties 
of  selectmen  are  imposed  by  the  town  meeting, 
while  other  powers  are  conferred  by  statute. 

The  powers  and  duties  of  the  selectmen  in- 
clude, in  general,  the  calling  of  the  town  meet- 
ing, the  care  of  town  property,  the  establish- 
ment of  highways  and  drains,  the  control  of 
elections,  and  the  granting  of  licenses.  They 
may  act  as  a board  of  health,  as  assessors,  and 
as  overseers  of  the  poor.  They  adjust  all 
claims  against  the  town ; but  they  have  no  au- 
thority to  levy  taxes.  In  some  instances  they 
appoint  minor  officers  and  may  fill  vacancies 
even  among  their  own  number.  Again  they  may 
possess  jurisdiction  in  probate  matters.  At  the 
annual  town  meeting  they  are  required  to  make 
a full  and  complete  report  of  their  doings. 
They  represent  and  are  “the  government  of  the 
town  during  the  intervals  between  the  town 
meetings,”  and  are  responsible  to  the  electors. 

Historically  the  selectmen  are  among  the 
earliest  officers  of  the  New  England  town,  and 
their  duties  were  far  more  numerous  formerly 
than  at  present.  The  principal  reason  for 
their  selection  is  suggested  by  the  growth  of 
the  annual  town  meeting,  which  became  too 
large  for  the  transaction  of  much  of  the  public 
business.  Furthermore,  the  representative 
principle  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  in  some 


286 


SELF-GOVERNMENT— SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


instances  tlie  selectmen  were  “chosen  out  of 
each  quarter  of  the  town.”  At  first  they  were 
selected  as  committees  or  “townsmen”  for  par- 
ticular duties;  their  general  functions  came 
about  through  the  increase  of  the  delegation  of 
powers  by  the  town  meeting. 

Among  the  duties  of  selectmen  in  colonial 
days  are  the  following:  the  admission  of 
“newcomers  as  inhabitants  of  the  town”;  the 
temporary  entertainment  of  strangers;  the  fix- 
ing of  fines  and  penalties;  the  granting  of  per- 
mission to  individuals  to  sell  real  estate;  and 
the  regulating  of  the  use  of  lands  generally. 
They  were  authorized  also  to  employ  teachers 
and  prescribe  regulations  for  the  public 
schools;  to  settle  disputes  between  the  English 
and  the  Indians;  and  to  set  to  work  the  idle 
and  disorderly;  and  to  care  for  the  insane  and 
feeble  minded.  Upon  the  action  of  these  officers, 
under  instructions  given  by  the  town  meeting, 
rests  much  of  the  “success  of  the  New  England 
town  government.” 

See  Executive  and  Executive  Reform  ; 
Town  Meeting;  Towns  and  Townships. 

References:  J.  Fiske,  Civil  Government 
(1890),  20,  24;  G.  E.  Howard,  Local  Constitu- 
tional History  (1889),  74,  167;  J.  A.  Fairlie, 
Local  Government  (1906),  22,  156;  E.  Clian- 
ning,  “Town  and  County  Government”  in  Johns 
Hopkins  University,  Studies,  II,  No.  4 (1884)  ; 
statute  laws  of  the  New  England  states. 

B.  F.  Shambaugh. 

SELF-GOVERNMENT.  The  principle  of 
permitting  definite  government  areas,  as  towns 
or  cities,  to  regulate  their  local  affairs.  Also 
in  a larger  sense  democratic  government  in 


which  the  law  proceeds  from  the  people  con- 
stituting the  community.  See  Local  Self- 
Government;  Municipal  Government;  Popu- 
lar Government.  O.  C.  H. 

SENATE,  COURTESY  OF  THE.  The  Presi- 
dent’s appointments  to  office  must  be  made 
“by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Senate”  (Const.  Art.  II,  Sec.  ii.  If  2).  Sen- 
ators are  likely  to  be  better  informed  than  the 
President  as  to  political  conditions  and  the 
availability  of  applicants  from  their  own  states. 
Since  appointments  must  secure  confirmation  in 
any  case,  before  submitting  nominations  the 
President  usually  takes  counsel  with  the  Sen- 
ators from  his  own  party.  Senators  have  con- 
strued the  right  to  advise  and  consent  into  a 
right  to  dictate  appointments.  They  resent  it — 
Conkling  and  Platt  in  1881  even  resigned  as  a 
protest — if  the  President  makes  an  appoint- 
ment from  their  state  which  they  have  not 
suggested  or  at  least  approved.  If  the  Senators 
from  the  appointee’s  state  are  not  of  the  Pres- 
ident’s party,  he  has  a somewhat  freer  hand. 
The  courtesy  of  the  Senate  is  the  rule  or  prac- 
tice which  requires  that  other  Senators,  in 
acting  upon  appointments  from  a given  state, 
s.iall  follow  the  lead  of  the  Senators  from  that 
state.  Of  the  result,  President  Taft  has  said: 
“The  appointing  power  is  in  effect  in  their 
[the  Senators’]  hands,  subject  only  to  a veto 
by  the  President.”  See  Appointment  of  Mem- 
bers of  Congress  to  Office;  President,  Au- 
thority and  Influence  of.  References:  C.  A. 
Beard,  Readings  in  Am.  Gov.  (1911),  212;  W. 
Wilson,  Congressional  Government  (12th  ed., 
1896).  G.  H.  H. 


SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


Constitutional  Provisions. — The  constitu- 
tion given  the  Senate  by  the  convention  (see 
Federal  Convention)  of  1787  was  the  result 
less  of  deliberate  design  than  of  necessary 
compromise.  Benjamin  Franklin  advocated  a 
unicameral  legislature;  but  the  example  of 
the  British  Parliament,  and  of  the  state  legis- 
latures, the  desirability  of  a checking  body, 
and  most  of  all  the  persistent  clash  of  interest 
between  the  large  and  small  states,  turned  the 
scale  in  favor  of  the  bicameral  system.  For 
a house  of  lords  American  society  afforded  no 
material.  After  long  debate,  it  was  settled, 
to  the  advantage  of  the  small  states,  that  the 
Senate  should  be  composed  of  two  Senators 
from  each  state.  It  was  later  determined  that 
each  Senator  should  have  one  vote.  Moreover, 
this  equality  of  representation  was  more 
strongly  protected  against  change  than  any 
other  section  of  the  Constitution  by  the  clause : 
“no  state,  without  its  consent,  shall  be  deprived 
of  its  equal  suffrage  in  the  senate”  (Art.  V). 


The  Senate  was  made  judge  of  the  qualifica- 
tions of  its  own  members  (Art.  I.  Sec.  v,  Tf  1). 
In  exercising  this  power,  the  Senate  may  not 
exact  other  qualifications  than  those  laid  down 
in  the  Constitution,  but  should  determine  as 
a judicial  question,  whether  the  candidate  for 
admission  possesses  the  qualifications  thus 
specified. 

Mode  of  Election. — After  protracted  debate 
it  was  determined  that  Senators  should  be 
elected  by  the  state  legislatures,  thus  ensuring 
a “filtration  in  the  choice.”  For  more  than  75 
years  the  election  procedure  varied  in  the  sev- 
eral states  until  it  was  regulated  by  the  law  of 
1866.  Growing  dissatisfaction  with  legisla- 
tive elections  l.ed  to  a movement  to  amend  the 
Constitution  so  as  to  provide  for  the  election 
of  Senators  by  direct  vote  of  the  people ; 
meanwhile,  discouraged  by  the  delays  encount- 
ered by  the  proposed  amendment,  many  states 
secured  the  substance  though  not  the  form  of 
popular  control  through  convention  instruc- 


287 


SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


tions  to  the  legislatures,  through  direct  pri- 
maries (see  Primary,  Direct),  and  even 
through  popular  elections,  the  results  of  which 
were  declared  by  law  to  be  a binding  mandate 
upon  the  legislature  ( see  Senators,  Election 
of)  . 

Instruction  of  Senators. — State  legislatures, 
the  constituencies  of  Senators,  have  often 
passed  resolutions  “instructing  our  Senators 
and  requesting  our  Representatives  in  Con- 
gress” to  do  certain  things.  Though  debated 
in  the  Federal  Convention,  the  right  of  in- 
struction was  not  mentioned  in  the  Constitu- 
tion. Publicists  of  weight  deny  its  existence. 
On  the  other  hand,  Henry  Clay  (see),  in  the 
Senate,  held  that,  although  no  legal  penalties 
could  be  imposed  for  the  disregarding  of  such 
instructions,  a Senator  was  nevertheless  bound 
either  to  obey  them  or  to  resign;  and  quite  a 
number  of  Senators  have  thus  resigned,  rather 
than  face  the  disapproval  of  the  people  in  their 
home  states  (see  Instructions  to  Representa- 
tives ) . 

Legislative  Power. — In  law-making  the  pow- 
ers of  the  Senate  are  for  the  most  part  coor- 
dinate with  those  of  the  House.  The  Constitu- 
tion prescribes  (Art.  I,  Sec.  vii,  Tf  1)  ; “All 
bills  for  the  raising  of  revenue  shall  originate 
in  the  House  of  Representatives;  but  the  Sen- 
ate may  propose  or  concur  with  amendments 
as  on  other  bills”  (see  Revenue,  Bills  for 
Raising).  Through  this  amending  power, 
the  Senate  has  encroached  seriously  upon  this 
privilege  of  origination.  It  has  cut  off  all  but 
the  enacting  clause  of  House  bills,  and  sub- 
stituted entirely  different  measures.  In  1897 
the  Senate  committee  on  finance  met  even  be- 
fore the  opening  of  Congress,  and  drafted  its 
own  tariff  bill,  the  provisions  of  which  were 
later  expressed  in  872  amendments  to  the  bill 
which  “originated”  in  the  House.  In  recent 
tariff  legislation,  the  influence  of  the  Senate 
has  been  dominant. 

Non-Legislative  Powers. — The  Senate  has 
certain  executive  powers  which  have  added 
greatly  to  its  ascendancy.  The  President  is 
empowered  “by  and  with  the  advice  and  con- 
sent of  the  Senate,  to  make  treaties,  provided 
two-thirds  of  the  senators  present  concur” 
(Art.  II,  Sec.  ii,  U 2).  President  Washington 
declared  that  in  the  work  of  negotiation  oral 
communication  was  necessary,  and  he  appeared 
in  person  before  the  Senate  and  asked  various 
questions  in  relation  to  a treaty,  and  the  Sen- 
ate prepared  answers.  At  present,  the  treaty 
is  ordinarily  negotiated  by  the  Secretary  of 
State,  acting  for  the  President,  and  keeping 
in  close  touch  with  the  Senate  committee  of 
foreign  relations,  or  with  some  of  the  most  in- 
fluential leaders  in  the  Senate.  Occasionally 
a treaty  has  been  sprung  upon  the  Senate 
without  warning.  Thus,  the  treaty  for  the 
purchase  of  Alaska  was  ready  for  signature 
before  any  intimation  was  given  that  such  a 
negotiation  was  under  way.  But  such  neglect 


to  take  the  Senate  into  confidence  is  likely  to 
breed  resentment,  for  the  Senate  considers  it- 
self an  integral  part  of  the  treaty-making  pow- 
er, and  has  even  gone  to  the  point  of  passing 
resolutions  urging  that  negotiations  upon  spe- 
cific subjects  be  opened  with  certain  countries. 
Nor  has  the  Senate  scrupled  to  amend  treaties 
submitted  for  its  ratification — notably  the 
Hay-Pauncefote  (see)  arbitration  treaty,  1900 
— to  the  great  embarrassment  of  the  adminis- 
tration, and  to  the  annoyance  of  the  other 
party  to  the  compact.  Foreign  governments 
have  become  wary  about  entering  upon  nego- 
tiations until  assured  of  the  attitude  of  the 
Senate.  In  1870  the  Secretary  of  State  gave 
the  British  envoy  to  understand  that  if  neces- 
sary the  chairman  of  the  committee  of  foreign 
relations  would  be  removed,  in  order  that  his 
great  influence  might  not  be  exercised  in  op- 
position to  the  Treaty  of  Washington  then 
pending. 

Mere  growth  in  numbers  has  put  a severe 
strain  upon  the  effective  exercise  of  the  Senate’s 
executive  powers.  In  the  first  Congress  only 
ten  states  were  represented.  Twenty  men, 
meeting  constantly  in  a small  room,  could  and 
did  carry  themselves  as  ambassadors,  and  their 
deliberations  over  matters  of  diplomacy  re- 
sembled those  of  a large  cabinet.  But  when 
the  numbers  approach  one  hundred,  there  can 
be  no  such  intimacy  of  discussion  or  unity  of 
purpose.  Almost  every  treaty  involves  mat- 
ters which  are  political  issues,  as  affecting  sec- 
tional or  party  interests,  so  that  if  one  group 
in  the  Senate  favors  a treaty,  their  opponents 
look  upon  it  with  suspicion.  The  minister  of 
a foreign  state  stands  as  the  one  representative 
of  his  own  government.  He  knows  the  precise 
range  of  concessions  and  demands  which  that 
government  will  sanction.  The  game  is  in  his 
own  hand,  and  he  can  play  it  with  astuteness 
and  reserve.  On  the  other  hand,  the  American 
Secretary  of  State  acts  with  the  perturbing 
consciousness  that  before  the  proposed  treaty 
can  become  valid,  its  every  point  must  run  the 
gauntlet  of  discussion  and  of  amendment  in  a 
body  of  nearly  100  men,  few  of  whom  have  any 
broad  knowledge  of  international  law  or  of 
this  particular  negotiation,  but  all  of  whom 
are  party  leaders,  subject  to  strong  sectional 
or  political  bias.  Secretary  Hay  (see  Hay, 
John)  used  to  declare  that  in  negotiating  a 
treaty  with  the  ambassador  of  a foreign  gov- 
ernment, he  felt  as  if  he  had  one  hand  tied 
behind  his  back  and  a ball  and  chain  about  his 
leg,  so  hampered  was  he  by  the  Senate.  Since 
the  war  with  Spain,  American  diplomatic  re- 
lations have  become  immensely  more  compli- 
cated. The  unfitness  of  a large,  political  body 
for  handling  matters  which  require  reserve  and 
finesse  is  proving  a serious  handicap  if  no  1 
menace  to  successful  treaty-making  ( see  Treat- 
ies of  the  LTnited  States). 

Executive  Session. — Whenever  the  Senate  en- 
ters upon  the  consideration  of  treaties  or  of 


SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


appointments,  it  goes  into  “executive”  or  secret 
session.  Criticism  is  often  directed  against 
this  practice,  as  shutting  out  the  salutary  light 
of  publicity  (see).  On  the  other  hand,  it  is 
urged  that  both  of  these  delicate  tasks  can  best 
be  performed  behind  closed  doors,  where,  un- 
biased by  popular  clamor,  the  Senate  may  de- 
liberate and  act  upon  information  which  for 
reasons  of  state  should  not  be  noised  abroad. 
That  such  reserve  and  secrecy  might  at  times 
be  of  great  public  advantage  is  indisputable; 
but  the  obvious  fact  is  that  the  secret  session 
yields  neither  the  best  nor  the  worst  results 
that  might  be  expected  from  it,  for  the  simple 
reason  that  it  is  not  secret.  The  galleries 
may  be  cleared,  but  the  walls  of  the  Senate 
chamber  leak,  and  in  a few  hours  the  daily 
papers  give  detailed  though  unauthoritative 
reports  of  the  Senate’s  deliberations.  Appar- 
ently, the  seal  of  secrecy  cannot  be  success- 
fully imposed  upon  so  large  and  varied  an 
assembly.  Senator  X is  too  anxious  that  his 
constituents  be  informed  of  what  he  has  said 
and  done. 

Confirmation  of  Appointments.— The  Senate 
is  also  yoked  with  the  President  in  the  exer- 
cise of  the  appointing  power.  The  Constitution 
requires  that  he  “shall  nominate,  and  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate, 
shall  appoint”  (Art.  II.  Sec.  ii,  If  2)  the  various 
officers  whose  appointment  is  not  otherwise 
provided  for  by  the  Constitution  or  by  Congress 
under  its  warrant.  This  puts  in  the  hands  of 
a majority  of  the  Senate — whatever  its  party 
or  factional  elements — great  power  to  resist  the 
President,  if  not  to  bend  him  to  its  will.  The 
Senate  may  not  appoint  officers,  but  it  can 
reject  all  of  the  President’s  nominees  until  he 
is  brought  to  name  someone  acceptable  to  his 
senatorial  advisers.  The  Senate  does  not  de- 
mur at  confirming  the  appointment  of  mem- 
bers of  the  Cabinet — they  are  the  President’s 
official  household,  responsible  to  him,  and  he 
must  bear  the  blame  if  they  prove  ineffective; 
but  other  appointments  are  frequently  reject- 
ed. This  control  on  the  part  of  the  Senate 
was  greatly  strengthened  by  the  growth  of  the 
“spoils  system”  (see)  and  the  development  of 
the  “courtesy  of  the  Senate”  (see  Senate,  Cour- 
tesy of  the),  the  custom  by  which,  in  passing 
upon  nominations,  the  Senators  follow  the  lead 
of  the  Senators  from  the  state  to  which  the 
nominee  is  accredited  (see  Appointments  to 
Office;  Patronage). 

Removals. — Through  most  of  our  history  it 
has  been  accepted  that  the  power  of  removal 
was  inherent  in  the  President’s  power  to  ap- 
point. In  1867,  however,  in  the  midst  of  the 
bitter  controversy  between  President  Johnson 
and  Congress  ( see  Reconstruction  ) the  tenure 
of  office  act  was  passed,  which  required  that  in 
making  removals  the  President  should  secure 
the  consent  of  the  Senate.  Failure  to  do  so 
was  specifically  declared  to  be  a “high  crime 
and  misdemeanor,”  and  this  was  one  of  the 


chief  offenses  later  alleged  against  Johnson. 
This  law  was  soon  modified;  in  1887  it  was 
repealed  altogether,  and  since  that  time  the 
Senate  has  asserted  no  power  over  removals 
from  office  ( see  Terms  of  Public  Officers). 

Impeachment. — To  the  Senate  is  given  “the 
sole  power  to  try  all  impeachments”  (Art.  I, 
Sec.  iii,  If  C)  which  may  be  brought  against  the 
President  and  other  civil  officers  of  the  United 
States  (see  Impeachment).  Nine  cases  have 
been  brought  to  trial.  Six  of  the  accused  offi- 
cers were  federal  judges,  only  three  of  whom 
were  removed  from  office.  A Senator  and  a 
Secretary  of  War,  against  whom  impeachment 
charges  were  brought,  resigned  before  the  cases 
came  to  trial,  so  that  the  question  as  to  lack 
of  jurisdiction  was  a factor  in  determining  the 
dismissal  of  the  charges  and  the  acquittal.  In 
the  case  of  President  Johnson,  the  vote  lacked 
but  one  of  the  requisite  two-tliirds.  The  proce- 
dure is  much  like  that  of  the  ordinary  court. 
In  the  trial  of  Johnson,  Senator  Sumner  in- 
sisted that  the  proceeding  was  primarily  a 
mode  of  removal  (see)  from  office,  and  hence 
that  the  Senate  was  not  bound  by  the  ordinary 
rules  of  evidence,  nor  were  the  Senators  con- 
strained to  judicial  reserve  in  speech  or  sus- 
pension of  judgment.  But  this  view  has  found 
slight  acceptance. 

Election  of  Vice-President. — Another  non- 
legislative power  was  assigned  to  the  Senate 
by  Amendment  XII  ( see  Twelfth  Amend- 
ment), which  provides  that  if  in  the  vote  of 
the  electoral  college  no  person  has  a majority 
for  Vice-President,  “then  from  the  two  highest 
numbers  on  the  list,  the  Senate  shall  choose 
the  Vice-President.”  It  is  to  be  observed  that 
only  under  these  circumstances  does  the  Sen- 
ate select  its  regular  presiding  officer,  although 
circumstances  may  transform  the  president 
'pro  tempore  (see)  into  the  regular  occupant 
of  the  chair.  By  the  Constitution  the  Vice- 
President  of  the  United  States  is  made  presi- 
dent of  the  Senate  (Art.  I,  Sec.  iii,  If  4).  His 
position  in  relation  to  the  Senate  is  thus  sharp- 
ly contrasted  with  that  of  the  Speaker  in  the 
lower  house.  Like  the  lord  high  chancellor  in 
the  House  of  Lords  and  like  the  lieutenant- 
governor  in  many  of  the  states,  he  presides  over 
a legislative  body  by  virtue  not  of  his  member- 
ship but  of  his  holding  a certain  non-legisla- 
tive office.  He  may  be  called  to  hold  the  gavel 
over  a Senate  the  majority  of  whose  members 
are  not  of  his  own  party.  Hence  his  duties 
are  those  of  a parliamentarian  rather  than  of 
a party  leader.  He  has  no  vote  except  in  case 
of  a tie,  and  this  casting  vote  has  been  rarely 
used,  though  it  was  recorded  three  times  in  a 
single  day  in  1911  (Feb.  2).  He  can  take  no 
part  in  any  debate;  he  appoints  no  committees, 
and  has  little  influence  in  determining  rules  or 
deciding  points  of  order.  Doubtless  the  thrifty 
framers  of  the  Constitution  assigned  these 
somewhat  incongruous  duties  to  the  Vice- 
President  with  a view  to  preventing  his  hands 


289 


SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


being  idle  and  to  enabling  him  to  earn  his 
salary,  while  otherwise  his  only  service  would 
be  to  “stand  and  wait.”  The  office  is  not  ex- 
hilarating, and  does  not  appeal  to  presidential 
aspirants  of  strenuous  temperament  (see  Vice- 
Pkesident)  . 

Contested  Elections. — Like  the  House,  the 
Senate  is  made  the  judge  of  the  elections,  re- 
turns and  qualifications  of  its  own  members 
( Art.  I,  Sec.  5,  j[  1 ) . Cases  in  which  these 
matters  are  in  question  often  drag  through 
many  months,  and  the  final  decision  is  likely 
to  be  determined  by  the  party  exigencies  of 
the  moment.  In  dealing  with  contested  elec- 
tions, however,  two  precedents  seem  pretty 
firmly  established.  The  Senate  refuses  to  ac- 
cept the  credentials  of  a man  appointed  by  a 
governor  to  fill  a vacancy  which  the  legisla- 
ture of  his  state  has  had  ample  opportunity 
to  fill.  In  cases  where  bribery  or  corruption 
is  alleged  to  have  invalidated  an  election,  it 
lias  repeatedly  been  held  that  it  must  be  proved 
by  legal  evidence:  (1)  that  the  claimant  was 
personally  guilty  of  corrupt  practices;  or  (2) 
that  the  corruption  took  place  with  his  sanc- 
tion; or  (3)  that  a sufficient  number  of  votes 
were  corruptly  affected  to  determine  his  elec- 
tion. Senators  George  F.  Hoar  (see)  and 
Elihu  Root  (see)  have  protested  vigorously 
against  the  Senate’s  construing  its  powers  so 
narrowly,  insisting  that  the  Senate  is  the 
guardian  of  its  own  honor,  and  that  in  deciding 
the  question  whether  a claimant  is  entitled 
to  a seat,  the  Senate  ought  not  to  be  limited 
by  the  strict  rules  of  evidence  which  would  ob- 
tain in  a court  of  law.  In  the  thirteen  cases 
in  which  Senators  have  been  brought  to  the  bar 
of  the  Senate  on  charge  of  bribery  or  corrup- 
tion, the  accused  was  exonerated  by  the  ma- 
jority reports  from  the  committees  in  ten 
cases;  yet  in  all  but  two  of  the  thirteen  to  a 
minority  of  the  committee  the  guilt  of  the  ac- 
cused seemed  probable.  In  two  cases  the  com- 
mittee reported  that  the  Senator  was  “not 
legally  elected” ; in  each  of  these  instances 
the  accused  resigned  before  the  committee’s  re- 
port was  acted  upon.  One  of  them,  W.  A. 
Clark,  was  reelected  by  acclamation  by  the 
Montana  legislature  at  the  opening  of  its  next 
session,  and  the  Senate  forthwith  admitted 
him  as  without  spot  or  blemish  ( see  Elec- 
tions, Contested). 

Rules  and  Discipline. — The  Senate  may  pun- 
ish its  members  for  disorderly  behavior,  and 
with  the  concurrence  of  two-thirds,  may  expel 
a member  (Art.  I,  Sec.  v,  H 2).  Censure  and 
suspension  have  been  imposed  upon  members 
for  assaults  within  the  Senate  chamber.  In 
1797,  Senator  Blount  of  Tennessee  was  ex- 
pelled for  tampering  with  Indians  for  the 
advantage  of  the  British.  In  1861  eleven  Sen- 
ators from  seceded  states  were  expelled,  and 
in  the  following  year  the  same  penalty  was 
imposed  upon  Polk  and  Johnson  of  Missouri, 
and  Bright  of  Indiana.  The  rules  of  the 


Senate,  unlike  those  of  the  House,  do 
riot  need  to  be  revised  and  adopted  anew  at 
the  beginning  of  each  Congress,  since  the 
Senate  is  a continuous  body.  Nor  has  it  been 
necessary  for  the  Senate  to  fetter  itself  by  such 
drastic  restrictions  as  obtain  in  the  House. 
In  the  days  when  the  Senate  consisted  of  but 
twenty  or  thirty  members,  certain  traditions 
of  senatorial  deference  took  their  rise,  and 
these  are  still  jealously  upheld,  although  at 
times  they  seriously  hamper  the  enlarged  Sen- 
ate. Thus,  in  1806,  the  Senate  put  an  end  to 
the  right  to  move  the  previous  question'  and 
later  Clay’s  efforts  to  revive  it  proved  unavail- 
ing. There  is  no  limit  other  than  that  of  his 
physical  endurance  upon  the  length  of  time  a 
Senator  may  speak.  This  is  the  Senate’s  spec- 
ialized form  of  filibustering  (see),  and  at  the 
end  of  a session  it  often  proves  effective  in  ex- 
torting concessions  or  in  talking  measures  to 
death.  Thus  in  1901  by  a harangue  of  thirteen 
hours  Senator  Carter  defeated  the  river  and 
harbor  bill,  and  in  1903,  by  the  mere  threat  of 
a similar  long-distance  speech  Senator  Tillman 
forced  upon  an  appropriation  bill  a claim  of 
South  Carolina  for  $47,000  which  the  proper 
auditing  authority  had  declared  amounted  to 
34  cents.  Mr.  Cannon  (see  Cannon,  Joseph), 
made  a vigorous  protest  against  this  high- 
handed procedure,  yet  legislation  of  so  much 
importance  was  at  stake  that  the  House  had  to 
accede  to  “this  gift  from  the  treasury,  against 
the  law,  to  the  state  of  South  Carolina.”  Re- 
peated proposals  have  been  made  for  placing  a 
limit  upon  debate  (see  Closure),  but  Sena- 
tors as  individuals  and  as  party  men  are  too 
jealous  of  what  may  at  any  moment  prove  an 
invaluable  weapon  to  be  willing  to  renounce 
it  for  the  common  good  (see  Rules  of  Con- 
gress). 

Committees. — The  Senate  appoints  its  own 
standing  committees.  Nominally  the  selection 
is  made  by  party  caucus,  but  in  fact  the  cau- 
cus often  empowers  its  chairman  to  appoint  a 
committee  on  committees,  and  its  list  is  usual- 
ly elected  without  protest  or  change,  although 
that  act  may  be  tantamount  to  deciding  the 
fate  of  the  most  important  measures  that 
are  to  come  before  that  Congress.  This  pro- 
cedure puts  the  control  of  the  great  legisla- 
tive committees  into  the  hands  of  a very  lim- 
ited number  of  men.  A Senator  is  rarely  re- 
moved from  a committee  except  at  his  own  re- 
quest. The  most  notable  instance  was  the 
removal  of  Charles  Sumner  (see)  from  the 
committee  on  foreign  relations  of  1871.  Among 
members  of  the  majority  party  on  a given  com- 
mittee, seniority  of  service  in  almost  every 
instance  determines  the  chairmanship — a prac- 
tice which  sometimes  places  and  keeps  in  posi- 
tions of  high  responsibility  men  of  low  ability 
and  of  narrow  interests.  A notable  departure 
from  this  seniority  rule  was  made  in  the 
organization  of  the  committee  on  appropria- 
tions at  the  opening  of  the  63rd  Congress, 


290 


SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


1913.  In  the  61st  Congress  the  number  of 
standing  committees  had  grown  to  72- 
ten  more  than  those  of  the  House  and 
enough  to  give  a chairmanship  to  every 
one  of  the  59  Senators  of  the  majority 
party,  however  recent  the  beginning  of  his 
service.  Ten  chairmanships  of  minor  and  non- 
political  committees  were  accorded  to  veteran 
members  of  the  minority.  With  the  chairman- 
ship— even  of  the  committees  on  revolutionary 
claims  and  on  disposal  of  useless  papers  and 
documents — there  goes  the  right  to  a committee 
room  and  to  the  appointment  of  one  or  more 
committee  clerks  and  messengers,  the  list  of 
whom  contains  some  suggestive  coincidences 
of  names  with  those  of  the  chairmen  (see  Com- 
mittee System  ) . 

“Equal  Suffrage.” — In  recent  years  the  equal- 
ity of  representation  in  the  Senate  presents 
inequalities  which  are  growing  yet  more  glar- 
ing. On  its  floor  Nevada  (81,875)  stands  the 
peer  of  New  York  (9,113,279),  although  in 
population  the  two  states  are  in  the  ratio  of 
one  to  111.  States  having  less  than  one- 
fifth  of  the  population  of  the  United  States 
elect  a majority  of  the  Senate;  Senators  repre- 
senting 8,000,000  people  in  16  states  might  de- 
feat a treaty  approved  by  Senators  repre- 
senting 83,000,000.  But  the  Senate  was  in- 
tended to  represent  not  blocks  of  population 
but  constituent  elements  in  a federal  union. 
Moreover,  the  force  of  such  statistics  as  an 
argument  against  the  states’  “equal  suffrage” 
in  the  Senate  is  lessened  by  two  considerations. 
In  the  first  place,  theory  and  experience  show 
that  the  small  states  do  not  align  themsehes 
over  against  the  large  states.  The  bonds  that 
bring  states  into  united  action  are  sectional 
and  economic.  Nevada  and  Delaware  have 
more  interests  in  common  with  California  and 
Pennsylvania,  respectively,  than  with  each 
other.  In  the  second  place,  eminence  of  public 
service  is  not  assured  by  the  fact  that  a large 
population  is  represented.  The  smaller  stat  s 
have  sent  to  the  Senate  and  have  retained  there 
not  a few  men  of  the  most  distinguished  merit. 
The  time  is  not  yet  out  of  mind,  when  it  would 
have  been  hard  to  select  three  of  the  smallest 
states  which  were  then  so  shabbily  represented 
in  the  Senate  as  were  the  three  largest  states  in 
the  Union. 

Developments. — In  the  first  years  of  its  ex- 
istence the  Senate  regarded  itself  as  primarily 
an  assembly  of  state  ambassadors,  closely  as- 
sociated with  the  President  in  executive  tasks. 
In  the  generation  before  the  Civil  War  the 
Senate  was  the  scene  of  the  all-engrossing  de- 
bates over  constitutional  questions,  and  the 
eminence  of  the  group  of  statesmen  there  as- 
sembled made  it  the  dominant  element  in  the 
government,  a position  of  leadership  which  it 
has  never  lost,  although  its  character  has  great- 
ly changed  ( see  Hayne,  R.  Y. ; Webster,  Dan- 
iel). The  smallness  of  the  body  as  compared 
with  the  House,  the  long  term,  the  gradual  re- 


newal of  its  membership,  all  tend  to  make  it  the 
goal  of  the  political  leader’s  ambition.  The 
Senate  has  encroached  upon  the  powers  both 
of  the  President  and  of  the  House.  It  prac- 
tically dictates  a host  of  appointments. 
Through  its  ratifying  of  treaties  it  exercises 
far-reaching  control  over  foreign  relations.  It 
has  said  the  decisive  word  on  most  important 
points  in  every  revenue-raising  measure  of  the 
past  generation.  It  makes  radical  increase  in 
House  appropriation  measures.  On  the  cur- 
rency, the  control  of  the  trusts,  the  regulation 
of  railways,  the  Senate’s  policy  has  prevailed. 
House  debates  and  votes  often  show  lack  of 
responsibility,  for  it  is  recognized  that  the 
really  vital  consideration  of  the  measure  will 
come  in  the  Senate. 

As  cause  and  also  as  effect  of  this  growth  in 
power,  there  has  come  a change  in  the  ele- 
ments that  make  up  the  Senate.  As  in  Web- 
ster’s day,  two  out  of  three  of  its  members  are 
lawyers,  but  they  are  no  longer  of  the  lawyer- 
statesman  type.  They  are  legal  specialists, 
most  of  whose  practice  has  been  connected 
with  great  business  interests.  And  the  other 
third  of  the  Senate  is  drawn  in  increasing 
degree  from  men  of  wealth  or  from  those  who 
have  achieved  success  in  the  great  financial, 
commercial  or  transportation  enterprises.  The 
result  is  that  the  Senate  has  come  to  be  looked 
upon  as  the  direct  representative  not  of  the 
individual  states  but  of  “political  experience 
and  the  interests  of  property,  that  is,  of  the 
conservative  elements  in  the  state.”  The  con- 
ditions which  attend  his  election  and  which 
surround  the  Senator’s  daily  service  tend  to 
strengthen  and  confirm  a conservative  bias. 
In  the  United  States  the  organization  of  busi- 
ness enterprises  is  becoming  centralized,  oli- 
garchic. The  very  conditions  which  have  made 
the  Senate  dominant  tend — entirely  aside  from 
any  hint  of  corruption — to  ally  it  in  sym- 
pathy with  the  masters  of  business  and  of 
finance.  Against  such  a class  spirit  in  the 
Senate  the  urgent  demand  for  election  of 
Senators  by  direct  vote  of  the  people  was  a 
protest.  Even  before  the  passage  of  the 
Seventeenth  Amendment  (see),  more  than  a 
third  of  the  Senators  were  elected  by  methods 
which  approximated  popular  control  (see 
Popular  Government).  And  not  a few  of 
the  men  thus  elected  had  a large  part  in  de- 
veloping a new  type  of  leadership. 

The  most  powerful  organ  of  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment is  in  a state  of  transition.  How  will 
it  use  its  power?  It  may  invite  revolution 
by  reactionary  conservatism.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  conceivable  that  popular  election 
may  give  control  to  demagogues  whose  radical- 
ism will  hasten  disaster.  Or  the  Senate  may 
develop  a leadership  which  will  enable  it  to 
achieve  the  task  of  progressive  melioration, 
acting  as  the  mediator  between  an  ever  more 
intelligent  democracy  and  the  class  interests 
of  wealth  and  industrial  centralization. 


291 


SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  CONFIRMATION  BY— SENATORS 


See  Congress;  Executive  and  Congress; 
House  of  Representatives  ; President  ; 
Rules  of  Congress  ; Senators  ; Senators, 
Election  of;  Treaties  as  the  Law  of  the 
Land;  Vice-President. 

References:  James  Bryce,  Am.  Commonwealth 
(4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  97-125;  J.  A.  Woodburn, 
Am.  Republic  (1906),  196-245;  P.  S.  Reinsch, 
Am.  Legislatures  (1907),  79-125,  Readings  on 
Am.  Fed.  Gov.  (1909),  127-222;  G.  II  Haynes, 
Election  of  Senators  (1906),  71-99;  P.  L. 
Kaye,  Readings  in  Civil  Government  (1910), 
156-183;  S.  E.  Moffett,  “Is  the  Senate  Unfair- 
ly Constituted?”  in  Pol.  Sci.  Quart.,  X (1895), 
248-256;  H.  von  Holst,  “Shall  the  Senate  Rule 
the  Republic?”  in  Forum,  XVI  (1893),  263- 
271;  W.  Wilson,  Congressional  Government 
(2d  ed.,  1896).  George  H.  Haynes. 

SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  CON- 
FIRMATION BY.  See  Confirmation  by  the 
Senate  of  the  United  States. 

SENATE,  PRESIDENT  OF  THE.  See 

President  of  the  Senate. 

SENATE,  STATE.  Senate  is  the  name 
which  has  been  adopted  in  all  the  states  for 
the  upper  branch  of  the  legislature.  Its  size 
is  usually  fixed  by  the  constitution.  It  varies 
from  17  in  Delaware  to  63  in  Minnesota,  and, 
in  comparison  with  the  numbers  in  the  lower 
house,  is  from  one-half  or  one-third  in  many  of 
the  states  to  one-fifteentli  in  New  Hampshire. 
In  the  newer  states,  after  each  decennial  cen- 
sus, the  states  is  redistricted  for  the  election 
of  the  fixed  number  of  senators.  In  only  two 
states,  Illinois  and  Minnesota,  does  the  same 
districting  serve  also  for  the  election  of  mem- 
bers of  the  lower  house.  In  most  states,  sena- 
torial districts  follow  county  lines,  and,  in 
New  England,  especially,  the  county  itself  is 
usually  the  basis  for  senatorial  representation. 
Unequal  representation  results,  sometimes 
from  according  a senator  to  each  political  unit 
— each  Rhode  Island  town  or  city  is  represented 
by  one  senator;  sometimes  by  limitations  in- 
tended to  restrict  the  influence  of  any  one  city 
— in  New  York,  no  county  may  have  more  than 
one-third  of  all  the  senators. 

The  senate  differs  from  the  other  branch  in 
its  smaller  size,  and  often  in  its  term  and  quali- 
fications. Following  the  example  set  in  Con- 
gress, 25  of  the  states  have  prescribed  for  their 
senators  a longer  term  (four  years)  than  that 
of  their  representatives  (two  years),  and  in 
several  states  only  one  half  of  the  senate  is 
renewed  at  any  one  election.  Many  states  in- 
sist upon  a higher  age  qualification  than  for 
representatives:  eighteen  states  prescribe  25 
as  the  minimum  age  for  a senator;  nine  set 
the  minimum  at  from  26  to  30  years.  A longer 
preliminary  residence  within  the  state  is  often 
required  from  senators  than  from  representa- 
tives. 


Such  slight  differences  in  qualifications  are 
not  sufficient  to  produce  any  considerable  dif- 
ferences in  the  personnel  of  the  two  houses. 
But  from  its  relatively  small  size  and  longer 
term,  the  senate  tends  to  draw  into  its  mem- 
bership the  abler  and  more  experienced  poli- 
ticians of  both  the  higher  and  the  lower  or- 
ders. The  senate  is  the  court  for  the  trial  of 
impeachments,  and  in  a few  states  its  approval 
must  be  obtained  for  the  governor’s  appoint- 
ments. Greater  influence  is  also  accorded  the 
senate  in  amending  the  constitution;  in  Ver- 
mont, amendments  must  be  initiated  by  the 
senate;  in  Massachusetts  the  approval  of  a 
mere  majority  of  the  senate  is  required,  where- 
as two-thirds  of  the  house  must  vote  for  the 
amendment. 

See  Senate  of  the  United  States;  State 
Legislature. 

References:  P.  S.  Reinsch,  Am.  State  Legis- 
latures (1907);  James  Bryce,  Am.  Common- 
wealth (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  481-497;  G.  H. 
Haynes,  Representative  in  State  Legislatures 
(1900);  Theodore  Roosevelt,  Am.  Ideals 
(1897),  ch.  v,  63-101.  G.  H.  Haynes. 

SENATORS.  A Senator  of  the  United 
States  must  have  attained  the  age  of  thirty 
years,  must  have  been  nine  years  a citizen 
of  the  United  States,  and  at  the  time  of  his 
election  must  be  an  inhabitant  of  the  state  for 
which  he  is  chosen  (Art.  I,  Sec.  iii,  H 3).  True 
to  its  name,  the  Senate  is  a body  of  men  of 
mature  years,  for  service  in  the  Senate  is 
usually  the  culmination  of  an  active  career. 
In  the  second  session  of  the  Sixty-first  Con- 
gress (January,  1910),  the  average  age  of  the 
92  men  then  in  the  Senate  was  59;  not  one 
was  less  than  40  years  old,  while  two  were  81. 
Thirty-five  men  were  between  51  and  60,  and 
twenty-four  between  61  and  70.  The  average 
age  at  which  they  had  entered  the  Senate 
was  51.  Seven  were  of  foreign  birth.  It  is 
a significant  fact  that  forty-five  years  after 
the  end  of  the  Civil  War  one  out  of  five  in 
the  Senate  was  a veteran  of  that  conflict. 
Eight  had  fought  for  the  Union,  and  ten  on 
the  other  side.  Both  Senators  from  three  of 
the  southern  states  were  Confederate  veterans. 

Training. — A large  proportion  had  served 
long  political  apprenticeships  both  in  party  or- 
ganizations and  in  the  elective  public  service. 
Twenty-eight  had  been  delegates  to  national 
party  conventions;  thirteen  had  been  members 
of  national  committees  from  their  respective 
states ; ten  had  served  as  presidential  electors. 
The  surprisingly  large  number  of  twenty-five 
out  of  the  ninety-two  had  been  governors,  most- 
ly in  the  southern  and  western  states.  Of  more 
direct  influence,  both  as  affording  training  for 
senatorial  service  and  as  familiarizing  them 
with  the  constituencies  from  which  their  elec- 
tions must  be  secured  and  with  which  they 
must  keep  on  good  terms,  was  the  fact  that 
forty  of  the  Senators  had  served  in  state  legis- 


292 


SENATORS,  ELECTION  OF 


latures.  Thirty-six  out  of  the  ninety-two,  in- 
cluding many  of  the  Senators  of  most  in- 
fluence, had  been  promoted  to  the  Senate  after 
from  one  to  ten  terms  of  service  in  the  House 
of  Representatives.  Such  promotions  are  more 
common  among  the  Senators  from  the  North 
and  East  than  from  other  sections. 

The  federal  Senate  is  not  an  assembly  of 
Olympians,  but  of  keen  men  of  affairs.  Fifty- 
seven  of  the  Senators  in  1910  were  men  of 
college  or  university  training,  at  least  to  the 
extent  of  having  pursued  professional  studies. 
In  its  representation  of  the  American  people, 
the  Senate  presents  some  anomalies.  First, 
there  is  the  heavy  predominance  of  lawyers — 
more  than  two-thirds  of  its  membership.  This 
proportion  may  be  no  higher  than  in  the  days 
of  Webster  and  Clay.  But  the  type  has 
changed.  In  place  of  the  lawyer-statesman, 
who  had  received  his  training  in  general  prac- 
tice, there  now  come  the  specialists — keener 
critics,  it  may  be,  of  the  practicability  of  meas- 
ures, but  often  with  a narrowed  interest  and 
outlook.  In  the  second  place,  there  is  scanty 
representation  of  some  of  the  most  character- 
istic American  fields  of  enterprise;  agri- 
culture, manufacturing  and  mining  claimed 
but  two  each;  mercantile  interests,  three; 
“business,”  three.  The  explanation  doubtless 
is  that,  while  the  tillers  of  the  soil  are  little 
skilled  as  politicians  and  poorly  supplied  with 
the  sinews  of  political  warfare,  the  leaders  in 
these  other  lines  of  enterprise  are  too  deeply 
engrossed  in  their  own  affairs  to  be  willing 
to  accept  senatorial  office,  and  have  preferred 
to  be  “represented  by  counsel” — hence  the 
presence  in  the  Senate  from  time  to  time  of 
men  who  have  been  recognized  as  primarily 
railroad  Senators,  express-company  Senators, 
oil,  copper,  silver  or  lumber  Senators. 

Character. — It  may  be  that  the  Senate  still 
contains  “the  best  men  that  our  system  calls 
into  politics,”  but  the  last  thirty  years  has 
seen  a notable  change  in  its  personnel  and 
temper.  The  committees  on  foreign  relations 
and  on  the  judiciary  have  been  relegated  to  the 
rear,  and  the  committee  on  finance  takes  the 
lead.  In  average  ability  the  Senate  doubt- 
less ranks  higher  than  the  House.  For  one 
reason,  two  out  of  five  of  its  members  have 
been  drawn  from  the  House,  which  serves  as  a 
preparatory  school  for  the  aspiring  politician 
or  statesman.  Once  in  the  Senate,  he  finds 
far  better  opportunities  for  developing  what- 
ever ability  he  has.  The  long  term,  the  gradual 
renewal,  the  small  numbers,  the  greater  free- 
dom of  debate,  all  combine  to  make  a seat  in 
the  Senate  a goal  which  is  eagerly  sought. 

Criticism. — In  the  closing  years  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  much  criticism  began  to  be  di- 
rected against  the  alleged  influence  of  wealth 
in  and  upon  the  Senate.  It  is  a conservative 
estimate  that  one  Senator  in  five  was  a man  of 
wealth  running  well  into  the  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  dollars.  Not  a few  of  these  were 


men  whose  eminent  ability  would  naturally 
have  brought  them  to  the  Senate,  as  a recog- 
nition of  their  effective  leadership;  some  were 
“merely  rich”  men,  whose  presence  in  the  Sen- 
ate could  be  attributed  to  nothing  else  than 
their  wealth;  much  more  menacing  than  these 
were  the  few  who  had  sought  entrance  to  the 
Senate  not  because  they  were,  but  because  they 
aspired  to  be,  rich.  The  scandalous  and  long- 
fought  campaigns  by  which  a few  millionaires 
sought  to  capture  seats  in  the  Senate,  and  the 
vast  power  which  is  obviously  possessed  by 
the  individual  Senator  in  connection  with 
financial  legislation  gave  rise  to  suspicions 
which  doubtless  did  grave  injustice  to  the 
rank  and  file  of  the  Senate. 

Influence. — The  social  prestige  attaching  to 
membership  in  the  Senate  is  considerable.  In 
Washington  society  at  private  functions  and  on 
occasions  of  ceremony  a precedence  is  accorded 
to  Senators  and  their  wives  which  must  be 
reckoned  as  one  of  the  allurements  of  the  office. 
Aside  from  his  direct  influence  upon  govern- 
ment, the  Senator  may  exercise  a far-reaching 
influence  in  politics.  His  control  over  appoint- 
ments ( see  Appointments;  Senate,  Courtesy 
of  the)  may  put  him  at  the  head  of  the  party 
organization  in  his  own  state,  and  he  is  promi- 
nent in  all  its  counsels.  In  the  national  party 
organization,  also,  Senators  play  leading  parts, 
as  members  of  national  conventions,  platform 
framers,  and  President  makers. 

See  Congress;  House  of  Representatives; 
Senate. 

References;  James  Bryce,  Am.  Common- 
wealth (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  113-125;  M.  D.  Con- 
way, “Ought  the  U.  S.  Senate  to  be  Reformed?” 
i Monist,  V (1895),  223-246;  P.  S.  Reinsch, 
Am.  Legislatures  (1907),  79-125;  G.  II. 

Haynes,  Election  of  Senators  (1906),  71-99; 
“Senate  in  the  Light  of  History”  in  Forum, 
XVI  (1893),  272-281,  “Still  Aged  Senate” 
in  Nation,  LXXXV,  July,  1907,  5;  “Shall  Mil- 
lionaires Run  the  Government?”  in  Review  of 
Reviews,  XXXV  (1907),  340;  C.  L.  Jones, 
Readings  on  Parties  and  Elections  (1912),  ch. 
v ; Congressional  Directories. 

George  H.  Haynes. 

SENATORS,  ELECTION  OF.  Legislation 

Concerning  Method.  The  Constitution  pro- 
vided that  the  Senators  from  each  state  shall 
“chosen  by  the  Legislature  thereof”  (Art.  I, 
Sec.  iii,  If  1 ) . In  the  constitutional  convention 
James  Wilson  was  the  only  man  who  advocated 
the  election  of  Senators  by  direct  vote  of  the 
people,  or  who  made  vigorous  protest  against 
their  election  by  the  legislatures.  For  more 
than  75  years  Congress  allowed  the  states  to 
regulate  the  method  of  senatorial  election. 
Deadlocks  and  contested  elections  were  fre- 
quent. Accordingly,  in  1866,  a law  was  passed 
which  prescribed  that  on  the  second  Tuesday 
after  the  organization  of  the  legislature,  each 
house  should  by  viva  voce  vote  name  one  person 


293 


SENATORS,  ELECTION  OF 


for  Senator;  on  the  following  day  the  members 
of  the  two  houses  should  meet  in  joint  session, 
and  the  result  of  the  previous  day’s  balloting 
should  be  announced.  If  any  candidate  had 
received  a majority  in  each  house,  he  should 
be  declared  elected;  if  not,  the  joint  assembly 
should  convene  each  legislative  day  at  noon, 
and  take  at  least  one  ballot  until  a Senator 
should  be  elected  by  a majority  of  all  the  votes 
of  the  joint  assembly. 

Experience  has  proved  this  procedure  faulty. 
It  has  given  rise  to  frequent  deadlocks,  often 
lasting  throughout  the  session,  and  resulting: 
(1)  in  a stampede  of  the  legislature,  at  the 
last  moment,  for  a compromise  candidate;  (2) 
in  the  turmoil  and  expense  of  a special  session 
of  the  legislature  for  the  sole  purpose  of  elect- 
ing a Senator;  (3)  in  the  state’s  being  de- 
prived for  two  years  of  its  “equal  suffrage” 
in  the  Senate.  Such  deadlocks  might  be  pre- 
vented by  amending  the  law  so  as  to  permit  a 
plurality  to  elect;  but  this  proposal  has  never 
received  strong  support,  since  its  enactment 
into  law  might  bring  undeserved  deprivation  of 
a seat  in  the  Senate  to  any  majority  party 
which  happened  to  be  split  by  faction.  More- 
over, in  not  a few  instances  these  deadlocks 
have  resulted  from  a fight  against  unworthy 
candidates  who  controlled  a plurality. 

Demand  for  Popular  Election. — Since  1870 
there  has  been  an  increasing  demand  that 
Senators  be  elected  by  direct  vote  of  the  peo- 
ple. Six  times,  at  intervals  between  1893  and 
1911,  a resolution  for  the  proposing  of  a con- 
stitutional amendment  to  secure  popular  elec- 
tion of  Senators  was  passed  by  the  House  of 
Representatives  before  it  was  allowed  to  come 
to  a vote  in  the  Senate,  where  (Feb.  28,  1911) 
it  lacked  but  four  votes  of  securing  the  requis- 
ite two-thirds  majority.  Meantime,  a move- 
ment had  been  started  by  the  Pennsylvania 
legislature  in  1899  to  attempt  the  untried 
process  of  initiating  the  amendment  by  a con- 
vention called  for  the  purpose  on  application 
to  Congress  by  two-thirds  of  the  state  legisla- 
tures. By  the  end  of  1911  about  twenty- five 
of  the  states  had  made  valid  application  for 
the  calling  of  such  a convention. 

The  advocates  of  the  popular  election  of 
Senators  argued  that  the  former  system  brought 
to  the  Senate  men  who  had  not  the  confidence 
of  the  public  and  who  were  little  responsive  to 
public  opinion;  that  it  blurred  state  and  na- 
tional issues  in  the  election  of  members  of  state 
legislatures,  and  distracted  the  legislatures 
from  their  normal  work ; that  the  greatness  of 
the  prize,  dependent  upon  the  vote  of  a very 
few  men,  fostered  bribery  and  corruption  of 
legislatures,  and  had  proved  one  of  the  chief 
causes  of  the  disrepute  into  which  they  had 
fallen;  that  it  stood  in  the  way  of  a sensible 
reform  of  state  systems  of  representation:  that 
deadlocks  often  caused  states  to  he  partly  or 
wholly  without  representation  in  the  Senate. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  was  urged  that  election 


by  the  legislature  secured  a more  intelligent 
choice  than  would  be  obtained  by  party  con- 
vention or  direct  primary;  that  legislative 
choice  accorded  with  the  federal  system,  and 
that  popular  election  would  lead  to  a demand 
for  state  representation  in  the  Senate  in  pro- 
portion to  population.  It  was  also  claimed  that 
popular  election  would  impair  the  conservatism 
of  the  Senate,  and  greatly  increase  the  number 
of  contested  elections. 

Quasi-Popular  Election. — In  many  states 
methods  had  been  devised  which  already  as- 
sured a large  degree  of  popular  control  over 
senatorial  elections.  In  states  where  one  party 
was  dominant,  the  indorsement  of  a particular 
candidate,  either  by  direct  primary  or  by  the 
state  party  election,  practically  reduced  the 
election  by  members  of  the  legislature  to  a mere 
formality.  In  Illinois  the  law  provided  for  a 
popular  vote  upon  candidates  for  the  Senate 
for  the  sole  purpose  of  ascertaining  the  senti- 
ment of  the  voters  of  the  respective  parties. 
Of  states  where  party  contests  were  close,  Ore- 
gon was  the  first  to  work  out  a system  which 
came  close  to  making  the  direct  election  of 
Senators  obligatory  and  certain.  A direct  par- 
ty primary  selected  the  party  candidates  and  at 
the  general  state  election  a plurality  determined 
the  “people’s  choice”  for  Senator.  Candidates 
for  the  state  legislature  were  given  an  opportu- 
nity to  pledge  themselves  to  vote  for  the  “peo- 
ple’s choice,”  and  voters  by  thousands 
pledged  themselves  to  vote  only  for  candidates 
who  did  thus  commit  themselves.  A law  of  the 
state  declared  that  the  plurality  obtained  in 
the  general  election  constituted  “an  instruction 
from  the  people  of  Oregon”  to  each  member  of 
the  legislature  to  vote  for  the  “people’s  cL<  ice.” 
Accordingly,  in  1909  a legislature  which  was 
Republican  by  a considerable  majority,  on  the 
first  ballot  elected  the  Democrat  who  had  led 
in  the  general  election. 

Seventeenth  Amendment. — Tn  the  first  ses- 
sion of  the  Sixty-second  Congress  a resolution 
passed  by  the  House  on  April  13,  1911,  was 
adopted  hy  the  Senate  in  an  amended  form 
on  June  12,  1912.  Agreement  between  the  two 
branches  was  not  reached  before  the  close  of 
that  session,  but  the  resolution  was  again  in- 
troduced in  the  House  in  the  form  adopted  by 
the  Senate  early  in  the  second  session.  On 
April  13,  1912,  the  House  adopted  a resolu- 
tion proposing  the  following  amendment,  in 
which  the  Senate  concurred  on  June  12 : 

The  Senate  of  the  United  States  shall  be  com- 
posed of  two  Senators  from  each  State,  elected 
by  the  people  thereof  for  six  years;  and  each 
Senator  shall  have  one  vote.  The  electors  in  each 
state  shall  have  the  qualifications  requisite  for 
electors  of  the  most  numerous  branch  of  the 
State  legislature. 

When  vacancies  happen  in  the  representation 
of  any  State  in  the  Senate,  the  executive  autho- 
rity of  such  State  shall  issue  writs  of  election 
to  fill  such  vacancies:  Provided  that  the  legis- 
lature of  any  State  may  empower  the  executive 
thereof  to  make  temporary  appointments  until 
the  people  fill  the  vacancies  by  election  as  the 
legislature  may  direct. 


294 


SEPARATION  OF  POWERS 


The  amendment  was  ratified  in  1912  by  the 
legislatures  of  Minnesota  and  Massachusetts. 
Before  the  middle  of  April,  1913,  less  than 
ten  months  after  the  proposed  amendment  had 
received  the  approval  of  the  Senate,  it  had 
been  ratified  by  the  legislatures  of  36  states. 
The  Seventeenth  Amendment  was  proclaimed 
as  part  of  the  Constitution  on  May  31,  1913, 
and  the  first  election  under  the  new  system 
was  held  in  Georgia  on  July  15,  1913. 

See  Popular  Government;  Senate  of  the 
United  States. 

References:  G.  H.  Haynes,  Election  of  Sen- 
ators (1906)  ; G.  S.  Taft,  Compilation  of  Sen- 
ate Election  Cases  (1903)  ; J.  Bryce,  Am.  Com- 


monwealth (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  99-102;  A.  P.  C. 
Griffin,  List  of  References  on  Popular  Election 
of  Senators  (1904);  H.  H.  B.  Meyer,  Refer- 
ences Relating  to  Popular  Election  of  Sen- 
ators (1911)  ; C.  E.  Fanning,  Selected  Readings 
m Election  of  Senators  (1909);  A.  A.  Doub, 
in  Sen.  Doc.,  61  Cong.,  3 Sess.  (1911),  No.  782; 
B.  J.  Hendrick,  “Statement  No.  1”  in  McClure’s 
Magazine,  XXXVII  (1911),  505-519;  P.  S. 
Reinsch,  Readings  on  Am.  State  Gov.  (1911), 
404-428;  C.  L.  Jones,  Readings  on  Parties  and 
Elections  (1912),  ch.  v;  C.  E.  Fanning,  “Se- 
lected Articles  on  Election  of  U.  S.  Senators” 
in  Debaters’  Handbook  Series  (1909)  ; Am.  Year 
Book,  1910-1913.  George  H.  Haynes. 


SEPARATION  OF  POWERS 


Governmental  Practice. — The  theory  of  the 
separation  of  powers  has  a twofold  signifi- 
cance in  the  United  States;  one  as  a principle 
of  governmental  practice,  and  one  as  a doctrine 
of  constitutional  law. 

As  a principle  of  governmental  practice  it 
provides  that  the  exercise  of  the  several  polit- 
ical functions  known  as  executive,  legislative 
and  judicial,  shall  be  vested,  as  far  as  practi- 
cally possible,  in  different  agencies  or  persons, 
which  agencies  or  persons  shall  be,  in  general, 
independent  of  one  another.  The  argument  in 
justification  of  this  principle  has  been  that 
while  thus  endowing  a government  with  ade- 
quate powers  of  control,  the  danger  of  oppres- 
sion of  the  governed  by  those  entrusted  with 
this  authority  is  minimized  in  that  the  cooper- 
ation of  these  independent  departments  is  re- 
quired for  the  purpose.  Thus  the  legislative 
body  does  not  execute  the  laws  which  it  en- 
acts; the  executive  but  enforces  the  orders 
given  it  by  the  legislative ; and  the  courts  limit 
their  functions  to  the  interpretation  and  appli- 
cation of  existing  laws,  and,  for  the  enforce- 
ment of  their  decrees,  are  obliged  to  look  to 
the  executive  arm  of  the  government.  As  a 
principle  of  governmental  practice  the  doctrine 
is  thus  closely  related  to  the  system  of  “checks 
and  balances”  (see) — a system  which  finds 
elaborate  application  in  the  Federal  Constitu- 
tional system.  This  system  goes  somewhat 
further,  in  the  partitioning  of  political  powers, 
and  the  provision  of  restraints  upon  official  ac- 
tions, than  is  demanded  by  the  theory  of  the 
separation  of  powers,  for  its  aim  is  not  simply 
to  prevent  oppression  of  the  governed  by  their 
governors,  but  to  avoid  hasty  and  unwise  action 
upon  the  part  of  the  latter.  Experience  has 
shown  that  law-making  bodies,  though  selected 
by  the  people  and  responsible  to  them,  and, 
in  general,  actuated  by  good  intentions,  are 
especially  subject  to  sudden  passions  and 
prejudices.  under  the  influence  of  which  unwise 
action  may  be  taken.  Hence  not  only  are  the 


powers  of  public  organs  and  officials  limited  in 
America  by  written  constitutions,  and,  in 
general,  the  legislative,  executive  and  judicial 
powers  distributed  to  different  departments, 
but,  by  dividing  the  legislature  into  two 
branches,  differently  constituted  and  chosen, 
the  one  branch  is  made  a check  upon  the  other : 
and,  by  giving  to  the  President  a qualified  veto, 
he  is  made  a check  upon  both ; and,  finally, 
the  courts  have,  of  course,  the  power  to  hold 
void  such  laws  as  have  run  the  gauntlet  but 
which  are  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of 
the  written  Constitution.  Again,  in  case  of 
nonfeasance  or  malfeasance  of  office  the  execu- 
tive is  subject  to  impeachment  (see)  or  remov- 
al (see)  from  office,  the  lower  or  popular 
branch  of  the  legislature  acting  for  this  pur- 
pose as  a jury  of  indictment,  and  the  Senate 
as  the  trial  court.  And,  finally,  the  people 
have  a check  through  their  suffrages  upon  all 
elected  officers.  The  federal,  and  some  of  the 
state  judges,  alone  have  a tenure  of  office  dur- 
ing good  behavior,  that  is  for  life  unless  re- 
moved by  impeachment. 

Complete  Separation  Impossible. — The  com- 
plete separation  of  executive,  legislative  and 
judicial  powers,  vesting  the  exercise  of  each  in 
absolutely  independent  departments  of  govern- 
ment is  recognized  to  be  a practical  impossibil- 
ity. These  three  departments  have  to  form 
one  machinery  of  political  control,  and,  if  this 
machinery  is  to  operate,  its  parts  must  be, 
in  some  measure,  connected  with  one  another, 
not  simply  as  checks  upon  one  another,  but  as 
integral  parts  of  a single  operative  machine. 
Thus  the  President,  in  addition  to  his  purely 
executive  authority,  participates  in  the  per- 
formance of  the  legislative  function  not  only 
by  the  recommendations  which  he  makes  to 
Congress,  but  by  the  use  of  his  veto  power 
(see).  So  also  the  Senate  exercises  executive 
functions  when  it  participates  in  the  approval 
of  treaties  and  the  ratification  of  presidential 
appointments  to  office.  Both  Houses  of  Con- 


295 


SEPARATION  OF  POWERS 


gress  exercise  judicial  functions  in  impeach- 
ment proceedings  and  in  the  trial  of  contested 
election  cases.  And  the  courts  in  the  appoint- 
ment of  court  officers  and  the  establishment  of 
rules  of  practice  and  procedure,  perform  acts 
essentially  executive  and  legislative  in  charac- 
ter. 

Distinguishing  Criteria. — Tlu  exact  state- 
ment of  the  essential  characteristics  which  dis- 
tinguish executive,  legislative  and  judicial 
powers  or  functions  from  one  another  is  a prob- 
lem of  political  theory  which  has  given  rise 
to  a great  deal  of  discussion.  There  are,  in- 
deed, not  a few  European  writers  who  assert 
that  governmental  functions  are  divisible  into 
but  two  classes;  namely,  the  making,  and  the 
enforcing,  of  law;  and  that  the  interpretation 
of  law  is  to  be  regarded  as  a part  either  of  the 
executive  or  the  legislative  function,  or  of 
both  ( see  Executive  Power,  Theory  of;  Leg- 
islative Powers,  Theory  of).  Upon  the  other 
hand,  there  are  those  who  recognize  a fourfold 
division  of  political  functions,  distinguishing 
the  discretionary  power  to  issue  and  enforce 
administrative  orders  and  decrees  from  the 
purely  executive  duties  of  enforcing  law  (with 
the  armed  forces  of  the  state  if  necessary)  and 
from  those  purely  political  acts'  which  are  not 
subject  to  judicial  review.  This  distinction 
between  the  political  and  administrative  func- 
tions of  the  President  is  pointed  out  in  the  arti- 
cle dealing  with  the  constitutional  powers  of 
that  officer  (see  President  of  the  United 
States,  Constitutional  Powers  of).  Profes- 
sor Goodnow,  in  his  Politics  and  Administra- 
tion (1900),  makes  a twofold  division  of  gov- 
ernmental functions,  the  one  concerned  with 
the  formation  of  the  policies  which  are  to  guide 
public  action,  and  the  other  with  the  carrying 
out  of  these  policies.  In  this  work  he  shows 
how  necessary  it  is  to  efficient  government  that 
those  who  decide  upon  the  policies  to  be  pur- 
sued should  in  some  way  be  able  to  secure  the 
proper  interpretation  and  execution  in  good 
faith  of  those  policies.  The  further  point  is 
made  that  where  constitutional  provision  is 
not  made  for  this  cooperation  and  control  the 
function  is  necessarily  assumed  by  political 
party  machines  organized  and  operated  outside 
of  the  government.  The  functions  which  politi- 
cal parties  and  their  machines  will  perform  in 
a state  is  thus  shown  to  be  dependent  in  a 
considerable  measure  upon  the  character  of  the 
government  that  is  constitutionally  provided. 

Objections  to  Separation  of  Powers. — That 
the  people  of  the  United  States  pay  a very 
heavy  price  for  the  security  from  oppression 
and  the  guarantee  against  hasty  political  ac- 
tion which  the  adoption  of  the  principle  of  the 
separation  of  powers  gives  them  is  beyond  ques- 
tion. Especially  have  evil  results  followed 
from  the  denial  to  the  executive,  both  in  the 
states  and  in  the  Federal  Government,  of  an 
adequate  power  of  direction  and  control,  and 
this  is  particularly  true  with  reference  to  the 


raising,  appropriating  and  expending  of  the 
public  revenues.  This  is  strikingly  shown  in 
Professor  Ford’s  work.  The  Cost  of  'National 
Government  (1910).  So,  also,  necessarily  un- 
satisfactory results  have  followed  from  the  at- 
tempts often  made  by  Congress  and  the  state 
legislatures  to  obtain  that  control  over  the  ad- 
ministration of  their  laws  which  the  federal 
and  state  constitutions  deny  to  them,  by  in- 
cluding within  their  statutes  detailed  provi- 
sions as  to  the  manner  which  they  are  to  be  en- 
forced, and  correspondingly  limiting  the  dis- 
cretionary powers  of  those  executive  and  ad- 
ministrative agents  who  alone  are  able  to  judge 
wisely  as  to  many  of  these  matters.  Closely 
connected  with  this  principle  of  the  separa- 
tion of  legislative  from  executive  authority,  is 
the  disintegrated  character  of  the  administra- 
tive systems  of  our  states.  Here,  unlike  the 
federal  system,  is  a distressing  lack  of  cen- 
tralized organization.  The  chiefs  of  the  sev- 
eral administrative  departments  are  without 
adequate  powers  of  direction  and  control  over 
their  subordinates,  and  they  themselves  are 
not  subject  to  the  authority  of  a single  execu- 
tive chief.  Most  of  these  chiefs  and  many  of 
their  subordinates,  being  elected  to  office,  feel 
little  responsibility  to  anyone  except  to  their 
constituents,  and  are,  in  fact,  but  slightly 
responsible  in  law  to  any  superior.  The  move- 
ment in  favor  of  what  is  called  the  short  bal- 
lot, which  of  late  years  has  made  considerable 
headway,  will  tend  to  correct  these  evils,  not 
only  by  decreasing  the  number  of  elective 
officers,  but  by  increasing  the  administrative 
authority  and  responsibility  of  the  higher 
officials. 

Constitutional  Theory. — Turning  now  to  the 
separation  of  powers  as  a constitutional  doc- 
trine, it  is  to  be  remarked,  first  of  all,  that 
the  principle  received  explicit  statement  in 
most  of  the  early  constitutions  of  the  states, 
in  the  form  of  what  is  known  as  “distributing 
clauses,”  and  that  these  clauses  have  continued 
to  appear  in  most  of  the  instruments  of  govern- 
ment which  have  since  been  adopted.  Thus,  for 
example,  Massachusetts,  in  the  constitution  of 
1780  provided  that  “in  the  government  of  this 
Commonwealth  the  legislative  department  shall 
never  exercise  the  executive  and  judicial  pow- 
ers or  either  of  them;  the  executive  shall  never 
exercise  legislative  and  judicial  powers  or 
either  of  them;  the  judicial  shall  never  exer- 
cise legislative  and  executive  powers  or  either 
of  them ; to  the  end  that  it  may  be  a govern- 
ment of  laws  and  not  of  men.”  And  Maryland 
in  her  first  fundamental  law  declared  that 
“the  legislative,  executive  and  judicial  powers 
of  government  ought  to  be  forever  separate  and 
distinct  from  each  other.” 

This  provision  for  a separation  of  powers  is 
one  which  the  states  have  adopted  for  them- 
selves. It  is  not  demanded  of  them  by  the 
Federal  Constitution,  for  that  instrument  only 
provides  that  the  governments  of  the  states 


296 


SEPARATION  OF  POWERS 


shall  be  republican  in  form  (Art.  IV)  and 
this  requirement  is  satisfied  when  those  in 
authority  owe  their  election  or  appointment 
to  the  people,  and  are  responsible  to  them  and 
to  the  law  for  their  official  acts  ( see  Repub- 
lican Form  of  Government). 

The  Federal  Constitution  contains  no  dis- 
tributing clause,  but  the  separation  of  powers 
is  provided  for  by  specific  statements  that  all 
the  legislative  power  that  is  granted  shall  be 
in  Congress  (Art.  I,  Sec.  viii,  U 18),  that  the 
executive  power  shall  be  in  the  President  (x\rt. 
II,  Sec.  i,  If  1),  and  that  the  judicial  power 
shall  be  vested  in  one  Supreme  Court  or  in 
such  inferior  courts  as  Congress  may  from  time 
to  time  ordain  and  establish  (Art.  Ill,  Sec.  i). 
These  specific  provisions,  taken  together  with 
the  accepted  doctrine  that  the  exercise  of  a 
power  constitutionally  granted  to  one  depart- 
ment or  organ  of  government  may  not  by  that 
organ  or  department  be  delegated  to  another, 
sufficiently  establishes  the  doctrine  of  the  sepa- 
ration of  powers  in  the  federal  constitutional 
law. 

Constitutional  Doctrine  Stated. — It  has  al- 
ready been  pointed  out  that  it  is  not  possible 
to  carry  out  the  principle  of  the  separation  of 
powers  to  such  a complete  extent  that  only 
legislative  powers  are  vested  in  the  legislative 
branch  of  the  government,  only  executive  pow- 
ers in  the  executive  branch,  and  only  judicial 
powers  in  the  courts.  It  is,  therefore,  not  a 
correct  statement  of  the  doctrine,  as  a consti- 
tutional one,  to  say  that  each  department  is 
absolutely  forbidden  to  exercise  any  powers  ex- 
cept those,  which,  from  their  essential  nature, 
belong  to  it.  “Rather,  the  correct  statement 
is  that  a department  may  constitutionally  exer- 
cise any  power,  whatever  its  essential  nature, 
which  has,  by  the  Constitution,  been  delegated 
to  it,  but  that  it  may  not  exercise  powers  not 
so  constitutionally  granted  which,  from  their 
essential  nature,  do  not  fall  within  its  divi- 
sion of  governmental  functions,  unless  such 
powers  are  properly  incidental  to  the  perform- 
ance by  it  of  its  own  appropriate  functions. 
From  the  rule,  as  thus  stated,  it  appears  that 
in  very  many  cases  the  propriety  of  its  exer- 
cise by  a given  department  does  not  depend 
upon  whether,  in  its  essential  nature,  the  pow- 
er is  executive,  legislative  or  judicial,  but 
whether  it  has  been  specifically  vested  by  the 
Constitution  in  that  department,  or  whether 
it  is  properly  incidental  to  the  performance  of 
the  appropriate  functions  of  the  department 
into  whose  hands  its  exercise  has  been  given. 
Generally  speaking,  it  may  be  said  that  when 
a power  is  not  peculiarly  and  distinctly  legis- 
lative, executive  or  judicial,  it  lies  within  the 
authority  of  the  legislature  to  determine  where 
its  exercise  shall  be  vested”  (W.  W.  Willough- 
by, United  States  Constitutional  Law,  1263). 

Delegation  of  Ordinance-Making  Power.— 
The  essential  function  of  legislative  power  is 
to  declare  rules  of  conduct,  to  create  legal 


rights  and  duties,  and  to  establish  principles 
of  public  policy.  Having  laid  down  a general 
rule  or  policy,  it  is  competent  for  the  legisla- 
tive body  to  assign  to  some  other  agency  the  is- 
suance of  the  specific  ordinances  or  orders  need- 
ed to  put  the  rule  into  operation  and  to  apply 
it  to  individual  cases.  The  extent  to  which 
this  delegation  of  the  ordinance-making  power, 
or  of  an  administrative  discretion,  may  be 
carried  without  rendering  the  grant  void  as 
an  unconstitutional  delegation  of  the  legis- 
lative power  itself,  has  been  so  liberally  con- 
strued that  the  rule,  though  constantly  re- 
affirmed as  a principle,  has  been  but  seldom 
applied  in  practice.  Thus,  although  it  is  recog- 
nized that  the  fixing  of  the  rates  that  may  be 
charged  by  public  service  corporations  is  a 
legislative  function,  laws  have  been  upheld 
which  have  provided  simply  that  the  rates 
shall  be  just  and  reasonable,  leaving  to  com- 
missions the  authority  to  determine,  in  specific 
cases,  what  rates  meet  these  requirements. 
The  extent  to  which  the  legislature  is  per- 
mited  by  the  courts  to  go  in  the  grant  of  dis- 
cretionary right  of  action  to  the  executive  is 
shown  in  the  leading  case  of  Field  vs.  Clark 
( 143  U.  S.  649 ) in  which  that  section  of  the 
Tariff  Act  of  1890  was  upheld  which  provided 
that  whenever  and  so  often  as  the  President 
might  deem  the  customs  regulations  of  foreign 
countries  with  reference  to  certain  specified 
articles  to  be  reciprocally  unequal  and  un- 
reasonable, he  should  have  the  power  to  take 
such  articles  from  the  list  of  those  entitled  to 
free  entry  into  this  country. 

It  is  well  established  that  a legislature  may 
not  itself  attempt  to  decide  as  to  the  legal 
rights  or  duties  of  individuals  or  corporations 
arising  out  of  past  actions,  for  this  is  primar- 
ily a judicial  function.  Thus,  for  example, 
the  law-making  body  can  determine  what  taxes 
shall  be  levied  and  what  rates,  but  it  may 
not  determine  just  how  much  the  as- 
sessment under  such  laws  shall  be  upon  spe- 
cific individuals  or  pieces  of  property.  Thus, 
also,  a legislature  may,  by  a so-called  declara- 
tory statute  (see),  fix  the  manner  in  which 
a given  law  shall  be  interpreted  in  the  future, 
but  it  cannot  control  that  interpretation  as  to 
actions  which  have  already  occurred ; and  in 
general,  it  may  be  said  that  retroactive  leg- 
islation, in  so  far  as  it  impairs  vested  rights, 
is  void  (see  Retrospective  Legislation; 
Vested  Rights).  Justice  Field  of  the  Su- 
preme Court  in  one  of  his  opinions,  stating 
the  essential  distinction  between  a judicial 
and  a legislative  act,  said:  “The  one  deter- 
mines what  the  law  is ; the  other  prescribes 
what  the  law  shall  be  in  future  cases  arising 
under  it.  Whenever  an  act  undertakes  to  de- 
termine a question  of  right  or  obligation,  or 
of  property,  as  the  foundation  upon  which  it 
proceeds,  such  act  is,  to  that  extent,  a judicial 
one,  and  not  the  proper  exercise  of  legislative 
functions;”  and  in  the  case  of  Taylor  vs. 


297 


SERGEANT-AT-ARMS— SERVICE,  THE 


Place  (4  R.  I.  324)  the  court  says:  “The 
judicial  power  is  exercised  in  the  decision  of 
cases;  the  legislature  in  making  general  regu- 
lations by  the  enactment  of  laws.  The  lat- 
ter acts  from  consideration  of  public  policy; 
the  former  is  guided  by  the  pleadings  and  evi- 
dence in  the  cases.” 

Courts  Exercise  only  Judicial  Powers. — The 
courts  are  no  less  quick  to  refuse  to  perform 
other  than  judicial  acts  than  they  are  to  in- 
terpose their  veto  when  the  legislative  or 
executive  departments  attempt  to  impose  upon 
them  the  exercise  of  other  than  their  appro- 
priate functions  (see  Political  Questions 
and  Judicial  Authority).  Thus  in  a very 
early  case  (Hayburn’s  Case,  2 Dali.  409)  the 
federal  judges  before  whom  the  question  came 
refused  to  act  judicially  under  a law  of  Con- 
gress upon  the  ground  that  their  decisions 
were  made  reviewable  by  an  executive  officer 
and  that,  therefore,  the  duty  could  not  be 
deemed  a judicial  one.  See,  also,  United 
States  vs.  Ferreira  (13  How.  40).  And  in 
Gordon  vs.  United  States  (117  U.  8.  697)  the 
Supreme  Court  refused  to  assume  jurisdiction 
in  a case  “where  its  judgments  would  not  be 
final  and  conclusive  upon  the  rights  of  the 
parties,  and  process  of  execution  awarded  to 
carry  it  into  effect.”  This  whole  subject  is 
carefully  reviewed  by  the  Supreme  Court  m 
the  case  of  Muskrat  vs.  United  States  (44 
Ct.  Cl.  137)  decided  January  23,  1911,  in 
which  was  held  invalid  an  act  which  au- 
thorized the  bringing  of  a suit  in  the  court  of 
claims,  with  an  appeal  to  the  Supreme  Court, 
simply  for  the  purpose  of  testing  the  consti- 
tutionality of  certain  acts  of  Congress.  The 
judicial  power  which  the  federal  courts  may 
exercise,  it  was  declared,  is  confined  to  the 
decision  of  cases  and  controversies,  and  these 
imply  the  existence  of  parties  litigant  having 
substantial  legal  interests  to  be  determined, 
and  does  not  include  the  decision  of  merely 
moot  question  (see  Courts,  Federal).  The 
right  to  hold  acts  unconstitutional  and  void, 
the  court  says,  is  given  to  it  not  that  it  may 
exercise  a revisionary  power  over  the  legis- 
lature, but  “because  the  rights  of  the  litigants 
in  justiciable  controversies  require  the  courts 
to  choose  between  the  fundamental  law  and 
a law  purporting  to  be  enacted  within  the 
constitutional  authority,  but,  in  fact,  beyond 
the  power  delegated  to  the  legislative  branch 
of  the  government  (see  Courts  and  Uncon- 
stitutional Legislation;  Law,  Constitu- 
tional, American). 

Administrative  agents,  in  the  determination 
of  questions  arising  as  to  the  applicability  of 
the  laws,  the  enforcement  of  which  is  placed 
within  their  hands,  are  often  obliged  to  act 
in  a manner  and  according  to  forms  judicial 
in  character,  and  in  such  cases  the  obligation 
of  due  process  of  law  requires  that  the  parties 
affected  shall  be  given,  at  some  stage  of  the 
proceedings,  an  opportunity  to  present  such 


facts  as  they  may  think  pertinent  to  the 
claims  which  they  make.  Such  administra- 
tive functions  are,  however,  whatever  their 
form,  essentially  administrative,  that  is,  ex- 
ecutive in  character.  They  are  not  “cases”  or 
“controversies”  between  parties  litigant,  and, 
therefore,  their  decision  does  not  involve  the 
exercise  of  judicial  power  in  the  strictest 
sense  of  the  term. 

See  Congressional  Government;  Execu- 
tive and  Congress;  Executive  and  Judici- 
ary; Judiciary  and  Congress;  Law,  Admin- 
istrative; Ordinances,  Executive. 

References:  J.  W.  Garner,  Intro,  to  Pol.  Sci- 
(1910),  406-426;  F.  T.  Goodnow,  Am.  Ad- 
ministrative Law  (1905),  Politics  and  Ad- 
ministration (1900);  H.  J.  Ford,  The  Cost  of 
Rational  Government  (1910);  P.  S.  Reinsch, 
Readings  on  Am.  Federal  Government  (1909), 
47-78;  W.  Bondy,  “The  Separation  of  Powers” 
in  Columbia  TJniv.  Studies,  V,  No.  2 (1893); 
T.  M.  Cooley,  Constitutional  Limitations  (7th 
ed.,  1903),  ch.  v.;  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Consti- 
tutional Law  of  U.  S.  (1910),  ch.  lxiii. 

W.  W.  W ILLOUHGBY. 

SERGEANT-AT-ARMS.  The  sergeant-at- 
arms  is  the  chief  police  officer  charged  to 
maintain  order  in  legislative  bodies  under  the 
direction  of  the  presiding  officer.  In  the  Con- 
gress of  the  United  States  the  symbol  of  his 
authority  is  the  mace,  which  must  be  borne 
by  him  while  enforcing  order  on  the  floor. 
He  has  also  certain  other  duties,  such  as  the 
arresting  of  absent  members  upon  a warrant 
issued  for  the  purpose  of  securing  a quorum 
of  the  House,  the  control  of  the  capitol  police, 
and  the  keeping  of  the  accounts  for  the  pay 
and  mileage  of  members.  Reference:  A.  C. 
Hinds,  Digest  and  Manual  of  Rules  (1908). 

A.  N.  H. 

SERVICE.  The  execution  or  legal  delivery 
of  a writ,  process  or  notice,  for  the  purpose  of 
notifying  the  person  served  of  some  action  or 
proceeding  in  which  he  is  concerned.  Actual 
service  is  either:  (a)  personal,  i.  e.,  by  actual 
delivery  of  the  instrument  to  the  person 
served;  or  (b)  substituted,  i.  e.,  by  some  leg- 
ally defined  equivalent,  as  by  leaving  a copy 
at  the  home  of  the  person.  Constructive  serv- 
ice is  such  as  is  by  law  conclusively  presumed 
to  give  notice,  as  by  publishing  the  notice  or 
mailing  a copy  of  the  instrument.  H.  M.  B. 

SERVICE,  THE.  As  used  in  such  phrases  as 
“for  the  good  of  the  service,”  or  “when  on 
service”  is  made  equivalent  to  “on  duty,”  this 
term  implies  the  acceptance  of  an  inherited 
tradition  of  loyalty  and  patriotism  and  a 
certain  readiness  to  subordinate  personal 
claims  in  the  interest  of  organization  and  dis- 
cipline. The  service  also  meant  in  a larger 
way  the  body  of  soldiers  and  sailors  with 
their  officers,  as  an  organized  force.  See 


298 


SERVITUDE— SESSION  OF  LEGISLATIVE  BODIES 


Army,  Standing;  Education,  Military  and 
Naval;  Instructions  to  Military  and  Naval 
Authorities;  Militarism;  Military  Law; 
Officers,  Military  and  Naval,  References: 
War  Department,  Military  Laws  (1908),  eh. 
xlvii;  Navy  Department,  Laws  Relating  to  the 
Navy  (1898),  7-21;  M.  Schaff,  Spirit  of  Old 
West  Point  (1907);  E.  H.  Pitcairn,  Unwrit- 
ten Laws  and  Ideals  of  Active  Careers  (1899), 
53-129.  C.  G.  C. 

SERVITUDE.  Generally,  the  condition  of 
being  bound  to  service.  In  property  law,  a 
charge  or  burden  resting  upon  one  estate 
for  the  benefit  of  another.  The  term  is  de- 
rived from  the  civil  law,  and  is  approxi- 
mately the  correlative  of  the  common  law 
easement.  Thus  if  A has  a right  of  way  over 
B’s  land,  the  latter  is  said  to  be  subject  to 
a servitude.  H.  M.  B. 

SERVITUDE,  INVOLUNTARY.  See  In- 

voluntary Servitude. 

SERVITUDE  OF  PERSONS.  A personal 
servitude  is  the  condition  of  being  bound  to 
service.  While  involuntary  servitude  except 
as  a punishment  for  crime  is  abolished,  there 
are  relations  recognized  by  law  which  impose 
some  measure  of  personal  service  on  the  part 
of  one  person  toward  another,  such  as  those 
of  husband  and  wife  and  parent  and  child.  An 
obligation  of  service  also  arises  out  of  the 
contract  of  apprenticeship.  See  Involuntary 
Seevitude;  Thirteenth  Amendment. 

E.  McC. 

SERVITUDES,  INTERNATIONAL.  The 

word  servitude  used  in  Roman  law  to  imply 
an  obligation  upon  a person  to  refrain  from  or 
to  permit  some  act  to  be  done  (Digest,  VIII, 
I,  15),  in  international  law  implies  an  obliga- 
ti' i of  a servient  state  not  to  act  in  a certain 
manner  or  to  allow  a foreign  state  to  do  some 
act.  Servitudes  may  arise  from  custom,  pre- 
scription, or  from  treaty  agreement.  The 
right  of  innocent  passage  through  the  terri- 
torial waters  of  a state  by  ships  of  a foreign 
state  is  regarded  as  a general  servitude.  An 
obligation  not  to  fortify  a certain  place  may 
be  a negative  servitude.  The  obligation  to 
allow  exceptional  use  of  the  territorial  waters 
by  a foreign  state  would  be  of  the  nature  of 
a positive  servitude.  Confusion  has  often 
arisen  in  the  discussion  of  servitudes  from 
failure  to  recognize  that  the  servitude  is  in 
effect  a restriction  on  the  exercise  of  a state’s 
jurisdiction  rather  than  on  its  sovereignty. 
Servitudes  received  much  attention  in  the 
North  Atlantic  Fisheries  case  in  1909.  See 
Extraterritoriality  ; Fisheries,  Interna- 

tional; Navigation  of  International  Riv- 
ers; Suzerainty;  Territory  in  Interna- 
tional Law.  References:  J.  C.  Bluntsclili,  Le 
Droit  International  (5th  ed.,  1895),  §§  353  et 
117  2' 


seq. ; M.  Fabre,  Des  servitudes  dans  le  Droit 
International  (1901)  ; W.  E.  Hall,  Int.  Law 
(6tli  ed.,  1909),  ch.  ii;  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of 
Int.  Law  (1906),  I,  774  et  seq.,  II,  18;  P. 
Pradier-Fod6rd,  Traite  de  Droit  Int.  Publio 
(1885-1906),  II,  §§  834  et  seq.;  A.  Rivier, 
Principes  du  Droit  de  Gens  (1896)  ; G.  G. 
Wilson,  Int.  Law  (1910),  153.  G.  G.  W. 

SESSION  OF  LEGISLATIVE  BODIES.  The 

national  legislatures  of  nearly  all  countries 
either  by  constitutional  requirement  or  by  usage 
hold  annual  sessions.  The  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  requires  Congress  to  assemble  at 
least  once  a year,  on  the  first  Monday  in  Decem- 
ber, unless  Congress  shall  by  law  fix  a different 
day  (Art.  I,  Sec.  IV,  If  2).  Each  Congress 
holds  two  regular  sessions,  one  styled  the  long 
session  which  convenes  on  the  first  Monday 
in  December  of  the  year  following  the  elec- 
tion and  continues  until  adjournment  in  the 
late  spring  or  early  summer  of  the  next  year; 
and  one,  known  as  the  short  session,  which 
convenes  on  the  same  day  in  the  even  numbered 
years  and  continues  until  the  expiration  of 
the  terms  of  its  members  on  the  fourth  of 
March  following.  In  addition  to  the  two  reg- 
ular sessions  there  may  be  as  many  extraor- 
dinary sessions  as  the  executive  may  see  fit  to 
convene.  Since  the  Constitution  went  into  ef- 
fect there  have  been  eighteen  such  sessions, 
including  that  of  the  Sixty-third  Congress. 

The  number,  time,  frequency  and  sometimes 
the  length  of  the  sessions  of  the  state  legisla- 
tures are  regulated  by  the  state  constitutions. 
Three  of  them  declare  that  the  legislature 
shall  be  “frequently  convened.”  In  six  states, 
(Georgia  Massachusetts,  New  Jersey,  Rhode 
Island,  South  Carolina  and  New  York),  annual 
sessions  are  now  held.  In  Alabama  the  legis- 
lature meets  quadrenially.  In  the  remaining 
states  biennial  sessions  are  the  rule.  In  all  of 
them  extraordinary  sessions  may  be  convened 
by  the  executive  subject  to  the  common  re- 
quirement that  the  subjects  which  may  be 
considered  at  such  session  must  be  specified  in 
the  proclamation  calling  it  and  subject  also 
to  restrictions  as  to  the  length  of  the  session. 
The  constitutions  of  a number  of  states  limit 
the  length  of  the  session  to  a certain  number  of 
days.  In  others,  particularly  where  the  per 
diem  method  of  compensation  prevails,  the 
constitution  usually  provides  that  after  a cer- 
tain number  of  days,  the  pay  of  members  shall 
cease  wholly  or  in  part.  The  purpose  of  such 
limitations  is  to  bring  pressure  to  bear  upon 
the  legislatures  to  expedite  their  business  and 
to  protect  the  state  against  the  evils  of  exces- 
sive legislation. 

See  Congress;  Extra  Session;  Legisla- 
ture and  Legislative  Reform;  State  Legis- 
lature. 

References:  A.  C.  Hinds,  House  Manual 
(1909),  Am.  Year  Book,  1912,  176,  177. 

James  W.  Garner. 


SETTLEMENTS,  COLLEGE— SEWARD  WHIGS 


SETTLEMENTS,  COLLEGE.  A terra  de- 
noting neighborhood  social  centers  where  uni- 
versity or  college  trained  social  workers  re- 
side and  seek  to  improve  home  and  industrial 
conditions  and  sanitary  surroundings,  and 
provide  opportunities  for  a normal  social  life. 
In  1860  Frederic  Denison  Maurice  founded  in 
London  the  “Working  Men’s  College”  where 
classes  were  taught  by  Cambridge  graduates. 
In  1885  Toynbee  Hall  was  founded  by  Oxford 
men.  In  1887  the  movement  was  inaugurated 
in  America  by  Dr.  Stanton  Coit’s  establish- 
ment of  the  Neighborhood  Guild  (later  the 
University  Settlement)  in  New  York.  The 
movement  rapidly  spread  to  practically  all  the 
leading  American  cities. 

See  Charities,  Associated;  Public  Mor- 
als, Care  for;  Social  Reform  Problems. 

Reference:  W.  D.  P.  Bliss,  New  Encyclopedia 
of  Social  Reform  (1908),  1106-1109. 

0.  C.  IT. 

SETTLEMENTS,  SOCIAL.  Social  settle- 
ments are  usually  places  of  residence  in  the 
poorer  districts  of  large  cities  where  men  and 
women  live  and  share  their  educational  ad- 
vantages with  their  less  fortunate  brethren 
on  a plane  of  fraternity  and  in  an  endeavor  to 
understand  and  interpret  the  neighborhood 
life  and  the  industrial  standards  of  widely 
separated  groups  of  people.  Usually  civic  and 
moral  efforts  to  give  expression  to  a more  real 
democracy  furnish  the  chief  continuous  pur- 
pose. 

Some  settlements  are  distinctly  religious  in 
character,  though  most  of  them  do  not  of- 
ficially conduct  religious  meetings.  Some  are 
organized  solely  for  men  residents  and  other 
for  women  alone.  All  find  the  best  opportun- 
ities for  work  are  with  the  children  and 
young  people  of  their  neighborhoods,  organiz- 
ing them  in  clubs  for  education  and  recreation, 
and  through  them  getting  the  readiest  access 
to  the  homes  and  the  real  problems  of  the 
lives  of  the  people. 

The  movement  began  with  Edward  Dennison, 
in  England,  in  1867,  when  he,  as  a young  man 
of  wealth  and  position,  took  lodgings  in  East 
London,  and  began  to  visit  the  people  of  the 
neighborhood.  Toynbee  Hall  was  established 
in  1884  and  the  Woman’s  University  Settle- 
ment in  London  in  1887.  In  America,  Dr. 
Stanton  Coit  founded  the  Neighborhood  Guild 
in  New  York  in  1886.  Out  of  this  grew  the 
University  Settlement,  now  housed  in  a splend- 
idly equipped  building  of  its  own.  The  Col- 
lege Settlement  (women  residents)  in  New 
York  and  Hull  House  in  Chicago  date  from 
1889.  There  are  413  settlement  organizations 
in  the  United  States  listed  in  the  latest  Hand- 
book of  Settlements  (1911),  published  by  the 
Russell  Sage  Foundation,  which  also  has  in 
preparation  a second  volume  on  the  history 
and  present  tendencies  of  settlement  work  in 
the  United  States. 


Settlement  workers  have  acquired  a valuable 
fund  of  information  that  is  used  constantly 
through  service  on  public  commissions,  on 
committees,  in  civic  and  political  movements 
of  all  kinds,  and  by  the  administrative  depart- 
ments of  state  and  city  governments  in  deal- 
ing with  many  troublesome  problems  concern- 
ing immigration,  labor  laws,  public  health  and 
sanitation,  especially  as  affecting  our  foreign 
population. 

See  Settlements,  College. 

References:  Jane  Addams,  Twenty  Years  at 
Hull  House  (1910);  C.  R.  Henderson,  Social 
Settlements  (1898);  R.  A.  Woods  and  A.  J. 
Kennedy,  Handbook  of  Settlements  (1911); 
G.  S.  White,  “The  Social  Settlement  after 
Twenty-five  Years”  in  Harvard  Theological  Re- 
view (January,  1911). 

Samuel  McCune  Lindsay. 

SEVENTEENTH  AMENDMENT.  In  re- 
sponse to  requests  by  the  legislatures  of  more 
than  30  states,  Congress  proposed  in  1912  an 
amendment  to  the  Federal  Constitution  pro- 
viding for  the  election  of  United  States  Sena- 
tors by  direct  vote  of  the  people.  The  text  of 
the  amendment  was  as  follows: 

The  Senate  of  the  United  States  shall  be  com- 
posed of  two  Senators  from  each  state,  elected  by 
the  people  thereof,  for  six  years;  and  each  Sena- 
tor shall  have  one  vote.  The  electors  in  each  state 
shall  have  the  qualifications  requisite  for  electors 
of  the  most  numerous  branch  of  the  state  legisla- 
tures. 

When  vacancies  happen  in  the  representation 
of  any  state  in  the  Senate,  the  executive  authority 
of  such  state  shall  issue  writs  of  election  to  fill 
such  vacancies:  Provided,  That  the  legislature  of 
any  state  may  empower  the  executive  thereof  to 
make  temporary  appointments  until  the  people 
fill  the  vacancies  by  election  as  the  legislature 
may  direct. 

This  amendment  shall  not  be  construed  as 
to  effect  the  election  or  term  of  any  Senator 
chosen  before  it  becomes  valid  as  part  of  the 
Constitution. 

The  proposing  resolution  was  passed  by  the 
House  on  April  13  and  by  the  Senate  on  June 
12.  Before  its  passage  in  the  Senate  the 
amendment  had  been  ratified  by  the  legisla- 
tures of  three  states,  Massachusetts  (May  22), 
Arizona  (June  3),  and  Minnesota  (June  10). 
Less  than  a year  after  its  submission  the  Sev- 
enteenth Amendment  received  its  thirty-sixth 
ratification  (Wisconsin,  May  9,  1913)  and  was 
proclaimed  as  part  of  the  Constitution  on  May 
31,  1913.  The  first  Senator  elected  by  popular 
vote  was  Augustus  O.  Bacon  of  Georgia,  chosen 
on  July  15,  1913,  to  sueceeed  himself  for  the 
term  expiring  in  1919.  See  Senators,  Elec- 
tion of.  Reference:  Am.  Year  Book,  1910, 
and  year  by  year.  F.  G.  W. 

SEWARD  WHIGS.  A name  given  in  New 
York  politics,  to  distinguish  those  approving 
Seward’s  course  in  the  U.  S.  Senate  in  1850 
regarding  the  compromise  measures.  See 
Compromise  of  1850;  Seward,  W.  H. ; Silver 
Grays;  Whig  Party.  J.  S. 


300 


SEWARD,  WILLIAM  HENRY— SEWERS  AND  SEWAGE  DISPOSAL 


SEWARD,  WILLIAM  HENRY.  William  H. 
Seward  (1801-1872)  was  born  at  Florida,  N. 
Y.,  May  16,  1801.  In  1822  lie  was  admitted 
to  the  bar,  and  rose  rapidly  to  prominence. 
He  at  first  identified  himself  with  the  “Buck- 
tail”  wing  of  the  Democrats,  led  by  Tompkins; 
while  a close  friendship  with  Thurlow  Weed 
continued  through  life.  In  1824,  however,  he 
joined  the  Anti-Masons,  though  declining  a 
proffered  nomination  to  Congress.  In  18.30 
he  became  state  senator,  and  in  1834  was 
nominated  by  the  Whigs  for  governor,  but  was 
defeated  by  Marcy.  He  was  elected  governor 
in  1838,  and  reelected  in  1840.  He  still  re- 
mained a Whig,  showed  pronounced  hostility 
to  slavery,  and  was  a prominent  speaker  in 
the  presidential  campaigns  of  1844  and  1848. 
In  1849  he  was  elected  United  States  Senator, 
and  his  “higher  law”  speech  of  March  11,  1830, 
made  him  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  anti- 
slavery forces.  He  opposed  the  Kansas-Ne- 
braska  bill,  but  was  reelected  to  the  Senate  in 
1855  notwithstanding.  In  the  presidential 
campaign  of  1856  he  supported  Fremont,  the 
Republican  candidate,  and  was  apparently  the 
leading  Republican  candidate  for  President  in 
1860.  After  Lincoln’s  nomination  he  took  part 
in  the  campaign,  and  was  appointed  Secretary 
of  State,  in  which  office  his  diplomatic  ability 
was  of  great  service  in  the  difficult  conditions 
of  civil  war.  An  unsuccessful  attempt  to  as- 
sassinate him,  as  well  as  Lincoln,  was  made 
on  April  14,  1865.  He  retained  his  secretary- 
ship throughout  Johnson’s  administration, 
negotiated  the  treaty  for  the  Annexation  of 
Alaska,  and  conducted  unsuccessful  negotia- 
tions for  the  annexation  of  Santa  Domingo 
and  the  Dutch  Islands.  He  died  at  Auburn, 
N.  Y.,  October  10,  1872.  See  Alaska,  Annex- 
ation of;  Republican  Party;  Slavery  Con- 
troversy; State,  Department  of.  References: 
W.  H.  Seward,  Works  (1883)  ; F.  W.  Seward, 
Seward  at  Washington  (1891)  ; T.  K.  Lothrop, 
William  Henry  Seward  (1896);  F.  Bancroft, 
Life  of  William  H.  Seward  (1900). 

W.  MacD. 

SEWERS  AND  SEWAGE  DISPOSAL.  Na- 
ture of  Sewage. — The  disposal  of  human  ex- 
crement and  other  domestic  and  manufactur- 
ing wastes  is  one  of  the  most  urgent  functions 
of  the  modern  municipality  and  it  presents 
some  of  the  most  difficult  problems  with  which 
the  sanitary  engineer  has  to  deal. 

The  term  sewage  is  applied  to  the  liquid  or 
semiliquid  wastes  from  residences  and  manu- 
facturing establishments.  Sewers  are  the  un- 
derground pipes  that  collect  and  convey  this 
waste,  usually  by  gravity,  to  some  central 
point  where  it  may  be  discharged  or  disposed 
of  otherwise.  They  are  often  designed  to  serve 
also  as  drains  for  carrying  off  the  surface 
water  from  the  streets,  but  in  modern  practice 
it  is  considered  best  to  have  separate  pipes  for 
sewage  and  for  surface  drainage.  The  sewage 


of  American  cities  is  mostly  water,  there  being 
only  one  or  two  parts  of  solids  to  one  thousand 
parts  of  water.  The  solid  matter  consists  of 
both  organic  and  inorganic  matter,  and  about 
two-thirds  of  it  is  held  in  solution  or  in  colloid 
suspension.  The  quantity  of  sewage  produced 
in  any  city  is  about  equal  to  the  quantity  of 
water  consumed. 

The  organic  matter  of  sewage  is  subject  to 
putrefaction  and  in  that  condition  may  become 
not  only  very  offensive  to  the  smell  but  dele- 
terious to  the  public  health.  Sewage  may 
carry  the  specific  germs  of  contagious  or  in- 
fectious diseases  and  if  discharged  into  bodies 
of  water  used  for  drinking,  may  introduce 
these  specific  germs  into  the  human  system, 
causing  epidemics  of  the  disease.  Thus,  ty- 
phoid fever  is  nearly  always  caused  by  drink- 
ing sewage-contaminated  water  containing  the 
germ  of  that  disease,  called  the  typhoid  bacil- 
lus. For  this  reason  the  practice  of  discharg- 
ing raw  sewage  in  considerable  quantities  into 
streams  or  bodies  of  water  likely  to  be  used  for 
domestic  purposes  is  now  generally  condemned, 
and  great  attention  is  given  to  methods  of 
treating  or  purifying  sewage  before  it  is  thus 
discharged.  However,  where  small  quantities 
of  sewage  are  discharged  into  large  quantities 
of  water  the  danger  is  not  very  great,  since 
the  organic  matter  is  rapidly  oxidized  and 
rendered  harmless. 

Purification. — A number  of  methods  of  puri- 
fying sewage  are  in  use.  A preliminary  treat- 
ment common  to  most  of  these  is  the  passage 
of  the  sewage  through  screens  to  remove  the 
coarser  masses,  such  as  sticks,  rags  and  other 
debris.  Settling  basins,  in  which  the  sewage 
is  quiescent,  or  flows  very  slowly,  allow  a part 
of  the  solid  matter  to  settle  to  the  bottom,  the 
partially  purified  liquid  flowing  off.  The  de- 
posit on  the  bottom  (called  sludge)  is  periodi- 
cally removed.  The  separation  and  settling  of 
the  solid  matter  may  be  expedited  by  the  use 
of  certain  chemicals  mixed  with  the  sewage. 
Treatment  of  the  raw  sewage  with  certain 
chemicals,  such  as  hypochloride  of  lime,  sul- 
phate of  copper,  etc.,  is  sometimes  employed 
to  destroy  the  living  organisms. 

In  many  European  cities  the  raw  sewage 
is  distributed  over  areas  of  land  outside  the 
city,  where  it  is  exposed  to  the  air  and  ab- 
sorbed by  the  soil,  and  the  organic  matter  rap- 
idly oxidized.  This  method  is  not  regarded 
with  favor  in  America. 

The  present  tendency  in  American  as  well  as 
European  practice  is  toward  the  employment 
of  what  are  called  bacterial  processes  of  puri- 
fication. In  these  the  object  is  to  cultivate 
and  facilitate  the  oxidising  action  of  beneficent 
(harmless)  bacteria  which  greatly  reduces  the 
solid  organic  matter  and  permits  the  inorganic 
matter  to  settle  more  rapidly  to  the  bottom  of 
the  containing  tanks.  Two  somewhat  dif- 
ferent plans  are  in  use.  In  the  one  (called 
contract  beds)  the  sewage  is  run  into  tanks 


301 


SEXES— SHERIFF 


which  are  first  filled  with  coarse  broken  stone 
or  other  materials,  allowed  to  stand  for  a cer- 
tain period  and  the  liquid  then  discharged. 
After  a period  of  rest  and  aeration  the  opera- 
tion is  repeated.  A mass  of  bacteria  soon 
forms  over  the  surface  of  the  stones  and  these 
rapidly  oxidize  a large  part  of  the  organic 
matter.  In  the  other  (called  sprinkling  filters) 
the  raw  sewage  is  sprinkled  over  a bed  of 
course  gravel  or  broken  stone  where  like  bac- 
terial action  takes  place.  In  these  bacterial 
processes  those  organisms  that  are  detriment- 
al to  the  public  health  are  largely  destroyed 
and  the  liquid  effluent  may  safely  be  discharged 
into  running  streams.  But  in  some  cases  it 
is  further  purified  by  filtering  through  beds  of 
sand. 

Sewer  Construction. — Sewer  systems  are  usu- 
ally owned  and  controlled  by  the  municipality. 
In  a few  cases,  notably  New  Orleans  until  re- 
cently, the  sewers  were  constructed  and  operat- 
ed under  a franchise  from  the  municipality  by 
a private  corporation  which  charged  the  users 
a connection  and  service  fee.  In  a majority 
of  cases  the  cost  of  the  sewer  system  is  borne 
by  the  corporation,  the  cost  of  construction 
being  met  from  the  sale  of  bonds.  In  other 
cities  the  cost  of  construction  is  specially  as- 
sessed against  the  property  benefitted.  In 
many  cities  the  territory  sewered  is  divided  in- 
to sewerage  districts  and  each  district  is 
specially  assessed  for  the  cost  of  its  own  sew- 
ers, various  methods  of  applying  the  assess- 
ment being  adopted  for  the  equitable  distribu- 
tion of  the  cost.  The  cost  of  maintenance  and 
operation  is,  in  nearly  all  cases,  provided  for 
out  of  general  funds  raised  by  taxation. 

See  Garbage  Removal;  Health,  Public, 
Regulation  of. 

References:  J.  W.  Adams,  Sewers  and 
Drains  for  Populous  Districts  (9th  ed.,  1902)  ; 
H.  P.  Raikes,  Sewage  Disposal  Works  (1908)  ; 
A.  P.  Folwell,  Sewage  (6th  ed.,  1911);  Am. 
Tear  Book,  1911,  458,  459,  ibid,  1912,  289,  560, 
640,  781;  sewerage  statistics  of  American 

cities  in  Municipal  Journal  and  Engineering, 
May  3,  1911.  Samuel  Whinery. 

SEXES.  See  Suffrage;  Social  Evil,  Reg- 
ulation  of;  Woman  Suffrage;  Woman’s 
Labor;  Woman’s  Legal  Rights. 

SEYMOUR,  HORATIO.  Horatio  Seymour 
(1810-1886)  was  born  at  Pompey  Hill,  N.  Y., 
May  31,  1810.  Fie  was  admitted  to  the  bar  in 
1832,  but  did  not  practice.  From  1833  to 
1839  he  was  military  secretary  to  Governor 
Marcy,  and  in  1842,  1844,  and  1845  was  a 
member  of  the  assembly,  serving  as  speaker 
during  the  latter  year.  He  was  a delegate  to 
the  Democratic  national  convention  in  1852, 
and  the  same  year  was  elected  governor. 
Largely  because  of  his  veto  of  a prohibition 
bill,  he  was  defeated  for  reflection  in  1854. 
He  was  a delegate  to  the  Democratic  national 


convention  in  1856,  but  declined  a diplomatic 
poot  tendered  him  by  Buchanan.  He  sided 
with  the  Union  cause  at  the  outbreak  of  the 
Civil  War,  and  as  governor  from  1862  to  1864 
aided  in  the  suppression  of  the  draft  riots  in 
New  York  City;  but  he  was  opposed  to  many 
of  Lincoln’s  measures,  and  publicly  criticized 
them.  In  1868  he  was  nominated  for  the  presi- 
dency by  the  Democrats,  and  received  80  elec- 
toral votes  against  214  for  Grant.  He  died 
near  LTtica,  February  12,  1886.  See  Demo- 
cratic Party.  References:  J.  D.  McCabe,  Life 
of  Horatio  Seymour  (1868);  DeA.  S.  Alex- 
ander, Pol.  Hist,  of  the  State  of  N.  Y.  (1906), 
II,  III;  J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  the  TJ.  S.  (1893- 
1905).  W.  MacD. 

SHAYS’  REBELLION.  In  1786  the  social 
conditions  of  Massachusetts,  like  those  of 
some  of  the  other  states,  were  badly  deranged. 
The  malcontents  in  Massachusetts  were  led 
by  Daniel  Shays,  and  armed  conflict  broke  out 
between  them  and  the  government  of  Massa- 
chusetts. There  were  serious  uprisings  in  vari- 
ous parts  of  the  state.  One  of  the  objects  of 
the  insurgents  was  to  prevent  the  courts  from 
sitting  and  thus  delay  the  trial  of  cases  against 
the  unfortunate.  General  Lincoln  took  charge 
of  the  state  forces  and  succeeded  in  dispersing 
the  rebels.  The  trouble,  lasting  for  some 
months,  sorely  tried  the  government  of  the 
new  state.  The  rebellion  must  be  looked  upon 
as  one  of  the  natural  consequences  of  social 
and  industrial  disorganization  growing  out 
of  a great  war,  which  had  stirred  society  to  its 
depths,  because  it  was  not  only  a revolution 
but  a civil  war.  See  Confederation.  Refer- 
ences: A.  C.  McLaughlin,  The  Confederation 
and  Constitution  (1905),  ch.  x;  J.  B.  McMas- 
ter,  Hist,  of  the  People  of  the  TJ.  S.  (1907),  I, 
299-330;  J.  Fiske,  Critical  Period  (1890),  177— 
186.  A.  C.  McL. 

SHERIFF.  One  of  the  principal  county  of- 
ficers, representing  the  executive  power  of  the 
state  within  the  county;  and  more  specifically 
the  chief  conservator  of  the  peace  and  execu- 
tive agent  of  the  judicial  courts.  It  is  the 
oldest,  and  may  be  called  the  constituent 
county  office. 

English  Precedent. — In  the  earliest  days  in 
England  the  shire  reeve,  or  sheriff,  was  pri- 
marily the  steward  of  the  royal  estates;  but 
in  the  later  Anglo-Saxon  period  he  became 
also  the  president  and  chief  executive  of  the 
shire  court.  After  the  Norman  conquest,  the 
office  of  sheriff  was  further  developed  as  the 
chief  agent  of  a strongly  centralized  perfec- 
toral  administration.  His  judicial  functions 
and  financial  powers  were  increased;  and  he 
was  also  the  local  agent  of  the  Crown  in  mili- 
tary affairs  and  as  chief  police  magistrate. 

Local  opposition  to  abuses  by  the  sheriffs 
and  distrust  by  the  Crown  of  the  tendency 
towards  hereditary  appointments  led,  during 


SHERMAN  ANTI-TRUST  ACT,  JUDICIAL  INTERPRETATION  OF 


the  Plantaganet  period,  to  a decline  in  the 
powers  and  importance  of  the  office.  The  de- 
velopment of  feudal  manorial  courts,  the  itin- 
erant royal  courts,  the  justices  of  the  peace, 
and  later  the  municipal  boroughs,  and  a spe- 
cial system  of  revenue  officials,  reduced  the 
authority  of  the  sheriff  until  he  became  simply 
a conservator  of  the  peace,  ministerial  agent 
of  the  courts  and  returning  officer  of  elections. 

In  England,  the  office  has  remained  one  of 
much  dignity;  and  the  annual  appointments 
by  the  Crown  are  made  from  land  owners  of 
social  position;  while  the  active  work  is  per- 
formed by  a permanent  staff  under  the  im- 
mediate direction  of  an  under  sheriff  who  holds 
his  position  continuously. 

American  Type. — Sheriffs  were  provided,  in 
the  American  colonies,  with  the  organization 
of  counties;  and  at  first  were  appointed  by  the 
governors.  But  as  early  as  1705  the  sheriffs 
in  Pennsylvania  became  elective  in  each 
county;  and  by  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth 
century  the  system  of  local  election  had  been 
generally  established,  and  is  now  followed  in 
all  the  states  except  Rhode  Island,  where 
sheriffs  are  chosen  annually  by  the  general  as- 
sembly. The  usual  term  is  two  years,  but  in 
a few  states  the  term  is  for  four  years.  In 
many  states  reelection  is  restricted;  in  several 
states  sheriffs  may  be  removed  for  cause  by 
the  governor. 

Functions. — The  importance  of  the  office  has 
been  further  diminished  in  this  country  by 
the  development  of  other  officers,  such  as 
county  treasurers  and  collectors,  and  prosecut- 
ing attorneys. 

As  conservator  of  the  peace,  the  sheriff  is 
the  representative  of  the  sovereign  power  of 
the  state ; and  his  power  in  this  field  is  largely 
discretionary.  This  authority  is  of  special  im- 
portance in  times  of  serious  disturbances, 
when  it  is  his  duty  to  take  measures  to  con- 
trol disorder,  and  if  necessary  to  call  on  the 
governor  for  military  aid.  But  in  ordinary 
times,  this  function  of  the  sheriff  is  of  less 
importance,  as  there  are  no  organized  forces 
of  county  police. 

Most  of  the  work  of  the  sheriff’s  office  is  as 
executive  agent  of  the  judicial  courts.  He,  or 
his  deputies,  attends  the  court  sessions,  serves 
summons,  warrants  of  arrest  and  subpoenas, 
and  executes  the  judgments  of  the  courts.  He 
has  charge  of  the  county  jail,  and  also  the 
hanging  of  those  sentenced  to  death,  except  in 
the  states  where  the  death  penalty  is  electro- 
cution at  the  state  penitentiaries.  In  the  dis- 
charge of  these  ministerial  duties,  the  sheriff 
is  held  to  strict  accountability. 

In  some  states  there  are  survivals  of  other 
functions,  as  in  several  southern  states  where 
the  sheriff  is  tax  collector  and  public  admin- 
istrator. 

Sheriffs  in  the  United  States  are  most  com- 
monly paid  by  fees;  but  in  several  states  a 
system  of  fixed  salaries  has  been  established. 


Difficulties. — The  present  position  of  the 
sheriff  shows  a conflict  between  old  traditions 
which  held  it  the  chief  county  post  and  the 
actual  powers  which  make  it  one  among  a 
number  of  coordinate  offices;  while  the  system 
of  local  election  serves  to  confuse  his  legal 
position  as  an  agent  of  the  state.  The  office 
tends  to  be  a center  of  local  politics;  and  as 
the  sheriff  is  responsible  for  the  acts  of  his 
deputies,  these  have  not  been  brought  under 
the  merit  system.  For  the  bulk  of  the  routine 
ministerial  work  of  the  office  a permanent  ad- 
ministrative staff  would  be  more  effective. 

See  County  Government;  Order,  Mainte- 
nance of;  State  Judiciary. 

References:  J.  A.  Fairlie,  Local  Government 
in  Counties,  Towns  and  Villages  ( 1906 ) , 106- 
112;  J.  G.  Crocker,  Duties  of  Sheriffs  (1899). 

John  A.  Fairlie. 

SHERMAN  ANTI-TRUST  ACT,  JUDICIAL 
INTERPRETATION  OF.  The  Sherman  Anti- 
Trust  Act  was  passed  July  2,  1890.  Its  im- 
portant provisions  are  as  follows: 

Section  1.  Every  contract,  combination  in  the 
form  of  trust’ or  otherwise,  or  conspiracy  in  re- 
straint of  trade  or  commerce  among  several  states, 
or  with  foreign  nations,  is  hereby  declared  to  be 
illegal. 

Every  person  who  shall  make  any  such  contract 
or  engage  in  any  such  combination  or  conspiracy, 
shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a misdemeanor,  and  on 
conviction  thereof,  shall  be  punished  by  fine  not 
exceeding  five  thousand  dollars,  or  by  imprison- 
ment not  exceeding  one  year,  or  both  said  punish- 
ments, in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

Section  2.  Every  person  who  shall  monopolize, 
or  attempt  to  monopolize  or  combine  or  conspire 
with  any  other  person  or  persons,  to  monopolize 
any  part  of  the  trade  or  commerce  among  the 
several  states,  or  with  foreign  nations,  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  a misdemeanor,  and,  on  convic- 
tion thereof,  shall  be  punished  by  fine  not  exceed- 
ing five  thousand  dollars,  or  by  imprisonment  not 
exceeding  one  year,  or  by  both  said  punishments, 
in  the  discretion  of  the  court. 

This  act  has  been  the  subject  of  a number 
of  judicial  interpretations  by  the  Supreme 
Court.  In  1895,  a suit  was  brought  to  prevent 
the  purchase  by  the  American  Sugar  Refining 
Company  of  four  refineries  in  Philadelphia  on 
the  ground  that  the  purchase  was  a violation 
of  the  Sherman  Act  (United  States  vs.  E.  C. 
Knight  Co.,  156  U.  S.  1 ) . The  Supreme  Court 
decided  that  the  act  applied  only  to  restraints 
of  interstate  trade;  that  the  business  of  the 
American  Sugar  Refining  Company  was  pri- 
marily manufacturing;  this  fact  did  not  au- 
thorize the  Federal  Government  in  asserting 
its  authority  over  all  combinations  of  manu- 
facturing enterprises,  organized  under  the  laws 
of  particular  states.  This  decision  was  con- 
sidered to  legalize,  so  far  as  the  Sherman  Act 
was  concerned,  the  large  combinations,  or- 
ganized as  holding  companies  under  the  laws 
of  New  Jersey. 

Since  the  Knight  case  was  decided,  however, 
a series  of  decisions  by  the  Supreme  Court,  be- 
ginning with  the  Northern  Securities  decision 
in  1903,  has  broadened  the  interpretation  of 
the  Sherman  Act.  In  the  Northern  Securities 


SHERMAN,  JOHN— SHERMAN,  ROGER 


case  (193  V.  S.  197),  of  the  Knight  case  it  is 
said: 

It  was  held  that  the  agreement  or  agreen  ents 
there  involved  had  reference  only  to  the  manu- 
facture or  production  of  sugar  by  those  engaged 
in  the  alleged  combination  ; but  if  it  had  directly 
embraced  interstate  or  internation  commerce,  it 
would  then  have  been  covered  by  the  anti-trust 
act  and  would  have  been  illegal. 

The  leading  case  involving  this  point  of  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  court  over  contracts  in 
restraint  of  interstate  commerce,  is  Loewe  vs. 
Lawler  (208  V.  /S'.  274),  where  the  Danbury 
Hatters  Union  had  instituted  a boycott  to 
destroy  the  business  of  a manufacturer  of 
hats.  It  was  alleged  in  the  demurrer  to  the 
complaint  that  the  complainants  resided  at 
Danbury,  Connecticut,  and  were  “located  and 
doing  business  as  manufacturers  and  sellers  of 
hats  there.”  The  Supreme  Court  held,  without 
dissent,  that  a combination  to  boycott  the  goods 
of  the  Danbury  manufacturers  and  prevent 
their  sale  in  states  other  than  Connecticut  was 
in  restraint  of  interstate  trade.  The  Supreme 
Court  in  recent  decisions  declaring  the  Stand- 
ard Oil  and  American  Tobacco  Companies  to 
be  illegal  combinations  and  finally  and  formal- 
ly rejected  the  view  which  was  drawn  from  the 
Knight  case.  It  is  now  settled  that  corpora- 
tions engaged  in  manufacturing  and  selling 
in  various  states  are  engaged  in  interstate 
commerce,  and  if  they  represent  unlawful  re- 
straints of  trade,  they  are  prohibited  by  the 
Sherman  Anti-Trust  law.  Other  leading  cases 
arising  under  the  Sherman  law  are  United 
States  vs.  Addyston  Pipe  Company  (see  Addy- 
ston  Pipe  Case)  (175  U.  S.  211),  and  Swift 
vs.  United  States  (196  U.  S.  375,  396),  and 
United  States  vs.  Trans-Missouri  Freight  Asso- 
ciation (166  V.  S.  390). 

See  Addyston  Pipe  Case;  Corporation 
Charters;  Elkins  Act;  Monopolies;  North- 
ern Securities  Case;  Reasonableness  in 
Restraint  of  Trade;  Restraint  of  Trade; 
Trusts. 

References:  W.  Z.  Ripley,  Trusts,  Pools  and 
Corporations  (1905),  v,  86-104,  xiv,  322-38; 
Victor  Morawetz,  “The  Sherman  Anti-Trust 
Act”  in  Am.  Econ.  Assoc.  Quart.,  3d  Series,  II 
(1910),  321-28;  “Spirit  of  the  Anti-Trust 
Law”  in  'Nation,  XC  (1910),  204-205;  T.  Mar- 
burg, “Amendment  of  Sherman  Anti-Trust 
Law”  in  Am.  Acad,  of  Pol.  and  Soc.  Sci.,  An- 
nals, XXXII,  1908,  34-42;  C.  H.  Montague, 
“Future  of  Sherman  Anti-Trust  Law”  in  In- 
dependent, LXV  (July  16,  1908),  137-164; 
A.  H.  Walker,  Hist,  of  the  Sherman  Law 
(1910)  ; Federal  Anti-Trust  Decisions,  Anti- 
Trust  Act  of  1890  (cases  decided  in  U.  S. 
Courts,  1890-1906  published  in  1907);  Am. 
Year  Book,  1910,  and  year  by  year. 

Edward  Sherwood  Mead. 

SHERMAN,  JOHN.  John  Sherman  (1823- 
1900)  was  born  at  Lancaster,  Ohio,  May  10, 
1823.  In  1844  lie  was  admitted  to  the  bar.  He 


was  a delegate  to  the  Whig  national  con- 
ventions of  1848  and  1852,  and  in  1855  pre- 
sided over  the  first  Republican  convention  in 
Ohio.  In  the  same  year  he  was  elected  to 
Congress,  and  sat  in  the  House  until  1861. 
He  was  a member  of  the  House  committee 
which  investigated  affairs  in  Kansas,  in  1856, 
and  signed  the  majority  report  condemning 
the  course  of  the  proslavery  faction.  In  1861 
lie  was  elected  United  States  Senator  from 
Ohio,  holding  his  seat  until  1877.  As  mem- 
ber and  chairman  of  the  committee  on  finance 
he  exercised  a commanding  influence,  and  was 
the  author  of  the  refunding  act  of  1870,  and 
of  the  act  of  1875  for  the  resumption  of  specie 
payment.  From  1877  to  1881  he  was  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury,  his  greatest  achievement  in 
this  capacity  being  the  resumption  of  specie 
payment,  January  1,  1879.  In  1881  he  was 
again  elected  Senator,  retaining  his  seat  until 
1897.  He  was  the  author  of  the  “Sherman 
Act”  of  1890,  for  the  compulsory  purchase 
of  silver  and  the  issuance  thereon  of  legal- 
tender  treasury  notes;  and  one  of  the  framers 
of  the  anti-trust  act  of  the  same  date.  In 
1884  and  1888  he  sought  unsuccessfully  the 
Republican  nomination  for  the  presidency.  In 
1897  he  was  for  a brief  time  Secretary  of 
State.  He  died  at  Washington,  October  22, 
1900.  See  Republican  Party;  Treasury  De- 
partment. References:  John  Sherman,  Recol- 
lections of  Forty  Years  (1895),  The  Sherman 
Letters  (1894)  ; T.  E.  Burton,  John  Sherman 
(1906);  A.  K.  McClure,  Recollections  of  Half 
a Century  (1902).  W.  MacD. 

SHERMAN,  ROGER.  Roger  Sherman  (1721- 
1793)  was  born  at  Newton,  Massachusetts, 
April  19,  1721.  He  learned  the  trade  of  shoe- 
maker, educated  himself,  and  in  1754  was  ad- 
mitted to  the  bar.  The  next  year  he  repre- 
sented New  Milford,  Conn.,  to  which  place 
he  had  removed  in  1743,  in  the  assembly,  and 
subsequently  held  minor  judicial  offices.  In 
1761  he  removed  to  New  Haven.  From  1766 
to  1789  he  was  a judge  of  the  superior  court 
of  Connecticut,  from  1766  to  1785  a member 
of  the  senate,  and  from  1784  to  1793  mayor 
of  New  Haven.  He  sat  in  the  Continental 
Congress  from  1774  to  1781,  and  in  the  Con- 
federation Congress  until  1784.  He  was  a 
member  of  the  committee  to  draft  the  Declara- 
tion of  Independence,  and  signed  that  instru- 
ment. In  the  Federal  Convention  he  took 
a leading  but  conservative  part,  being  chiefly 
remembered  for  his  advocacy  of  equal  repre- 
sentation of  the  states  in  Congress.  From 
1789  to  1791  he  was  a member  of  Congress, 
and  was  then  elected  to  the  Senate,  retain- 
ing his  seat  until  his  death,  July  23,  1793, 
at  New  Haven.  See  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence; Federal  Convention.  References: 

L.  H.  Boutell,  Life  of  Roger  Sherman  (1896)  ; 

M.  Farrand,  Records  of  the  Federal  Conven- 
tion (1911).  W.  MacD. 


SHERMAN  SILVER  ACT— SHIPBUILDING,  REGULATION  AND  PUBLIC  AID  OF 


SHERMAN  SILVER  ACT.  A statute  passed 
July  14,  1890,  as  a means  of  warding  off  a 
free  coinage  silver  bill  and  named  after  Sena- 
tor Sherman  of  Ohio,  who  favored  it  as  a 
substitute  for  worse  measures.  It  provided 
for  the  issue  of  Treasury  notes,  payable  in 
coin  and  backed  by  fifty-four  million  ounces 
of  silver,  which  were  to  be  purchased  annually. 
It  was  repealed  Oct.  30,  1893.  See  Bland- 
Allison  Bill;  Silver  Coinage  Controversy; 
Specie  Currency  in  the  United  States. 
References:  J.  E.  Burton,  John  Sherman 
( 1906 ) ; W.  V.  Byars,  An  American  Common- 
er— Richard  Parker  Bland  (1900)  ; John  Sher- 
man, Recollections  of  Forty  Years  ( 1895 ) . 

A.  B.  H. 

SHINPLASTERS.  A name  given  as  early 
as  the  panic  of  1837  to  notes  of  small  denom- 
ination issued  on  private  responsibility  as  a 
substitute  for  small  coin.  Such  notes  were 
common  during  the  early  years  of  the  Civil 
War.  The  name  was  also  given  to  notes  of 
small  denomination  issued  by  the  government. 

0.  C.  H. 

SHIPBUILDING,  REGULATION  AND  PUB- 
LIC AID  OF.  The  following  table  shows  the 
American  tonnage  in  the  coastwise  and  for- 
eign trade  for  certain  years  from  1789  to  1911: 


duties  and  granted  a discount  of  10  per  cent 
on  import  duties  on  goods  brought  in  by  Amer- 
ican vessels.  (2)  July  20,  1789,  a law  was 
passed  which  imposed  a tax  of  six  cents  a ton 
on  American  built  ships,  owned  by  Americans, 
and  fifty  cents  a ton  on  ships  constructed  and 
owned  abroad — American  vessels  in  the  coast- 
ing trade  to  pay  this  tax  but  once  during  the 
year,  foreign  vessels  to  pay  it  whenever  they 
entered  an  American  port.  The  effect  was 
practically  to  bar  all  foreign  carriers  from 
the  coastwise  trade.  (3)  An  Act  of  Septem- 
ber 1,  1789,  amended  in  1792  and  still  on 
our  statute  books,  confined  American  registry 
to  vessels  built  at  home  and  owned  by  actual 
residents  of  the  United  States. 

Added  tonnage  duties  were  levied  in  1804. 
On  April  5,  1808,  in  connection  with  the  Em- 
bargo Act,  foreign  carriers  were  forbidden  to 
enter  our  coastwise  trade.  In  1809  this  re- 
striction was  modified,  but  the  Navigation  Bill, 
of  March  1,  1817,  closed  the  coastwise  trade 
to  all  vessels  “belonging  wholly  or  in  part  to 
the  subject  of  any  foreign  power.”  This  stat- 
ute has  never  since  been  repealed  and  hence 
our  vessels  practically  have  had  since  1792,  a 
monopoly  of  our  coastwise  traffic,  including 
the  traffic  with  Hawaii,  the  Philippines  and 
all  our  insular  possessions. 

Reciprocity  in  Tonnage  Duties. — The  marked 


Year 

Coastwise 

Trade 

Tonnage 

In  Foreign 
Trade 
Tonnage 

Proportion  of  Foreign  Trade 
in  American  Vessels 

Commerce  of 
United 
States 

Imports, 

Per  Cent 

Exports, 

Per  Cent 

17S9  

68,607 

123,893 

17.5 

30. 

No  record 

1800  

215,295 

657,107 

91. 

87. 

162,224,548 

1820  

539,080 

583,657 

90. 

89. 

144,141,669 

IS30  

496,640 

537,563 

93.6 

86.3 

134,391,691 

1810  

1,114,634 

762,838 

86.6 

79.9 

221,927,638 

1S50  

1,755,797 

1,439,694 

77.8 

65.5 

317,885,252 

I860  

2,599,319 

2,379,396 

63. 

69.7 

687,192,176 

1870  

2,595,328 

1,448,846 

33.1 

37.7 

828,730.176 

1880  

2,584,418 

1,314,102 

22. 

13. 

1,503,593,404 

1890  

3,330,377 

928,062 

16.6 

9. 

1,647,139,093 

1900  

4.195,875 

816,795 

12.9 

7.1 

2,089,528.616 

1911  

6,766,119 

863,495 

10.2 

7.5 

3,210,642.970 

The  United  States  merchant  marine  in  1911 
totalled,  in  both  foreign  and  coastwise  trade, 
25,991  vessels  of  7,638,790  tons.  For  the  same 
date,  the  total  tonnage  of  the  world  according 
to  Lloyd’s  Register  was  43,147,154  tons,  19,- 
418,824  tons  of  which  were  under  the  British 
flag  and  4,466,888  under  the  German. 

In  contrast  to  other  powers,  American  ship- 
ping is  almost  wholly  devoted  to  domestic 
transportation,  two-fifths  of  it  being  on  the 
Great  Lakes  and  the  Mississippi  River  and  its 
tributaries.  The  annual  output  of  the  ship 
yards  of  the  United  States  was  614,216  tons 
in  the  fiscal  year  1908,  and  291,162  tons  in 
1911.  About  three-fourths  of  this  tonnage  is 
steam. 

Protection  to  Coasting  Trade. — The  first 
Congress  was  much  influenced  by  the  shipping 
trade,  and  passed  several  protective  acts:  (1) 
July  4,  1789,  it  levied  discriminating  tonnage 


effect  of  this  prohibitive  legislation  was  a 
growth  in  tonnage  and  business.  In  1789 
American  ships  carried  but  17.5  per  cent  of 
our  imports  and  30  per  cent  of  our  exports ; 
in  1796,  94  per  cent  of  our  imports  and  90 
per  cent  of  our  exports  were  carried  in  Ameri- 
can bottoms.  At  the  maximum  in  1826,  Amer- 
ican vessels  carried  95  per  cent  of  the  imports 
and  89.6  per  cent  of  the  exports. 

In  1815  began  a change  from  protection 
through  tonnage  taxes  and  discriminating  du- 
ties to  reciprocity.  By  1826,  reciprocity  treat- 
ies had  been  obtained  only  with  Great  Britain, 
France,  Sweden  and  Norway.  Since  1826, 
thirty-nine  countries,  including  all  those  of 
importance,  have  accepted  the  offer  of  reciproc- 
ity as  to  tonnage  duties,  so  the  United  States 
can  no  longer  be  said  to  offer  aid  to  ship 
building  through  discriminating  taxes  and  du- 
ties. 


305 


SHIPPING,  REGULATION  OF 


Subsidies. — On  March  3,  1845,  a new  policy 
was  adopted,  that  of  aiding  shipping  through 
grants  to  certain  lines  for  the  carriage  of 
mails.  From  1845  to  1857  about  $14,500,000 
was  paid  by  the  government  for  this  service. 
This  plan  was  abandoned  from  1858  to  1865 
when  a grant  was  made  to  a line  operating 
between  New  York  and  Rio  Janeiro,  $1,500,000 
being  paid  out  altogether  before  the  grant  was 
withdrawn.  In  1865  a grant  was  made  to  the 
Pacific  Steamship  Company  for  operating  ships 
to  the  Orient.  When  this  contract  expired  in 
1877,  the  company  had  received  from  the  na- 
tional government  a total  of  $4,500,000. 

The  mail  subvention  was  renewed  in  1891 
by  a statute  authorizing  postmasters  general 
to  make  five  to  ten  year  contracts  with  steam- 
ers carrying  foreign  mail,  the  maximum  to  be 
paid  therefor  being  fixed  at  a price  greater 
than  the  services  actually  rendered  to  the  gov- 
ernment were  worth.  In  1912,  there  were 
but  seven  contracts  in  operation  under  this 
law,  six  for  ten  year  terms  and  one  for  a 
five  year  term.  During  the  fiscal  year  ending 
June  30,  1911,  the  total  cost  of  the  contract 
mail  service  under  the  Act  was  $1,074,945.29 
an  excess  cost  of  $240,059.29  over  the  amount 
that  would  have  been  allowable  for  the  con- 
veyance of  the  mails  carried  if  the  conveying 
steamers  had  not  been  under  contract  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  Act. 

Advantages  in  Building. — The  United  States 
aids  her  merchant  marine  indirectly  in  many 
ways.  Free  service  is  rendered  by  various  de- 
partments of  the  national  government,  such 
as  the  light  house  department  (see),  coast 
survey  (see),  hydrographic  department  (see), 
weather  bureau  (see),  and  life  saving  service 
(see).  The  most  valuable  aid,  aside  from 
giving  to  our  shipping  a monopoly  on  the 
coastwise  traffic  and  the  advantages  of  the 
registry  law  in  building  ships,  is  principally 
in  letting  large  naval  contracts  to  American 
ship  yards  and  from  free  importation  of  build- 
ing materials  to  be  used  for  vessels  in  the 
foreign  trade. 

Causes  of  Decrease. — The  noted  decrease  in 
our  foreign  shipping  cannot  be  attributed  sole- 
ly to  the  want  of  national  aid.  Its  phenomenal 
growth  during  the  earlier  years  was  not  due 
so  much  to  the  aid  received  from  discriminat- 
ing national  legislation  as  it  was  to  the  abil- 
ity to  build  wooden  ships  more  cheaply  than 
could  any  other  nation.  When  wooden  ships 
gave  way  to  iron  ships,  this  definite  advan- 
tage was  lost,  and  this  as  a negative  check 
was  followed  by  heavy  losses  during  the  Civil 
War. 

Another  potent  reason  for  the  want  of  great- 
er investments  of  American  capital  in  Amer- 
ican shipping  is  that  both  capital  and  labor 
can  secure  higher  returns  in  other  industries. 
Moreover,  ship  owners  must  pay  higher  wages 
in  building  and  operating  ships.  The  Ameri- 
can protective  tariff,  by  checking  imports, 


makes  it  more  difficult  for  vessels  to  obtain  re- 
turn cargoes.  The  registry  law,  which  opens 
to  American  registry  only  those  vessels  built 
at  home,  closes  to  ship  owners  the  opportunity 
of  buying  cheaper  ships  abroad,  unless,  as  is 
frequently  the  case,  shipowners  buy  such  ships 
and  sail  them  under  foreign  flags. 

Suggestions  for  Rehabilitation. — Numerous 
suggestions  have  been  made  for  rehabilitating 
our  merchant  marine.  (1)  The  repeal  of  the 
present  registry  law,  thus  allowing  ship  own- 
ers to  buy  abroad  at  lower  prices.  The  registry 
law  helps  ship  builders  but  not  ship  owners; 
all  other  nations  have  repealed  their  discrim- 
inating registry  laws,  England  as  far  back  as 
1849.  (2)  Extension  of  the  postal-aid  law 

of  1891  to  all  vessels  conforming  to  require- 
ments as  to  speed,  and  so  built  that  they  may 
be  transformed  into  auxiliary  cruisers  in  time 
of  war.  Such  vessels,  however,  are  limited  in 
their  profitableness  in  time  of  peace,  and  are 
of  relatively  little  value  as  ships  of  war.  (3) 
The  granting  of  money  subsidies  (see  Subsi- 
dies to  Shipping  ) . 

See  Labor,  Relation  of  the  State  to; 
Mail  Subsidies;  Navigation,  Regulation  of; 
Shipping,  Regulation  of;  Subsidies  to  Ship- 
ping. 

References:  W.  J.  Abbott,  American  Mer- 
chant Ship  and  Sailor  (1902)  ; Commis- 
sioner of  Navigation,  Annual  Reports-,  W.  W. 
Bates,  Shipping  Restoration  (1907);  W.  L. 
Marvin,  Am.  Merchant  Marine  (1902);  R. 
Meeker,  History  of  Shipping  Subsidy  (1905). 

Clyde  L.  King. 

SHIPPING,  REGULATION  OF.  Vessels  of 
the  United  States  are  defined  by  statute  as 
those  belonging  to  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  and  enrolled  as  such  with  the  commis- 
sioner of  navigation.  All  vessels,  except  ca- 
nal boats,  must  be  enrolled,  and  secure  a li- 
cense. This  .enrollment  includes  a description 
of  the  vessel  and  its  name  and  number.  The 
name  of  the  vessel  cannot  be  changed  under 
pain  of  forfeiture  of  the  vessel,  save  with  the 
consent  of  the  commissioner  of  navigation. 

Each  vessel  before  it  sails  for  a foreign 
port  must  secure  a passport  to  be  deposited 
with  the  United  States  consul  upon  the  ves- 
sel’s arrival  at  its  destination.  The  pilots, 
engineers,  masters  and  mates  of  all  United 
States  vessels  must  be  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  and  must  secure  a license  based  on  in- 
spection, and  issued  by  a board  of  local  in- 
spectors, central  supervision  over  which  is 
vested  in  a board  of  supervising  inspectors. 
The  circuit  court  judges  appoint  shipping  com- 
missioners for  each  port  of  entry;  their  spe- 
cial duty  being  to  supervise  the  shipping  arti- 
cles signed  by  apprentices,  and  to  give  protec- 
tion and  relief  to  American  seamen,  with  pow- 
ers over  their  wages,  effects,  food  and  employ- 
ment. When  the  ship  is  in  a foreign  port, 
these  duties  vest  in  our  consuls. 


SHIRES  IN  GREAT  BRITAIN 


All  vessels  bearing  passengers  to  the  United 
States  must  provide  at  least  one  hundred 
cubic  feet  per  passenger,  and  must  not  take  on 
over  one  passenger  to  every  two  tons  of 
vessel  and  sixteen  feet  of  deck  space.  The 
laws  also  prescribe  the  amount  and  character 
of  provisions  that  must  be  taken  on  board  for 
each  passenger.  The  vessel,  upon  reaching  its 
destination  in  this  country,  is  inspected  by  ail 
inspector  of  the  customs,  to  see  that  all  rules 
and  regulations  have  been  complied  with. 

In  order  to  prevent  collisions  and  accidents, 
statutes  and  regulations  in  minute  detail  fix 
the  character  and  position  of  lights  and  of 
signals,  the  nature  of  sound  signals,  of  steering 
and  sailing  rules  and  the  use  of  distress  sig- 
nals. These  regulations  are  different  for:  (1) 
the  sea;  (2)  the  Great  Lakes  and  tributaries; 
(3)  rivers,  harbors  and  inland  waters;  (4)  the 
Red  River  of  the  North  and  the  tributaries  of 
the  Gulf  of  Mexico. 

The  liability  of  the  owner  of  any  vessel  for 
any  and  all  losses  or  destruction  to  merchan- 
dise or  other  freight  is  limited  to  the  amount 
of  the  value  of  the  interest  of  such  owner  in 
such  vessel  and  her  freight  then  pending.  The 
liability  as  to  freight  pending  is  limited  to 
the  sum  of  money  received  for  freight  on  the 
voyage  during  which  the  accident  occurred,  not 
for  the  return  trip.  If  the  liability  is  greater 
than  the  whole  value  of  the  vessel  and  freight 
for  the  voyage,  the  damage  is  divided  up  among 
the  various  owners  in  proportion  to  their  re- 
spective losses.  Of  course,  due  diligence  must 
be  used  and  the  statutes  specifically  provide 
that  covenants  tending  to  avoid  due  diligence 
are  null  and  of  no  effect.  The  limitation  of 
liability  does  not  apply  to  vessels  used  in 
rivers  or  inland  waters. 

The  administration  of  shipping  regulations 
and  the  supervision  of  shipping  is  vested  in 
the  bureau  of  navigation,  headed  by  the  com- 
missioner of  navigation,  the  bureau  being  a 
division  of  the  Department  of  Commerce  and 
Labor  (see). 

Reference:  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Naviga- 
tion, Reports.  Clyde  L.  King. 

SHIRES  IN  GREAT  BRITAIN.  Origin.— 

England  and  Scotland  are  each  divided  into 
districts  known  as  shires  or  counties,  which 
are  both  local  areas  for  certain  purposes  of 
central  administration  and  also  the  largest 
local  government  district.  In  the  south  and 
the  extreme  north  of  England,  some  of  the 
shires  represent  the  original  districts  of  the 
earlier  Anglo-Saxon  kingdoms  or  distinct  bod- 
ies of  the  Teutonic  peoples,  which  retained 
some  elements  of  self-government  after  their 
absorption  in  the  larger  kingdom.  In  the 
midlands,  the  shires  were  districts  created  for 
convenience  of  administration. 

Shire  Court. — During  the  later  Anglo-Saxon 
period  in  England,  the  public  business  of  each 
shire  was  managed  by  a semi-annual  court, 


composed  of  representatives  from  each  town- 
ship and  individual  landowners,  though  the 
latter  may  have  been  represented  by  the 
twelve  senior  thegns  from  each  hundred.  The 
principal  function  of  this  court  was  the  admin- 
istration of  justice.  The  initiative  and  active 
control  of  affairs  rested  in  three  officials, — the 
ealdorman  (representing  the  earlier  royal  fam- 
ilies or  local  nobility),  the  sheriff  (the  repre- 
sentative of  the  Crown),  and  the  bishop,  who 
presided  in  ecclesiastical  cases. 

Officials. — After  the  Norman  conquest  the 
disappearance  of  the  earls  and  bishops  from 
active  functions  in  the  shire  court  paved  the 
way  for  the  supremacy  of  the  sheriff,  as  the 
chief  agent  of  the  Crown  in  a highly  centra- 
lized administration.  Later,  however,  with 
the  development  of  travelling  royal  judges, 
feudal  manorial  courts  and  justices  of  the 
peace,  the  powers  and  importance  of  the  sher- 
iff and  the  shire  court,  were  diminished  (see 
Sheriff). 

Under  the  Tudors,  the  powers  of  the  jus- 
tices of  the  peace  were  further  developed,  and 
a new  office  of  lord  lieutenant  for  eaoh  county 
was  established  at  the  head  of  the  militia 
system.  The  local  officials  were  also  under 
the  active  supervision  of  the  privy  council. 

Seventeenth  Century. — Later  the  active  con- 
trol of  the  privy  council  declined;  and  the 
machinery  of  shire  government  at  this  time 
formed  the  basis  for  the  early  county  govern- 
ments in  the  American  colonies.  The  prin- 
cipal officials  were  the  lord  lieutenant,  the 
sheriff,  the  coroner  and  justices  of  the  peace. 
All  but  the  coroner  were  appointed  by  the 
Crown,  but  from  the  landed  classes,  and  as  the 
positions  were  unsalaried  local  administration 
in  practice  was  much  decentralized.  The  sher- 
iff was  chief  conservator  of  the  peace  and  ex- 
ecutive agent  of  the  royal  courts,  and  presided 
over  the  fast  waning  shire  courts,  where  small 
civil  cases  were  tried  and  county  members  of 
Parliament  were  elected.  Local  administra- 
tion was  mainly  in  the  hands  of  the  justices  of 
the  peace.  In  addition  to  their  functions  in- 
dividually and  in  petty  sessions,  the  justices 
in  each  shire  formed  collectively  a quarterly 
court  of  criminal  jurisdiction  which  also  acted 
as  the  fiscal  and  administrative  authority  for 
the  shire. 

Reorganization. — This  system  of  shire  gov- 
ernment in  England  remained  much  the  same 
during  the  eighteenth  and  most  of  the  nine- 
teenth century.  Even  after  the  reform  of  the 
House  of  Commons  and  the  municipal  cor- 
porations, radical  changes  in  poor  law  ad- 
ministration and  important  developments  in 
other  branches  of  local  government,  the  shire 
administration  continued  in  the  hands  of  the 
landed  gentry  as  justices  of  the  peace.  In 
1888,  however,  there  was  established  a sys- 
tem of  county  councils  (see)  elected  on  a sub- 
stantially democratic  basis,  to  which  was 
granted  the  administrative  powers  of  the  jus- 


307 


SHIRT  SLEEVE  DIPLOMACY— SIDEWALKS 


tices  of  the  peace  and  also  additional  powers 
of  local  government.  The  justices  continue  to 
exercise  their  judicial  functions;  and  the  con- 
trol of  the  county  police  is  exercised  by  a 
joint  committee  of  justices  and  members  of 
the  county  councils. 

Scotland. — In  Scotland  the  earlier  system  of 
shire  government  has  left  more  traces  on  the 
present  arragnements.  The  sheriff  continues 
his  judicial  functions;  and  is  in  fact  the  prin- 
cipal judge  for  the  local  trial  of  cases.  In 
1889  elective  county  councils  were  established 
as  in  England. 

See  County  Council  in  Great  Britain. 

References:  G.  E.  Howard,  Local  Constitu- 
tional History  (1889),  298-318;  J.  A.  Fairlie, 
Local  Government  in  Counties,  Towns  and  Vil- 
lages (1906),  ch.  i;  D.  J.  Medley,  Manual  of 
English  Constitutional  History  (1907)  ; S.  and 
B.  Webb,  English  Local  Government,  the  Par- 
ish and  the  County  (1906),  Bk.  ii;  Redlich 
and  Hirst,  Local  Government  in  England 
(1903),  Bk.  II,  Pt.  II;  W.  B.  Odgers,  Local 
Government  (1899),  ch.  x. 

John  A.  Fairlie. 

SHIRT  SLEEVE  DIPLOMACY.  A title 
which  has  been  given  to  some  of  the  diplomacy 
of  recent  years  which  has  disregarded  much 
of  the  circumlocution  and  indirectness  of 
earlier  practice  and  has  stated  clearly  the 
purpose  of  the  negotiation  and  the  methods 
by  which  a state  proposed  to  attain  the  pur- 
pose. This  term  has  been  particularly  ap- 
plied to  the  diplomacy  of  the  United  States 
from  the  late  years  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
See  Diplomacy  and  Diplomatic  Usage. 

G.  G.  W. 

SHOESTRING  DISTRICT.  A name  applied 
to  the  sixth  congressional  district  of  Missis- 
sippi, about  300  miles  in  length  and  20  miles 
in  breadth — a most  flagrant  example  of  gerry- 
mandering. See  Gerrymander.  O.  C.  H. 

SHORT  BALLOT.  See  Ballot,  Short. 

SHORT  HAIRS.  A term  said  to  have  been 
coined  by  John  Morrissey  in  New  York  in 
1876  denoting  the  common  man  and  “toughs” 
in  politics  in  contradistinction  to  the  fashion- 
able “swallow  tails”  (see).  O.  C.  H. 

SHORT  HAUL.  See  Long  and  Short 
Haul. 

SIC  SEMPER  TYRANNIS.  The  motto  of 
the  state  of  Virginia,  made  memorable  by  its 
use  at  the  assassination  of  Lincoln  bv  Booth 
as  he  leaped  upon  the  stage  from  the  Presi- 
dent’s private  box  at  Ford’s  theatre. 

O.  C.  H. 

SIDE  JUDGES.  In  Pennsylvania  there  has 
been  from  early  times  a system  of  judges  not 


learned  in  the  law,  who  sit  beside  the  regular 
judge.  The  purpose  is  to  fortify  the  legal 
knowledge  of  the  judge  with  the  common 
sense  of  the  farmer  or  store-keeper.  The  side 
judges  have  little  influence  on  the  decision 
of  cases,  for  they  cannot  lay  down  any  prin- 
ciples of  law  before  the  jury.  See  Court, 
County;  State  Judiciary.  A.  B.  H. 

SIDEWALKS.  Sidewalks  are  more  general- 
ly used  by  the  public  than  other  portions  of 
the  street,  and  yet,  as  a rule,  receive  far  less 
attention  both  from  the  public  and  the  of- 
ficial, not  only  than  any  other  part  of  the 
street,  but  than  any  other  portion  of  city 
work.  Sidewalk  construction  is,  in  most  places, 
left  to  the  individual  owner,  subject  to  few  or 
no  municipal  regulations  or  restrictions. 

American  cities  could  with  profit  follow  the 
precedents  established  in  Germany,  where  due 
care  and  attention  is  given  both  to  the  con- 
struction and  maintenance  of  the  sidewalks. 
Not  only  is  the  portion  used  by  pedestrians 
kept  in  order,  but  due  provision  for  the  un- 
derground conduits  is  made,  so  that  they  can 
be  reached  without  the  tearing  out  of  the 
whole  sidewalk  or  of  the  street  between  the 
curbs.  Moreover,  the  whole  construction  is 
designed  to  be  esthetic  as  well  as  useful.  Only 
a beginning  in  this  direction  has  been  made  in 
American  cities. 

Brick,  flagstone,  asphalt  and  cement  are  the 
prevailing  materials  used  in  American  side- 
walks. The  cement  walk  so  common  in  the 
United  States  is  used  to  a much  less  extent 
in  Germany.  Many  of  the  German  walks  are 
made  of  concrete  mosaics  on  a cinder  subbase 
of  an  adequate  thickness. 

As  a general  rule,  the  cost  of  sidewalk  con- 
struction is  borne  by  the  owner  of  the  abutting 
property,  although  in  an  increasing  number 
of  cities  the  requirements  as  to  material, 
width  and  subbase  are  becoming  more  numer- 
ous. In  some  few  cities  the  cost  is  paid  out 
of  the  general  city  treasury.  In  others  a com- 
bination of  the  two  plans  is  followed. 

Sidewalks  form  an  important  part  of  busi- 
ness properties,  being  used  for  display  and 
storage.  In  many  communities  ordinances 
prohibiting  such  use  of  the  sidewalks  are  open- 
ly defied,  the  authorities  winking  at  the  prac- 
tice in  exchange  for  the  political  support  of 
the  owners  or  tenants  of  the  abutting  prop- 
erty. In  foreign  quarters  a general  use  of 
the  sidewalk  to  the  inconvenience  and  danger 
of  the  pedestrian  is  permitted,  in  exchange 
for  political  and  personal  advantage.  The 
prevailing  American  practice  in  regard  to  side- 
walks is  to  give  the  first  consideration  to  the 
interests  of  the  owner  or  tenant,  second  to 
the  pedestrian,  and  lastly  to  the  city,  the 
exact  reverse  of  the  most  approved  foreign 
practice. 

See  Public  Works,  National,  State  and 
Municipal  ; Streets, 


308 


SIDNEY,  ALGERNON— SILVER  COINAGE  CONTROVERSY 


References:  P.  B.  Beery,  Portland  Cement 
in  Sidewalk  Construction  (1909);  Concrete 
Publishing  Co.,  Concrete  Sidewalks  (1911)  ; A. 
A.  Houghton,  Concrete  Floors  and  Sidewalks 
(1910)  ; C.  Richardson,  Modern  Asphalt  Pave- 
ment (1908)  ; L.  J.  Riegler,  Failures  in  Con- 
crete Sidewalks  and  how  to  Correct  Them 
(1911).  Clinton  Rogers  Woodruff. 

SIDNEY,  ALGERNON.  See  Political  The- 
ories of  English  Publicists. 

SIGNAL  CORPS.  The  Signal  Corps  of  the 
United  States  Army  exercises  general  super- 
vision over  the  signal  service,  is  charged  with 
the  construction,  operation  and  maintenance 
of  military  lines  of  information,  and  performs 
all  other  services  required  by  the  field  service 
regulations,  such  as  the  maintenance  of  one 
aero-wireless  battalion  for  each  field  army.  It 
also  operates  the  Government  telegraph  sys- 
tems in  Alaska  and  the  Philippine  Islands, 
supervises  fire-control  installations  for  coast 
defense,  and  has  charge  of  wireless  telegraphy 
and  military  aeronautics.  References:  Secre- 
tary of  War,  Annual  Report-,  C.  H.  Van  Tyne 
and  W.  G.  Leland,  Guide  to  the  Archives  (2d 
ed.,  1907),  132-133.  A.  N.  H. 

SILK  STOCKINGS.  A derisive  appellation 
bestowed  by  the  “practical  politicians”  upon 


those  citizens  of  wealth  and  high  social  posi- 
tion who  occasionally  interfere  in  politics  in 
support  of  some  reform  measure  or  candidate. 

0.  C.  H. 

SILVER  CERTIFICATES.  During  the  Civil 
War  when  gold  was  at  a high  premium,  the 
United  States  under  a statute  of  1863,  received 
gold  deposits  and  issued  certificates  for  them 
which  were  transferred  from  hand  to  hand 
as  a gold  currency  ( see  Gold  Certificates  ) . 
After  the  resumption  of  specie  payment  in 
1879,  these  certificates  were  still  continued 
because  of  the  convenience  in  handling  large 
denomination  notes  rather  than  the  coin.  The 
first  silver  certificates,  issued  under  the  Bland 
Act  (see)  of  1878,  were  intended  in  the  same 
way  to  replace  the  so-called  cart-wheel  dollars 
with  notes  which  were  easier  to  handle.  The 
certificates  issued  under  the  Sherman  Act  of 
1890  were  made  redeemable  in  coin.  The  sil- 
ver certificates  of  all  kinds  have  circulated  at 
par  in  gold  because  of  the  public  and  justified 
belief  that  the  government  would  hold  them  a 
specie  liability.  See  Coinage  and  Specie  Cur- 
rency; Legal  Tender  Controversy;  Paper 
Money;  Silver  Coinage  Controversy.  Refer- 
ences: D.  R.  Dewey,  Financial  Hist,  of  the 
U.  S.  (1903);  National  Problems  (1907);  J. 
H.  Latan6,  Am.  as  a World  Power  (1907),  121- 
127,  231-234.  A.  B.  H. 


SILVER  COINAGE  CONTROVERSY 


Demonetization  of  1873. — The  act  of  Febru- 
ary 12,  1873,  dropped  the  standard  silver  dol- 
lar from  the  list  of  coins  to  be  thereafter  is- 
sued from  the  mint  (see  Coinage).  In  the 
following  year  by  a general  revision  of  the 
statutes  the  legal  tender  power  of  all  silver 
coins  was  limited  to  five  dollars.  Silver  dol- 
lars had  not  been  in  circulation  for  a third 
of  a century.  Not  only  had  all  forms  of  me- 
tallic money  disappeared  from  circulation 
since  the  suspension  of  specie  payments  in  De- 
cember, 1861,  but  there  was  no  inducement  to 
bring  silver  to  the  mint,  as  by  the  legal  ratio 
of  16  to  1 it  was  undervalued  compared 
with  gold.  The  average  commercial  ratio  in 
1872  was  15.63  and  in  1873,  15.92.  So  com- 
pletely had  the  silver  dollar  passed  out  of 
use  that  little  significance  was  attached  to  its 
omission  from  the  list  of  coins  or  to  its  de- 
monetization. Practically  no  opposition  was 
made;  there  was  but  little  discussion,  and  in- 
deed many,  members  of  Congress,  were  not 
aware  of  the  change. 

Fall  in  Silver,  1871-1875.— In  1871  to  1873 
Germany  demonetized  silver,  and  immediately 
the  metal  began  to  fall  in  value,  as  seen  in 
the  following  table  of  ratios  between  gold  and 
silver : 


1874  lfi.17  to  1 

1875  16.58  to  1 

1876  17.87  to  1 

1877  17.22  to  1 

1878  17.94  to  1 

1879  18.39  to  1 

1880  18.04  to  1 


In  1875  Congress,  after  much  halting  and 
delay,  devoted  its  attention  to  the  resumption 
of  specie  payments,  and  the  status  of  the 
monetary  medium  to  be  restored  assumed  new 
importance.  Moreover,  there  was  an  agitation 
for  an  increase  in  the  volume  of  currency  as 
seen  in  the  efforts  to  secure  an  inflation  of 
the  greenback  issues.  This  was  checked  by  a 
veto  of  President  Grant,  April  22,  1874,  and 
the  inflationists  turned  to  silver  as  a possible 
means  to  accomplish  their  end.  An  additional 
influence  in  strengthening  the  movement  for 
the  rehabilitation  of  silver  was  the  increased 
supply  of  the  metal  from  mines  recently  opened 
in  Colorado.  The  annual  product  of  silver  in 
the  United  States  from  1865  to  1880,  in  ounces, 
was  as  follows: 


1865  

8.507.000 

1875  

24.529.000 

1870  _. 

— - 12.375,000 

1876  

29,996.000 

1871  

— - 17.789.000 

1877  

30.778.000 

1872  

22. 296.090 

1878  

35.022.000 

1873  

27.650.000 

1880  

31.566.000 

1874  

....  28,868,000 

1880  

30,319,000 

SILVER  COINAGE  CONTROVERSY 


Bland- Allison  Silver  Act.— Naturally  tlie  op- 
erators of  these  mines  viewed  with  alarm  any 
fall  in  the  value  of  the  metal  and  were  united 
to  stop  it,  if  possible,  by  legislation.  The 
contest  began  in  Congress  in  1876.  Represent- 
atives from  both  parties  joined  in  the  effort 
to  restore  silver  dollars  to  coinage,  Kelly,  of 
Pennsylvania,  a Republican,  and  Bland  (see) 
of  Missouri,  taking  the  leadership.  A commis- 
sion composed  of  three  Senators,  three  Repre- 
sentatives, and  three  experts,  was  authorized 
to  investigate  and  report  upon  the  policy  of 
remonetization.  The  majority  of  the  Commis- 
sion reported  favorably  on  the  grounds  that 
the  fall  in  the  value  of  silver  was  due  to 
demonetization  rather  than  increased  produc- 
tion; that,  owing  to  the  decreased  production 
ot  gold,  silver  was  needed;  that  prices  would 
be  more  stable  under  a double  standard;  and 
that  to  require  the  payment  of  the  public  debt 
in  gold  alone  would  impose  too  heavy  a burden. 
Reference  was  also  made  to  the  attempts  to 
make  gold  the  single  standard  through  inter- 
national agreements,  as  witnessed  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  International  Monetary  Confer- 
ence (see)  in  1867;  and  it  was  charged  that 
the  recent  legislation  of  the  United  States  had 
been  part  of  a scheme  or  conspiracy  to  bring 
this  about.  One  member  of  the  minority  fav- 
ored remonetization  of  silver  if  it  could  be 
attained  through  international  agreement. 

In  1877  the  Republican  platforms  of  Penn- 
sylvania and  many  of  the  western  state  con- 
ventions demanded  remonetization,  and  there 
was  even  more  general  agreement  among  the 
Democrats.  Congress  quickly  responded  to 
this  pressure  and,  November  5,  1877,  by  a vote 
of  163  to  34,  passed  the  Bland  bill  (see)  pro- 
viding for  free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver. 
There  were,  however,  92  members  not  recorded. 
In  the  Senate  the  volume  of  coinage  was  lim- 
ited, and  in  that  form  the  act  was  passed,  not- 
withstanding the  veto  of  President  Hayes. 
The  final  vote  in  the  House  was  203  to  72,  and 
in  the  Senate  46  to  19.  As  a concession  to 
those  who  believed  that  the  coinage  of  silver 
could  be  safely  undertaken  only  by  joint  action 
with  other  countries,  this  statute  authorized 
the  President  to  invite  the  principal  commer- 
cial nations  to  send  representatives  to  a second 
international  monetary  conference  (see). 

Period  of  Repose  (1878-1888). — -For  several 
years  after  the  passage  of  the  Bland-Allison 
Act  the  silver  question  attracted  but  little  at- 
tention. The  deliberations  of  the  Monetary 
Conference  were  fruitless;  the  prophecies  of 
disaster  to  result  from  the  coinage  of  even  a 
limited  amount  of  silver,  proved  untrue,  and 
the  country  as  well  as  the  nation’s  treasury 
enjoyed  prosperity.  President  Cleveland, 
elected  in  1884,  endeavored  without  success  to 
awaken  interest  in  the  folly  of  continued  pur- 
chases of  silver.  But  Congress  would  not 
desert  silver,  and  in  1886  the  passage  of  a 
free  coinage  bill  was  only  narrowly  averted  in 


the  House.  Silver  continued  to  fall  in  value; 
but  of  more  consequence  as  a factor  in  giving 
strength  to  the  silver  movement  was  the  con- 
tinued fall  in  the  price  of  agricultural  staples. 
Farmers  in  the  South  and  West  who  were 
suffering  from  the  burdens  of  mortgage  in- 
debtedness incurred  when  prices  were  higher, 
generally  agreed  that  the  declining  returns  of 
agriculture,  as  measured  in  money,  were  due 
to  an  insufficiency  of  monetary  medium. 

Renewed  Agitation  (1889-1893). — Influenced 
doubtless  by  political  motives  of  expediency, 
the  silver  question  was  not  given  prominence 
by  either  party  in  the  presidential  campaign 
of  1888.  And  yet  no  sooner  was  the  new  Re- 
publican administration  installed  in  power 
than  active  interest  in  the  free  silver  agitation 
was  revived.  In  November,  1889,  a silver  con- 
vention was  held  in  St.  Louis;  and  in  the  fol- 
lowing month,  Windom,  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  brought  forward  a project  for  the 
issue  of  silver  certificates  against  bullion  at 
its  market  value.  Recommendations  coming 
from  such  a responsible  source  at  the  very  be- 
ginning of  a party’s  accession  to  power  in- 
fluenced Congress  to  act.  Windom’s  particu- 
lar recommendation  was  set  aside  in  favor  of 
the  bill  subsequently  known  as  the  Sherman 
Act  of  1890  (see  also  Treasury  Notes). 
This  again  was  a compromise  and  did  not  rea- 
lize all  the  hopes  of  the  silver  party.  In  in- 
creasing the  purchases  of  silver  it  meant  a 
partial  victory  which  inspired  the  party  to 
further  activity.  The  Republican  party  had 
now  been  definitely  committed  to  silver;  in 
the  Senate  a free  coinage  bill  was  passed  early 
in  1891,  and  again  in  1892.  In  the  House, 
however,  there  was  more  opposition  and  the 
bill  failed  by  a vote  of  136  yeas  to  154  nays 
(July  13,  1892). 

Cleveland  was  again  the  Democratic  candi- 
date for  President  in  1892 ; he  was  known  to 
he  opposed  to  further  purchase  of  silver,  but 
the  campaign  was  contested  on  the  now  fa- 
miliar issue  of  tariff  reform.  The  Democrats, 
who  were  successful,  inherited  an  embarrassed 
treasury  and  were  soon  forced  to  meet  finan- 
cial difficulties  of  the  gravest  nature.  Inter- 
national trade  and  business  distrust  led  to  an 
unprecedented  demand  for  redemption  of  treas- 
ury notes.  Although  silver  advocates  argued 
that  redemption  of  the  new  notes  of  1890 
might  be  made  in  silver  as  well  as  in  gold,  the 
administration  asserted  that  in  order  “to  keep 
the  public  faith  and  to  preserve  the  parity 
between  gold  and  silver,”  redemption  must  be 
made  in  gold,  if  so  desired.  But  the  gold  re- 
serve was  perilously  near  exhaustion.  In 
May,  1893,  there  was  a panic,  and  Congress  was 
called  to  meet  in  special  session  in  August. 

Cessation  of  Silver  Coinage  (1893). — 
It  was  Cleveland’s  conviction  that  the  first  im- 
perative step  to  check  further  financial  disaster 
was  the  repeal  of  the  Sherman  Act.  Influenced 
by  the  commercial  and  industrial  distress 


310 


SILVER  COINAGE  CONTROVERSY 


which  prevailed  throughout  the  country,  the 
House  followed  his  leadership,  but  the  Senate 
was  more  obstinate.  Only  after  two  months 
of  debate  was  repeal  achieved.  Silver  advo- 
cates even  then  surrendered  on  the  pledge  that 
another  effort  should  be  made  to  secure  bimet- 
allism through  international  agreement.  The 
silver  party,  however,  was  aroused-  to  bitter 
exasperation  by  the  administration’s  policy  in 
selling  bonds  for  gold.  Claims  of  betrayal 
were  freely  made.  The  Republicans  were  still 
divided;  many  countenanced  silver  in  ambigu- 
ous terms  of  bimetallism.  A yet  larger  wing 
of  the  Democratic  party  explicitly  demanded 
free  coinage  by  the  United  States,  without  any 
qualifications  or  conditions  involving  action  by 
other  countries. 

The  Republicans  in  their  national  convention 
in  1896  opposed  free  coinage  of  silver  except 
by  international  agreement,  but  this  lack  of 
decisive  recognition  of  silver  led  to  a split  in 
the  party.  In  the  Democratic  convention  the 
free  coinage  advocates  gained  complete  control. 
Moved  by  the  fire  and  eloquence  of  a dele- 
gate from  Nebraska,  William  J.  Bryan,  the 
convention  gave  to  him  the  presidential  nomi- 
nation in  preference  to  Bland  of  Missouri,  who 
had  championed  the  cause  for  twenty  years. 
This  unqualified  championship  of  free  coinage 
created  divisions  within  the  Democratic  party, 
just  as  negative  action  had  caused  dissension 
among  the  Republicans.  The  Republicans  won 
the  election,  but  as  the  tariff  was  once  more 
made  the  foremost  issue  in  their  campaign, 
their  victory  did  not  mean  the  cessation  of  the 
silver  contest.  Advocates  of  the  gold  standard, 
however,  now  took  the  more  agressive  stand, 
and  endeavored  to  secure  legislation  which 
would  definitely  settle  the  status  of  silver  and 
gold  respectively. 

A monetary  convention  held  at  Indianapolis 
in  1897  led  to  the  preparation  of  a report  and 
bill  widely  circulated,  whereby  gold  was  to  be 
made  the  sole  standard;  the  coinage  of  silver 
dollars  (still  required  when  treasury  notes 
of  1890  were  redeemed)  to  cease;  and  silver 
dollars  to  be  redeemed  in  gold.  The  Republi- 
cans gradually  were  convinced  that  it  was 
impossible  to  secure  bimetallism  by  interna- 
tional agreement,  and  that  further  efforts  in 
behalf  of  silver  were  unpolitic ; and  consequent- 
ly in  1900  (March  14)  there  was  passed  a 
Gold  Standard  Act,  based  in  part  on  the 
measure  proposed  by  the  Indianapolis  conven- 
tion. Under  this  act,  gold  was  made  the  sole 
standard  and  the  coinage  of  silver  dollars  was 
stopped.  It  was  generally  agreed  that  by  this 
definitive  action  the  silver  question  was  finally 
disposed  of.  Revival  of  business,  dating  from 
1897,  and  an  increased  production  of  gold 
available  for  the  monetary  medium,  contrib- 
uted to  this  belief. 

International  Discussion. — What  were  the 
principal  arguments  and  forces  which  controlled 
the  agitation  over  a period  of  twenty-five  years? 


(1)  It  is  to  be  noted  that  the  special  plea  for 
free  coinage  of  silver  came  at  a time  when  there 
was  a world-wide  movement  to  make  a large 
place  for  silver  under  international  agreement. 
By  1865  the  gold  discoveries  in  California  and 
Australia  had  spent  their  force,  and  gold 
ceased  to  fall  in  value  as  measured  in  silver. 
The  expansion  of  trade  brought  about  by  rail- 
way and  steamship  development  necessitated 
an  enlarged  medium  of  currency;  and  even 
England  was  willing  to  listen  to  proposals  for 
use  of  silver.  The  arguments  in  favor  of  in- 
ternational bimetallism  are  well  represented 
in  the  writings  of  Francis  A.  Walker  and  S. 
Dana  Horton.  Though  the  effort  was  unsuc- 
cessful, its  supporters  in  dwelling  upon  its 
desirability,  furnished  the  free  coinage  party 
in  the  United  States  with  a wealth  of  argu- 
ment, although  often  illogical  in  its  applica- 
tion, to  the  adoption  of  bimetallism  by  one 
country  alone. 

Inflation. — (2)  A conviction  was  wide 
spread  that  the  contraction  of  the  currency  at 
the  close  of  the  Civil  War  was  responsible  for 
the  fall  of  prices  in  this  country,  and  that  pub- 
lic interest  demanded  an  increase  in  the  mone- 
tary medium  in  order  to  counteract  this  ten- 
dency. The  greenback  movement  was  the  earl- 
ier manifestation  of  this  reasoning;  when  de- 
feated, its  advocates  willingly  turned  to  silver 
coinage  as  a possible  agency  of  relief.  It  was 
patriotically  declared  that  the  United  States 
could  direct  economic  influences  and  results 
by  its  own  individual  action;  and  that  it  was 
unnecessary  to  wait  on  the  action  of  other  na- 
tions. England,  whose  cooperation  was  held 
essential  by  international  bimetallists,  would 
never,  it  was  asserted,  participate  in  any  agree- 
ment for  an  increase  in  the  world’s  money ; 
as  a creditor  nation,  it  was  to  her  interest 
that  prices  should  remain  low.  It  was  folly 
to  postpone  action,  for  the  chains  of  bondage 
were  forged  so  much  the  tighter. 

Sentiment. — (3)  Associated  with  this  argu- 
ment for  an  American  policy  was  the  appeal 
to  historical  precedent.  Silver,  it  was  said, 
was  recognized  in  the  Constitution;  the  first 
mint  law  provided  for  its  coinage.  Much  sen- 
timent was  devoted  to  the  “dollar  of  our 
daddies”  (see). 

Crime  of  ’73. — (4)  Of  minor  importance, 
though  undoubtedly  of  much  popular  influence, 
was  the  claim  that  demonetization  was  ac- 
complished in  1873  by  underhand  methods. 
This  claim  was  enlarged  upon  until  finally  it 
became  common  to  refer  to  the  “Crime  of 
1873.”  It  was  freely  asserted  that  the  fram- 
ers of  the  mint  act  of  that  year  had  entered 
into  a conspiracy  with  creditor  capitalists,  here 
and  abroad,  in  order  to  change  the  standard 
of  value  and  thus  impose  a heavy  burden  upon 
the  debtor  class.  For  years  there  was  much 
bickering  and  dispute  over  the  record  of  the 
participants  in  the  legislation  of  1873,  charges 
and  countercharges  being  made  of  inconsis- 


311 


SILVER  GRAYS— SINKING  FUND 


tency,  ignorance,  and  deceit.  Although  inves- 
tigation shows  that  there  was  no  deception, 
and  that  representatives  from  silver  producing 
states  acquiesced  with  knowledge  of  the  pur- 
port of  the  act,  the  charge  of  conspiracy  was 
readily  accepted  by  large  numbers  in  the  South 
and  West,  who  were  struggling  against  the 
odds  of  indebtedness  occasioned  by  the  Civil 
War  and  the  settlement  of  new  lands. 

Popular  Literature. — (5)  In  the  later  years 
of  the  controversy  a small  book  written  in 
simple  language  with  striking  illustrations, 
entitled  Coin’s  Financial  School,  by  William 
H.  Harvey,  had  an  enormous  circulation,  and 
widespread  influence.  This  and  a flood  of 
pamphlet  literature  helped  to  prepare  the  way 
for  the  dramatic  campaign  carried  on  by 
Bryan  in  1896.  The  advocates  of  silver  dwelt 
not  only  upon  the  wrongs  of  the  people  but 
took  the  aggressive  in  a theory  of  monetary 
science  based  upon  the  simplest  form  of  the 
quantity  theory  of  money.  The  steady  decline 
in  the  production  of  gold,  and  the  fall  in 
prices  gave  strong  support  to  such  reasoning. 
From  such  data  advocates  of  international 
bimetallism  drew  their  arguments,  so  that  by 
implication  the  free  silver  party  greatly 
strengthened  its  position. 

Sectional  Feeling. — (6)  The  controversy  was 
in  a large  measure  sectional.  Silver  found 
its  support  in  the  South  and  West,  the  section 
in  which  farm  products  predominated,  and  in 
which  per  capita  indebtedness  was  greatest. 
At  heart  the  East  was  in  favor  of  the  gold 
standard,  though  at  times  eastern  states,  from 
motives  of  political  expediency,  showed  sympa- 
thy with  the  silver  advocacy,  in  their  party 
platforms.  In  fact,  to  a large  degree,  the 
silver  sentiment  was  sustained  by  those  who 
believed  that  the  fiscal  system  of  the  gov- 
ernment was  such  as  to  give  advantages 
to  the  East  over  the  West;  and  that  free 
silver  would  aid  to  restore  the  balance. 

See  Bland- Allison  Silver  Act;  Bullion; 
Coinage  and  Specie  Currency;  Coinage, 
Free;  Coinage,  Subsidiary;  Crime  of  ’73; 
Dollar  of  Our  Daddies  ; Gold  Reserve  ; Mul- 
tiple Standard;  Seigniorage;  Sherman  Sil- 
ver Act;  Silver  Certificates;  Sixteen  to 
One;  Trade  Dollars. 

References;  A.  B.  Hepburn,  Hist,  of  Coinage 
and  Currency  in  the  U.  S.  (1903),  274-319, 
363-394;  F.  W.  Taussig,  Silver  Situation 
(1892)  ; F.  A.  Walker,  International  Bimetal- 
lism (1896)  ; J.  L.  Lauglilin,  History  of  Bime- 
tallism in  the  U.  S.  (4th  ed.,  1897);  E.  B. 
Andrews,  “An  Honest  Dollar”  in  Am.  Econ. 
Assoc.,  Publications,  1889;  New  York  Reform 
Club,  Sound  Currency  (1894-1910),  I-X;  W. 
H.  Harvey,  Coin’s  Financial  School  (1894); 
First  National  Silver  Convention,  Proceedings, 
1889;  W.  J.  Bryan,  First  Battle  (1897);  D. 
R.  Dewey,  National  Problems  (1907),  76-80, 
220-237/252-276,  314-328. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 


SILVER  GRAYS.  The  name  given  to  Whigs 
of  the  Fillmore  stripe  in  New  York  in  1850, 
as  distinguished  henceforth  from  Seward 
Whigs.  Fillmore,  as  President,  had  approved 
the  Compromise  of  1850,  which  Seward  op- 
posed in  the  Senate,  desiring  California’s  ad- 
mission as  a free  State  without  compacts  con- 
cerning slavery.  At  the  Whig  convention  of 
September,  in  Syracuse,  resolutions  were 
adopted  which,  though  loyally  expressed 
toward  the  President,  approved  the  course 
which  Seward  had  taken;  whereupon  forty 
voters  in  the  minority  left  the  convention  and 
held  a separate  one  at  Utica.  These  seceders 
nominated  the  same  state  ticket,  with  Wash- 
ington Hunt  for  governor.  See  Whig  Party. 
Reference:  J.  Schouler,  Hist,  of  V.  S.  (1891), 
V,  208.  J.  S. 

SILVER  PARTY.  In  1896  there  were 
several  parties  in  existence  in  addition  to 
the  well-known  and  long-established  parties. 
Among  these  was  the  Silver  party,  largely 
made  up  of  Silver  Republicans  (see).  The 
party  held  a convention  at  St.  Louis,  Missouri, 
July  22,  1896,  and  nominated  William  J. 
Bryan  and  Arthur  Sewall,  the  candidates  put 
forward  by  the  Democrats  in  their  convention 
of  two  weeks  before.  They  demanded  the  un- 
restricted coinage  of  silver  and  gold  at  the 
ratio  of  16  to  1.  See  Democratic  Party;  Re- 
publican Party;  Silver  Coinage  Contro- 
versy. A.  C.  McL. 

SILVER  REPUBLICANS.  Those  Republi- 
cans who  in  1896  followed  Senator  Teller  and 
other  western  leaders  in  opposition  to  the  gold 
policy  of  the  main  body  of  the  party.  They 
supported  Mr.  Bryan  for  the  presidency  and, 
partly  at  least,  were  absorbed  by  the  Demo- 
cratic party.  See  Democratic  Party;  Repub- 
lican Party;  Silver  Coinage  Controversy; 
Silver  Party;  Teller  Resolutions.  Refer- 
ence: J.  A.  Woodburn,  Pol.  Parties  and  Party 
Problems  (1903),  115-132.  A.  C.  McL. 

SINEWS  OF  WAR.  A phrase  used  in  its 
political  signification  to  denote  the  pecuniary 
resources  furnished,  usually  by  the  business 
magnates,  to  the  campaign  committees  to  fi- 
nance a political  campaign.  O.  C.  H. 

SINGLE  STANDARD.  See  Bimetallism 
Monometallism;  Standard  Money. 

SINGLE  TAX.  See  Tax,  Single. 

SINKING  FUND.  A sinking  fund  as  orig- 
inally devised  is  a portion  of  a public  debt 
purchased  by  the  government  responsible  for 
the  debt,  and  set  aside  as  a separate  fund  to 
increase  by  annual  interest  increments,  and 
finally  to  be  applied  to  the  extinction  of  the 
debt.  Originally  it  was  supposed  that  there 
was  a direct  financial  profit  in  the  use  of  this 
312 


SIXTEEN  TO  ONE— SLAUGHTER  HOUSE  CASES 


device,  so  that  indebtedness  might  be  safely 
incurred.  A small  percentage  of  debt  owned 
by  the  government  would,  it  was  argued, 
through  the  operation  of  compound  interest, 
in  the  course  of  time  equal  the  original  prin- 
cipal of  the  debt.  The  fallacy  of  the  argument 
lay  in  neglect  to  recognize  that  interest  on  the 
debt,  whether  held  by  individual  investors  or 
by  the  government  treasury,  must  be  met  by 
taxation;  and  that  as  long  as  the  debt  was 
in  existence  the  public  was  burdened.  In  other 
words,  a sinking  fund  has  no  power  of  in- 
dependent production  of  wealth. 

While  it  is  now  agreed  that  debt  can  be 
extinguished  only  by  taxation,  it  is  generally 
held  to  be  expedient,  when  creating  a debt,  to 
establish  a fund  which  shall  be  inviolably 
pledged  for  the  redemption  of  the  debt.  Ac- 
cordingly, it  is  common  practice  to  provide 
that  a certain  percentage  of  a debt  should  be 
annually  purchased;  and  that  in  addition  to 
this  the  interest  on  so  much  of  the  debt  as  has 
been  heretofore  redeemed  shall  be  pledged. 
The  term  “sinking  fund”  may  also  be  applied 
in  a still  freer  use  to  any  fund  which  is 
created  for  the  extinction  of  debt. 

The  sinking  fund  was  first  introduced  into 
the  English  financial  system,  by  Pitt,  under 
the  influence  of  the  writings  of  Robert  Hamil- 
ton. Alexander  Hamilton,  first  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury,  adopted  this  precedent  in  a 
modified  form,  in  his  recommendations  of  the 
settlement  of  public  indebtedness  in  1790,  and 
Congress  followed  his  advice.  Its  use  was  also 
authorized  in  connection  with  the  loans  of  the 
Civil  War,  by  the  requirement  that  one  per 
cent  of  the  public  debt  be  purchased  annually. 
These  provisions,  however,  were  disregarded, 
and  debt  was  extinguished  according  to  the 
size  of  the  surplus  and  the  state  of  the  bond 
market.  Moreover,  Secretary  McCullough, 
when  bonds  were  purchased,  cancelled  the  ob- 
ligations immediately  without  resort  to  the 
maintenance  of  a separate  fund,  and  this 
method  was  authorized  by  the  funding  act  of 
1870.  Notwithstanding  the  adoption  of  extinc- 
tion of  indebtedness  by  cancellation  rather 
than  by  the  establishment  of  a separate  fund, 
federal  statutes  and  treasury  practice  still  re- 
fer to  sinking  fund  requirements. 

The  use  of  distinct  sinking  funds  has  been 
often  adopted  by  states  and  municipalities  in 
the  management  of  local  financial  systems.  In 
some  states  its  use  is  imposed  by  constitutional 
requirements.  The  indebtedness  purchased, 
however,  for  such  funds  is  not  always  the  same 
security  as  that  of  the  debt  to  be  extinguished, 
but  often  consists  of  other  securities  issued  by 
the  given  state  or  city.  As  new  indebtedness 
is  constantly  created,  this  opportunity  is  al- 
ways open ; and  the  government  concerned  may 
thus  buy  its  own  new  obligations  to  satisfy 
its  requirements  of  the  sinking  fund.  In  re- 
cent years  the  use  of  serial  bonds  has  been 
advocated  as  a substitute.  By  this  system  the 


bonds  are  issued  with  varying  dates  of  ma- 
turity, so  that  in  each  year  a certain  number 
will  be  redeemed  without  the  contingency  of 
the  payment  of  a premium. 

See  Debt,  Public,  Administration  of  ; Debt, 
Public,  Funding  of. 

References:  C.  C.  Plehn,  Introduction  to 
Public  Finance  (1909),  406-414;  E.  A.  Ross, 
“Sinking  Fund”  in  Amer.  Econ.  Assoc.,  Publi- 
cations, VII  (1892),  311-416. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

SIXTEEN  TO  ONE.  This  phrase  refers  to 
the  ratio  between  silver  and  gold  which  the 
advocates  of  silver  during  the  controversy 
1875  to  1900,  desired  to  establish  in  a bime- 
tallic standard.  It  was  quite  generally  be- 
lieved that  this  was  the  ratio  adopted  under 
the  mint  act  of  1793,  and  that  a return  to 
complete  bimetallism  would  be  a patriotic  en- 
dorsement of  the  wisdom  of  the  first  statesmen 
of  the  Republic.  The  original  ratio,  however, 
was  15  to  1,  the  change  to  16  to  1 being 
brought  about  by  the  acts  of  1834  and  1837. 
See  Silver  Coinage  Controversy.  D.  R.  D. 

SIXTEENTH  AMENDMENT.  On  July  31, 
1909,  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States,  having  been  passed  by  the  re- 
quisite two-thirds  vote  of  both  houses  of  Con- 
gress, was  deposited  in  the  office  of  the  Secre- 
tary of  State.  It  is  worded  as  follows: 

The  Congress  shall  have  power  to  lay  and  collect 
taxes  on  incomes,  from  whatever  source  derived, 
without  apportionment  among  the  several  States 
and  without  regard  to  any  census  or  enumeration. 

The  purpose  of  this  amendment  was  to  avoid 
the  necessity  of  distributing  direct  taxes  among 
the  states  in  accordance  with  their  respective 
populations.  There  has  been  some  objection 
to  the  form  of  the  amendment  on  the  ground 
that  the  words  “from  whatever  source  derived” 
might  be  construed  to  empower  the  United 
States  government  to  tax  the  bonds  of  states 
and  municipalities,  and  other  properties  of 
that  kind,  and  thus  greatly  increase  the  possi- 
bility of  concentration  of  power  and  authority 
in  the  National  Government.  Feb.  3,  1913,  Wy- 
oming and  Delaware  ratified  the  Amendment, 
making  one  more  than  the  necessary  three- 
fourths.  It  was  declared  in  force  Feb.  25, 
1913.  See  Tax,  Income;  Taxation;  Taxes, 
Direct.  A.  G.  McL. 

SLAUGHTER  HOUSE  CASES.  The  Slaugh 

ter  House  Cases  (16  Wallace  36)  are  a group 
of  cases  decided  by  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court  in  1873,  which  obtained  their  name  from 
the  fact  that  they  involved  the  constitution- 
ality of  a law  of  the  state  of  Louisiana  which 
chartered  a certain  company  and  gave  to  it 
exclusive  rights  to  establish  and  maintain 
stockyards  and  slaughter  houses  for  the  city 
of  New  Orleans,  and  provided  that  all  ani- 
mals intended  for  food  should  be  slaughtered 


313 


SLAVE  TRADE 


therein.  This  law  was  attacked  upon  the 
grounds  that,  in  violation  of  the  Thirteenth 
Amendment  (see)  of  the  Constitution,  it  cre- 
ated an  involuntary  servitude  of  those  who 
were  impelled  to  make  use  of  the  establish- 
ments of  the  company;  and  that,  in  violation 
of  the  Fourteenth  Amendment  (see),  it  denied 
to  them  the  equal  protection  of  the  laws,  de- 
prived them  of  property  without  due  process 
of  law  (see  Due  Process  of  Law),  and  also 
abridged  the  privileges  and  immunities  of  cit- 
izens of  the  United  States.  The  first  of  these 
claims  was  easily  disposed  of,  the  court,  though 
admitting  that  “servitude”  (see)  has  a broader 
meaning  than  “slavery,”  declined  to  extend  its 
meaning  so  as  to  include  the  obligations  creat- 
ed by  such  an  administrative  regulation  as 
was  here  involved.  The  claims  that  equal  pro- 
tection of  the  laws  was  denied  (see  Equality 
before  the  Law  ) , and  that  property  was 
taken  without  due  process  of  law,  were  dis- 
missed with  slight  argument,  the  court  ob- 
serving that  they  had  not,  indeed,  been  much 
pressed  by  the  plaintiffs.  The  really  important 
question  in  the  cases  was  whether,  by  the  act 
of  Louisiana,  any  privileges  or  immunities  of 
citizens  of  the  United  States  were  abridged, 
for  if  it  should  be  held  that  such  rights  as 
were  involved  were  federal  ones,  it  would  fol- 
low that  practically  the  entire  body  of  the 
civil  rights  of  all  citizens  would  be  transferred 
to  the  protection  of  the  Federal  Government, 
and  that,  under  the  operation  of  the  enforce- 
ment clause  of  the  Fourteenth  Amendment, 
this  entire  domain  of  private  law,  previously 
belonging  exclusively  to  the  states,  could  be 
brought  within  the  regulative  control  and  leg- 
islative definition  of  Congress.  It  is  not  sur- 
prising, therefore,  that  Justice  Miller,  who  ren- 
dered the  opinion  for  the  majority  of  the  court, 
should  have  declared  that  “No  questions  so 
far  reaching  and  pervading  in  their  conse- 
quences, so  profoundly  interesting  to  the  peo- 
ple of  this  country,  and  so  important  in  their 
bearing  upon  the  relations  of  the  United  States 
and  of  the  several  States  to  each  other,  and  to 
the  citizens  of  the  States  and  of  the  United 
States,  have  been  before  this  court  during  the 
official  life  of  any  of  its  members.”  The  court, 
in  result,  found  that  this  great  change  in  the 
character  of  our  constitutional  system  was  not 
the  intention  of  the  Fourteenth  Amendment. 
It  was  the  purpose  and  effect  of  that  addition 
to  the  Constitution,  the  court  held,  to  make 
national  citizenship  primary,  but  to  preserve 
that  citizenship  distinct  from  state  citizenship; 
and  the  privileges  and  immunities  which  it  was 
declared  might  not  be  abridged  by  the  states 
were  declared  to  be  only  those  which  are  pecul- 
iar to,  and  arise  distinctly  out  of,  the  status 
of  federal  citizenship.  These  rights  had  indeed 
been  constitutionally  secured  from  state  abridg- 
ment since  the  beginning  of  the  government, 
and,  therefore,  as  to  this  provision,  the  Four- 
teenth Amendment  was  given  only  a declara- 


tory force.  The  court  declared  it  was  obliged 
to  hold  that,  notwithstanding  the  pressure 
of  excited  feeling  growing  out  of  the  Civil  War, 
“Our  statesmen  have  still  believed  that  the  ex- 
istence of  the  States  with  powers  for  domestic 
and  local  government,  including  the  regulation 
of  civil  rights,  the  rights  of  person  and  of 
property,  was  essential  to  the  perfect  working 
of  cur  complex  form  of  government,  though 
they  have  thought  proper  to  impose  additional 
limitations  on  the  States,  and  to  confer  ad- 
ditional power  on  that  of  the  Nation.”  See 
Privileges  and  Immunities;  United  States 
as  a Federal  State;  Reconstruction.  Ref- 
erences: W.  A.  Dunning,  Reconstruction , Politi- 
cal and  Economic  (1907),  260; 'W.  W.  Will- 
oughby, Constitutional  Law  of  TJ.  S.  (1910), 
I,  177-183.  W.  W.  Willoughby. 

SLAVE  TRADE.  The  trade  in  African 
slaves,  practiced  from  antiquity  by  many  na- 
tions, was  revived  by  the  Portugese  before  the 
discovery  of  America;  introduced  into  the 
Spanish  colonies  very  soon  after  their  founda- 
tion ; taken  up  by  the  English  in  traffic  with 
the  West  Indies;  transferred  to  the  continent 
by  the  Dutch  in  1619 ; and  thereafter  prac- 
ticed with  the  English  colonies  and  later  in 
the  United  States  down  to  1861.  The  prin- 
cipal source  of  supply  was  always  the  west 
coast  of  Africa,  though  large  parts  of  the 
interior  were  bestirred  by  slave  raids,  and 
members  of  many  tribes  were  carried  down  to 
the  coast.  The  trade  was  carried  on  in  the 
small  vessels  of  the  period  often  with  great 
inhumanity;  so  that  the  loss  of  a fourth  of  the 
cargo  of  healthy  slaves  was  not  uncommon. 
By  the  Asiento  treaty  (see),  concluded  at 
Madrid  on  March  26,  1713,  the  British  for 
about  thirty  years  had  a monopoly  of  the 
trade  with  the  Spanish  colonies. 

Meanwhile  objections  to  the  trade  were  put 
forward  by  several  of  the  English  colonies, 
on  the  ground  that  it  brought  in  a dangerous 
element;  other  colonies  laid  a tax  on  importa- 
tions. The  British  Government  regularly  dis- 
allowed all  acts  of  limitations  on  a trade  very 
profitable  to  British  merchants,  particularly 
those  of  Bristol.  In  the  Association  of  1774 
the  colonists  boycotted  the  slave  trade  and 
when  the  war  broke  out  nearly  all  of  them 
forbade  the  trade  outright. 

The  Federal  Convention  of  1787  gave  Con- 
gress general  authority  to  regulate  external 
trade,  but  excepted  for  twenty  years  the  slave 
trade  in  states  which  permitted  it  (Art.  I,  Sec. 
ix,  Tf  1).  By  acts  of  1794  and  later,  Congress 
legislated  on  the  conduct  of  the  trade ; and 
in  1807  absolutely  prohibited  the  introduction 
of  slaves  in  the  United  States  after  Jan.  1, 
1808.  As  a matter  of  fact  it  was  already 
illegal  in  all  the  states  except  Georgia  and 
South  Carolina.  The  penalties  of  the  act  were 
not  sufficient  and  it  allowed  slaves  captured 
under  way  to  be  brought  here  and  sold  for  ben- 


314 


SLAVERY  AS  A LABOR  SYSTEM 


efit  of  the  government.  Therefore  in  1819  the 
slave  trade  was  declared  to  be  piracy  (after- 
ward held  not  to  be  piracy  in  the  international 
sense,  but  subject  to  the  penalties  of 
piracy  in  the  United  States  courts).  By  an 
act  of  1820  the  system  was  strengthened  and 
provision  was  made  for  carrying  captured 
slaves  back  to  Africa  in  connection  with  the 
colonization  movement  ( see  Colonization  of 
Negroes).  No  limitation  was  ever  put  by 
Congress  on  the  interstate  slave  trade,  except 
in  the  District  of  Columbia  by  the  act  of 
1850  ( see  Compromise  of  1850). 

No  further  statutes  were  passed,  but  in  1842 
by  the  so-called  cruising  convention  (see),  the 
United  States  agreed  to  furnish  part  of  the 
joint  fleet  to  cooperate  with  Great  Britain  in 
dealing  with  the  trade  on  the  African  coast. 
Neither  the  statutes  nor  the  treaties  were  suf- 
ficiently carried  out.  Cargoes  of  slaves  were 
landed  in  the  United  States  probably  every 
year;  and  though  some  vessels  were  captured, 
not  till  1862  was  any  slaver  executed  for  his 
crime.  Toward  1860  there  was  a movement 
for  reopening  the  trade  to  the  United  States. 
The  Civil  War  immediately  ended  the  illicit 
slave  trade;  and  by  treaties  with  Great  Britain 
the  United  States  joined  in  stopping  what  has 
become  throughout  the  western  world  and 
Africa  a prohibited  and  outlawed  trade. 

See  Slavery  as  a Labor  System;  Slavery 
Controversy. 

References:  W.  E.  B.  Dubois,  Suppression  of 
the  African  Slave  Trade  (1896)  ; H.  C.  Carey, 
Slave  Trade  ( 1853 ) ; A.  B.  Hart,  Slavery  and 
Abolition  (1906),  ch.  xix;  W.  H.  Collins, 
Domestic  Slave  Trade  (1904). 

Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

SLAVERY  AS  A LABOR  SYSTEM.  The 

economic  value  of  slave  labor  can  best  be 
studied  in  the  experience  of  the  United  States 
of  America.  In  the  southern  colonies,  soil  and 
climate  were  favorable  to  the  production  of 
certain  great  staples — tobacco,  rice,  cotton  and 
sugar,  crops  which  required  a large  amount  of 
low-grade  labor.  The  settlers  found  the  tillage 
of  highly  nitrogenous  and  malarial  soils  under 
a torrid  sun  distasteful,  even  dangerous,  the 
native  races  were  non-industrial,  and  free  la- 
borers were  not  available  in  sufficient  numbers. 
The  slave  traders  of  the  Gold  Coast,  however, 
furnished  an  apparently  inexhaustible  supply 
of  laborers  inured  to  tropic  climates,  and  ca- 
pable of  such  unintelligent  muscular  exertion 
as  was  required  for  one-crop  agriculture.  Slav- 
ery, originally  adopted  as  a temporary  neces- 
sity, was  accepted  as  a permanent  policy,  once 
its  profit-producing  quality  came  to  be  realized. 
Slave  labor  was  entitled  to  no  recompense  be- 
yond mere  sustenance,  the  cost  of  which  was 
slight,  and  the  whole  surplus  product  accrued 
to  the  owner  of  the  means  of  production. 

Advantages. — The  peculiar  advantage  of  the 
slave  owner  was  demonstrated  in  the  rapid 
118 


exploitation  of  the  south  Atlantic  and  Gulf 
states  by  comparison  with  the  relatively  slow 
progress  of  the  frontier  across  the  Northwest 
Territory.  The  pioneer  farmer,  with  his  quar- 
ter section  of  land  and  his  “hired  man,”  was 
usually  able  to  maintain  his  family  and  ac- 
cumulate a moderate  property;  but  the  planter 
who  brought  a gang  of  slaves  to  the  Tombigbee 
or  Yazoo  River  managed  to  clear  the  forest, 
plant  the  stump-encumbered  fields  and  ship  a 
boat-load  of  cotton  to  market  within  two  years. 
Undisputed  control  of  a body  of  laborers  that 
might  be  shifted  at  will  from  one  employment 
to  another  was  a factor  of  prime  importance 
in  the  production  of  cotton,  sugar  and  rice. 
The  working  force  might  be  brought  to  bear 
on  the  several  processes  in  turn.  Slaves  were 
unintelligent  and  prone  to  shirk;  but  the  range 
of  their  capacities  was  sufficient  for  the  needs 
of  the  plantation,  and  overseers  and  drivers 
were  relied  upon  to  keep  them  at  work. 

Slave  labor  was  most  remunerative  on  the 
great  plantation  and  under  wholesale  methods 
of  production.  Since  one  overseer  could  direct 
from  fifty  to  one  hundred  slaves,  and  one  slave 
could  work  five  acres  of  cotton,  the  ideal  ratio 
was  one  overseer  to  one  hundred  slaves  and. 
five  hundred  acres  of  tilled  land.  Moreover, 
the  possession  of  rice  mill,  cotton  gin  or  sugar- 
house,  together  with  superior  transportation 
facilities,  gave  the  wealthy  planter  an  advan-, 
tage  which  rendered  it  difficult  for  the  small 
farmer  to  sell  in  the  same  market.  The  “poor 
whites”  were  forced  to  sell  their  lands  and 
retreat  to  the  mountains  or  the  pine  barrens. 
By  1860  the  typical  agricultural  unit  of  the 
Gulf  states  was  the  great  plantation,  people^ 
by  slaves  and  run  by  an  overseer  responsible 
to  a landowner  who  was  often  an  absentee. 
That  the  system  was  a profitable  one  for  the 
planters  is  evident  from  the  rapid  increase  of 
the  per  capita  wealth  (including  slaves)  of 
the  south  central  section. 

Economic  Disadvantages. — By  1840,  the  dis- 
advantages of  slavery  were  becoming  painfully 
apparent.  Slave  labor  was  reluctant,  unskill- 
ful and  wanting  in  versatility,  because,  work- 
ing under  compulsion  and  with  no  hope  of 
betterment,  the  slave  felt  little  inducement  to 
put  forth  energy  or  intelligence.  Absence  of 
responsibility  resulted  in  incorrigible  careless- 
ness, so  that  the  maltreatment  of  draft  ani- 
mals, the  breakage  of  tools,  the  waste  of  ma- 
terials, made  up  a considerable  element  in  the 
cost  of  carrying  on  agriculture  by  slave  la- 
bor. Machinery  and  high-grade  tools  could 
not  safely  be  entrusted  to  slaves.  The  acreage 
value  of  farm  implements  in  the  South  in 
1860  was  less  than  half  that  in  the  northern 
states,  and  the  statistics  of  live  stock  show 
a like  disparity.  Olmsted  on  a careful  com- 
putation came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  ordi- 
nary achievement  of  one  hired  laborer  was 
equivalent  to  that  of  four  slaves.  In  cost  to 
the  employer,  he  found  little  difference  between 


315 


SLAVERY  CONTROVERSY 


the  bondman  and  the  free.  In  New  York,  a 
farm  laborer  might  be  had  for  $110  a year 
with  board,  and  in  Virginia  the  customary 
hire  of  a slave  was  $100  with  board  and  clothes. 

Effect  on  Industrial  Development. — The  non- 
economic quality  of  slave  labor  became  appar- 
ent, first  in  the  south  Atlantic  states,  later 
on  the  Gulf  coast  and  finally  in  Texas,  by  the 
slow  but  sure  exhaustion  of  the  soil.  Under 
the  slave  regime,  there  was  no  attempt  at  con- 
servation, for  rotation  of  crops,  contour  plow- 
ing, and  scientific  fertilization  were  alike  im- 
practicable. The  exploitation  of  labor  was  no 
less  evident.  The  reputation  of  an  overseer, 
his  position  and  his  salary  were  determined 
by  his  crop  showing,  and  he  was  tempted  to 
drive  his  working  force  to  the  limit  of  endur- 
ance, assured  that  the  losses  from  sickness  and 
death  would  be  made  good  by  the  purchase  of 
new  slaves. 

Finally  the  lack  of  skill  and  versatility  in 
slave  labor  condemned  the  South  to  extensive 
agriculture  and  the  slipshod  methods  of  the 
frontier.  Diversification  of  crops  was  un- 
profitable, by-industries  were  neglected,  even 
the  effort  to  raise  sufficient  food  for  slave  ra- 
tions was  abandoned.  Fresh  slaves  from  Vir- 
ginia and  Kentucky,  dry  goods  from  New  Eng- 


land, farm  implements  from  Pennsylvania, 
flour  and  bacon  from  the  commonwealths  be- 
yond the  Ohio,  drained  the  financial  resources 
of  the  South,  and  there  was  little  surplus  to 
invest  in  railroads,  mines  or  manufactures. 
Before  the  collapse  of  the  slave  regime,  it  was 
evident  to  disinterested  observers  that  the  pros- 
perity of  the  slave  states  was  fictitious.  Many 
estates  were  heavily  mortgaged,  and  the  stand- 
ard of  living  both  for  planters  and  poor  whites 
was  far  inferior  to  that  of  corresponding  class- 
es in  the  free  states. 

See  Economic  History  of  the  United 
States  ; Labor  and  Wages  ; Peonage  ; Slav- 
ery Controversy;  South. 

References:  U.  B.  Phillips,  ‘'Plantation  and 
Frontier,  1049-1863,”  in  Documentary  Hist,  of 
Am.  Society  (1910),  I,  II;  J.  D.  B.  DeBow, 
Industrial  Resources  of  the  Southern  and 
Western  States  (1852)  ; Robert  Russell,  North 
America,  Its  Agriculture  and  Climate  (1857)  ; 
F.  L.  Olmsted,  Journeys  and  Explorations  vn 
the  Cotton  Kingdom  (1861),  Seaboard  Slave 
States  (1856)  ; G.  P.  Kettell,  Southern  Wealth 
and  Northern  Profits  (1860)  ; W.  E.  B.  Du 
Bois,  “Negro  Farmer”  in  Bureau  of  Commerce 
and  Labor,  Bulletin , No.  8,  1903. 

Katherine  Coman. 


SLAVERY  CONTROVERSY 


Genesis  of  American  Slavery. — Slavery  is 
older  than  history,  precedes  all  forms  of  or- 
ganized government,  and  is  associated  with  the 
earliest  ideas  of  property.  Conflicts  between 
the  master  and  the  bondman,  and  also  between 
the  slaveholder  and  the  freeman  who  has  no 
slaves,  have  proceeded  unceasingly  for  ages. 
When  the  first  settlers  landed  in  Jamestown 
chattel  slavery  had  practically  ceased  in  Eng- 
land, and  even  villeinage  had  almost  died  out 
The  colonists  brought  with  them  that  equality 
before  the  law  which  was  the  greatest  contri- 
bution of  the  English  race  to  law  and  govern- 
ment up  to  that  time. 

To  these  great  principles  there  were  from  the 
beginning  exceptions.  (1)  Life  convicts  were 
practically  slaves  for  life  and  had  the  slave’s 
experiences.  (2)  Slavery  of  infidels  was  still 
acknowledged  as  proper  among  Christian  pow- 
ers, and  the  American  colonists  North  and 
South,  speedily  began  to  make  captives  of  their 
Indian  enemies  and  to  buy  and  sell  them  as 
commodities.  (3)  A few  negroes,  commonly 
called  blackamoors,  were  held  as  slaves  in 
England.  (4)  In  1619  the  first  purchase  of 
negro  slaves  was  made  by  the  Virginians. 

With  the  single  but  vital  exception  that  the 
children  of  indentured  and  convict  servants 
were  free,  the  curse  of  slavery  also  rested  upon 
thousands  of  white  persons  in  the  colonies. 
Either  as  a penalty  for  crime,  or  by  tbeir  ac- 


ceptance of  a formal  written  obligation  or  in- 
denture (see),  the  service  of  these  people  was 
delivered  over  to  masters  and  mistresses  for  a 
term  of  years  or  for  life.  The  legislation  of 
the  colonies  authorized  for  such  persons  whip- 
pings and  brandings  and  recovery  by  force  if 
they  ran  away. 

Indian  slavery  was  everywhere  practiced, 
though  limited  by  the  Indians  in  dying  in  bond- 
age without  leaving  a sufficient  offspring;  and 
by  danger  of  furnishing  examples  to  powerful 
tribes  like  the  Six  Nations,  who  knew  how  to 
make  slaves  of  their  white  prisoners.  After 
the  Revolution  the  slavery  of  Indians  who  had 
no  negro  blood  was  considered  illegal  and  be- 
came very  uncommon. 

Colonial  Anti-Slavery. — Indentured  service 
and  Indian  slavery  gave  way  before  the  growth 
of  negro  slavery.  Alongside  the  desire  to  make 
a profit  out  of  the  slaves’  labor  was  a dim  idea 
of  advancing  Christianity  by  bringing  these 
heathen  under  its  influence.  The  contrast 
early  attracted  the  attention  of  humane  colon’ 
ists,  and  the  earliest  protest  against  negro 
slavery  was  that  of  William  Usselinx  in  his 
plan  for  a Swedish  colony  in  1624.  The  Mass- 
achusetts Body  of  Liberties  of  1641  forbade 
“bond  slaverie,  villeinage  or  Captivitie  amongst 
us  unless  it  be  lawfull  Captives  taken  in  just 
warres  and  such  strangers  as  willingly  selle 
themselves  or  are  sold  to  us.”  There  was  a 


316 


SLAVERY  CONTROVERSY 


similar  Rhode  Island  statute  in  1652.  From 
the  first,  therefore,  some  colonists  felt  a dis- 
like of  slavery  and  particularly  of  African 
slavery,  and  made  efforts  to  impede  it  by  law. 
In  Georgia,  from  1732  to  1749,  slavery  was  pro- 
hibited; Oglethorpe  said  it  was  against  the 
gospel,  as  well  as  the  fundamental  law  of  Eng- 
land. Nevertheless  slavery  everywhere  con- 
tinued and  was  legal  in  every  colony  at  the 
time  of  the  Revolution. 

Where  was  the  church  in  this  controversy 
as  to  the  relations  of  immortal  men?  One  re- 
ligious body,  the  Quakers,  beginning  with  the 
famous  Germantown  Protest  of  1688,  did  grad- 
ually put  itself  on  record  as  opposed  to  slavery, 
and  some  Congregational  ists  refused  fellow- 
ship to  slaveholders;  but  the  great  national 
churches,  the  Congregational,  the  Protestant 
Episcopal,  Catholic,  Presbyterian,  Dutch  and 
German  churches  accepted  the  system  as  they 
found  it;  and  no  powerful  organized  church, 
except  the  Northern  Methodists,  held  slave- 
holding inconsistent  with  its  rules. 

In  the  nature  of  things,  however,  slavery 
aroused  from  the  beginning  the  protest  of 
reformers,  most  of  whom  were  ministers  of  the 
gospel.  Roger  Williams,  in  1637,  vainly  ob- 
jected to  the  enslavement  of  the  Pequots.  John 
Eliot  and  Cotton  Mather  publicly  urged  the 
humane  treatment  of  slaves.  Richard  Bax- 
ter, perhaps  the  most  widely  read  English  theo- 
logian of  his  time,  held  that  slaves  “are  rea- 
sonable creatures  as  well  as  you,  and  born  with 
us  with  natural  liberty.”  Samuel  Sewall,  par- 
son and  judge,  in  1700  in  his  tract,  The  Sell- 
ing of  Joseph,  declared  that  “originally  and 
naturally  there  is  no  such  thing  as  slavery.” 
In  1701  the  town  of  Boston  instructed  its  rep- 
resentatives to  favor  putting  “a  period  to  ne- 
groes being  slaves.”  Later  the  Yankee  par- 
son, Nathaniel  Appleton,  of  Cambridge,  the 
Quakers,  Ralph  Sandiford  and  Benjamin  Lay, 
the  French  Huguenot,  Benezet,  all  engaged  in  a 
propaganda  against  slavery;  and  the  gentle 
Quaker,  John  Woolman,  traveled  far  and  wide 
urging  his  fellow  religionists  to  emancipate 
their  slaves. 

Objections  to  Slavery. — (1)  Down  to  the 
Revolution  the  argument  against  slavery  that 
was  most  pressed  was  its  opposition  to  the 
spirit  of  the  gospel,  its  oppression  of  the 
weak.  The  Revolution  emphasized  an  argu- 
ment (not  overlooked  before)  that  slavery  was 
contrary  to  natural  political  rights. 

(2)  The  success  of  the  Revolution,  the  grav- 
ing in  the  minds  of  Americans  of  the  Declara- 
tion of  Independence  (see)  with  its  assertion 
that  “all  men  are  created  equal,”  and  they  are 
endowed  with  inalienable  rights,  life,  liberty 
and  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  forever  strength- 
ened this  political  argument,  which  was  made 
the  stronger  by  the  fact  that  in  several  of  the 
colonies  a free  negro  stood  on  substantially 
the  same  basis  as  a free  white  man,  and  could 
exercise  the  suffrage  (see). 


(3)  Another  objection  was  the  social,  and 
economical  wastefulness  of  slavery,  its  culture 
of  indifference,  indolence,  and  disregard  of 
others’  interests.  This  economic  argument  had 
great  weight  in  communities  where  slaves  were 
few,  and  the  system  could  be  choked  out  with- 
out serious  disturbance.  Hence,  during,  and 
immediately  after,  the  Revolution,  came  a peri- 
od of  emancipatipn  by  the  northern  states, 
mostly  a gradual  process  (see  Emancipation 
by  States)  which  by  1804  had  committed 
every  community  north  of  Maryland  to  the 
principle  of  no  slavery.  Those  acts  were  great- 
ly strengthened  by  the  federal  Ordinance  of 
1787,  establishing  gradual  emancipation  for  the 
Northwest  Territory,  an  act  reaffirmed  bv  the 
Federal  Congress  in  1789. 

Eighteenth  Century  Societies. — These  state 
enactments  were  urged  by,  and  in  some  cases 
scured  by  formal  organizations  of  opponents  to 
slavery.  Long  before  the  Revolution,  several 
of  the  colonies  tried  to  stop  the  slave  trade, 
though  it  is  hard  to  understand  the  efforts 
to  set  up  a moral  distinction  between  slave 
trading  and  slave  holding;  if  either  was  right 
or  allowable  the  other  was;  if  either  was  cruel, 
unchristian  and  hurtful  to  the  community, 
the  other  was.  In  1775  the  anti-slavery  peo- 
ple of  Pennsylvania  formed  the  first  society; 
for  a time  it  was  inactive,  but  the  agitators  by 
petitions  and  by  influence  in  the  legislature, 
sought  first  to  protect  free  people  of  color, 
and  then  to  bring  about  emancipation.  The 
Pennsylvania  emancipation  act  of  1780  was  in 
part  due  to  their  efforts;  by  1792  every  state 
from  Virginia  northward  had  such  a society. 
Some  of  them  petitioned  Congress  with  re- 
gard to  slavery;  they  put  a pressure  on  their 
legislatures  to  enforce  the  emancipation  acts. 
In  1794  began  the  American  Convention  (see), 
an  annual  meeting  of  abolitionists  to  consult 
and  plan  attacks  on  slavery  in  every  form. 

Anti-Slavery  from  1789  to  1829. — Contrary 
to  a general  belief  in  later  times,  this  organ- 
ized protest  never  ceased.  From  1794  to  1829 
the  American  Convention  met  twenty-four 
times,  and  more  than  one  hundred  local  so- 
cieties were  at  one  time  or  another  in  exis- 
tence. It  was  to  a large  degree  a southern 
movement  extending  from  North  Carolina  to 
New  York  with  a few  New  England  societies. 
The  abolitionists  of  that  time  used  all  the 
forms  of  appeal  later  employed  by  abolition- 
ists, printed  statements,  petitions,  newspapers; 
they  saw  the  significance  of  the  District  of 
Columbia  in  the  controversy ; and  stood  against 
the  spread  of  slavery  into  new  territory. 

The  anti-slavery  movement  in  this  period 
was  greatly  aided  by  a fourth  main  argument 
against  slavery — its  cruelty.  That  phase  at- 
tracted little  attention  in  the  frankly  inhu- 
man seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries, 
when  the  most  enlightened  communities  habit- 
ually allowed  violence,  and  abuse  of  children, 
apprentices,  lunatics,  convicts,  prisoners  for 


317 


SLAVERY  CONTROVERSY 


318 


SLAVERY  COXTROVERSY 


debt,  servants  and  slaves.  When  about  the  be- 
ginning of  the  nineteenth  century  a wave  of 
humanitarianism  rolled  over  the  United  States, 
slavery  was  one  of  the  many  legalized  forms 
of  denial  of  equality;  and  a favorite  argument 
against  it  was  that  it  not  only  bruised  the 
slave  but  destroyed  the  moral  feeling  of  the 
master. 

Decline  of  Anti-Slavery. — Nevertheless,  in 
1829,  the  old  anti-slavery  movement  had  spent 
its  strength,  and  most  of  the  societies  had  died 
out.  The  principal  agitator  then  at  work  was 
Benjamin  Lundy,  who  traveled  widely  through 
the  West  and  South  and  during  the  twenties 
issued  a little  paper,  the  Genius  of  Universal 
Emancipation.  The  main  reason  for  this  de- 
cay was  that  the  movement  was  strongest  in 
states  in  which  the  cotton  gin  made  possible  a 
supply  of  the  staple;  and  the  sale  of  slaves 
southward  from  the  border  states  involved  the 
whole  South  in  the  new  cotton  industry,  in 
which  crude  labor  could  be  profitably  em- 
ployed in  large  gangs.  The  economic  argu- 
ment for  a time  worked  for  slavery,  opposition 
to  which  was  held  to  be  opposition  to  the 
section’s  vital  industry.  The  earlier  rebukes 
by  local  conferences  of  churches,  especially  the 
Methodist,  were  heard  no  longer.  The  inter- 
est of  the  southern  opponents  of  slavery  was 
in  part  drawn  into  the  American  Colonization 
Society  (see  Colonization  of  Negroes). 
Meanwhile  the  slave-holding  states  of  Ken- 
tucky, Tennessee,  Louisiana,  Mississippi  and 
Alabama,  had  been  admitted  and  there  were 
evidences  of  an  intention  to  annex  Texas. 

On  the  other  hand  the  anti-slavery  cause 
from  1800  to  1830  registered  some  potent  vic- 
tories. The  slave  trade  was  prohibited  in 
1807.  The  territory  of  Indiana  failed  to  get 
from  Congress  a repeal  of  the  Northwest  Ordi- 
nance, and  the  effort  to  change  the  constitu- 
tion of  Illinois  so  as  to  allow  slavery  broke 
down  in  1823.  By  the  Missouri  Compromise 
(see)  in  1820,  Congress  prohibited  slavery 
in  a second  great  territorial  area. 

Nevertheless  the  movement  seemed  to  lose 
vitality.  From  1637  to  1830  an  anti-slavery 
movement  had  been  going  on,  including  many 
southern  ministers  and  public  men — among 
them  Washington,  Jefferson  and  Madison. 
Slavery  had  been  held  up  to  the  world  as  con- 
trary to  Christianity,  to  natural  right,  to  hu- 
manity, and  to  the  real  economic  interest  of 
the  slave-holding  section.  Yet  slavery  had 
never  seemed  so  strong.  The  slaves  increased 
from  697,624  in  1790,  to  2,009,043  in  1830. 
Cotton  ruled  in  high  places;  every  President  ot 
the  United  States  from  1789  to  1861  was  a 
slaveholder  or  a sympathizer  with  slaveholders. 
The  institution  was  buttressed  by  the  great 
principle  of  state  rights  (see),  the  privilege 
of  every  organized  community  to  manage  its 
own  concerns. 

Reasons  for  Renewed  Agitation. — The  final 
and  effective  anti-slavery  movement  began  m 


1831  with  the  publication  by  William  Lloyd 
Garrison  of  the  first  number  of  the  Liberator. 
In  many  ways  this  propaganda  differed  from 
all  previous  assaults.  (1)  Slavery  was  now 
almost  extinguished  north  of  Mason  and  Dix- 
on’s Line  and  the  Ohio  River.  No  northern 
community  had  anything  to  gain  from  south- 
ern slave  labor,  except  as  it  produced  the  staple 
for  a growing  cotton  manufacture  in  the  New 
England  and  middle  states,  and  as  the  Soutii 
as  a whole  was  a customer  for  northern  food 
stuffs  and  other  products.  (2)  It  was  a period 
of  “causes”;  anti-slavery  was  one  of  many 
movements  of  the  time.  Societies,  conventions 
and  newspaper  organs  carried  on  popular  agi- 
tation in  behalf  of  temperance,  of  woman’s 
rights,  of  humane  treatment  of  the  insane,  of 
home  and  foreign  missions,  of  social  experi- 
ments. (3)  It  was  also  a period  of  glorious' 
belief  in  the  capacities  of  mankind;  the  suf- 
frage was  widening,  the  cities  enlarging,  immi- 
grants coming;  the  air  was  full  of  hope  and 
exultation.  (4)  Between  1833  and  1840  the 
British  abolitionists  forced  their  government 
to  set  free  the  slaves  in  the  West  Indies  (with 
due  compensation  to  the  owners),  and  in  1848 
France  followed  this  example,  thus  throwing 
upon  the  United  States  the  responsibility, 
along  with  Spain  and  Brazil,  of  maintaining 
a discredited  system.  (5)  The  movement  now 
had  champions  of  greater  weight  than  ever  be- 
fore, including  relentless  journalists  like  Gar- 
rison; converted  slaveholders  like  James  G. 
Birney;  poets  like  Whittier  and  Lowell;  novel- 
ists like  Mrs.  Stowe;  statesmen  like  John 
Quincy  Adams,  Chase,  Seward  and  Abraham 
Lincoln.  (6)  These  irrepressible  opponents  of 
slavery  were  confined  within  the  same  Federal 
Union  with  equally  courageous  and  forceful 
men  like  John  C.  Calhoun,  Jefferson  Davis  and 
Alexander  H.  Stephens;  for  the  first  time  the 
friends  of  slavery  rallied  to  an  active  propa- 
ganda on  behalf  of  the  institution. 

Political  Anti-Slavery. — Amid  this  new  dis- 
tribution of  conditions  and  forces  there  arose 
a new  issue,  no  longer  whether  slavery  should 
continue  where  it  existed,  but  whether  it  should 
extend  into  broader  regions;  and  that  was  an 
issue  which  the  Federal  Government  had  to  de- 
cide. For  ten  years  the  anti-slavery  people 
and  their  opponents  engaged  in  an  uproar  of 
contention  in  public  meetings,  in  the  press, 
in  the  halls  of  Congress.  After  a vain  effort 
^7  “gag  resolutions”  (see)  to  prevent  discus- 
sion, on  the  ground  that  slavery  was  too  deli- 
cate to  be  brought  in  question,  the  two  sides 
locked  horns  over  the  main  issue  whether 
slavery  was  or  was  not  a Christian,  enlighten- 
ing and  enriching  institution  which  ought  to 
be  enlarged.  In  this  struggle  the  anti-slavery 
people  had  the  advantage  of  the  pens  of  most 
of  the  most  brilliant  writers  in  American  liter- 
ature, but  that  had  no  effect  upon  those  people 
of  the  southern  states  who  alone  possessed 
legal  power  to  do  away  with  slavery. 


319 


SLAVERY  CONTROVERSY 


Hence  from  1840  to  1852  the  movement  took 
on  a political  shape,  with  national  tickets  and 
campaigns.  The  Abolitionists,  so-called,  were 
never  more  than  a few  score  thousand ; but 
the  anti-slavery  people  who  disliked  slavery 
and  were  unwilling  that  it  should  spread,  grew 
to  the  millions.  The  annexation  of  Texas 
brought  out  a considerable  cohort  of  frank 
anti-slavery  men.  The  annexation  of  New 
Mexico  and  California  increased  the  number 
until,  in  1846,  appeared  an  anti-slavery  ma- 
jority in  the  national  House,  and  the  matter 
was  with  difficulty  adjusted  for  the  time  by 
the  Compromise  of  1850  (see). 

Four  years  later  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Act 
precipitated  the  formation  of  an  out  and  out 
anti-slavery  party  which  gave  itself  the  name 
of  the  Republican.  It  included  uncompromis- 
ing Abolitionists  like  Sumner,  and  Benjamin 
Wade,  and  Salmon  P.  Chase;  moderate  anti- 
slavery  men  like  Seward  and  Cameron;  men 
of  little  conviction  on  the  subject,  such  as 
Banks  and  Gideon  Welles;  but  they  all  united 
on  the  platform  that  slavery  must  stop  where 
it  was.  This  meant  no  more  annexations  of 
potential  slave  territory,  no  more  slave-hold- 
ing states;  the  inevitable  result  must  be  the 
extinction  of  slavery  by  the  wearing  out  of 
the  lands  upon  which  it  was  settled. 

Methods  of  Agitation. — The  anti-slavery 
movement  was  only  a part  of  a general  human- 
itarian agitation  which  was  sweeping  over  the 
United  States  and  western  Europe;  and  in  its 
organization  and  methods,  it  was  very  like 
the  contemporary  temperance,  woman  suffrage, 
prison  reform,  and  socialistic  propaganda  of 
the  time.  The  old  system  of  state  societies  was 
revived  or  extended.  A few  such  societies  like 
that  of  Pennsylvania  had  not  disbanded.  Then, 
in  1833  was  formed  the  American  Anti-Slavery 
Society,  which  was  the  general  clearing  house 
of  the  movement.  Its  annual  meetings  were 
large  and  enthusiastic.  In  1840  the  Abolition- 
ists boasted  of  200,000  members  in  the  various 
societies,  most  of  them  affiliated  with  this  na- 
tional organization.  The  society  was  then 
split,  chiefly  because  of  the  radical  views  of 
Garrison  and  his  immediate  friends  and  fol- 
lowers on  other  than  slavery  questions,  and  a 
parallel  society,  the  American  and  Foreign 
Anti-Slavery  Society  was  formed  with  the  re- 
sult that  neither  of  them  ever  had  anything 
like  the  strength  and  influence  of  the  parent 
society. 

In  several  respects,  the  Abolitionists  offend- 
ed the  community  in  which  they  lived:  they 
allowed  and  encouraged  women  to  take  part 
in  their  meetings;  they  brought  negroes  upon 
the  platform;  they  spoke  with  great  freedom 
and  disfavor  of  all  slaveholders;  they  pub- 
lished in  almanacs  and  in  the  issues  of  their 
numerous  papers,  rude  woodcuts  showing  ne- 
groes undergoing  cruelty  and  torture ; they 
openly  defied  the  laws  for  the  recovery  of 
fugitive  slaves.  Hence,  they  have  then  and 


since  been  accused  of  needlessly  arousing  the 
resentment  and  opposition  of  the  South,  and 
have  even  been  held  responsible  for  the  severe 
laws  passed  in  some  of  the  southern  states 
against  offences  by  slaves.  In  this  they  simply 
took  advantage  of  the  fact  that  they  lived  in 
states  in  which  it  was  neither  legally  nor  mor- 
ally wrong  to  denounce  slavery;  and  they  held 
that  the  reason  their  action  seemed  so  unseemly 
was  that  slavery  was  unseemly,  that  it  was 
contrary  to  the  principles  of  free  government 
to  have  a system  of  personal  relations  which 
was  so  delicate  that  it  could  not  be  discussed 
even  a thousand  miles  away. 

The  Abolitionists  had  the  great  advantage 
of  the  literary  skill  of  many  of  the  foremost 
American  writers  of  the  time;  Whittier,  Long- 
fellow, Lowell,  Emerson,  and  many  lesser 
writers  were  engaged  in  the  crusade;  and  they 
reached  a large  constituency  of  readers  who 
did  not  attend  abolitionist  meetings. 

Triumph  of  Anti-Slavery. — When  the  Civil 
War  began  in  1861  it  at  once  started  up  an 
aggressive  movement  which  never  ceased  till 
its  end  was  reached;  anti-slavery  men,  indif- 
ferent men,  and  pro-slavery  men  joined  the 
array.  Though  in  July,  1861,  Congress  dis- 
avowed any  intention  to  destroy  slavery,  war 
was  certain  to  break  it  in  pieces.  The  old 
abolitionism  was  submerged  in  the  larger  move- 
ment, and  had  little  immediate  influence  on 
the  series  of  dramatic  measures  by  which,  in 
the  course  of  1862,  Congress  put  an  end  to 
slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  prohibit- 
ed territorial  slavery,  practically  broke  up  the 
return  of  fugitive  slaves  in  the  loyal  states, 
and  decreed  a confiscation  of  slaves  that  were 
used  against  the  government  or  the  property 
of  enemies  of  the  government.  When  the  Pres- 
ident, by  his  final  Emancipation  Proclamation 
of  January  1,  1863,  declared  slavery  at  an 
end  within  the  military  lines  of  the  Confeder- 
acy, the  whole  North  practically  became  aboli- 
tionist, because  it  was  clear  that  if  the  North 
was  successful  slavery  would  infallibly  cease. 
By  the  Thirteenth  Amendment  (see),  1865, 
slavery  was  constitutionally  prohibited. 

However  little  part  the  abolitionists  took 
in  this  climax  of  measures,  they  did  prepare 
the  way  by  their  long  insistence  that  slavery 
was  out  of  accord  with  the  genius  of  a free 
government.  They  emphasized  and  exploited 
the  cruelties  of  the  system;  they  minimized 
the  good  relations  between  masters  and  slaves; 
they  were  unreasonable,  shrill  and  indiscrim- 
inating;  but  they  had  the  great  world  on 
their  side.  Their  propaganda  finally  reached 
the  northern  laborer,  who  felt  that  slavery 
somehow  degraded  his  position.  Without 
much  knowing  the  negro,  or  making  much 
allowance  for  the  difficulties  of  the  master, 
the  anti-slavery  people  eventually  convinced 
the  country  in  the  language  of  the  man  most 
eminent  among  them  “that  the  nation  cannot 
endure  half  free  and  half  slave.” 


320 


SLAVERY,  LEGAL  DISCUSSION  OF— SLEEPING  CARS 


See  Abolitionists;  Compromise  of  18.50; 
Constitution  of  the  U.  S.,  Compromises  of; 
Emancipation  by  States;  Emancipation 
Proclamation;  Fugitive  Slaves;  Govern- 
ment, Theory  of;  Higher  Law;  Kansas- 
Nebraska  Bill;  Kansas  Struggle;  Liberty, 
Civil;  Missouri  Compromise;  Natural 
Rights;  Negro  Problem;  Personal  Liberty 
Laws  ; Pro-Slavery. 

References:  M.  E.  Locke,  Anti-Slavery  in 
America  (1901);  Alice  D.  Adams,  'Neglected. 
Period  of  Anti-Slavery  (1908);  Marion  G. 
McDougall,  Fugitive  Slaves  (1908)  ; A.  B. 
Hart,  Slavery  and  Abolition  (1906);  T.  C. 
Smith,  Parties  and  Slavery  (1906)  ; W.  E.  B. 
Du  Bois,  Suppression  of  the  African  Slave 
Trade  (1896),  Select  Bibliography  of  the  Am. 
Negro  (1901);  W.  H.  Collins,  Domestic  Slave 
Trade  (1904)  ; J.  E.  Cutler,  Lynch-Law 
(1905);  A.  P.  C.  Griffin,  Select  List  of  Ref- 
erences on  the  Negro  Question  (1903)  ; Chan- 
ning,  Hart,  and  Turner,  Guide  to  Am.  Hist. 
(1913),  §§  165,  180,  197,  202,  209-212,  223, 
240;  also  lives  of  anti-slavery  men  and  women, 
Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

SLAVERY,  LEGAL  DISCUSSION  OF.  Slav- 
ery in  a proper  sense  ol  the  term,  implying 
absolute  and  unlimited  power  given  to  one 
person  over  the  life  and  fortune  of  another, 
had  already  at  the  time  of  the  independence 
of  the  United  States  been  declared  in  England 
to  be  contrary  to  law.  It  was  not  formally 
abolished  in  England,  however,  until  1833. 
In  some  of  the  colonies  African  slavery  ex- 
isted under  the  authority  of  the  British  Gov- 
ernment. Its  continued  existence  was  counte- 
nanced in  guarded  provisions  of  the  Federal 
Constitution  relating:  (1)  to  the  basis  of 
representation  in  Congress  (Art.  I,  See.  ii, 
1 3)  ; (2)  as  to  “migration  or  importation  of 
such  persons  as  any  of  the  states  now  existing 
shall  think  proper  to  admit”  (Art.  I,  Sec.  ix, 
If  1)  ; (3)  for  the  return  by  one  state  to  an- 
other of  persons  held  to  service  or  labor  escap- 
ing from  the  latter  (Art.  IV,  Sec.  ii,  If  3). 
Even  in  states  in  which  such  slavery  was  rec- 
ognized the  rights  of  the  master  were  not  re- 
garded as  absolute.  He  was  entitled  to  the 
services  of  the  slave  and  to  the  control  of 
his  liberty  and  property,  but  might  be  pun- 
ished for  crimes  committed  against  him.  The 
slave,  however,  had  no  standing  in  the  courts, 
although  he  was  subject  to  punishment  under 
the  criminal  law.  In  1865,  by  amendment  to 
the  Federal  Constitution,  slavery  was  prohibit- 
ed within  the  United  States  and  all  places 
subject  to  its  jurisdiction  (see  Thirteenth 
Amendment).  Within  a few  years  after  the 
adoption  of  the  Constitution  Congress  had 
legislated  with  reference  to  the  suppression  of 
the  slave  trade  (Acts  of  1794,  1800,  1807,  1818, 
1819,  and  1820).  In  various  states  in  which 
slavery  was  recognized  the  slave  trade  was 
regulated  or  prohibited.  In  other  states  by 


statutes  or  by  constitutional  provisions,  slav- 
ery was  expressly  prohibited.  By  the  Emanci- 
pation Proclamation  (see)  of  President  Lin- 
coln (January  1,  1863),  all  persons  held  as 
slaves  within  certain  designated  states  and 
parts  of  states,  the  designation  being  intended 
to  cover  the  portions  of  the  territory  of  the 
United  States  within  which  a condition  of 
rebellion  existed,  were  declared  to  be  free.  This 
proclamation  was,  however,  effectual  only  as 
a war  measure,  and  did  not  in  itself  render 
slavery  unlawful.  E.  McC. 

SLEEPING  CARS.  As  early  as  1836  night 

trains  in  the  United  States  were  occasionally 
fitted  with  a device  for  turning  up  the  backs 
of  the  seats  and  constructing  sleeping  berths 
over  and  under  the  backs.  This  gave  place 
in  the  neighborhood  of  1859,  to  cars  fitted  with 
a crude  system  for  upper  and  lower  berths. 
These  were  operated  by  each  company  for  it- 
self as  a part  of  its  regular  equipment.  About 
the  time  of  the  Civil  War,  began  the  practice 
of  running  sleeping  cars  over  more  than  one 
line  of  road;  and  alongside  with  fast  freight 
lines,  and  the  express  business,  were  developed 
several  sleeping  car  companies  of  which  the 
Pullman  and  the  Wagner  became  the  most 
important.  The  Wagner  system  in  1899  was 
absorbed  by  the  Pullman,  which  shortly  came 
to  have  almost  a monopoly  of  the  business.  As 
late  as  1912  a few  roads,  like  the  Chicago  and 
Northwestern,  and  Chicago,  Milwaukee  and 
St.  Paul,  Canadian  Pacific  and  New  York,  New 
Haven  and  Hartford,  were  still  running  their 
own  sleepers  and  parlor  cars. 

The  general  arrangement  is  that  the  Pull- 
man Company  furnishes  the  car,  the  railroad 
furnishes  track,  station  facilities  and  motive 
power;  the  Pullman  company  takes  all  the 
berth  fare,  the  railroad  company  takes  the 
regular  fare.  This  gives  the  Pullman  company 
a very  large  profit,  so  that  the  rates,  though 
low  in  comparison  with  those  in  other  coun- 
tries, were  somewhat  reduced  in  1911  by  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  (see).  On 
the  other  hand  the  railroad  companies  under- 
take the  expensive  hauling  of  the  heavy  cars 
somewhat  to  their  disadvantage;  and  the  ordi- 
nary fare  passenger  traffic  in  the  end  has  to 
make  up  the  loss,  if  any.  Inasmuch  as  de- 
sirable travel  cannot  be  drawn  to  a road  upon 
which  Pullman  cars  are  not  running,  the  Pull- 
man Company  is  in  a position  to  dictate. 

The  business  is  organized  in  a great  cor- 
poration, the  Pullman  Company.  Its  report 
of  June,  1912,  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission, showed  that  for  the  preceding  year 
its  capital  stock  was  $120,000,000 ; its  total 
revenue  $40,219,748;  its  operating  expenses 
$22,608,178;  its  dividends  $9,599,460,  being  8 
per  cent  on  its  capital  stock.  It  owned  or  con- 
trolled 6,229  cars,  and  its  assets  in  cars,  real 
estate,  and  operating  supplies  were  valued  at 


$107,448,698. 
321 


SLIDELL,  JOHN— SMITH,  JOSEPH 


The  company  maintains  a manufacturing 
plant  at  Pullman,  Illinois,  near  Chicago,  which 
was  intended  to  be  a model  factory  town.  Be- 
sides its  own  cars  it  builds  passenger  cars 
of  other  types  for  the  railroads. 

The  company  builds  and  operates  cars  of 
several  types : ( 1 ) the  parlor  car,  intended 

for  day  runs  only;  (2)  the  standard  sleeper, 
which  includes  most  of  the  rolling  stock,  and 
has  come  down  to  a normal  type;  (3)  the 
tourist  sleeping  car,  built  on  almost  the  same 
plan  as  the  standard,  but  plainer  in  finish, 
provided  with  rattan  seats,  and  including  a 
little  kitchen  where  passengers  may  cook  light 
meals;  (4)  compartment  sleeping  cars;  the 
Pullman  Company  has  never  taken  kindly  to 
closed  and  separate  sleeping  compartments, 
but  runs  a few  cars  of  this  type  on  through 
lines  at  extra  fare;  (5)  observation  cars,  with 
or  without  regular  berths. 

On  most  lines  the  Pullman  Company  has  a 
conductor  of  its  own,  who  receives  the  Pull- 
man fare,  which  is  calculated  at  about  half  a 
cent  a mile — tourist  sleeper  rates  just  one 
half  or  about  a quarter  of  a cent  a mile. 

The  sleeping  car  service  is  a public  conven- 
ience and  travel  is  benefited  by  the  service 
of  this  national  company,  inasmuch  as  the 
Pullman  cars  run  on  through  routes  which  may 
pass  over  several  different  railroad  lines. 
These  long  routes  extending  into  several  states 
made  it  difficult  to  regulate  the  Pullman  serv- 
ice. Between  1890  and  1908  some  states  passed 
laws  regulating  the  service  from  one  point  to 
ftnother  point  in  the  same  state,  as  for  in- 
stance, compelling  the  company  to  leave  the 
upper  berth  up  when  it  was  not  sold.  By  act 
of  Congress  of  1908  sleeping  car  lines  were 
placed  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission,  which  has  required  an- 
nual reports  of  the  companies,  and  in  1911 
made  a special  investigation  of  the  service  and 
ordered  some  reductions  on  through  rates  in 
the  far  West,  and  a flat  reduction  of  20  per 
cent  on  all  upper  berth  rates,  which  up  to 
that  time  had  been  the  same  as  the  lower 
berth  rate. 

See  Interstate  Commerce  Legislation  ; 
Pullman  Cars,  Regulation  of;  Railroad 
Commissions,  State. 

Reference:  Interstate  Commerce  Commis- 
sion, Reports.  Albert  Bushnell  Hart, 

SLIDELL',  JOHN.  John  Slidell  was  born  in 

New  York  City  in  1793  ahd  died  in  London 
July  29,  1871.  Educated  in  New  York  and 
at  Columbia  he  began  a business  career,  but 
failing,  he  studied  law  and  settled  in  New 
Orleans  in  1819.  He  entered  politics  as  a 
supporter  of  Andrew  Jackson  in  1828  and 
entered  the  national  House  of  Representatives 
in  1842  as  a state  rights  Democrat.  In  1845 
he  was  minister  to  Mexico  but  failed  of  recog- 
nition. He  was  elected  to  the  United  States 
Senate  in  1853  where  he  remained  until  1861. 


An  ardent  believer  in  the  “peculiar  institu- 
tion” of  the  South  he  advocated  the  doctrine 
of  secession  and  was  one  of  the  most  influential 
leaders  of  the  anti-Douglas  forces  in  the 
Charleston  convention  of  1860.  He  was  ap- 
pointed Confederate  commissioner  to  France 
in  1861.  Seized  on  the  high  seas  by  Captain 
Wilkes  on  behalf  of  the  United  States,  he  was 
held  a prisoner  until  his  release  was  demand- 
ed by  England.  He  won  the  sympathy  of 
Louis  Napoleon,  secured  a loan  of  $15,000,000 
for  his  government  and  only  barely  missed  the 
object  of  his  mission,  the  recognition  of  the 
Confederacy  by  France.  He  lived  in  England 
from  the  close  of  the  war  until  his  death. 
See  Confederate  States;  Trent  Affair. 

W,  E.  D. 

SMITH,  JOHN.  John  Smith  (1579-1631) 
was  born  at  Willoughby,  Lincolnshire,  Eng- 
land, in  January,  1579.  According  to  his  own 
account  of  his  life,  which,  if  not  to  be  re 
jected  as  untrustworthy,  cannot  be  verified  in 
detail,  he  ran  away  from  home  as  a boy,  saw 
something  of  France  and  the  Low  Countries, 
and  served  in  arms  with  the  Huguenots  and 
against  the  Turks.  He  was  a member  of  the 
Virginia  Company  of  1606,  and  went  with  the 
first  expedition  dispatched  to  Virginia;  but 
he  quarreled  with  Wingfield  on  the  voyage, 
was  put  in  irons,  and  was  only  released  when, 
upon  arrival,  the  sealed  instructions  were 
found  to  have  designated  him  as  a member  of 
the  council.  He  showed  firmness  and  skill  in 
dealing  with  the  Indians,  was  made  president 
of  the  council  in  September,  1608,  and  during 
the  following  winter,  by  vigorous  measures, 
saved  the  colony  from  starvation.  A wound 
compelled  his  return  to  England,  but  in  1614 
he  explored  the  coast  of  New  England  and 
made  a map  of  the  region.  The  next  year  he 
entered  the  service  of  the  Plymouth  Company, 
but  did  not  again  visit  America.  He  died  at 
London,  June  21,  1631.  See  Virginia.  Refer- 
ences: John  Smith,  Works  (E.  Arber,  Ed., 
1884)  ; W.  Stith,  Hist,  of  Virginia  (1747, 
1865)  ; E.  Channing,  Hist,  of  the  U.  8.  (1905), 
T.  chs.  vii,  viii.  W.  MacD. 

SMITH,  JOSEPH.  Joseph  Smith  was  born 
in  Sharon,  Vt.,  December  23,  1805.  He  claimed 
to  be  an  inspired  leader  and  the  discoverer 
and  translator  of  the  Book  of  Mormon.  In 
1830,  he  founded  the  Mormon  Church  at  Pal- 
myra, N.  Y.  The  “Latter  Day  Saints,”  in 
1840,  established  the  “Holy  City”  at  Nauvoo, 
111.  This  was  a well-built  city,  having  a popu- 
lation of  15,000  in  which  Smith  was  “prophet, 
mayor,  general  and  judge.”  His  authority  was 
supreme  over  his  followers  through  the  mili- 
tary organization  which  he  established,  in 
which  he  was,  himself,  lieutenant-general.  He 
advocated  greater  powers  for  the  President  of 
the  United  States.  In  1844,  chiefly  because  of 
his  doctrines  on  religion,  he  was  killed  by  a 


322 


SMITHSONIAN  INSTITUTION— SMUGGLING 


mob.  See  Lttah.  References:  Johiah  Quincy, 
Figures  of  the  Past  (1901),  376-400;  0.  F. 
Berry,  “Mormon  Settlement  in  Illinois”  in  111. 
State  Hist.  Society,  Transactions,  1906,  88- 
102.  J.  A.  J. 

SMITHSONIAN  INSTITUTION.  The  Smith- 
sonial  Institution  is  a learned  institution  in 
Washington,  D.  C.,  established  in  1846  under 
the  terms  of  the  will  of  James  Smithson  of 
England  who  bequeathed  his  fortune  “to  the 
United  States  of  America,  to  found  at  Wash- 
ington, under  the  name  of  the  Smithsonian  In- 
stitution, an  establishment  for  the  increase 
and  diffusion  of  knowledge  among  men.”  This 
bequest,  amounting  to  $541,379.63,  was  for- 
mally accepted  by  Congress,  and  the  Institution 
was  established  by  an  act  approved  August  10, 
1846.  By  subsequent  gifts  and  bequests  the 
permanent  fund  has  increased  to  $997,500,  000. 
In  1891  the  Hodgkins  Fund  was  created,  the 
income  of  part  of  which  is  devoted  to  the 
study  of  atmospheric  air  in  relation  to  the 
welfare  of  man.  The  statutory  members  of 
the  Institution  are  the  President  of  the  United 
States,  the  Vice-President,  the  Chief  Justice, 
and  the  heads  of  the  executive  departments. 
The  governing  body  is  a board  of  regents  com- 
posed of  the  Vice-President  of  the  United 
States,  the  Chief  Justice,  three  members  of  the 
Senate,  three  of  the  House  of  Representatives, 
and  six  citizens  selected  by  Congress.  The 
board  elects  a chancellor  as  its  presiding  officer. 
The  executive  officer  is  the  secretary  of  the 
institution  who  is  elected  by  the  regents. 

The  objects  of  the  Institution  are:  (1)  to 
increase  knowledge  by  original  investigation 
and  study  in  either  science  or  literature;  (2) 
to  diffuse  knowledge  not  only  through  the 
United  States  but  everywhere,  especially  by 
promoting  an  interchange  of  thought  among 
persons  prominent  in  learning  in  all  nations. 
The  Institution  aids  investigators  by  making 
grants  for  research  and  exploration.  It  has 
initiated  numerous  scientific  projects  some  of 
which  have  resulted  in  the  creation  of  inde- 
pendent government  bureaus.  It  advises  the 
government  in  many  matters  of  scientific  char- 
acter, especially  those  having  an  international 
aspect.  It  cooperates  with  scientific  bodies  of 
national  importance. 

Under  the  fostering  influences  of  the  insti- 
tution a number  of  dependencies  or  branches 
have  grown  up,  which  are  supported  by  appro- 
priations from  Congress,  the  secretary  being 
the  ex  officio  head  of  each.  These  are  as  fol- 
lows: the  international  Exchange  Service, 
begun  in  1850  for  the  interchange  of  scientific 
publications  between  learned  institutions;  the 
United  States  National  Museum,  the  lawful 
place  for  the  deposit  of  objects  of  art  and  of 
foreign  and  curious  research,  and  all  objects 
of  natural  history  belonging  to  the  United 
States;  the  National  Gallery  of  Art,  created 
in  1846  by  the  act  establishing  the  Smith- 


sonian Institution;  the  Bureau  of  American 
Ethnology,  which  has  devoted  much  attention 
to  the  native  American  tribes;  the  National 
Zoological  Park,  established  in  1890;  the  As- 
trophysical  Observatory,  established  in  1890; 
and  the  United  States  Bureau  of  the  Interna- 
tional Catalogue  of  Scientific  Literature.  The 
Smithsonian  library  contains  about  280,000 
volumes,  mostly  deposited  in  the  Library  of 
Congress.  The  Institution  and  its  branches  or 
dependencies  published  up  to  the  year  1913 
about  440  volumes. 

References:  G.  B.  Goode,  Smithsonian  Insti- 
tution, 18If6-1896  (1897);  W.  J.  Rhees,  Ed., 
“The  Smithsonian  Institution:  Documents  Re- 
lating to  its  Origin  and  History,  1835-1899” 
in  House  Doc.,  56  Cong.,  1 Sess.,  No.  113 
(1898).  Charles  D.  Walcott. 

SMOKE,  PUBLIC  REGULATION  OF.  A re- 
cent investigation  conducted  by  the  United 
States  Government  revealed  that  smoke  causes, 
in  the  United  States,  more  than  $500,000,000 
damage  each  year,  by  injury  to  merchandise 
through  soot;  through  the  defacement  of  build- 
ings, and  the  tarnishing  of  metals;  through 
increasing  the  labor  and  cost  in  housekeeping; 
through  injury  to  plant  life;  and  through  im- 
pairment of  health  and  human  efficiency. 
The  first  attempt  to  abate  the  smoke  nui- 
sance was  taken  in  1819  when  England  ap- 
pointed a parliamentary  committee  “to  in- 
quire how  far  persons  using  steam  engines  and 
furnaces  could  erect  them  in  a manner  less 
objectionable  to  public  health  and  comfort.” 
In  1875  England  passed  a public  health  act 
levying  a fine  for  all  nuisances  due  to  smoke 
from  furnaces  and  chimneys.  Action  in  the 
L’nited  States  has  been  largely  taken  by  mu- 
nicipalities, among  which  Chicago,  Cincinnati 
and  Boston  have  taken  the  lead.  Chicago,  for 
instance,  has  an  efficient  smoke  inspection  de- 
partment, charged  with  the  task  of  keeping 
down  the  smoke  in  some  16,000  boiler  plants, 
and  1,600  locomotives,  and  provided  with  a 
splendid  scientific  equipment.  Smoke  dissipat- 
ing chimneys  are  not  effective.  Government 
regulation  must  therefore  require  proper  equip- 
ment of  furnaces  and  efficiency  in  firing.  See 
Health,  Public,  Regulation  of;  Police 
Power.  References:  W.  C.  Popplewell,  Preven- 
tion of  Smoke  (1901);  W.  Nicholson,  Smoke 
Abatement  (1905)  ; Booth  and  Kershaw,  Smoke 
Prevention  and  Fuel  Economy  (1904)  ; London 
Smoke  Abatement  Committee,  Official  Report, 
1882;  “Reports  of  the  Laws  in  Certain  For- 
eign Countries  in  Regard  to  Emission  of  Smoke 
from  Chimneys”  in  Foreign  Office  Return  Co. 
(1905),  2347;  London  Fog  Inquiry  (1901- 
1902 ) ; Department  of  Smoke  Inspection,  City 
of  Chicago,  Reports,  1911,  1912.  C.  L.  K. 

SMUGGLING.  Smuggling  is  the  act  of  im- 
porting into  the  country  dutiable  articles  with- 
out passing  them  through  the  custom  house  or 


323 


SNAPPERS— SOCIAL  COMPACT  THEORY 


submitting  them  to  revenue  officers  for  exam- 
ination. Technically  it  is  to  be  distinguished 
from  fraudulent  entry  which  more  specifically 
applies  to  deception  in  the  valuation  and  class- 
ification of  goods  at  the  time  of  entry  and 
appraisal  (see  Sugar  Frauds).  Smug- 
gling is  likely  to  be  extensive  when  tariffs  are 
severely  restrictive,  thus  affording  large  prof- 
its to  those  who  are  successful  in  avoiding  the 
payment  of  duties. 

In  the  colonial  period,  when  the  navigation 
laws  of  Great  Britain  placed  many  restrictions 
upon  the  commerce  of  the  colonies,  not  only 
with  foreign  nations  but  with  the  mother  coun- 
try, the  practice  became  prevalent.  Even  re- 
spectable merchants  participated  in  illicit 
trade,  and  public  sentiment  was  so  demoral- 
ized in  regard  to  the  evasion  of  revenue  laws 
that  when  the  cause  was  removed,  a low 
standard  of  mercantile  morality  as  far  as 
public  financial  obligations  were  concerned, 
continued  to  prevail.  The  embargo  and  non- 
intercourse acts  at  the  beginning  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  led  to  a revival  of  such  frauds 
on  an  extensive  scale;  and  until  the  govern- 
ment was  able  to  establish  its  authority  with 
vigorous  measures  along  the  southern  Atlantic 
coast,  there  were  ample  opportunities  to  en- 
gage in  smuggling  operations  with  Cuba  and 
the  West  Indies. 

Smuggling  at  the  present  time  is  carried  on 
along  the  northern  and  southwestern  frontiers, 
more  particularly  in  the  bringing  of  horses  and 
cattle,  and  by  incoming  passengers  from  Europe 
(see  Passengers’  Baggage).  Though  usually 
petty  in  individual  cases,  smuggling  by  travel- 
ers in  the  aggregate  amounts  to  a serious  eva- 
sion of  the  customs  laws.  It  has  been  fostered 
by  the  annoying  regulations  of  a highly  pro- 
tective tariff,  by  a perverted  public  sentiment 
in  regard  to  the  morality  of  such  practice 
when  undertaken  on  a small  scale,  and  by  the 
low  morals  of  customs  inspectors  who  accept 
bribes  at  some  ports  of  entry.  Officers  and 
other  employees  of  the  incoming  steamers 
sometimes  smuggle  on  their  own  account.  De- 
termined efforts  have  been  made  to  raise  the 
standard  of  subordinate  officials  and  enforce 
the  revenue  laws  more  strictly. 

The  penalties  against  smuggling  are  severe. 
Goods  are  confiscated,  and  the  person,  if  con- 
victed, may  be  fined,  not  exceeding  $5,000,  or 
imprisoned  not  exceeding  two  years,  or  both. 


Punishment,  however,  as  a rule  is  limited  to 
a confiscation  of  merchandise.  In  1911  but 
two  travelers  were  sentenced  to  imprisonment, 
and  four  were  fined.  Two  steamship  officials 
were  also  sentenced  to  imprisonment. 

See  Passengers’  Baggage,  Duties  on; 
Smuggling;  Sugar  Frauds;  Tariff  Adminis- 
tration; Undervaluations. 

Reference:  U.  S.  Treasury  Department,  Fi- 
nance Report,  1910,  10-12. 

Davis  R.  Dewet. 

SNAPPERS.  A nickname  applied  to  the 
machine  Democrats  in  New  York  in  1892,  who, 
under  the  leadership  of  David  B.  Hill,  held 
a very  early  state  convention  on  short  notice, 
called  a “snap”  convention  (Feb.  22,  1892). 
The  Hill  machine  worked  smoothly  and  with- 
out opposition,  and  a solid  body  of  “snappers” 
came  to  the  state  convention  and  in  two  hours 
and  a half  ground  out  the  work  prearranged 
by  the  leader  of  the  machine,  sending  a solid 
Hill,  or  anti-Cleveland,  delegation  to  the  na- 
tional convention.  This  convention  was  also 
called  the  “Kodak  Convention” — the  boss  ma- 
nipulator pressing  the  button  and  the  obedient 
“snapper”  delegates  doing  the  rest.  See  Anti- 
Snappers.  J.  A.  W. 

SOAP.  A term  used  by  the  Republicans  as 
a telegraphic  cipher  for  money  during  the  cam- 
paign of  1880.  It  gained  political  currency  in 
1884,  as  a campaign  slogan  of  the  Democrats 
charging  corruption  against  the  Republicans. 
See  Corruption.  O.  C.  H. 

SOCIAL  CENTER.  The  term  relates  to  an 

effort  to  provide  the  opportunity  for  the  people 
of  small  communities,  or  parts  of  larger  com- 
munities, to  come  together,  and  to  cultivate 
mutual  interests.  In  some  places  the  move- 
ment takes  the  form  of  allowing  the  school 
houses  to  be  used  in  the  evenings,  and  on 
Saturdays,  and  even  Sundays,  for  social  meet- 
ings, amateur  plays,  and  the  like.  In  some 
cases  another  building  is  constructed  or  set 
apart  for  the  same  purposes.  The  public  au- 
thorities recognize  that  public  property  may 
be  used  not  only  for  the  instruction  of  youth, 
but  for  the  enjoyment  of  the  whole  community. 
See  Amusements,  Public;  Education,  Recent 
Tendencies  in;  Public  Morals,  Care  for; 
School  Extension.  A.  B.  H. 


SOCIAL  COMPACT  THEORY 


An  Ancient  Theory. — The  origin  of  the  state 
or  of  government  in  an  agreement  or  contract 
is  one  of  the  oldest  of  political  theories;  the 
theory  changed  its  form  as  the  centuries  went 
by,  for  like  other  theories  it  was  influenced 
by  movements  of  society,  by  developments  of 


religious  or  ecclesiastical  thought,  by  condi- 
tions of  political  or  governmental  order.  But 
in  one  form  or  another,  the  theory  was  used  by 
political  writers  from  the  ancient  Greeks  to 
Thomas  Jefferson  and  beyond  ( see  Political 
Theories,  Ancient  and  Mediaeval). 


324 


SOCIAL  COMPACT  THEORY 


Nature  of  the  Compact. — The  exact  nature 
of  the  compact  it  is  not  always  easy  to  dis- 
cover from  the  writings  of  those  who  an- 
nounced the  doctrine  or  took  it  for  granted ; 
sometimes  the  contract  was  not,  strictly  speak- 
ing, a social  compact  at  all  but  rather  a con- 
tract between  government  and  governed;  some- 
times it  was  an  agreement  whereby  men  en- 
tered into  what  we  should  now  call  the  state 
or  organized  society.  Sometimes,  generally 
indeed,  the  exact  natui'e  of  the  arrangement  is 
obscure.  At  least  from  the  beginning  of  the 
seventeenth  century  the  contract  is  commonly 
represented  as  between  men  on  entering  into 
social  and  governmental  .relations,  and  such 
theory  was  easy  and  natural  for  those  Puri- 
tans that  advocated  the  establishment  of  the 
church  through  covenant.  Locke’s  theories  are 
not  perfectly  plain,  but  his  contract  appears 
to  be  of  the  kind  last  named.  The  same  is 
true  of  Milton,  and,  of  course,  of  Rousseau. 
Pufendorf  (1672)  names  two  distinct  con- 
tracts. 

English  Publicists. — Among  the  earliest  of 
those  whose  writings  especially  influenced  the 
foundations  of  the  doctrines  that  were  taken 
up  and  applied  in  America  was  Richard  Hook- 
er, who  in  the  latter  part  of  the  sixteenth 
century  discussed  in  his  Ecclesiastical  Polity 
(1593  or  1594)  the  presocial  state  of  man  and 
the  establishment  of  civil  society  and  govern- 
ment through  consent.  In  the  next  century 
the  idea  that  men  had  existed  in  a state  of 
nature  and  had  come  under  government  by 
virtue  of  agreement  was  commonly  held  and 
insisted  upon  especially  by  those  who  objected 
to  the  doctrines  of  divine  right  and  sought 
to  establish  the  theory  that  kings  and  govern- 
ments have  delegated  rather  than  inherent  and 
and  original  power.  Milton,  for  example,  says : 
“No  man  who  knows  aught  can  be  so  stupid 
as  to  deny  that  all  men  naturally  were  born 
free  . . .;  and  that  they  lived  so  till  from 

the  root  of  Adam’s  transgression  falling  among 
themselves  to  do  wrong  and  violence  . . . 

they  agreed  by  common  league  to  bind  each 
other  from  mutual  injury  and  jointly  to  de- 
fend themselves  against  any  that  gave  disturb- 
ance or  opposition  to  such  agreement.  . . . 

The  power  of  kings  and  magistrates  is  only 
derivative,  transferred  and  committed  to  them 
in  trust  from  the  people  to  the  common  good 
of  them  all,  to  whom  the  power  yet  remains 
fundamentally,  and  cannot  be  taken  from  them 
without  violation  of  their  natural  birthright.” 
John  Locke’s  Two  Treatises  of  Government 
(1690),  summing  up  as  it  did  in  considerable 
measure  the  political  philosophy  of  the  cen- 
tury as  far  as  it  made  against  the  supreme 
authority  of  the  monarch,  was  probably  of 
more  influence  in  America  than  any  other  one 
book,  though  it  is  plain  that  some  men  of  the 
American  Revolution  knew  other  writers  and 
probably  were  conversant  with  Grotius,  Pufen- 
dorf, Montesquieu,  Vattel  and  others.  Locke’s 


statement,  like  that  of  others,  is  wanting  in 
complete  definiteness  concerning  the  form  and 
content  of  the  contract  by  which  men  left 
the  inconveniences  of  a state  of  nature;  but 
he  relies  fully  on  the  fact  of  consent  and 
agreement:  “Men  being,  as  has  been  said, 

by  nature  all  free,  equal  and  independent,  no 
one  can  be  put  out  of  this  estate  and  sub- 
jected to  the  political  power  of  another  with- 
out his  consent,  which  is  done  by  agreeing 
with  other  men,  to  join  and  unite  into  a com- 
munity for  their  comfortable,  safe  and  peace- 
able living,  one  amongst  another,  in  a secure 
enjoyment  of  their  properties,  and  a greater 
security  against  any  that  are  not  of  it”  (Sec- 
ond Treatise,  § 95 ) . Locke  and  Milton,  un- 
like some  others  who  upheld  the  compact  the- 
ory, insisted  on  the  literal  historical  fact  of 
compact.  The  reasons  that  actuated  men  to 
leave  a state  of  nature  were,  according  to 
Locke,  sufficient  in  themselves  to  refute  any 
doctrine  supporting  absolutism  as  a system  of 
government. 

New  England  Compact. — No  statement  of  the 
compact  theory,  even  a brief  article  like  this, 
should  omit  the  fact  that  the  men  of  early 
New  England  did  agree  in  a good  many  cases 
to  live  together  and  to  subject  themselves 
to  the  government  of  the  whole.  To  say  that 
these  persons  did  not  technically  form  inde- 
pendent states  and  that  they  did  not  enter 
society  from  a state  of  nature,  from  a condi- 
tion of  pure  individualism,  is  to  dwell  on  the 
technically  correct  and  to  lose  sight  of  the 
influential  truth.  The  formation  of  churches 
by  agreement  and  covenant,  the  organization 
of  self-governing  towns  resting  on  the  consent 
of  the  governed,  helped  at  the  very  least  to 
take  the  doctrine  of  compact  out  of  the  rari- 
fied  air  of  political  theory  and  to  make  the 
idea  something  like  a reality  to  the  American 
colonists. 

American  Constitutional  Theory. — The  influ- 
ence of  the  compact  theory  in  American  his- 
tory and  government  can  scarcely  be  over- 
stated. The  principle  that  men  existed  before 
government  and  that  government  rests  on  con- 
sent of  the  governed  was  a natural  revolu- 
tionary doctrine  and  was  made  use  of  to  com- 
bat the  theory  of  the  complete  sovereignty 
and  legislative  power  of  Parliament.  When 
the  state  constitutions  were  formed  there  was 
in  some  quarters  at  least,  a belief  that  the 
men  of  the  time  were  faithfully  carrying  out 
the  principle  of  compact:  “As  a reward  for 
our  exertion  in  the  great  cause  of  freedom,” 
said  Jonathan  Mason,  Jr.,  in  1780,  “we  are 
now  in  the  possession  of  those  rights  and 
privileges  attendant  upon  the  original  state 
of  nature,  with  the  opportunity  of  establishing 
a government  for  ourselves,  independent  upon 
any  nation  or  people  upon  earth.”  The  next 
year,  1781,  Thomas  Dawes,  Jr.,  exclaimed, 
. . . “And  yet  the  people  of  Massachusetts 

have  reduced  to  practice  the  wonderful  theory. 


325 


SOCIAL  DEMOCRATS— SOCIAL  EVIL,  REGULATION  OF 


A numerous  people  have  convened  in  a state 
of  nature,  and,  like  our  ideas  of  the  patriarchs, 
have  deputed  a few  fathers  of  the  land  to 
draw  up  for  them  a glorious  covenant.”  It 
is  well  known  that  the  constitution  of  Massa- 
chusetts declares  that  “The  body  politic  is 
formed  by  a voluntary  association  of  indi- 
viduals ; it  is  a social  compact,  by  which  the 
whole  people  covenants  with  each  citizen,  and 
each  citizen  with  the  whole  people  that  all 
shall  be  governed  by  certain  laws  for  the  com- 
mon good.”  The  Virginia  bill  of  rights  says 
that  “All  men  are  by  nature  equally  free  and 
independent,  and  have  certain  inherent  rights, 
of  which,  when  they  enter  into  a state  of  so- 
ciety, they  cannot  divest  their  posterity.” 

The  same  conception  was  in  mind  at  the 
adoption  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States.  For  example,  the  letter  which  the 
convention  of  1787  drew  up  and  which  Wash- 
ington signed  contains  the  doctrine  of  com- 
pact— evidently  with  the  notion  that  the  states 
surrendered  a portion  of  their  sovereign  rights 
to  preserve  reserved  rights.  “It  is  obviously 
impracticable,”  said  the  letter,  “in  the  Federal 
Government  of  these  states,  to  secure  all  rights 
of  independent  sovereignty  to  each,  and  yet 
provide  for  the  interest  and  safety  of  all : 
Individuals  entering  into  society  must  give 
up  a share  of  liberty  to  preserve  the  rest.” 
This  theory  that  the  state  had  “reserved 
rights,”  similar  to  the  rights  reserved  by  in- 
dividuals when  entering  society,  appears  to 
be  the  principle  of  the  Virginia  and  Kentucky 
Resolutions  (see). 

The  compact  theory,  with  its  necessary  sup- 
position that  men  had  existed  as  individuals 
before  the  establishment  of  the  state  and  gov- 
ernment, that  men  have  inherent  rights  which 
they  did  not  obtain  from  government,  under- 
lies the  individualistic  principles  of  American 
law.  Modern  collectivism  and  the  sense  of 
the  rights  of  the  community  as  such  often 
show  themselves  at  variance  with  the  funda- 
mental notion  of  individual  freedom  and  the 
reserved  rights  of  the  individual. 

See  Bills  of  Rights;  Government,  Theory 
of;  Organic  Theory  of  the  State;  Political 
Theories;  State,  Theory  of. 

References:  W.  A.  Dunning,  Hist,  of  Pol. 
Theories,  Ancient  and  Mediceval  (1902)  ; W.  A. 
Dunning,  Hist,  of  Pol.  Theories,  from,  Luther 
to  Montesquieu  (1905);  W.  W.  Willoughby, 
Theory  of  the  State  (1896);  J.  Locke,  Two 
Treatises  on  Government  (J.  Morley,  Ed.,  2d 
ed.,  1887)  ; C.  E.  Merriam,  Hist,  of  Am.  Pol. 
Theories  (1903),  chs.  i,  ii;  D.  G.  Ritchie,  “So- 
cial Contract  Theory”  in  Pol.  Sci.  Quar.,  VI 
(1891),  656-676;  A.  C.  McLaughlin,  “Social 
Compact  and  Constitutional  Construction”  in 
Am.  Hist.  Review,  V (1900),  467-490;  J.  W. 
Garner,  Intro,  to  Pol.  Sci.  (1910),  92-114; 
A.  C.  McLaughlin,  The  Courts,  the  Constitu- 
tion, and  Parties  (1912). 

Andrew  C.  McLahghlin. 


SOCIAL  DEMOCRATS.  This  party  was  or- 
ganized in  1897  under  the  leadership  of  Eu- 
gene V.  Debs,  the  former  president  of  the  Amer- 
ican Railway  Union,  who  had  led  the  great 
railway  strike  of  1894  and  had  suffered  im- 
prisonment by  injunction, — an  experience  that 
converted  him  to  Socialism.  In  1898,  in  state 
and  congressional  elections,  Socialist  candi- 
dates received  91,749  votes,  the  Social  Demo- 
crats polling  but  9,545  of  these.  In  1900  there 
was  a union  among  Socialists  and  the  Social 
Democrats,  with  Eugene  V.  Debs,  of  Indiana, 
and  Job  Harriman,  of  California,  as  their  pres- 
idential ticket,  polled  87,814  votes,  the  greater 
part  of  the  Socialist  Labor  (see)  party  coming 
to  its  support.  The  party  declared  against 
capitalism  and  for  collective  ownership  of  the 
means  of  production.  The  object  of  the  party 
was  to  organize  the  working  class  into  a 
political  party  and  to  abolish  “wage-slavery” 
by  establishing  a national  system  of  coopera- 
tive industry.  Its  immediate  demands  were, 
the  public  ownership  of  all  monopolized  in- 
dustries, the  railroads,  telegraphs,  telephones, 
mines  and  gas  wells;  the  reduction  of  hours  of 
labor;  a system  of  public  works  to  engage  the 
unemployed;  national  insurance  for  working 
people;  equal  political  rights  for  men  and 
women;  the  initiative,  referendum  and  recall; 
the  abolition  of  war  and  the  introduction  of 
international  arbitration.  Since  1900  the  par- 
ty has  been  generally  known  as  the  Socialist 
party  (see).  See  Socialism;  Socialism, 
State;  Socialist  Party.  References:  F.  H. 
McKee,  National  Conventions  and  Platforms 
(1901),  372-373;  E.  V.  Debs,  “Social  Dem. 
Party”  in  Independent,  LII  (1900),  2018-2021; 
A.  Rosenthal,  Differences  between  the  Socialist 
Party  and  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  (1908). 

J.  A.  W. 

SOCIAL  ETHICS.  See  Democracy  and  So- 
cial Ethics. 

SOCIAL  EVIL,  REGULATION  OF.  Govern- 
ment regulation  of  the  social  evil  in  the  Unit- 
ed States  has  gone  through  four  distinct  phas- 
es, suppression,  regulation,  the  “white  slave” 
crusade,  and  social  investigation. 

Suppression.— The  keeping  of  houses  of  pros- 
titution is  penalized  by  nearly  all  the  states 
of  the  American  Union;  and  with  one  excep- 
tion none  of  the  states  legally  regulates  it. 
Prostitution  itself  is  penalized  in  a few  states, 
and  fornication  in  a large  majority  of  the 
states.  Prostitution  is  indiscriminate  sexual 
intercourse  for  gain.  Fornication  is  illicit  in- 
tercourse, and  differs  from  prostitution  in  that 
it  relates  to  a single  act  and  is  irrespective  of 
gain.  The  only  state  which  legally  regulates 
houses  of  prostitution  is  Louisiana,  whose  laws 
are  founded  on  the  Napoleonic  Code.  Under 
the  state  code  prostitution  and  houses  of  pros- 
titution have  been  segregated  and  regulated  by 
municipal  ordinance  in  the  city  of  New  Or- 
326 


SOCIAL  EVIL,  REGULATION  OF 


leans.  In  Missouri,  for  a brief  period,  a state 
law,  not  generally  understood  at  the  time  of 
its  enactment,  authorized  segregation  and  reg- 
ulation of  prostitution  in  St.  Louis  (1870- 
73)  but  when  the  significance  of  the  statute 
became  known,  it  was  attacked  and  repealed. 
With  these  exceptions,  there  has  been  no  legal 
toleration  of  prostitution  in  the  United  States. 

Regulation. — Regulation  of  the  social  evil, 
though  legally  forbidden  by  implication,  has 
been  the  general  police  policy,  and  that  policy 
has  been  tacitly  accepted  by  the  courts.  In 
Washington,  the  national  capital,  segregation 
of  houses  of  prostitution  was — till  1914 — the 
avowed  policy.  In  several  cities  on  the 
Pacific  coast  a similar  policy  has  been  openly 
maintained.  In  the  large  cities  of  the  East 
segregation  has  been  the  tacit,  though  not  the 
avowed  policy.  In  Boston,  alone,  during  the 
five  years  1908-1913  the  Commissioner  of  Po- 
lice has  declared  uncompromising  warfare 
against  all  houses  of  prostitution. 

Police  officials  throughout  the  country  al- 
most without  exception  have  held  that  prosti- 
tution was  inevitable  and  even  necessary. 
They  have  therefore  ignored  the  law  except  in 
certain  instances  of  open  and  flagrant  offense. 
No  legal  license  fees  have  been  established, 
but  it  is  the  common  knowledge  that  payments 
of  protection  money  to  the  police  by  prosti- 
tutes and  keepers  of  houses  of  prostitution  are 
customary.  Failure  to  make  such  payments 
have  been  a not  infrequent  cause  of  police 
arrests. 

The  courts  have  been  as  slack  as  the  police 
in  the  enforcement  of  the  laws  relating  to  the 
social  evil.  With  a few  notable  exceptions 
judges  and  magistrates  have  imposed  only 
fines  as  penalties  upon  prostitutes  and  keepers 
of  houses  of  prostitution.  Such  penalties  are 
in  effect  only  license  fees  and  are  generally  so 
regarded  by  the  defendants.  While  this  atti- 
tude of  the  judiciary  still  obtains  to  a consider- 
able extent,  the  bench  as  a whole  has  decidedly 
altered  its  policy.  Sentence  of  imprisonment 
is  more  frequently  imposed  after  conviction 
upon  keepers  of  houses  of  prostitution;  and 
prostitutes  convicted  of  street  solicitation  are 
more  generally  committed  to  reformatories. 
In  short,  the  laws  against  prostitution  are  at 
present  more  honestly  and  effectively  enforced 
and  the  toleration  of  the  social  evil  by  the 
police  and  by  the  courts  is  less  general. 

White  Slave  Trade. — From  1880  to  1900  a 
vigorous  agitation  \yas  carried  on  both  in  Eng- 
land and  on  the  continent  against  the  alleged 
enticement  and  seduction  of  girls  and  their 
subsequent  confinement  in  houses  of  prostitu- 
tion by  the  procurers  who  bought  or  enticed 
them.  Their  condition  was  declared  to  be 
actually  that  of  slavery  according  to  its  exact 
definition  of  “complete  subjection  to  the  will 
and  commands  of  another.”  Hence  the  pro- 
curing of  these  girls  was  styled  “the  white 
slave  traffic.”  This  term  was  adopted  in  a 


treaty  drafted  in  Paris  in  1902  at  a Congress 
called  by  the  French  Government  to  consider 
means  for  the  suppression  of  the  traffic.  The 
treaty  was  ratified  by  the  leading  governments 
of  Europe  and  by  that  of  the  United  States, 
and  was  highly  significant  as  being  the  first 
international  treaty  to  deal  with  the  social 
evil.  Its  ratification  by  nearly  all  the  great 
treaty-making  powers  of  the  world  may  justly 
be  regarded  as  epoch-making. 

Following  the  treaty  of  Paris  and  as  a 
result  of  exposures  in  America  similar  to 
those  in  Great  Britain  and  in  Europe,  two  na- 
tional laws  were  passed  in  the  United  States. 
The  first,  known  as  the  Bennet  Law  (Mar.  26, 
1910),  penalizes  the  importation  of  women 
into  the  United  States  for  immoral  purposes, 
and  the  second,  the  Mann  Law  (June  25, 1910), 
penalizes  their  transportation  from  state  to 
state  for  such  purposes.  The  Bennet  Law 
aimed  at  evils  connected  with  immigration,  and 
the  Mann  Law  aimed  to  correct  the  weakness 
of  state  laws  and  the  lack  of  interstate  co- 
operation in  the  prosecution  of  crimes  against 
women.  In  addition  to  these  national  laws 
aimed  at  this  traffic,  during  the  period  between 
1905-1910,  thirty-five  states  also  passed 
“white  slave”  laws. 

Social  Investigation. — A notable  feature  of 
the  recent  agitation  regarding  the  social  evil 
in  the  United  States  lias  been  the  consideration 
of  it  as  a social  problem,  due  mainly  to  the 
conditions  of  modern  life,  rather  than  as  a 
purely  criminal  problem.  As  early  as  1858 
a remarkably  thorough  investigation  on  this 
line  was  made  in  New  York  City  by  Dr.  Wil- 
liam W.  Sanger;  but  the  time  was  not  ripe 
for  its  proper  appreciation  and  use.  Of  more 
recent  investigations,  the  first  was  made  in 
1902  by  the  Committee  of  Fifteen  of  New 
York  City.  But  the  first  comprehensive  in- 
vestigation was  that  of  the  Vice  Commission 
of  Chicago  in  1910.  Following  this  came  the 
Report  of  the  Minneapolis  Vice  Commission 
(1911),  the  Study  of  the  Laws  in  New  York 
relating  to  the  Social  Evil  by  the  Committee 
of  Fourteen  of  New  York  City  (1910),  and  the 
Presentment  of  the  Additional  Grand  Jury  of 
New  York  County  in  June,  1910.  At  the 
present  time  (1914)  investigations  are  under 
way  in  New  York,  Philadelphia,  Baltimore, 
and  Boston,  and  the  subject  once  avoided  is 
receiving  serious  consideration  by  municipal, 
state,  and  national  authorities.  The  theory 
heretofore  held  that  the  social  evil  is  inevita- 
ble is  losing  ground.  In  its  stead  has  arisen 
a new  belief  and  confidence  in  the  efficacy  of 
social  remedies  and  in  the  imposition  of  severer 
penalties  upon  those  who  procure  and  exploit 
women  for  immoral  purposes. 

See  Amusements,  Regulation  op;  Health, 
Public,  Regulation  of;  Hotels  and  Lodging 
Houses,  Regut, ation  of;  Police  in  American 
Cities;  Prisons  fop.  Women;  Public  Morals, 
Care  for;  Social  Reform,  Problems  of. 


327 


SOCIAL  ORGANIZATION,  THEORY  OF— SOCIAL  REFORM,  PROBLEMS  OF 


References;  W.  W.  Sanger,  Hist,  of  Prostitu- 
tion (2d  ed.,  1895);  E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  The 
Social  Evil  (2d  ed.,  1912)  ; Research  Commit- 
tee of  the  Committee  of  Fifteen,  Report  on 
Social  Evil  in  New  York  City,  1910;  U.  S. 
Immigration  Commission,  “Importing  Women 
for  Immoral  Purposes”  in  Document  No.  IDG 
(1910);  Commissioner  General  of  Immigra- 


tion, Annual  Report , 1910;  Minneapolis  Vice 
Commission,  Report,  1911;  Vice  Commission  of 
Chicago,  Social  Evil  in  Chicago  (1911)  ; Am. 
Year  Book,  1910,  and  year  by  year. 

James  Bronson  Reynolds. 

SOCIAL  ORGANIZATION,  THEORY  OF. 

See  Sociology. 


SOCIAL  REFORM,  PROBLEMS  OF 


Historical;  Dependent  Classes  and  Remedial 
Measures. — Natural  inequalities  in  the  inher- 
ited abilities  of  men,  supplemented  by  inequali- 
ties of  opportunity  involved  in  a competitive 
industrial  system,  have  resulted  in  the  division 
of  society  into  hostile  groups,  rich  vs.  poor, 
cultured  vs.  ignorant.  Social  reform  has  for 
its  object  the  adjustment  of  social  conditions, 
so  as  to  create  harmony  among  these  antago- 
nistic groups.  Palliative  measures  were,  first 
employed;  the  giving  of  alms  by  rich  to  poor 
indiscriminately.  Then  followed  remedial 
measures  for  the  dependent  and  dangerous 
classes  of  society.  Charities  became  organized 
and  scientific.  Hospitals  were  provided  for 
the  sick,  public  almshouses  for  the  destitute 
and  aged,  asylums  for  the  insane  and  defective, 
prisons  for  the  criminal;  but  the  treatment 
was  stereotyped,  not  fitted  to  the  special  needs 
of  the  cases.  Many  such  institutions  still  re- 
main in  the  most  enlightened  communities,  and 
their  improvement  still  constitutes  a serious 
problem  of  social  reform. 

Recent  advances  in  the  study  of  psychology 
and  therapeutics  have  revealed  the  necessity 
of  adapting  the  means  of  cure  to  the  mental 
and  physical  needs  of  the  patient.  This  in- 
volves not  only  classification  of  types,  but  also 
“case  records” — study  of  heredity  and  environ- 
ment— and  continuous  personal  contact  with 
each  case  by  sympathetic  officials.  The  result 
of  this  new  type  of  treatment  is  the  education 
of  the  body,  mind  and  character  of  the  pa- 
tient, increased  productivity,  and  consequently 
a decreased  economic  loss  to  the  community. 

Institutional  treatment  for  these  classes  is 
decreasing  or  at  least  is  supplemented  by  in- 
creased personal  attention.  The  destitute,  after 
examination,  are  less  frequently  aided  with 
money  but  are  found  employment  or  given  in- 
struction in  improved  domestic  or  industrial 
methods.  Neglected  children  are  not  put  in  or- 
phanages but  placed  in  private  homes.  Insti- 
tutions for  defectives  or  delinquents  are  not 
forbidding  barracks  but  are  schools  built  on 
attractive  cottage  plans,  and  practising  mini- 
mum restraint,  self-government  by  inmates, 
and  daily  instruction  in  workshops  or  farms. 
The  destitute  and  many  types  of  abnormal 
persons  are  rendered  self-supporting.  The  prac- 
tices of  after-care  of  patients  and  of  parole 


for  prisoners  continue  the  care  of  the  institu- 
tional center  over  the  individual  until  his 
process  of  adjustment  with  society  is  finished 
and  the  danger  of  reversion  is  minimized. 

Even  these  improved  methods  of  alleviation 
and  cure  are,  however,  constantly  being  dis- 
placed among  the  programs  of  social  reform  by 
methods  which  seek  to  eliminate  the  root 
causes  of  existing  evil  conditions  in  modern 
life.  Social  reform  of  today  aims  at  the  de- 
velopment of  character  and  the  establishment 
of  a constructive  environment  in  which  all  in- 
dividuals may  find  maximum  opportunity  for 
proper  development.  Therefore  any  scientific 
program  of  social  reform  begins  in  an  exact 
study  of  conditions  to  determine:  (1)  what  is 
wrong  in  the  social  body;  (2)  what  are  the 
existent  forces  that  may  be  adapted  to  social 
improvement. 

Programs  of  social  reform  based  upon  this 
preliminary  diagnosis  fall  into  two  main  di- 
visions: (1)  direct  improvement  of  the  race 
through  scientific  breeding;  (2)  indirect  bet- 
terment of  society  through  the  creation  of  an 
environment  favorable  to  the  development  of 
the  individual. 

Home  Environment.— The  latter  program  of 
social  reform — the  improvement  of  environ- 
ment— comprises  by  far  the  greatest  portion 
of  all  current  activities  for  social  betterment. 
Studies  of  individual  lives  as  well  as  studies  of 
communities  show  that  health  or  illness,  pro- 
gressiveness or  deterioration,  depend  upon  the 
nature  of  the  individual  on  the  one  hand  and 
the  environment  upon  which  he  reacts,  on  the 
other.  The  nature  of  the  individual  depends 
upon  accumulated  factors  transmitted  through 
a long  line  but  may  be  dwarfed,  or  unevenly 
developed,  whether  physically  or  mentally,  by 
improper  environmental  conditions.  For  con- 
venience the  environments  within  which  men 
live  may  be  classified  under  three  heads:  (1) 
the  home  where  they  sleep  and  eat;  (2)  the 
place  of  work,  where  the  family  income  is 
earned;  (3)  the  environment  of  leisure  hours. 
Programs  of  social  reform  are  gradually  recog- 
nizing the  influences  which  these  environments 
bring  to  bear  upon  men  and  communities  of 
men  and  seek  to  eliminate  destructive  influ- 
ences or  prevent  them  from  action,  cultivating 
those  influences  that  are  constructive. 


328 


SOCIAL  REFORM,  PROBLEMS  OF 


For  example,  housing  surveys  show  that  in 
all  American  towns  there  are  dwelling  condi- 
tions detrimental  to  the  welfare  of  the  occu- 
pant. Some  houses  are  structurally  unsafe, 
others  inflammable  and  with  inadequate  fire- 
escapes.  Tenement  houses  of  cities  may  be  over- 
crowded, reducing  the  available  supply  of  ox- 
ygen to  tenants,  or  may  have  dark  hallways, 
common  water-closets  where  diseases  easily 
spread,  damp  basement  dwellings  and  dark, 
ill-ventilated  rooms  where  the  bacillus  of  tu- 
berculosis thrives,  cellars,  shafts  and  yfirds 
littered  with  refuse  where  flies  breed  and 
may  carry  the  germs  of  typhoid  fever  or 
other  diseases.  On  the  farm  the  contents 
of  the  privy  vault  may  pollute  wells  and 
indirectly  infect  the  food  supply  of  the 
city.  Bad  housing  conditions  both  re- 
duce the  vitality  of  tenants  through  over- 
crowding and  breathing  of  polluted  air 
and  increase  the  liability  to  contagion.  Re- 
sultant illness  may  involve  in  turn  unemploy- 
ment, or  industrial  inefficiency  and  thus  desti- 
tution and  other  evils. 

Housing  conditions  as  thus  revealed  by  more 
than  twenty  recent  intensive  investigations  in 
American  cities  (New  York,  Philadelphia, 
Washington,  Chicago,  Louisville,  etc.)  justify 
programs  of  reform  which  deal  with  causes, 
and  the  causes  of  causes  to  prevent  them  from 
operation.  Dark  hallways  or  rooms  dangerous 
to  health  and  morality  are  made  light  by  new 
windows,  toilets  are  cleaned  and  placed  within 
each  apartment,  and  repetition  of  existing  evils 
in  future  dwellings  is  prevented  by  the  enact- 
ment of  improved  tenement  hbuse  legislation, 
with  provision  for  enforcement.  Or  new  sub- 
urban homes  are  erected  for  slum  dwellers 
and  methods  are  discovered  to  remove  factor- 
ies from  cities  into  rural  regions  where  each 
family  can  afford  a private  home — open  to  sun- 
light and  air,  with  a garden.  Prevention  of 
recurrence  of  dangerous  environmental  condi- 
tions, and  construction  of  a new  improved 
home  and  community  environment  constitute 
the  program  of  enlightened  housing  reform. 

Governmental  means  of  improving  European 
housing  conditions  comprise  municipal  erection 
of  model  tenements  and  lodging  houses  (Lon- 
don, Liverpool,  Glasgow)  ; municipal  erection 
of  suburban  cottages  to  rent  to  workingmen 
(London  and  Ulm,  Germany)  ; municipal  pur- 
chase and  development  of  suburbs  on  approved 
city-planning  lines  (Germany)  ; taxation  of 
land  with  reduction  on  improvements,  causing 
vacant  lots  to  be  built  up  (Pittsburg  and  Van- 
couver, Canada)  ; tax  exemption  or  reduction  for 
model  dwellings  (France  and  Italy)  ; cheap 
state  loans  for  philanthropic  and  cooperative 
societies  building  model  dwellings  (England, 
Germany) . In  the  United  States  the  government 
aids  the  improvement  of  housing  conditions  by 
legislation  only;  through  health  ordinances 
prescribing  minimum  sanitary  conditions  for 
existing  dwellings;  and  building  laws  stipu- 


lating in  some  detail  the  minimum  size  of 
rooms,  yards  and  courts,  the  type  of  water- 
closet,  height  of  building,  fireproofing,  etc.  A 
few  state  governments  have  passed  legislation 
governing  tenement  building  throughout  the 
state  or  in  cities  above  a specified  size  (New 
Jersey,  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  Connecticut, 
Indiana,  Wisconsin).  Elsewhere,  housing  con- 
ditions are  governed  by  municipal  ordinance. 

Industrial  Environment. — The  problems  of 
the  industrial  environment  have  received  more 
public  attention  in  America  than  those  of  the 
home  environment.  Studies  of  family  budgets 
have  revealed  the  existence  of  wage  rates  too 
low  to  provide  clean,  nutritious  food,  in  addi- 
tion to  rent,  furniture,  clothing  and  other  ne- 
cessities. The  usual  result  in  the  working- 
man’s family  is  either  a use  of  foods  inade- 
quate to  maintain  efficiency,  the  taking  of 
lodgers  to  reduce  rents  (causing  overcrowd- 
ing) or  the  exploitation  of  wives  and  children 
in  industry  with  the  intention  of  raising  the 
family  income.  The  presence  of  married  wo- 
men in  trade  and  industry  means  not  only  the 
neglect  of  housekeeping  and  proper  rearing  of 
children  but  also  the  payment  of  low  wages 
to  all  unskilled  women.  Child  labor,  similarly, 
is  paid  low  wages  and  contributes  to  the  re- 
duction of  the  parent’s  wages  and  not  only 
prevents  continued  education  but  also  may 
stunt  growth  and  cause  early  moral  perver- 
sion. 

Studies  of  factory  life  show  that  workshops 
are  often  unsanitary  or  crowded,  that  certain 
processes  are  dangerous  to  life  or  health,  that 
fire  risks  are  not  properly  safeguarded.  Work 
too  long  or  unvaried  may  equally  reduce  the 
vitality  or  dwarf  the  mentality  of  operatives. 
Immigration  of  hundreds  of  thousands  of  un- 
skilled foreigners  with  low  standards  of  liv- 
ing each  year  complicates  the  industrial 
problem  by  causing  competition  with  native 
workingmen. 

These  conditions  are  met  by  a wide  range 
of  organizations  for  the  improvement  of  in- 
dustrial conditions  which  may,  like  the  move- 
ments for  housing  reform,  be  grouped  into 
the  philanthropic,  cooperative  and  governmen- 
tal. Philanthropic  efforts  at  industrial  reform 
include  movements  to  protect  or  distribute  im- 
migrants, to  protect  child  and  woman  labor; 
as  well  as  thousands  of  local  organizations, 
often  federated  by  states  or  nationally,  to 
relieve  the  hardships  occasioned  by  the  indus- 
trial system.  Private  initiative  often  improves 
industrial  conditions  locally  through  the  es- 
tablishment by  employers  of  institutions  for 
the  welfare  of  their  employees.  These  efforts 
take  the  form  of  “profit-sharing”  or  the  grant- 
ing of  cash  bonuses,  pensions,  or  shares  of 
stock  to  employees  in  addition  to  wages.  They 
may  take  the  form  of  “welfare  work”  under 
the  direction  of  a “social  secretary,”  providing 
artistic  and  sanitary  villages,  club  rooms,  ath- 
letic contests,  educational  classes,  etc. 


329 


SOCIAL  REFORM,  PROBLEMS  OF 


Organization  of  Labor. — Organization  of 
workingmen  as  a means  to  improvement  of 
the  industrial  environment  takes  three  impor- 
tant forms:  (1)  trade  unions  to  bargain  with 
employers  for  higher  wages,  shorter  hours  of 
labor  or  protection  of  operatives  from  unjust 
conditions;  (2)  cooperative  societies  for  the 
common  ownership  of  trade  and  industry  on 
a voluntary,  democratic  basis;  (3)  political 
organizations,  of  which  the  most  significant 
aim  to  supersede  capitalism  by  state  owner- 
ship of  the  means  of  production.  This  latter 
movement  for  political  socialism  is  rapidly 
growing  in  America.  Cooperative  movements 
which  are  highly  significant  in  Europe — count- 
ing over  2,500,000  members  in  England  alone, 
an  distributing  annually  $60,000,000  in  prof- 
its— 'have  scarcely  gained  a foothold  among 
American  workingmen. 

By  far  the  most  extensive  of  these  three 
movements  of  organized  workingmen  is  the 
trade  union  (see).  This  form  of  organization 
is  to  be  found  in  every  state  and  in  every  im- 
portant industry  excepting  agriculture.  Wo- 
men and  child  laborers  are  still  ordinarily 
unorganized.  Unions  have  accomplished  a 
great  deal  for  the  improvement  of  labor  by 
means  of  collective  bargaining  with  the  employ- 
er. In  many  trades  they  have  shortened  the 
hours  of  labor  and  increased  wages.  They 
have  been  seriously  limited,  however,  in  their 
scope  by  the  presence  of  immigrants  who  are 
unable  to  act  with  native  workingmen  because 
unacquainted  with  the  language.  By  means 
of  strikes  threatened  or  actual  the  trade  unions 
have  quite  largely  secured  terms  which  im- 
prove the  working  conditions  of  their  members. 

Government  Action  in  Industrial  Better- 
ment.— All  forms  of  organization  for  the  im- 
provement of  industrial  conditions  look  to  the 
government  for  aid.  In  Europe  national  gov- 
ernments have  aided  cooperative  societies, 
through  cheap  loans  and  favorable  legislation. 
In  America  state  legislation  is  frequently  hos- 
tile to  cooperation.  State  governments  have 
prevented  widely  the  employment  of  woman 
and  child  labor  under  conditions  dangerous 
to  morality.  They  have  further  restricted  the 
hours  of  labor  for  women  and  for  children, 
and  the  kinds  of  industry  in  which  thev  mav 
be  engaged.  In  all  large  industries  excepting 
agriculture,  child  labor  is  safeguarded.  Reg- 
ulations in  regard  to  compulsory  education  of 
children  under  specified  ages,  are  on  the  stat- 
utes of  the  more  progressive  states.  Govern- 
ments also  tend  increasingly  to  provide  for  the 
safety  of  employees  from  accident  and  disease. 
Machinery  dangerous  to  life  is  forbidden  or 
required  to  be  safeguarded  by  specified  appli- 
ances. Dangerous  trades  are  hedged  about 
with  regulations  minimizing  the  health  menace. 
Sanitary  provisions  for  both  sexes  and  fire- 
escapes  are  ordinarily  required  in  factories. 

State  governments,  further,  may  pass  laws 
providing  for  optional  or  compulsory  arbitra- 


tion of  labor  disputes  (see),  systems  of  indus- 
trial education  (see),  employer’s  liability 
(see),  minimum  wages  (see)  and  governmental 
provision  of  work  for  the  unemployed. 

Recreation  Environment. — The  environment 
in  which  men  pass  their  leisure  hours,  aside 
from  the  home,  comprises  a variety  of  insti- 
tutions tending  to  either  the  development  or 
the  degradation  of  manhood.  Much  of  the  lei- 
sure time  of  men  must  be  spent  in  rest  or  in 
passive  amusement.  These  hours  may  be  spent 
in  loafing  on  the  street  or  in  the  club,  they 
may  be  spent  at  the  saloon  in  drinking  and 
idle  conversation,  in  houses  of  ill  fame  or  in 
theaters  good  or  bad.  Commercial  institu- 
tions aiming  at  maximum  profit  on  the  in- 
vested capital  tend  to  provide  such  forms  of 
amusement  as  will  draw  an  average  crowd. 
Among  city  places  of  amusement  the  moving 
picture  show,  the  theatre  for  vaudeville  and 
burlesque,  the  cheap  dance  hall,  the  billiard 
room  and  saloon  play  a very  large  part. 
Harmless  sports  such  as  baseball  or  football 
which  involve  physical  exercise  and  healthy 
bodily  invigoration  become  decreasingly  pos- 
sible where  population  is  aggregated.  Chil- 
dren, particularly,  are  seriously  handicapped  in 
their  recreation  by  laws  preventing  play  in 
streets. 

Private  action  has  attempted  to  improve 
these  conditions  by  the  establishment  of  set- 
tlement houses  with  common  social  rooms, 
clubs  for  boys  and  girls  and  for  adults,  classes 
for  instruction  in  science  and  industry,  dances 
and  drama.  Similar  activities  are  carried  on 
by  institutional  churches  in  cities  and  by  em- 
ployers of  labor  in  industrial  villages.  Model 
theaters  may  be  erected  or  current  types  con- 
trolled by  organizations  of  citizens,  as  for  ex- 
ample the  moving  picture  productions  through- 
out America  have  been  regulated  by  a Na- 
tional Board  of  Censorship,  with  headquarters 
in  New  York  City. 

Clubs  are  often  formed  cooperatively  some- 
times for  debating  or  political  purposes,  some- 
times as  secret  societies  or  mutual  benefit  as- 
sociations. 

States  have  acted  for  the  improvement  of  the 
conditions  of  recreation  through  legislation  reg- 
ulating or  prohibiting  saloons  and  houses  of 
ill  fame.  Municipal  governments  have  main- 
tained boards  of  censorship  to  pass  upon  the 
commercial  amusements  of  the  city.  More  im- 
portant, however,  are  the  increasing  number 
of  institutions  financed  through  government 
funds  for  constructive  public  recreations.  Pub- 
lic baths  and  gymnasiums  have  been  estab- 
lished by  American  municipalities.  Extensive 
reservation  of  land  for  playgrounds  and  parks 
is  becoming  increasingly  a recognized  part  of 
municipal  action.  Our  cities  have,  however, 
waited  too  late  before  establishing  them  so 
that  public  playgrounds  still  are  often  remote 
from  the  area  of  congested  population  where 
they  are  most  needed.  Municipal  concerts  and 


330 


SOCIAL  SETTLEMENTS— SOCIALISM 


theaters,  art  museums,  public  libraries,  and 
evening  schools  with  branches  throughout  the 
city,  are  planned  for  the  cultural  development 
of  the  population. 

American  cities  are  now  beginning  to  realize 
the  necessity  of  providing  social  centers  (see) 
or  meeting  places  for  the  leisure  hours  of  cit- 
izens— for  lectures,  games,  amateur  drama  and, 
most  important,  for  debates  on  matters  of 
public  interest.  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  took  the  lead 
among  American  cities  in  opening  her  schools 
for  these  purposes.  The  establishment  of  pub- 
lic social  centers,  open  on  equal  terms  to  every- 
one, is  probably  the  next  important  step  which 
city  government  may  take  to  provide  construc- 
tive recreations  for  the  people. 

Programs  of  city  planning  (see),  increas- 
ingly advocated,  provide  not  only  for  the  prop- 
er layout  of  cities,  the  segregation  of  industry, 
the  building  of  adequate  streets  for  traffic  pur- 
poses and  retired  streets  in  residence  sec- 
tions, but  must  take  cognizance  of  the  social 
life  of  the  city  and  the  need  of  the  population 
for  direct  contact  with  the  natural  environ- 
ment which  parks  or  suburbs  afford.  Adequate 
reservations  of  land  for  parks,  schools,  librar- 
ies and  social  centers,  should  be  made  in  ad- 
vance before  the  price  of  land  becomes  pro- 
hibitive. In  no  other  way  is  it  possible  for  the 
state  to  provide  adequately  for  a healthy  use 
of  leisure  hours  by  all  of  its  population. 

Eugenics. — Movements  for  social  reform 
which  deal  only  with  the  improvement  of 
environmental  conditions  are  hampered  or 
made  wasteful  by  the  presence  in  the  social 
body  of  inferior  types  of  men.  The  basic  pro- 
gram for  social  reform  would  rid  society  of 
its  undesirables  and  build  a race  superior  to 
our  own  by  means  of  scientific  breeding  of 
men.  This  program  in  negative  form  would 
prevent  the  unfit,  hereditary  degenerates,  de- 
fectives, etc.,  from  breeding,  by  means  of  se- 
gregation or  by  surgically  rendering  them  in- 
capable of  procreation.  This  so-called  Indiana 
plan  has  not  yet  been  widely  copied  in  the 
United  States  nor  has  segregation  of  the  unfit 
been  practised  in  a large  percentage  of  cases ; 
hence  the  breeding  of  hereditary  criminals, 
imbeciles,  blind,  deaf-mutes  and  syphilitics  con- 


tinues. A positive  form  of  the  eugenics  move- 
ment would  advise,  and  among  extreme  eugen- 
ists  would  force  under  governmental  direction, 
the  mating  of  certain  specified  types  calculated 
to  perfect  the  species.  The  American  head- 
quarters of  this  movement  is  the  eugenics’  sec- 
tion of  the  American  Breeders’  Association, 
with  office  at  Cold  Spring  Harbor,  Long  Island. 
The  eugenics  doctrine,  though  propounded  in 
classical  times,  has  not  been  widely  advocated 
among  American  social  reformers  until  recent- 
ly. The  present  stage  of  the  movement  is  one 
of  careful  scientific  research  to  which  physi- 
cians, biologists,  psychologists  and  social  scien- 
tists contribute.  The  science  of  eugenics  has 
not  yet  been  widely  popularized,  though  it  is 
likely  to  be  applied  as  a primary  measure  of 
social  reform.  Government  action  in  this  field 
is  as  yet  limited  to:  (1)  segregation— too  of- 
ten temporary — of  such  types  of  the  unfit  as 
by  law  require  institutional  treatment;  (2) 
sterilization  of  certain  types  of  the  unfit  in 
Indiana  and  a few  other  states — seldom  prac- 
tised; (3)  laws  in  a few  states  preventing 
marriage  of  specified  types  of  unfit — easily 
avoided  by  illicit  intercourse  or  by  immigration 
to  states  which  lack  such  laws. 

See  Charities,  Associated;  Charities,  Pub- 
lic Agencies  for;  Children,  Public  Care  of; 
Defective  Classes. 

References:  Department  of  Social  Ethics, 
Harvard  University,  Guide  to  Reading  in  So- 
cial Ethics  and  Allied  Subjects  (1910)  ; A.  G. 
Warner,  American  Charities  ( rev.  ed.,  1908 ) ; 
L.  Veiller,  Housing  Reform  (1910)  ; T.  S. 
Adams,  and  H.  L.  Sumner,  Labor  Problems 
(7th  ed.,  1910)  ; P.  U.  Kellogg,  Ed.,  The  Pitts- 
burg Survey  (1910)  ; Committee  of  Fifty,  The 
Liquor  Problem  (1905)  ; National  Conference 
of  Charities  and  Corrections,  Proceedings 
(1874-1913);  W.  D.  P.  Bliss,  New  Encyclo- 
pedia of  Social  Reform  (1908). 

James  Ford. 

SOCIAL  SETTLEMENTS.  See  Settlements, 
Social. 

SOCIAL  WORKERS,  SCHOOLS  FOR.  See 

Schools  for  Social  Workers. 


SOCIALISM 


Definition. — The  term  socialism,  like  democ- 
racy or  republicanism,  is  very  difficult  to  define, 
because  it  includes  so  many  different  shades  of 
opinion.  Its  exponents  are  sometimes  led  to 
define  it  so  vaguely  as  to  rob  it  of  all  mean- 
ing, and  to  include  nothing  to  which  anybody 
could  possibly  object.  Thus  it  is  sometimes  de- 
fined merely  as  a policy  which  aims  at  a better 
distribution  of  wealth  than  that  which  now 
exists.  In  somewhat  more  definite  form  it  is 
sometimes  defined  as  a policy  which  aims  to 
119  3 


secure  a better  distribution  of  wealth  through 
the  public  ownership  and  operation  of  the 
means  of  production — that  is,  of  the  farms, 
factories,  railroads,  stores,  shops,  etc.  A 1 ittl  • 
reflection  will  show  that  the  first  of  these  defi- 
nitions is  entirely  misleading.  Every  one  who 
thinks  at  all  desires  a better  distribution  of 
wealth,  but  that  does  not  make  every  one  a 
socialist.  The  avowed  socialist  will  emphati- 
cally repudiate  any  one  who  claims  to  be  a 
socialist  on  this  ground  while  opposing  the 


SOCIALISM 


public  ownership  and  operation  of  the  means 
of  production.  That  which  distinguishes  the 
socialist  from  the  non-socialist  is  not  the  de- 
sire for  a better  distribution  of  wealth,  but 
the  program  by  means  of  which  that  end  is  to 
be  attained.  A socialist  is  one  who  believes 
that  it  is  to  be  attained  by  means  of  public 
ownership  and  operation  of  the  means  of  pro- 
duction. A non-socialist  is  one  who  believes 
it  is  to  be  attained  in  some  other  way.  Thus 
the  term  socialist,  like  the  term  vegetarian,  is 
an  exclusive  one,  and  includes  only  those  who 
believe  in  a fairly  definite  and  specific  pro- 
gram. 

Foundation  Theory. — The  theory  on  which 
this  program  is  based  is  also  fairly  definite 
and  explicit.  There  is  no  leading  socialist 
who,  and  no  influential  socialist  book  which, 
does  not  accept  absolutely  the  formula,  ‘‘Labor 
alone  is  productive.”  From  this  formula  the 
reasoning  is  fairly  consistent  and  conclusive. 
Labor  (see)  alone  being  productive,  labor  alone 
earns  income.  All  other  income — rent,  inter- 
est, profits — are  therefore  unearned  and  the 
result  of  exploitation.  No  one  who  accepts 
that  formula  could  do  otherwise  than  advocate 
socialism  in  the  strict  and  exclusive  sense  al- 
ready described.  But  while  capital  (see)  is 
unproductive,  according  to  these  formulists,  it 
is  highly  useful  for  production,  and  must  there- 
fore be  had.  This  is  of  course  inconsistent, 
but  inconsistency  is  a minor  matter.  The 
only  way  by  which  this  useful  factor  in  in- 
dustry can  be  had,  without  allowing  individu- 
als to  derive  income  from  it,  is  for  the  public 
to  own  and  operate  it. 

Contrary  to  a somewhat  widespread  belief, 
socialism  would  not  do  away  with  competition 
(see)  as  such,  though  socialists  have  made 
use  of  the  evils  of  competition  as  an  argument 
in  favor  of  their  policy.  But  there  are  two 
distinct  types  of  competition  in  modern  society, 
the  industrial  and  the  political.  There  is  just 
as  fierce  a rivalry  among  individuals  for  po- 
litical office,  or  civil  service  positions,  as  there 
is  in  the  industrial  field  for  business  and  cus- 
tomers. The  effect  of  the  socialistic  program 
would  be  greatly  to  increase  the  political  form 
of  competition  by  bringing  nearly  every  occu- 
pation under  the  civil  service,  and  greatly  to 
restrict  the  field  for  the  industrial  form  of 
competition  by  taking  industries  out  of  the 
field  of  private  enterprise.  Practically  every 
worker  would  then  be  an  employee  of  the  pub- 
lic, and  in  a position  similar  to  that  of  the 
men  now  engaged  in  the  civil  service.  The 
result  would  be  that  the  largest  success  would 
go,  under  socialism,  to  the  men  who  were 
most  adapted  in  that  form  of  competition 
which  goes  on  in  politics  and  in  the  civil  serv- 
ice; whereas  the  adepts  in  that  kind  of  com- 
petition which  now  goes  on  in  business  would 
find  their  field  of  endeavor  greatly  restricted 
and  would  therefore  have  a smaller  chance  of 


Modified  Socialism  and  Individualism. — 

There  are  some  half-hearted  socialists  who 
do  not  demand  the  full  socialistic  program, 
but  who  profess  to  be  willing  to  leave  some 
room  for  private  enterprise,  especially  of  the 
smaller  sort.  There  is  no  individualist  who 
opposes  every  form  of  government  enterprise. 
The  essential  difference  between  this  mild  form 
of  socialism  and  the  modified  individualism 
which  is  now  the  prevailing  practical  philos- 
ophy is,  briefly,  as  follows:  Under  socialism 
all  the  great  means  of  production,  such  as  are 
now  owned  and  managed  by  large  corporations, 
would  be  owned  and  operated  by  the  public — 
that  is,  either  by  the  state  or  by  local  govern- 
ments. Under  individualism  the  greater  part 
of  these  instruments  of  production  are,  in  the 
main,  to  be  owned  and  managed  by  private 
individuals,  or  by  voluntary  associations  like 
corporations,  cooperative  societies,  etc.  In 
neither  case  does  one  form  of  ownership  ex- 
clude absolutely  the  other;  but  under  the  in- 
dividualistic system  the  presumption  is  always 
in  favor  of  individual  initiative,  while  public 
ownership  and  management  are  the  exceptions, 
and  the  burden  of  proof  is  thrown  upon  those 
who  advocate  public  ownership  in  any  specific 
case;  whereas  under  socialism  the  presumption 
is  always  in  favor  of  public  ownership,  while 
private  ownership  and  management  are  excep- 
tional cases,  and  the  burden  of  proof  is  upon 
any  one  who  desires  to  initiate,  to  own,  and 
to  manage  a private  business.  In  the  main 
this  must  be  contrary  to  socialistic  policy, 
because  any  one  who  would  desire  to  own  and 
operate  a capitalistic  enterprise,  however 
small,  must  expect  to  derive  some  advantage 
from  such  ownership.  But  since,  according 
to  the  socialist  formula,  capital  is  unproduc- 
tive, such  an  advantage  to  the  individual  must 
be  an  unearned  advantage;  and  unless  he  can 
show  some  reason  why  he  can  be  allowed 
such  an  advantage  the  logic  of  the  situation 
would  forbid  his  receiving  it.  The  individu- 
alist (see  Individualism)  believes,  however, 
that  capital  is  productive,  or  useful  in  produc- 
tion, which  means  the  same  thing.  The  creator 
of  a useful  factor  in  production  is  himself  a 
producer  and  entitled  to  a reward  for  his  pro- 
ductive service,  therefore  he  is  not  expected 
to  prove  his  right  before  being  allowed  to 
own  and  manage  capital.  It  is  taken  for 
granted  that  he  has  a right  to  own  and  operate 
a piece  of  productive  capital  if  he  sees  it  to 
be  to  his  advantage  to  do  so.  They  who  deem 
it  inexpedient  that  he  should  be  allowed  to 
do  so  must  prove  their  case  in  every  individu- 
al instance.  This  does  not  imply  that  there 
are  no  such  cases,  for  there  are  a good  many 
industries  in  the  aggregate  which  seem  to  be 
better  adapted  to  public  than  to  private  owner- 
ship. Under  this  individualistic  philosophy 
there  is  no  reason  against  public  ownership 
in  such  eases.  Thus  the  essential  difference 
between  this  milder  form  of  socialism  and  the 


332 


success. 


SOCIALISM 


practical  individualism  of  the  present  is  one 
of  presumption  and  burden  of  proof.  The 
individualist  assumes  that  individual  owner- 
ship and  initiative  are  entirely  proper,  unless 
a satisfactory  reason  in  each  instance  can  be 
shown  to  the  contrary.  The  socialist  assumes 
that  individual  ownership  and  initiative  are 
improper,  unless  a satisfactory  reason  can  be 
shown  in  each  instance  in  their  favor.  There 
is  thus  a sharply  drawn  issue  between  the  two 
systems  of  practical  philosophy.  It  matters 
not  whether  the  socialist  proposes  a sweeping 
revolution  or  a gradual  evolution,  the  issue 
is  equally  sharp  in  either  case.  However  grad- 
ually it  is  to  come  about,  the  transfer  from 
private  to  public  ownership  and  control  must 
eventually  be  fairly  complete.  This  situation 
is  a logical  result  of  the  socialistic  theory  of 
capital.  If  capital  is  unproductive,  and  the 
income  from  capital  unearned  (and  no  one  is 
a socialist  unless  he  believes  that),  then  it  is 
proportionally  as  unsound  and  irrational  for 
a private  individual  to  gain  a hundred  dollars 
as  a million  dollars  as  the  result  of  such 
ownership. 

Interest  and  Capital. — From  the  strictly  sci- 
entific point  of  view,  the  whole  question  turns 
upon  the  problem  of  interest.  If  the  capital- 
ist performs  a useful  function,  in  return  for 
which  he  receives  interest,  then  interest  is 
earned.  And  one  who  believes  this  cannot  be 
a socialist.  If  the  capitalist  does  not  perform 
a useful  function,  if  capital  is  unproductive 
or  useless  in  production  and  interest  is  un- 
earned, no  one  could  be  anything  but  a social- 
ist. 

To  deny  that  capital  is  productive  and  to 
admit  that  it  is  useful  in  production  (see)  is, 
as  already  indicated,  inconsistent.  To  deny 
that  capital  is  productive  is  to  deny  that  tools 
are  useful;  for  capital  is  tools.  If  tools  are 
useful,  then  every  one  who  has  an  essential 
part  in  the  making  of  tools  is  performing  a 
useful  service.  The  first  step  in  the  making 
of  a tool  is  the  decision  of  some  one  to  post- 
pone consumption;  that  is,  to  expend  his  time 
and  energy,  or  his  money,  for  tools  rather  than 
for  consumers’  goods.  If  I have  a dollar  and 
spend  it  for  food  for  my  own  satisfaction, 
I to  that  extent  encourage  the  producers  of 
food.  If  instead  of  buying  food  I decide  to 
buy  an  ax,  I to  that  extent  encourage  the 
makers  of  axes.  Upon  my  decision  depends 
whether  the  productive  forces  of  society  shall 
be  directed  into  the  food-producing  or  the  tool- 
making industries.  By  spending  my  dollar  for 
an  ax,  I virtually  divert  a dollar’s  worth  of 
productive  energy  from  the  food-producing 
to  the  ax-making  industry.  The  result  of  this 
is  that  society  is  better  provided  with  axes 
than  it  would  otherwise  have  been.  Its  future 
productive  power  is  increased  by  that  fact. 
My  decision  to  forego  the  present  consumption 
of  food  in  order  to  buy  an  ax  has  increased 
the  productive  power  of  the  community,  and 


I have  to  that  extent  rendered  a service  to 
the  community.  This  is  essentially  the  origin 
of  every  form  of  capital,  whether  it  be  an  ax, 
a plow,  a factory,  or  a railroad.  They  are 
all  tools  of  different  sizes. 

No  one  who  thus  understands  the  nature 
and  origin  of  capital  could  logically  take  the 
position  that  all  private  ownership  of  capital 
is  wrong  and  all  income  from  capital  unearned. 
Nor  could  he  take  the  position  that  the  would- 
be  owner  and  manager  of  a piece  of  productive 
capital  must  prove  his  case,  or  give  a satisfac- 
tory reason  why  he  should  be  allowed  to  do 
so,  before  being  allowed  to  embark  upon  a 
productive  enterprise.  Such  a person  might 
believe  in  the  public  ownership  of  a good  many 
things,  like  water  works,  electric  lighting 
plants,  or  even  railways.  But  he  would  expect 
to  prove  that  private  enterprise  ought  not  to 
be  allowed  in  these  enterprises. 

Most  of  the  examples  of  unearned  capital 
which  the  socialist  points  out  are  cases  of  rise 
in  land  values,  of  monopolistic  accumulation 
(see  Monopolies),  or  of  inherited  capital. 
One  can,  however,  be  opposed  to  all  these  forms 
of  capital — that  is,  he  can  be  a single  taxer, 
an  anti-monopolist,  and  an  opponent  of  the 
laws  of  inheritance  which  permit  wealth  to 
pass  from  one  generation  to  another — without 
being  a socialist.  The  single  tax  (see)  does 
not  interfere  with  the  private  ownership  of 
land,  and  it  leaves  the  management  of  land 
just  where  it  is  now.  It  merely  taxes  away 
that  part  of  the  value  of  land  which  is  not 
the  result  of  the  improvements  made  by  the 
owners.  This  proposal  is  based  upon  the  fact 
that  the  land  itself  is  not  the  product  of  the 
labor,  abstinence,  or  enterprise  of  the  owner. 
But  since  tools  and  improvements  are  the  re- 
sults of  such  labor,  abstinence,  or  enterprise, 
their  values  are  to  be  left  in  possession  of  the 
owners.  Monopoly  profits  are  excessive  above 
the  value  of  the  actual  service  rendered,  and 
must  therefore  be  prevented  by  public  control ; 
but  ordinary  profits,  in  a competitive  industry, 
cannot  be  permanently  in  excess  of  the  value 
of  the  service,  otherwise  more  competitors 
would  enter  the  field  and  reduce  them.  Where 
an  industry  is  necessarily  a monopoly,  like  the 
water,  gas,  and  electric  light  works  of  a city, 
its  telephone  and  street  railway  system,  and 
possibly  the  railway  and  telegraph  systems 
and  the  mineral  deposits  of  a country,  and 
competition  cannot  be  expected  to  regulate 
prices,  then  the  public  must  regulate  them  by 
law. 

The  case  of  inherited  capital  is  complicated 
by  its  connection  with  the  institution  of  the 
family  (see).  Its  function  is  to  give  perma- 
nency and  solidarity  to  that  institution,  and 
its  social  utility  depends  upon  the  value  of 
the  compact  and  permanent  family  as  the  unit 
of  social  organization.  But  if  we  leave  out 
of  consideration  the  question  of  the  family, 
it  will,  of  course,  be  obvious  that  inherited 


SOCIALISM 


capital  is  not  earned  by  the  one  who  inherits 
it.  Moreover,  the  race  of  life  is  not  an  even 
one  when  some  of  the  contestants  start  with 
a fund  of  inherited  capital  while  others  start 
with  nothing  but  their  bare  hands.  Looking 
at  the  question  wholly  from  the  point  of  view 
of  the  rising  generation,  without  regard  for 
the  past  generation,  or  the  perpetuity  of  the 
family  interest,  it  seems  unfair  that  some  in- 
dividuals should  be  thus  handicapped.  But 
it  looks  different  when  viewed  from  the  stand- 
point of  the  passing  generation,  and  with  due 
regard  for  the  family  interest.  Granting  that 
a member  of  the  passing  generation  is  earning 
his  income,  no  one  can  give  a good  reason 
why  he  should  not  be  allowed  to  save  a part 
of  it  and  accumulate  capital.  If  he  prefers 
to  spend  a part  of  his  income  in  buying  tools 
rather  than  consumers’  goods,  it  would  be  ab- 
surd to  deny  him  the  privilege.  If  he  chooses 
to  give  some  of  his  tools  away,  it  would  be 
difficult  to  give  a reason  why  he  should  not  be 
permitted  to  do  so.  And  if  he  chooses  to  give 
them  to  his  children,  either  before  or  after  his 
death,  the  common  sense  of  mankind  could 
not  deny  him  that  right.  But  to  admit  all  this 
is  to  sanction  the  capitalistic  system  in  every 
essential  detail.  As  between  these  opposing 
points  of  view  it  is  difficult  to  choose ; but 
the  world  is  actually  moving  along  the  line  of 
compromise,  that  is,  along  the  line  of  a heavily 
graduated  inheritance  tax.  There  is  not  the 
least  semblance  of  socialism  in  this,  since  pri- 
vate ownership  and  management  of  the  means 
of  production  are  still  recognized  as  normal, 
and  there  is  not  the  slightest  encroachment 
upon  the  domain  of  private  enterprise  and  in- 
itiative. 

Is  Labor  Alone  Productive? — The  doctrine 
that  labor  alone  is  productive,  or  that  all 
wealth  is  produced  by  labor,  may  be  said  to 
be  the  corner  stone  of  the  structure  of  social- 
ist theory.  That  is  the  doctrine  without  which 
there  would  be  and  could  be  no  such  thing 
as  a socialistic  system  of  thought.  The  sig- 
nificance and  weakness  of  this  doctrine  may 
be  shown  by  the  following  analogy.  In  the 
arid  states  of  the  far  West  there  is  frequently 
found  soil  of  excellent  quality  with  abundant 
stores  of  plant  food,  but,  moisture  being  scarce 
during  the  greater  part  of  the  year,  the  land 
is  bare  of  vegetation.  When  rain  falls  plants 
spring  abundantly.  They  seem  therefore  to 
depend  upon  water,  as  they  vanish  when  water 
is  absent  and  they  appear  when  water  is  pres- 
ent. One  might  therefore  be  excused  for  con- 
tending that  water  alone  produces  vegetation, 
but  it  would  not  be  true.  If  nitrogen,  or  pot- 
ash, or  phosphorous  were  absent,  vegetation 
would  be  just  as  scarce  as  when  water  is  ab- 
sent. Similarly,  in  an  uninhabited  wilderness 
there  may  be  fertile  soil,  abundance  of  mois- 
ture, stores  of  minerals,  stately  forests,  and 
every  other  physical  resource,  but  no  wealth 
is  produced,  labor  (see)  alone  being  absent. 


When  labor  is  added  to  the  combination, 
wealth  results.  There  is  therefore  some  excuse 
for  the  conclusion  that  labor  alone  is  produc- 
tive, but  it  would  be  just  as  untrue  as  to  say, 
in  the  foregoing  illustration,  that  water  alone 
produces  vegetation. 

Class  Consciousness.- — Next  in  importance  to 
the  doctrine  that  labor  alone  is  productive 
is  the  doctrine  that  progress  comes  through 
class  struggle  or  class  war.  Therefore  all 
their  authoritative  writers,  from  Karl  Marx 
down  to  the  present  time,  openly  and  frankly 
advocate  the  class  war,  and  call  upon  all 
workingmen  everywhere  to  unite,  to  become 
“class  conscious,”  and  to  view  every  problem 
from  the  class  conscious  standpoint.  Others 
are  less  frank  in  their  avowal  of  this  policy, 
some  even  profess  to  repudiate  it,  but  there  is 
scarcely  one  who  could  be  called  a socialist 
leader  who  does  not  appeal  directly  to  class 
prejudice,  or  inveigh  against  the  capitalist 
class.  In  a certain  broad  sense,  this  is  a 
repetition,  in  a new  form,  of  the  old,  old  strug- 
gle between  territoriality  and  class  as  a basis 
of  social  grouping.  When  the  territorial  group 
• — that  is,  the  people  inhabiting  a certain  ter- 
ritory— become  group  conscious,  and  when  the 
loyalty  of  this  group  transcends  every  other 
loyalty,  then  there  is  a state.  When  a number 
of  people  professing  the  same  religion,  or  be- 
longing to  the  same  class,  become  group  con- 
scious, and  when  loyalty  to  that  group  tran- 
scends every  other  form  of  loyalty,  then  the 
state  is  destroyed  and  church  or  class  be- 
comes the  supreme  power.  That  was,  in  socio- 
logical terms,  the  meaning  of  the  struggle  be- 
tween church  and  state;  and  it  is  also  the 
meaning  of  this  modern  struggle  between  class 
and  territoriality  as  a basis  of  the  group  con- 
sciousness and  group  loyalty.  When  the  labor- 
ing classes  become  more  loyal  to  their  own 
class  group  than  they  are  to  the  territorial 
group  known  as  the  state,  class  will  dominate 
the  state  as  the  church  did,  or  came  near  do- 
ing, at  one  time.  Men  who  have  become  thor- 
oughly class  conscious  naturally  look  with  dis- 
favor upon  any  exhibition  of  territorial  group 
consciousness.  It  is  not  any  special  abhorrence 
for  war  or  love  for  peace  which  induces  so- 
cialistic bodies  to  oppose  international  war; 
it  is  simply  their  feeling  that  international 
war  is  the  wrong  kind  of  war.  Class  war  de- 
mands class  loyalty.  International  war  re- 
quires loyalty  to  the  territorial  group  called 
the  state,  and  tends  to  stimulate  and  develop 
it.  That,  however,  tends  to  make  territorial 
loyalty  supreme  over  class  loyalty.  Therefore 
the  advocates  of  the  class  war  could  not  do 
otherwise  than  oppose  international  war. 

Socialism  and  Anarchism. — In  the  popular 
mind  socialism  is  not  always  sharply  distin- 
guished from  anarchism,  though  so  far  as  their 
programs  are  concerned  they  are  almost  dia- 
metrically opposite.  That  is,  the  socialist  pro- 
gram calls  for  a great  enlargement  of  the 


SOCIALISM 


functions  and  the  power  of  government,  where- 
as the  anarchist  program  calls  for  a great 
curtailment  or  the  complete  destruction,  of 
that  power,  so  far  at  least  as  it  rests  upon 
authority  and  compulsion.  But  there  is  a cer- 
tain partial  justification  for  this  popular  con- 
fusion. If  instead  of  considering  the  two 
programs  we  consider  the  attitude  of  mind  of 
the  two  groups  of  reformers,  we  shall  find 
much  in  common  between  them.  Both  are  alike 
opposed  to  a situation  where  one  man  has 
power  or  authority  over  another.  Such  a term 
as  wage-slavery,  which  is  a favorite  among 
socialist  leaders,  is  symptomatic  of  this  atti- 
tude. Many  of  the  socialist  agitators  explain 
that  they  are  not  opposed  to  private  property 
as  such,  but  only  to  such  forms  of  private 
property  as  give  one  man  power  over  another. 
It  is  not,  in  other  words,  private  property  to 
which  they  object,  but  the  power  of  one  man 
over  another.  To  this  the  anarchist  replies, 
and  with  irrefutable  logic,  “There  are  two 
sources  of  this  power  of  one  man  over  another; 
one  is  property  in  the  means  of  production, 
the  other  is  government.  To  take  away  one 
source  of  power  and  to  increase  the  other  is 
only  to  make  matters  worse.  The  socialist, 
therefore,  is  only  a half-way  anarchist.”  How- 
ever, as  explained  above,  socialism  is  a pro- 
gram, and  is  not  an  attitude  of  mind.  There- 
for it  is  not  to  be  confused  with  anarchism; 
though,  if  it  were  an  attitude  of  mind,  it 
would  not  always  be  easy  to  distinguish  be- 
tween the  two. 

Karl  Marx. — The  leading  personality  in  the 
modern  socialistic  movement  is  undoubtedly 
Karl  Marx  (1818-1883),  though  his  doctrines 
are  only  vaguely  understood  and  are  generally 
ignored  by  the  leading  present-day  socialists. 
The  secret  of  his  influence,  however,  is  not  to 
be  found  in  his  economic  doctrines,  but  in  his 
bold  and  effective  advocacy  of  the  class  strug- 
gle. In  this  respect  he  was  the  voice  through 
which  the  class  hostility  engendered  by  the 
modern  industrial  organization  was  able  to 
express  itself,  and  his  name  has  become  the 
“In  hoc  signo  vinces”  of  the  workingmen’s 
class  conscious  crusade.  In  his  advocacy  of 
the  class  struggle  he  was  absolutely  uncom- 
promising and  would  tolerate  no  opposition 
even  from  his  dearest  friends.  Because  of 
differences  of  opinion,  he  successively  repudiat- 
ed and  attacked  his  different  friends  and  as- 
sociates, such  as  Bruno  Bauer,  Arnold  Ruge, 
even  Proudhon  under  whose  influence  he  had 
become  a socialist,  and  Lassalle,  his  greatest 
rival  for  the  position  of  leadership.  In  every 
contest  for  supremacy  among  the  revolutionary 
leaders  of  his  day  Marx  invariably  won  the 
victory,  partly  because  of  his  striking  personal- 
ity, but  mainly  because  of  his  more  perfect 
voicing  of  the  sentiments  of  the  class  consci- 
ous revolutionists. 

This  class  consciousness  is  the  inevitable  out- 
come of  the  modern  joint  stock  system  of  own- 


ership, under  which  owners  and  workers  are 
widely  separated,  having  few  opportunities  of 
meeting  and  acquaintance.  Such  separation 
of  men  into  sharply  distinct  groups,  whether 
the  dividing  line  be  a geographical  boundary, 
a racial  difference,  or  a social  distinction,  in- 
variably produces  lack  of  sympathy  and  pre- 
disposes men  toward  intergroup  warfare.  Thus 
the  capitalistic  system  contains  within  itself, 
according  to  this  theory,  the  seeds  of  its  own 
destruction.  Like  certain  disease  germs  in 
the  human  body,  the  capitalistic  system  in  the 
body  politic  develops  certain  antitoxins  which 
will  rid  the  body  of  capitalism,  and  capitalism 
will  thus  run  its  course  like  other  diseases. 
This  is  a phase  of  the  question  upon  which 
capitalists  will  do  well  to  meditate,  though 
they  will  probably  continue  to  say,  “After  us 
the  deluge!” 

The  other  economic  doctrines  of  Marx  are: 
(1)  the  labor  theory  of  value;  (2)  the  mate- 
rialistic interpretation  of  history;  (3)  the  doc- 
trine of  evolution  through  class  struggle.  Of 
the  first  it  is  only  necessary  to  say  that  it 
is  not  held  by  a single  scientific  economist.  Of 
the  second  it  may  be  said  that  it  has  a cer- 
tain wide  acceptance,  but  it  has  been  expound- 
ed with  vastly  greater  insight  and  learning 
by  such  men  as  Buckle,  Comte,  and  Spencer. 
The  one  doctrine  which  seems  likely  to  stand 
the  test  of  criticism  and  experience  is  the  doc- 
trine that  social  evolution  comes  through  class 
struggle.  The  modern  capitalistic  system  is 
dependent  upon  large  supplies  of  cheap  labor. 
Therefore  the  dominant  capitalistic  interests 
will  always  favor  policies  which  encourage  the 
rapid  multiplication  of  cheap  laborers,  either 
through  natural  reproduction  or  immigration 
from  lower  civilizations  and  less  developed 
countries.  This  will  eventually  make  the  prop- 
ertyless class  the  most  numerous,  and  they  will 
then  assert  their  power,  either  through  legal 
or  revolutionary  means,  and  dispossess  the  cap- 
italists of  their  capital. 

See  Capital  and  Capitalization;  Chris- 
tian Socialism;  Competition;  Distribution, 
Economic;  Economic  Theory,  History  of; 
Fabian  Socialists;  Labor;  Socialism, 
State  ; Sociology. 

References:  R.  T.  Ely,  French  and  German 
Socialism  (1883),  Socialism  (1894);  J.  Rae, 
Contemporary  Socialism  (3d  ed.,  1910);  J.  T. 
Stoddart,  The  New  Socialism  (1910)  ; M.  Hill- 
quit,  Hist,  of  Socialism  in  the  U.  S.  (1903)  ; 
K.  Marx  and  F.  Engels,  The  Communist  Mani- 
festo (1901)  ; K.  Marx,  Capital  (1889)  ; F. 
Engels,  Socialism,  Utopian  and  Scientific 
( 1892)  ; G.  B.  Shaw,  Ed.,  Fabian  Essays  in  So- 
cialism (1890)  ; W.  D.  P.  Bliss,  A Handbook 
of  Socialism  (1895);  E.  Vandervelde,  Collect- 
ivism and  Industrial  Revolution  (1904);  J. 
Spargo,  Socialism  ( 1906 ) ; J.  Mackaye,  The 
Economy  of  Happiness  ( 1906 ) ; J.  R.  Mac- 
Donald, Socialism  and  Government  ( 1907 ) ; J. 
E.  Le  Rossignol,  Orthodox  Socialism  (1907); 


SOCIALISM,  CHRISTIAN— SOCIALISM,  STATE 


E.  von  Bohm-Bawerk,  Karl  Marx  and  the  Close 
of  his  System,  (1898)  ; A.  M.  Low,  “What 
in  Socialism?”  in  North  Am.  Rev.,  CXCVI, 
CXCVII  (Jan.,  Feb.,  1913). 

T.  N.  Carver. 

SOCIALISM,  CHRISTIAN.  See  Christian 

Socialism. 

SOCIALISM,  MUNICIPAL.  Municipal  so- 
cialism is  both  a theory  of  local  government 
and  the  program  of  a political  party.  As  a 
theory  of  local  government  it  is  best  defined 
in  the  words  of  Joseph  Chamberlain,  when 
Mayor  of  Birmingham  (1874)  : 

The  leading  idea  . . . may  be  said  to  be 

that  of  a joint  stock  or  cooperative  enterprise  in 
which  every  citizen  is  a shareholder,  and  of  which 
the  dividends  are  receivable  in  the  improved  health 
and  the  increase  in  the  comfort  and  happiness  of 
the  community.  . . . The  primary  object  of  all 

concerned  is  not  so  much  to  lessen  expenditure,  as 
to  spend  most  wisely. 

The  International  Socialist  party  was  at 
first  opposed  to  municipal  socialism  as  a po- 
litical doctrine,  just  as  it  was  opposed  to  co- 
operation, and  trade  unionism,  and  every  non- 
political and  merely  local  form  of  collective 
action.  Eventually,  however,  the  International 
Socialist  Congress,  held  at  Paris  in  1900,  for- 
mally resolved  that  “the  term  Municipal  So- 
cialism does  not  designate  a peculiar  form  of 
socialism,  but  simply  the  application  of  gen- 
eral socialist  principles  to  a special  sphere  of 
political  action.”  Thus  the  ideal  of  a group  of 
English  middle-class  municipal  reformers  was 
officially  incorporated  into  the  political  pro- 
gram of  the  international  labor  party.  See 
Local  Government;  Municipal  Ownership; 
Socialism.  References:  W.  G.  Towler,  So- 
cialism in  Local  Government  (1909);  F.  W. 
Jowett,  Socialism  and  the  City  (1907)  ; E.  J. 
Levey,  “Municipal  Socialism”  in  Pol.  Sci. 
Quart.,  XXIV  (1909),  23-56;  National  Civic 
Federation,  Municipal  and  Private  Operation 
of  Public  Utilities  (1907).  A.  N.  H. 

SOCIALISM,  STATE.  Distinguished  from 
Socialism. — The  term  state  socialism,  like 
strict  socialism  itself,  is  somewhat  difficult  to 
define.  It  resembles  middle-of-the-road  social- 
ism in  that  it  implies  a considerable  extension 
of  the  functions  of  the  state,  particularly  in 
two  directions:  first,  in  the  direction  of  state 
ownership  and  operation  of  many  large  busi- 
ness interests,  such  as  transportation  systems 
and,  in  general,  all  those  enterprises  commonly 
known  as  public  utilities;  second,  in  the  direc- 
tion of  assuming  greater  responsibility  for 
the  care  of  the  poor.  In  this  latter  direction 
it  is  commonly  urged  that  the  state  should 
provide  universal  old  age  pensions,  insurance 
against  accidents  and  -unemployment,  and 
sometimes  even  the  endowment  of  motherhood. 
It  differs  from  middle-of-the-road  socialism  in 
that  it  postulates  nothing  as  to  the  nature 


of  private  property  in  instruments  of  produc- 
tion, and  does  not  condemn  interest,  or  profits 
per  se.  It  aims  to  cut  off  all  sources  of  ex- 
cessive profits  by  bringing  all  natural  monop- 
olies under  state  ownership,  and  to  aid  by 
means  of  pensions  and  other  public  funds  those 
who  are  beaten  in  the  competitive  struggle. 
Thus  the  state  is  to  be  the  paternal  agency 
for  redressing  the  inequalities  resulting  from 
an  unrestricted  competition. 

Activities  of  the  Present  State. — Every  mod- 
ern state  is  now  engaged  in  activities  of  both 
kinds.  In  the  direction  of  public  ownership 
we  have  the  post  office,  which  is  everywhere 
a public  affair.  In  this  country  we  have  the 
departments  of  agriculture,  both  federal  and 
state,  carrying  on  elaborate  experiments  and 
explorations  in  the  field  of  agricultural  sci- 
ence, and  distributing  literature,  seeds,  etc. 
We  have  also  our  national  forest  reserves,  a 
lighthouse  service,  and  a multitude  of  other 
enterprises  of  a public  nature,  while  many  of 
the  leading  countries  own  and  operate  their 
railroads.  Municipalities  commonly  own  their 
water  works  and  some  other  public  utilities. 
This,  however,  is  sometimes  distinguished  from 
state  socialism  by  the  name  of  municipal  so- 
cialism, though  there  is  no  difference  in  prin- 
ciple. But  enterprises  of  this  kind,  as  now 
carried  on  by  modern  states,  lack  certain  char- 
acteristics common  to  every  socialistic  scheme. 
They  are  not  usually  undertaken  because  of 
belief  in  any  formula  respecting  the  nature  of 
capital,  nor  are  they  stimulated  by  spirit  of 
class  war.  They  do  not  indicate  any  general 
opposition  to  the  competitive  system,  because 
there  is  and  can  be  no  effective  competition 
in  these  enterprises.  The  choice  in  these  cases 
is  not  between  public  ownership  and  competi- 
tion, but  between  public  and  private  monopoly. 
Since  these  industries  must  necessarily  be  mo- 
nopolies any  way,  it  argues  no  general  disap- 
proval of  competition  when  they  are  owned 
by  fhe  public. 

In  the  direction  of  aiding  those  who  are 
beaten  in  the  competitive  struggle  we  have  a 
multitude  of  provisions  for  the  care  of  the 
poor  and  destitute,  employment  bureaus  and 
other  agencies  to  help  the  unemployed  to  find 
work,  special  training  schools  to  fit  the  un- 
employable to  become  employable.  It  is  only 
necessary  to  carry  government  enterprise  far 
enough  in  these  two  directions  and  we  shall 
have  what  is  sometimes  called  state  socialism. 
Just  where  the  dividing  line  is  beyond  which 
lies  state  socialism  it  is  not  easy  to  say.  In 
general,  it  may  be  said  that  so  long  as  the 
policy  of  the  government  is  primarily  deter- 
mined in  the  interest  of  those  who  are  capable 
of  taking  care  of  themselves  in  the  stress  of 
economic  competition,  and  only  secondarily 
in  the  interest  of  those  who  are  unsuccessful 
in  that  struggle,  the  line  has  not  been  crossed 
which  distinguishes  a socialistic  from  an  in- 
dividualistic state.  But  that  line  is  crossed 


SOCIALISM,  STATE 


whenever  the  policy  of  the  state  is  primarily 
directed  in  the  interests  of  those  who,  in  the 
economic  struggle,  would  be  unsuccessful. 

Economic  and  Political  Competition. — By 
economic  competition  is  meant:  first,  rivalry 
in  production,  or  in  the  performance  of  serv- 
ice; second,  the  appraisal  of  the  product  of 
one’s  labor  or  the  value  of  one’s  service  and 
the  payment  for  it  by  the  one  who  receives 
it,  rather  than  by  the  public  in  general  by  a 
vote,  or  by  the  agents  of  government.  They 
succeed  best  who  are  able  to  produce  the  most, 
or  who  are  able  to  render  the  greatest  service. 
Under  political  competition  the  value  of 
one’s  product  or  service  is  appraised  by 
the  public  or  a public  official,  and  paid 
for  out  of  the  public  treasury.  So  long 
as  economic  competition  remains  the  domi- 
nant and  characteristic  method  of  achiev- 
ing success,  the  state  is  not  a socialistic  state. 
But  when  the  dominant  and  characteristic 
method  is  political  as  opposed  to  economic 
competition,  it  may  be  said  to  be  a socialistic 
state. 

Paternalism. — Another  aspect  of  state  so- 
cialism, which  helps  to  distinguish  it  from  so- 
cialism of  the  common  type,  is  its  paternalistic 
character.  It  is  a policy  carried  out  for  the 
laboring  classes,  but  not  by  them.  The  dis- 
tinction seems  clearer,  however,  than  it  really 
is.  In  the  Panama  Canal  Zone  there  is  an 
admirable  system  of  administration  carried  out 
in  the  interest  of  the  workers,  but  it  partakes 
of  the  nature  of  a benevolent  despotism  rather 
than  of  democratic  socialism.  Here  the  dis- 
tinction seems  clear.  It  may  be  state  socialism 
but  it  certainly  is  not  socialism.  But  if  the 
Canal  Zone  were  a self-governing  state,  con- 
trolled as  other  democratic  states  are  by  rep- 
resentative bodies  and  elected  officials  chosen 
by  the  people  who  live  there,  and  if  these 
officials  were  to  vote  to  do  the  same  things 
as  are  now  being  done,  it  is  not  certain  whether 
it  would  be  called  socialism  or  not.  To  some 
the  government  would  seem  to  be  something 
apart  from  and  above  the  people  for  whom  the 
various  benevolent  enterprises  were  carried  out, 
just  as  the  government  of  the  United  States 
is  now  regarded  by  the  dissatisfied  elements. 
They  would  call  it  a paternalistic  government, 
and  its  enterprises  they  would  call  state  so- 
cialism. To  others  the  government  would  seem 
to  be  a thing  of  the  people,  as  our  own  gov- 
ernment now  seems  to  most  of  its  loyal  citi- 
zens. They  would  then  call  those  enterprises 
socialistic. 

Opportunity  vs.  Paternal  Care. — One  impor- 
tant distinction,  commonly  overlooked,  is  be- 
tween a government  policy  which,  like  divine 
Providence,  aims  to  help  men  to  help  them- 
selves, and  a policy  which  takes  care  of  those 
who  can  not  take  care  of  themselves.  So  long 
as  the  efforts  of  the  government  are  directed 
toward  creating  opportunities  for  the  strong 
as  well  as  the  weak,  opportunities  open  to  all 


who  are  capable  of  making  use  of  them,  and 
toward  creating  a fair  field  for  competition 
with  no  favors  to  anyone,  its  efforts  can  not 
properly  be  called  socialistic  from  any  point 
of  view.  But  when  its  efforts  are  directed 
toward  interfering  in  the  struggle  and  giving 
special  help  to  those  who,  unaided,  would  fail, 
such  efforts  may  be  called  socialistic.  The 
public  school  system,  for  example,  creates  op- 
portunities for  the  strong  as  well  as  the  weak. 
In  fact,  the  intellectually  capable  are  able  to 
use  the  educational  opportunities  to  better  ad- 
vantage than  the  intellectually  incapable.  The 
state  does  not  educate  any  one.  It  merely  pro- 
vides opportunities.  The  individual  must  edu- 
cate himself.  They  who  have  the  capacity  to 
be  educated  and  the  diligence  to  apply  them- 
selves are  benefited  by  a system  of  popular 
education.  They  who  lack  either  the  capacity 
or  the  diligence  receive  little  or  no  benefit. 
They  have  a more  efficient  body  of  competitors 
provided  by  the  state,  and  may  thus  be  posi- 
tively injured  by  the  public  school  system. 
Therefore  the  public  school  system  can  not  be 
called  a socialistic  enterprise.  But  free  soup 
houses,  provided  at  public  expense,  or  any  other 
enterprises  by  means  of  which  men  who  fail  in 
competition  are  enabled  to  escape  the  results 
of  their  failure,  become  socialistic.  Any 
scheme  for  the  distribution  of  wealth  which 
interferes  by  political  authority  with  the  nor- 
mal processes  of  free  and  voluntary  exchange 
of  services  is  socialistic. 

Essential  Distinctions. — This  brings  us  to 
the  essence  of  the  whole  question.  The  free 
and  voluntary  exchange  of  services  is  one  way 
of  determining  the  distribution  of  wealth.  An- 
other way  is  by  political  action  or  general 
laws.  Any  extension  of  the  functions  of  the 
state  which  leaves  the  distribution  of  wealth 
to  be  determined  by  the  free  and  voluntary 
exchange  of  services,  or  which  merely  removes 
hindrances  to  such  a free  and  voluntary  ex- 
change, is  not  socialistic.  Under  this  system, 
the  individual’s  success  depends  primarily  up- 
on his  efficiency  in  economic  competition,  that 
is,  upon  his  ability  to  perform  services  which 
somebody  wants  individually  and  is  willing 
to  pay  for  out  of  his  own  individual  pocket. 
But  any  extension  of  the  functions  of  the  state 
which  attempts  to  distribute  wealth  in  any 
other  way  than  by  tbe  free  and  voluntary  ex- 
change of  services  among  individuals,  is  so- 
cialistic. Under  such  a system,  the  individu- 
al’s success  depends,  not  upon  his  ability  to 
perform  a service  which  some  one  is  willing 
to  pay  for  out  of  his  own  pocket,  but  upon 
his  ability  to  persuade  the  mass  of  men  to 
vote  something  out  of  the  public  treasury. 
In  other  words,  the  individual’s  success  de- 
pends upon  his  efficiency  in  the  political  rather 
than  the  economic  form  of  competition.  When 
under  this  arrangement  government  is  con- 
ceived of  as  something  apart  from  and  above 
the  workers,  it  is  called  state  socialism.  When 


337 


SOCIALIST  LABOR  PARTY 


it  is  conceived  of  as  something  of,  for,  and  by 
the  workers,  it  is  called  socialism. 

See  Competition  ; Economic  Theory,  His- 
tory of;  Fabian  Socialists;  Socialism. 

References:  R.  T.  Ely,  French  and  German 
Socialism  (1883)  ; J.  Rae,  Contemporary 
Socialism  (3d  ed.,  1901);  J.  T.  Soddart,  The 
New  Socialism  (1910)  ; M.  Iiillquit,  Hist,  of 
Socialism  in  V.  S.  (1903);  W.  D.  P.  Bliss, 
Handbook  of  Socialism  (1895). 

T.  N.  Carver. 

SOCIALIST  LABOR  PARTY.  This  party 
first  appeared  in  the  field  of  national  politics 
with  a presidential  ticket  in  1892.  For  more 
than  a decade  it  had  been  the  dominant  factor 
in  the  socialist  movement  in  America,  and  as 
a socialist  organization  it  was  known  by  this 
name  as  early  as  1877.  It  represented  an  eco- 
nomic rather  than  a political  movement  in  its 
earlier  years.  In  a convention  held  in  New 
York  on  August  28,  1832,  Simon  Wing, 

of  Massachusetts,  was  nominated  for  President 
and  Charles  H.  Matchette,  of  New  York,  for 
Vice-President.  The  party  declared  for  a re- 
duction in  the  hours  of  labor;  for  national 
ownership  of  railroads,  canals,  telegraphs,  tele- 
phones, and  all  means  of  transportation  and 
communication;  for  municipal  ownership  of 
waterworks  and  lighting  plants;  the  recovery 
of  land  grants  by  the  United  States;  the  ex- 
clusive right  of  the  United  States  to  issue 
money;  progressive  income  and  inheritance 
taxes;  compulsory  free  education;  employers’ 
liability  laws;  the  reduction  of  the  law-making 
body  to  a single  chamber ; the  direct  vote  and 
a secret  ballot  in  all  elections,  with  universal 
suffrage,  regardless  of  race,  creed,  or  sex; 
all  public  officers  to  be  subject  to  the  recall; 
the  referendum  in  law-making;  and  also  it 
favored  the  abolition  of  the  presidency  and  the 
substitution  therefor  of  an  elective  executive 
board  subject  to  the  recall  by  the  House  of 
Representatives. 

The  party  in  1892  polled  21,164  votes,  and 
it  has  had  a presidential  ticket  in  the  field 
in  every  campaign  since,  substantially  repeat- 
ing in  each  campaign  its  political  platform, 
calling  for  collective  ownership — that  both  the 
machinery  of  government  and  the  machinery 
of  production  and  distribution  be  controlled 
by  the  people  in  common.  The  party  attrib- 
utes to  private  property  in  the  natural  sources 
of  production  and  in  the  instruments  of  labor 
the  cause  of  all  economic  ills,  and  it  calls  on 
all  laborers  to  unite  into  “a  class  conscious 
body”  to  take  possession  of  the  public  powers 
— the  land  and  all  the  means  of  production  and 
transportation — and  thus  to  substitute  the  co- 
operative commonwealth  for  the  “present  state 
of  planless  production,  industrial  war,  -and  so- 
cial disorder.” 

In  1896  the  party  polled  36,454  votes  for 
Charles  H.  Matchette  for  President.  In  a con- 
vention at  Rochester,  New  York,  January  27, 


1900,  the  party  decided  to  make  overtures  for 
union  to  the  Social  Democratic  party  and  a 
committee  on  “Social  Union”  was  appointed 
for  this  purpose.  At  the  same  convention  it 
was  decided,  as  the  best  means  of  promoting 
union,  to  put  a presidential  ticket  in  the  field, 
and  Job  Harriman,  of  California,  was  nomi- 
nated for  President  and  Max  Hayes,  of  Ohio, 
for  Vice-President.  In  a convention  of  the 
Social  Democratic  party  at  Indianapolis 
March  6,  1900,  the  union  of  these  two  parties 
was  agreed  to.  The  Harriman  and  Hayes  tick- 
et was  withdrawn  and  the  united  Socialists, 
under  the  name  of  the  Social  Democratic  par- 
ty, nominated  Eugene  V.  Debs,  of  Indiana, 
a Social  Democrat,  for  President,  and  Job  Har- 
riman of  California,  of  the  Socialist  Labor 
party,  for  Vice-President.  The  great  majority 
of  the  Socialist  Labor  party  favored  the  union 
and  supported  this  ticket  but  a minority  re- 
fused to  do  so,  and  in  a convention  in  New 
York  (June  2-8,  1900)  they  retained  the  old 
name  and  organization  and  nominated  Joseph 
F.  Maloney,  of  Massachusetts,  for  President, 
and  Valentine  Remmel,  of  Pennsylvania,  for 
Vice-President,  in  opposition  to  the  Socialist 
following  of  Debs  and  Harriman.  These  dis- 
senting Socialists,  however,  cast  but  32,751 
votes  for  their  candidates  in  that  year,  while 
in  1898  the  Socialist  Labor  party  had  received 
as  many  as  82,204  votes  in  eighteen  states. 
In  1904  the  Socialist  Labor  vote  increased 
somewhat — to  33,724  votes  for  Charles  H.  Cor- 
rigan for  President — but  in  1908  the  vote  for 
their  presidential  candidate,  August  Gillhaus, 
of  New  York,  was  only  13,825.  The  party  had 
nominated,  in  1908,  Martin  R.  Preston  of  Ne- 
vada for  President,  but,  as  Preston  was  a con- 
vict in  the  Nevada  penitentiary  and  was,  more- 
over, ineligible  to  the  presidency,  being  under 
the  constitutional  age,  Gillhaus  was  subse- 
quently named  as  “a  candidate  by  proxy.”  The 
decline  in  the  party’s  vote  does  not  indicate 
a decline  in  socialistic  sentiment.  The  great 
body  of  voting  socialists  in  America  in  1900 
supported  the  Social  Democratic  party  (see) 
and  have  since  supported  the  later  and  larger 
Socialist  party  (see).  The  Separatists  among 
the  Socialists  since  1900,  who  have  kept  up  the 
name  and  organization  of  the  “Socialist  Labor” 
party,  were,  chiefly,  the  followers  of  Daniel  De 
Leon,  and  they  represent  a radical  and  extreme 
type  of  industrial  socialism  and  are  in  stout 
opposition  to  trades  unions.  These  radical  so- 
cialists hold,  also,  to  the  socialism  of  Karl 
Marx,  urging  that  the  revolution  in  govern- 
ment and  politics  must  be  coupled  with  a revo- 
lution in  industry.  They  oppose  the  larger 
Socialist  party  because  that  party  holds  that 
only  the  political  reorganization  is  sufficient, 
ignoring  the  necessity  of  industrial  revolution 
and  the  economic  organization  of  labor.  The 
difference  between  the  two  parties  is  one  of 
means  to  a common  end — a difference  as  to 
whether  the  reorganization  of  industrial  so- 


338 


SOCIALIST  PARTY 


ciety  should  accompany  or  follow  the  triumph 
of  political  socialism.  The  Socialist  Labor  par- 
ty is  organized  in  "sections,”  or  chapters,  like 
a brotherhood,  in  thirty  states.  Any  seven  per- 
sons may  form  a “section,”  provided  they  ac- 
knowledge the  platform  and  constitution  of  the 
party.  Its  members  have  been  chiefly  of  for- 
eign birth,  unacquainted  witn  the  customs,  hab- 
its, and  language  of  America,  perhaps  not 
more  than  ten  per  cent  of  the  party  being 
native  Americans.  In  1912  the  party  con- 
ducted its  eighth  presidential  campaign,  nomi- 
nating Arthur  E.  Reimer  for  President,  and 
August  Gillhaus  for  Vice-President,  with  a 
platform  calling  for  “industrial  self-govern- 
ment of  the  workers,  for  the  workers,  by  the 
workers.”  It  polled  29,072  votes.  The  party 
tends  toward  the  more  radical  attitude  of 
Syndicalism  (see),  or  the  Industrial  Workers 
of  the  World. 

See  Labor  Parties;  Socialism;  Socialism, 
Municipal;  Socialism,  State;  Socialist 
Party;  Syndicalism. 

References:  R.  T.  Ely,  Labor  Movement  in 
America  (1905);  M.  Hillquit,  Hist,  of  Social- 
ism in  U.  S.  (1910)  ; A.  Gillhaus,  “Socialist 
Labor  Party’s  Appeal”  in  Independent,  LXV 
( 1908 ) , 889-892 ; A.  Rosenthal,  Differences  be- 
tween the  Socialist  Party  and  Socialist  Labor 
Party  (1908).  James  A.  Woodburn. 

SOCIALIST  PARTY.  The  Socialist  party  in 
the  United  States  was  the  outcome  of  a union 
in  1900,  between  the  Social  Democratic  party 
(see)  and  the  greater  part  of  the  Socialist 
Labor  party  (see).  In  1900  the  united  so- 
cialists took  the  name  of  the  Social  Democratic 
party,  but  since  that  year  it  has  been  known 
as  merely  the  Socialist  party  and  under  its 
organization  and  direction  the  greater  part  of 
the  agitation  and  growth  of  political  party 
socialism  has  been  conducted.  In  its  national 
platform  of  1908  the  party  declared  itself  the 
party  of  the  working  class,  and  bewailed  the 
closing  of  factories,  mills  and  mines,  while 
millions  of  willing  workers  were  forced  into 
idleness  and  starvation.  It  opposes  the  pri- 
vate trusts  that  are  “the  inevitable  result  of 
individual  competition,”  and  seeks  one  all-em- 
bracing public  trust,  of  the  people,  by  the 
people,  and  for  the  people.  It  arraigns  the 
private  trusts  as  “dictating  the  terms  on 
which  we  may  live,”  the  courts,  as  “threatening 
the  rights  of  the  workers,”  the  ruling  classes, 
as  “in  conspiracy  against  organized  labor,” 
and  Congress  and  the  executive  as  those  “from 
whom  the  working  classes  may  expect  no  rem- 
edy.” Courts,  legislatures,  and  executive  of- 
fices must  be  taken  from  the  control  of  the 
exploiting  classes  who  use  these  agencies 
against  the  toilers.  The  industrial  demands 
of  the  party  include:  (1)  immediate  govern- 
ment relief  for  the  unemployed  by  public  works, 
by  reforesting  cut-over  and  waste  lands,  recla- 
mation of  swamps,  and  by  loans  of  money  with- 


out interest  to  states  and  cities  for  public 
improvements;  (2)  collective  ownership  of  tel- 
egraphs, railroads,  telephones,  steamship  lines, 
and  other  means  of  transportation  and  com- 
munication; (3)  collective  ownership  of  all 
industries  in  which  competition  has  ceased  to 
exist;  (4)  the  extension  of  the  public  domain 
to  include  mines,  quarries,  oil  wells,  forests, 
and  water  power. 

The  party’s  political  demands  call  for  the 
extension  of  inheritance  taxes ; the  graduated 
income  tax;  equal  suffrage  for  men  and  wo- 
men; the  initiative  and  referendum;  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  United  States  Senate;  the  amend- 
ment of  the  Constitution  by  a majority  vote; 
the  election  of  judges  for  short  terms;  and  the 
abolition  of  the  judicial  power  usurped  by  the 
Supreme  Court  to  declare  acts  of  Congress 
null  and  void — national  laws  to  be  abrogated 
only  by  act  of  Congress  or  by  a referendum 
vote. 

In  1900  the  candidates  of  the  united  Social- 
ists, Debs  and  Harriman,  received  94,768  votes. 
In  1904  the  Socialist  party  nominated  Eugene 
V.  Debs  of  Indiana,  for  President,  and  Benja- 
min Hanford,  of  New  York  for  Vice-President, 
and  polled  402,460  votes.  In  1908  the  party 
again  nominated  Debs  and  Hanford  and  polled 
420,820  votes.  In  the  state  and  congressional 
elections  in  1910,  the  Socialist  vote  was  mate- 
rially increased,  the  returns  showing  605,000 
votes  with  gains  in  every  stnte  in  the  Union. 
The  party  elected  thirteen  members  of  the  leg- 
islature in  Wisconsin  and  one  each  in  Massa- 
chusetts, Pennsylvania,  Minnesota,  and  North 
Dakota,  while  for  the  first  time  a party  So- 
cialist was  elected  to  Congress,  in  the  person 
of  Victor  L.  Berger,  of  Milwaukee,  who  repre- 
sented the  fifth  Wisconsin  congressional  dis- 
trict. Mr.  Berger,  a representative  Socialist, 
has  urged  in  Congress  resolutions  proposing  the 
abolition  of  the  United  States  Senate,  a con- 
vention for  the  revision  of  the  United  States 
Constitution,  and  a system  of  old  age  pensions. 
In  the  fall  of  1911  the  party  carried  Flint, 
Michigan;  Butte,  Montana;  Berkeley,  Califor- 
nia; and  elected  councilmen  in  a large  number 
of  other  cities.  It  now  claims  600  elective 
officers,  including  32  mayors,  and  18  legisla- 
tors in  five  states.  In  1912  the  party  again 
nominated  Debs  for  President,  with  Emil  Sei- 
del, ex-mayor  of  Milwaukee,  for  Vice-Presi- 
dent, and  this  party  ticket  received  848.296 
votes.  Mr.  Hillquit,  the  historian  of  the 
party,  claims  that  the  laboring  classes  “are 
coming  more  and  more  into  its  ranks  every 
year,  every  month,  and  every  day”  (Report  on 
the  National  Convention,  May  12,  1912). 

The  party  organization  embraces  over  125, 
000  members  who  pay  dues  of  twenty-five  cents 
a month  for  an  active  socialist  propaganda, 
which  is  carried  on,  between  campaigns  as  well 
as  in  election  years,  by  means  of  agents,  speak- 
ers, mass  meetings,  parades,  placards,  and  the 
distribution  of  leaflets  and  petition.  The 


339 


SOCIETIES,  LEGAL  STATUS  OF 


Appeal  to  Reason,  Girard,  Kansas,  the  New 
York  Call,  the  Chicago  Daily  Socialist  and  the 
Milwaukee  Leader  are  the  chief  newspaper 
organs  of  the  party.  The  party  headquarters 
are  in  charge  of  the  national  secretary,  John 
M.  Work,  at  205  West  Washington  Street,  Chi- 
cago, Illinois. 

See  Socialism;  Socialism,  State. 

References;  J.  Spargo,  Socialists  (1908)  ; 
R.  Hunter,  Socialists  at  Work  (1908),  “So- 
cialist Party  in  Present  Campaign”  in  Review 
of  Reviews,  XXXVII  (1908),  293-299;  “The 
Socialist  Platform”  in  Outlook,  LXXXIX 
(1908),  974-976;  Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  638, 
ibid,  1911,  78,  343,  ibid,  1912,  27-29;  Morris 
Hillquit,  History  of  Socialism  in  the  XJ.  S 
(1910).  James  A.  Woodbukn. 

SOCIETIES,  LEGAL  STATUS  OF.  Right  of 

Association. — In  the  United  States  no  effort 
has  ever  been  made  to  restrict  the  right  of 
association  for  any  purpose  not  unlawful,  save 
in  the  case  of  military  organizations,  which  in 
most  states  are  allowed  to  exist  only  under 
authority  of  the  state.  It  is  generally  held 
that  laws,  enacted  by  the  states,  prohibiting 
the  formation  of  unlicensed  associations  for 
military  purposes,  are  not  in  contravention  of 
the  state  constitutions  which  guaranty  the 
right  to  bear  arms,  or  of  the  corresponding 
provision  found  in  the  Second  Amendment  to 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  In  like 
manner  many  of  the  states  prohibit  the  organi- 
zation or  employment,  without  authority  of 
law,  of  bodies  of  armed  detectives  or  other  men 
to  be  used  as  private  guards  or  police  in  pro- 
tecting property  against  the  disorders  conse- 
quent upon  labor  troubles  or  other  uprisings, 
or  for  the  purpose  of  suppressing  strikes. 
(For  an  example  see  Idaho  Constitution,  Art. 
XIV,  § 6.) 

The  right  of  peaceable  assembly,  which  is 
but  supplementary  to  the  right  of  association, 
is  specifically  secured  to  the  people  by  the  con- 
stitutions of  the  United  States  (Amendment  I) 
and  of  many  of  the  several  states.  It  is 
recognized,  however,  that  these  constitutional 
provisions  do  not  create,  but  merely  confirm, 
the  common  law  right  of  assembly. 

Legal  Status  of  Associations. — The  incorpo- 
rated association  is  a juristic  person  separate 
and  distinct  from  its  members;  and  as  such 
person  can  do  all  acts  that  are  within  the 
provisions  of  its  charter,  which  is  the  meas- 
ure of  the  powers  granted  to  it  by  the  state. 
In  its  corporate  capacity  it  can  make  contracts 
and  hold  property,  sue  and  be  sued.  Its  in- 
ternal regulations,  governing  the  manner  of  the 
exercise  of  its  corporate  powers  by  its  members, 
are  ordinarily  termed  by-laws.  In  these  re- 
spects the  legal  status  of  the  incorporated  as- 
sociation does  not  differ  materially  from  that 
of  the  commercial  corporation. 

Voluntary  or  unincorporated  associations, 
not  possessing  any  juristic  personality  apart 


from  their  members,  occupy  an  anomalous  posi- 
tion in  the  law,  and  their  legal  status  is  by 
no  means  well  defined.  Generally  speaking, 
the  law  does  not  recognize  the  unity  of  the 
association,  but  sees  only  the  individual  mem- 
bers composing  it.  They  must  contract  as  an 
aggregation  of  individuals,  and  they  must  sue 
and  be  sued  as  individuals.  Any  property  of 
the  association  must  vest  in  its  individual 
members,  or  must  be  held  by  trustees  for  them. 
The  officers  of  such  an  association  or  club  can 
act  for  it  only  to  the  extent  to  which  they  are 
authorized,  under  the  general  principles  of  the 
law  of  agency,  to  act  as  agents  of  the  members 
as  individual  principals. 

Community  Rights. — The  rights  of  the  asso- 
ciates among  themselves  are  worked  out  in 
accordance  with  the  contract  of  association, 
found  in  the  articles  of  association,  or  consti- 
tution, and  in  those  other  regulations,  intend- 
ed to  be  of  less  permanence  and  importance,' 
which  are  usually  called  by-laws. 

Every  person,  by  his  mere  act  of  becoming  a 
member  of  the  association,  agrees  that  his 
community  rights  shall  be  determined  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  provisions  of  its  constitu- 
tion and  by-laws.  Consequently,  he  can  appeal 
to  the  law  of  the  land  for  relief  against  the 
action  of  his  associates  only  when  he  is  denied 
those  rights  secured  to  him  under  the  conven- 
tional laws  of  the  association.  Thus  if  a mem- 
ber be  expelled  from  an  association  for  a cause 
recognized  under  the  rules,  after  procedure 
fairly  taken  in  accordance  with  those  rules, 
he  cannot  have  the  action  of  his  associates, 
however  unjust  it  may  be,  reviewed  in  a court 
of  law.  But  if  the  expulsion  was  arbitrary, 
and  not  for  any  cause  set  forth  in  the  rules 
of  the  association,  or  if  the  method  of  pro- 
cedure provided  by  such  rules  was  not  fol- 
lowed in  good  faith,  the  injured  member  may 
have  relief  in  a court  of  equity,  which  will  en- 
join the  associates  from  giving  effect  to  such 
wrongful  expulsion  (Otto  vs.  Journeymen 
Tailors’  Union,  75  Cal.  308). 

In  no  case  will  a court  of  equity  take 
jurisdiction  of  a dispute  between  an  associa- 
tion and  any  of  its  members  unless  the  dis- 
gruntled members  can  show  that  they  have 
exhausted  all  means  of  redress  provided  by  the 
rules  of  the  association  (Levy  vs.  Magnolia 
Lodge,  110  Cal.  297).  Furthermore  it  should 
be  noted  that  under  no  circumstances  will  a 
court  take  cognizance  of  the  complaint  of  an 
expelled  member  when  membership  gives  no 
right  or  privilege  having  value  in  the  eyes  of 
the  law,  but  merely  an  opportunity  of  associ- 
ating with  the  other  members.  Thus  a court 
would  not  concern  itself  with  the  wrongs  of  a 
person  excluded  from  a whist  club  which  pos- 
sessed no  property  and  collected  no  dues,  how- 
ever arbitrary  and  reprehensible  might  be  the 
conduct  of  the  other  members. 

Contests. — The  same  principle  is  held  to  ap- 
ply to  disputes  among  members  of  committees 


340 


SOCIETY— SOCIOLOGY 


of  political  parties  when  membership  upon 
such  committees  gives  no  valuable  right  but 
only  personal  satisfaction  and  political  in- 
fluence, which,  in  the  eyes  of  the  law,  are  not 
valuable.  So  when  each  of  two  contesting 
committees  of  a political  party  claims  the 
right  to  exercise  the  powers  conferred  by  the 
party  organization  upon  the  regular  commit- 
tee, a court  will  not  consider  their  differences 
so  long  as  there  is  a central  committee  or  other 
superior  body  within  the  party  to  which  the 
contending  factions  may  appeal.  Nor  will  the 
correctness  of  the  decision  of  such  a central 
committee  be  reviewed  by  a court  of  law  unless 
fraud  be  proved. 

See  Assembly,  Right  of;  Bills  of  Rights; 
Church  and  State  in  America;  Corporation 
Charters;  Corporation,  Public;  Freedom  of 
Speech  and  the  Press  ; Influence  in  Govern- 
ment; Labor,  Freedom  of;  Labor  Organiza- 
tions ; Liberty,  Legal  Significance  of  ; Priv- 
ileges and  Immunities;  Railroad  Associa- 
tions. 

References:  “Associations”  in  Cyclopaedia  of 
Law  and  Procedure,  IV  (1902),  299-316;  Am. 
and  English  Encyclopaedia  of  Law  (2d  ed., 
1903),  XXV,  1129-1143;  E.  Freund,  Police 
Power  (1904),  514-522;  James  Kent,  Com- 
mentaries (12th  ed.,  1873),  II,  268  et  seq.\  S. 
E.  Baldwin,  “History  of  the  Law  of  Private 
Corporations  in  the  Colonies  and  States”  in 
Anglo-American  Legal  Essays,  III  (1909),  236- 
255;  United  States  vs.  Cruikshank,  92  U.  8. 
542;  Presser  vs.  Illinois,  116  U.  S.  252;  Law- 
son  vs.  Hewell,  118  Cal.  613;  Otto  vs.  Journey- 
men Tailors’  Union,  75  Cal.  308;  Levy  vs. 
Magnolia  Lodge,  110  Cal.  297 ; Ex.  Com.  vs. 
Wetzel  County  Court,  68  W.  Va.  113. 

William  R.  Vance. 

SOCIETY.  Society  originally  meant  com- 
panionship, converse,  association.  Broadly 
considered,  however,  it  signifies  the  body  of  in- 
dividuals who  associate  and  also  the  associa- 
tion itself,  the  relations  which  bind  the  asso- 


ciating individuals  together.  The  word  has 
not,  necessarily,  a political  significance.  The 
state  is  a society,  but  so,  too,  is  the  family. 
So  are  the  members  of  a university  or  of  a 
church.  Every  individual  belongs  to  many  of 
these  particular  societies  and  also  to  society  in 
general,  which  includes  every  human  being. 
No  man  is  without  relation  to  every  other 
man.  All  human  relations  and  all  collective 
activities  of  mankind  are  embraced  in  the  term 
society. 

Time  and  effort  have  been  wasted  in  trying 
to  account  for  the  origin  of  society.  It  devel- 
oped with,  and  is  inherent  in,  the  human  race. 
As  soon  as  there  were  two  persons  having  any- 
thing to  do  with  each  other  there  was  so- 
ciety and  they  were  society.  This,  however, 
is  not  stating  the  reason  for  its  existence  but 
merely  the  fact  that  it  does  exist.  The  inevi- 
table relation  of  the  individual  to  the  com- 
munity has  been  variously  described  in  so- 
called  theories  of  society.  The  monistic  the- 
ory is  that  individuals  have  no  independent 
existence,  but  owe  everything  they  are  and 
have  to  society.  The  monadistic  theory,  go- 
ing to  the  other  extreme,  makes  society  a 
mere  aggregation  of  individuals  without  any 
unity.  The  dualistic  or  mechanical  theory,  a 
compromise  between  the  two  foregoing,  main 
tains  that  there  is  both  an  individual  and  a 
community  life.  What  we  may  call  the  chem- 
ical theory  holds  that  social  life  is  an  entirely 
new  product,  evolved  out  of  individual  lives. 
Finally  the  organic  theory  makes  the  individ 
ual  in  society  analogous  to  the  cell  in  the 
living  organism.  Every  of  these  views  is  in 
part  sound.  Society  is  individuals,  dealing 
perforce  with  one  another,  viewed  in  the  col- 
lective aspect. 

See  Organic  Theory  of  the  State;  Sociol- 
ogy. 

References:  F.  H.  Giddings,  Principles  of 
Sociology  (1896),  3,  4;  J.  S.  Mackensie,  Intro, 
to  Social  Philosophy  (2d  ed.,  1895),  150-155. 

Henry  A.  Yeomans. 


SOCIOLOGY 


Definitions. — General  sociology  is  the  study 
of  the  conditions,  physical  and  psychical,  ele- 
ments, forms,  forces,  processes,  results  (at  given 
stages),  and  implications  of  human  association. 
Special  sociology  (“applied  sociology,”  “so- 
cial technology,”  “Sozialpolitik”)  is  procedure 
on  the  basis  of  a presupposed  general  sociology, 
particularly  upon  the  presumption  of  certain 
ascertained  social  values  and  corresponding 
purposes,  to  work  out  feasible  programs  for 
social  cooperation  which  will  assure  progress 
toward  attainment  of  the  purposes.  It  will  be 
convenient  to  amplify  these  descriptions  by 
means,  first,  of  a brief  historical  survey,  and 
second,  of  further  analysis. 


History. — One  of  the  least  contested  conven- 
tionalities of  sociology  is  that  Auguste  Comte 
was  its  founder  ( Philosophic  Positive,  6 vols., 
1830-1842).  It  does  not  detract  from  Comte’s 
merit,  while  it  partially  explains  the  sparse 
growth  of  sociology  for  a half  century  after 
his  first  planting,  to  point  out  that  a tedious 
work  of  clearing  the  ground  was  necessary 
before  the  kind  of  seed  sown  by  Comte  could  be 
fruitful.  It  is  instructive  to  recall  certain 
almost  forgotten  steps  in  the  experience  of 
bringing  soil  fit  for  the  growth  of  modern 
social  science  under  cultivation. 

The  Civic  Idea. — The  apogee  of  the  specula- 
tive method  of  interpreting  social  phenomena 


341 


SOCIOLOGY 


was  marked  by  Hegel’s  lectures  on  the  “Phil- 
osophy of  History”  (1823-1827).  The  finial  of 
Hegel’s  social  philosophy  is  the  “synthesis” — 
“the  state  is  reason  at  its  highest  power.” 
An  unfinished  century  of  practical  politics  has 
meanwhile  proved,  not  by  dialectics  but  by  its 
diplomacies,  its  international  law,  its  Hague 
Tribunal,  its  arbitration  treaties,  and  its  in- 
dustrial and  social  developments,  that  the 
state  is  not  reason  at  its  highest  power.  Some 
of  Hegel’s  own  contemporaries  began  to  be 
sceptical  of  the  Hegelian  formulation  of  the 
congenital  German  presumption.  Evidence  was 
already  visible  that  both  power  and  reason 
existed  in  the  world  above  and  beyond  the 
state.  Accordingly,  men  began  to  reconsider 
the  question,  what  is  the  state.  Almost  a 
generation  after  Hegel  had  pressed  his  method 
to  its  self-contradiction  in  drawing  the  dead- 
line of  human  development  at  the  boundaries 
of  the  state,  challenge  of  this  arbitrariness 
first  took  its  modern  form.  With  or  without 
the  Hegelian  logic,  the  question  would  in- 
evitably have  elicited  answers,  sooner  or  later, 
in  terms  of  what  the  state  is  not.  In  fact, 
at  the  middle  of  the  century,  a number  of  men 
in  unison,  but  with  little  if  any  knowledge  of 
one  another  except  in  one  or  two  instances, 
uttered  virtually  the  same  answer : “The  state 
is  not  society.  When  then  is  society  ?”  This 
question  in  effect  opened  up  from  a new  di- 
rection the  whole  field  of  inquiry  since  occu- 
pied by  the  sociologists.  There  could  be  no 
development  of  the  researches  which  Comte 
demanded  till  the  minds  of  many  men  were 
fertilized  by  desire  for  objective  knowledge 
of  the  social  reality.  At  the  same  time,  it 
would  be  provincial  and  preposterous  for  the 
sociologists  to  claim  that  they  alone  have 
made  the  discoveries  with  which  sociology  is 
immediately  concerned.  All  human  experi- 
ence, and  all  social  science  as  interpretation 
of  that  experience  have  cooperated  in  reaching 
perceptions  which  it  is  now  the  sociologists’ 
division  of  labor  to  formulate,  to  systematize 
and  to  evaluate  as  means  of  more  penetrating 
interpretation  of  experience.  In  other  words, 
the  relation  between  general  sociology  and  the 
social  sciences  as  a whole  bears  close  resem- 
blances to  the  relation  between  historical  meth- 
odology, as  represented  by  Bernheim  for  in- 
stance, and  the  historical  sciences  in  particular. 

Social  Idea. — Although  the  term  “society” 
( Gesellschaft ) is  not  a modern  invention,  it 
was  not  until  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth 
century  that  serious  attempts  were  made  to 
fashion  that  term  into  a tool  of  scientific  pre- 
cision. The  names  of  Ahrens  (Cours  du  Droit 
Naturel,  1839;  Organische  Staadslehre,  1850; 
Rechtsphilosophie,  4th  ed.,  1852),  Von  Mobl 
( Geschichte  and  Literatur  der  Staatsioissen- 
schaften , 1855)  and  Lorenz  von  Stein  (Der 
Sociulismus  und  Kommunismus  des  heutigen 
Frankreichs,  2d.  ed.,  1848)  may  be  selected 
to  represent  the  mid-century  effort  to  this  end. 


Under  the  general  title,  Civic  Sciences  and 
Societary  Sciences,  Von  Mohl  sketched  the  for- 
tunes of  the  concept  “society”  previous  to 
his  time,  and  attempted  to  show  the  need  of 
a system  of  societary  sciences.  When  the  in- 
surgency which  w7as  latent  in  the  societary 
conception  had  reached  expression  in  the  group 
referred  to,  the  principal  variant  from  the 
prevalent  orthodoxy  was  distinct  affirmation  of 
a somewhat  over  and  above  the  state,  cor- 
responding to  the  term  “society.”  The  problem 
then  was  to  analyze  the  concepts  “state”  and 
“society”  so  as  to  determine  their  relation 
to  each  other.  The  success  of  this  mid-century 
outreaching  for  a definition  of  “society”  which 
would  be  a means  of  more  precisely  determin- 
ing the  state  was  dubious.  One  of  the  reasons 
was  to  be  found  in  an  association  carried  over 
from  immemorial  tradition  of  the  state,  and 
transferred  in  kind  as  a preconception  of  “so- 
ciety.” In  brief,  as  the  state  was  thought  of 
in  a mystical  fashion  as  a power  independent 
of  persons,  superior  to  persons,  and  transcend- 
ent over  persons,  so  the  initial  attempts  to 
comprehend  “society”  did  not  untrammel  them- 
selves from  a parallel  mysticism.  Certain 
obvious  facts  were  observed  and  noted  about 
spheres  of  human  interests  which  were  not 
coterminous  with  the  realm  of  the  state. 
At  this  stage  of  interpretation  a certain 
type  of  spatial  conception  was  the  peculiar 
factor  of  unreality.  “Sphere,”  “area,”  “inter- 
mediate life  phenomena,”  and  the  like  are 
phrases  which,  as  the  context  conclusively 
shows,  connoted  location  as  one  of  the  chief 
stigmata  of  “society”  in  the  same  sense  in 
which  it  was  attributed  to  the  state.  “Soci- 
ety,” like  the  state,  was  somewhere,  the  two 
somewheres  not  coinciding  in  position;  and  the 
problem  was  primarily  to  mark  their  stations. 

Mysticism  in  Early  Theory. — It  must  be  ad- 
mitted that  these  propositions  do  not  account 
for  everything  contained  in  theorizings  about 
state  and  society  of  which  tljey  are  affirmed. 
On  the  contrary,  the  main  difficulty  in  dis- 
covering the  clue  to  differences  between  earlier 
and  later  conceptions  of  state  and  society  is 
that  in  so  large  a part  of  their  concrete  con- 
tents they  look  identical.  It  is  only  when 
we  probe  down  to  these  antecedent  notions 
that  we  find  radical  variation.  Thus,  Von 
Mohl  posits  three  cardinal  human  “conditions” 
(Zustande) , which  appear  to  figure  in  his 
mind  as  intersecting  planes  of  human  life, 
(and  yet,  by  definition,  not  human  life  at  all), 
or  perhaps  more  nearly  as  interpenetrating 
nebulae  of  different  composition.  In  the  first 
place,  there  is  the  “area”  of  the  “individual 
personality,”  or  “the  great  number  of  the 
particular  personalities  existing  side  by  side 
in  time  and  space,  and  their  relationships  to 
like  personalities.”  In  the  second  place,  there 
is  the  area  of  the  state,  or  “an  organism  of 
arrangements  which  in  each  case  unites  a num- 
ber of  persons  living  together  in  a limited  space 


342 


SOCIOLOGY 


into  a unity  with  a total  will,  a total  energy, 
and  pursuing  common  purposes.”  In  the  third 
place,  there  is  “society,”  i.  e.,  a totality  of 
associations  “which  can  be  located  neither  in 
the  life-circle  of  the  separate  individuals  nor 
in  that  of  the  state”  (loc.  cit.,  98).  Refer- 
ring to  this  third  category  Von  Mohl  further 
specifies : 

These  conditions  are  differentiated  from  the  life 
of  the  individuals  essentially  in  this  respect,  that 
in  the  latter  the  central  point  always  is  the  egotis- 
tic purpose  {Selbstweck ) of  a single  person,  and 
every  thing  may  be  considered  merely  in  connec- 
tion with  the  same.  In  the  former,  on  the  con- 
trary, a considerable  collection  of  persons  is  at 
the  same  time  under  corresponding  influence  of  a 
common  cause,  and  thus  moved  to  community  ac- 
tion. The  essence  of  the  individual  life  is  selfish 
reference  to  itself.  The  essence  of  these  spontane- 
ous associations  is  extension  and  community. 

In  a note,  Von  Mohl  exposes  the  futility  of 
his  analysis  more  effectively  than  it  could  be 
done  by  a critic.  He  refers  to  the  possible 
question.  May  there  not,  besides  these  three 
relationships  of  men  to  men,  be  others,  and  if 
that  is  the  case,  is  it  not  necessary,  in  order 
to  discover  the  full  truth,  to  investigate  all 
of  these  at  the  same  time?  To  this  he  re- 
plies: 

Undoubtedly  there  are,  along  with  these  three, 
other  relationships  of  men  to  men,  and  among 
these  many  that  are  important  : for  instance,  the 
family,  the  tribe,  the  associations  of  states : yet 
for  the  present  purpose  it  is  enough  to  investigate 
the  three,  because  the  others  do  not  contribute  to 
the  understanding  of  the  nature  of  society  and  of 
the  state  in  themselves,  and  of  their  relationships 
to  one  another.  It  follows  that  taking  them  into 
account  xcould  merely  confuse  our  survey  and 
insight. 

Proposed  Societary  Sciences. — Although  po- 
litical philosophy  had  arrived  at  a strong  sense 
of  the  necessity  of  a social  philosophy,  its 
exclusions  as  thus  indicated  show  that  it  was 
still  a long  way  from  a clue  to  an  objective 
method  of  social  interpretation.  Nevertheless, 
Von  Mohl  proceeds  to  develop  an  intricate 
scheme  of  “societary  sciences,”  to  be  worked 
out  in  close  parallelism  with  the  civic  sciences 
as  at  that  time  defined.  This  whole  mid- 
century movement,  under  the  influence  of  a 
partially  completed  discovery  that  in  addition 
to  the  state  there  are  outlying  human  rela- 
tionships not  yet  interpreted,  marked  an  im- 
portant advance  toward  positive  social  phil- 
osophy. It  emphasized  a need,  although  it  did 
not  accomplish  much  toward  satisfying  the 
demand. 

The  immediate  effects  of  these  groping  so- 
cial interpretations  upon  the  methodology  of 
the  social  sciences  are  not  easy  to  trace.  For 
nearly  a generation  after  the  Ahrens-Von  Mohl 
movement  there  was  little  to  indicate  vitality 
in  the  suggestion  of  “societary  science.”  In 
1874,  for  example,  Roscher  declared  that  he 
was  not  impressed  with  the  methodological 
importance  of  Von  Mohl’s  proposals. 

Actual  Beginnings  of  Sociology. — Roscher 
undoubtedly  voiced  the  impression  of  the  ma- 
jority of  his  generation  that,  so  far  as  serious 


science  was  concerned,  the  societary  suggestion 
was  a closed  incident.  But  a new  generation 
was  already  on  the  stage,  and  even  the  older 
generation  had  not  yet  uttered  its  last  word 
on  the  subject  of  society.  The  Verein  fur 
Sozialpolitik  was  born  before  Roscher’s  book 
appeared.  That  organization  proved  to  be,  in 
spirit  and  in  practice  if  not  as  profoundly 
as  might  be  in  confession,  a vindication  of  the 
social  idea.  Almost  at  the  same  moment  with 
the  publication  of  Roseher’s  book,  Schaffle  was 
writing  the  preface  of  Bau  und  Leben  des 
Socialen  Korpers  (1875),  and  Spencer  was 
delivering  the  first  installment  of  Principles 
of  Sociology  (1874-77).  Society  had  been  re- 
discovered by  a publicist  whom  Roscher  him- 
self had  called  “certainly  one  of  the  foremost 
economists  of  our  time”  and  by  a cosmic  phil- 
osopher who  was  doing  more  than  any  con- 
temporary to  advise  the  world  of  the  signifi- 
cance of  Charles  Darwin’s  generalizations. 
Both  of  these  writers  were  ridiculed  and 
abused,  but  the  opposition  attacked  non-essen- 
tials and  was  blind  to  that  part  of  their  work 
which  marked  an  achievement  in  objective  ap- 
prehension of  human  reality.  Both  of  them 
overworked  biological  analogies  as  vehicles  for 
t exposition  of  the  interconnections  between  hu- 
man facts ; but  all  their  crudities  of  method 
were  outweighed  by  their  service  in  visualizing 
literal  relations  between  different  human  ac- 
tivities. Schaffle  and  Spencer  had  outgrown 
the  obsessions  which  credited  state  and  society 
with  “spheres”  set  off  in  mystical  ways  from 
persons.  They  had  advanced  to  the  perception 
that  human  experience,  from  earliest  to  latest, 
is  a function  of  innumerable  group  relation- 
ships. Their  problem  then  was  to  make  out 
the  different  orders  of  groups  which  are  visible 
in  human  experience,  and  to  define  the  typical 
forms  of  reciprocal  influence  which  these  groups 
exhibit.  We  may  characterize  the  Sehaffle- 
Spencer  stage  of  societary  interpretation  as 
assured  of  the  continuity  of  human  relation- 
ships, of  interconnections  of  personal  actions 
and  reactions,  from  the  minutest  or  most  cas- 
ual human  group  out  to  the  most  comprehen- 
sive and  permanent,  as  having  made  a credit- 
able beginning  of  analysing  the  social  groups 
and  their  interactions,  from  family  to  human- 
ity, and  (perhaps  most  significant  of  all)  as 
having  in  principle  suspended  all  favoritism 
toward  particular  types  of  groups.  The  clue 
which  their  analysis  followed  was  that  society 
is  a plexus  of  personal  reactions  mediated 
through  institutions  or  groups.  One  among 
these  reaction-exchanges  was  the  state ; but 
the  state  was  no  longer  presumed  to  be  in  the 
last  analysis  of  a radically  different  origin, 
office  or  essence  from  any  other  group  in  the 
system.  It  simply  had  to  pass  muster  with 
the  other  groups,  on  the  merits  or  the  demerits 
of  its  performance. 

It  would  be  imprudent  to  allege  that  the 
sociologists  since  the  Schaffle-Spencer  period 


343 


SOCIOLOGY 


have  discovered  anything  which  was  not  im- 
plicitly in  the  two  works  named.  Purposely 
waiving  that  issue,  we  need  assert  only  that 
subsequent  observations  of  human  phenomena 
have  resulted  in  reconstructions  which  con- 
trast sharply  in  form,  in  details  of  content, 
and  in  effect  upon  mental  and  moral  attitude, 
with  the  sociological  interpretations  of  that 
earlier  date.  This  proposition  is  true  in  dif- 
ferent particulars  in  the  variations  of  socio- 
logical theory  peculiar  to  different  countries. 
The  limits  of  this  article  permit  illustration 
of  the  divergence  in  a single  case  only. 

English  Attitude  toward  Sociology. — Until 
quite  recently  sociology  has  languished  in  Eng- 
land, while  it  has  flourished  in  the  United 
States.  One  of  the  decisive  reasons  for  the 
English  side  of  this  contrast  was  a diversion 
created  by  an  antecedent  question  which  ar- 
rested the  development  of  purely  sociological 
theory.  It  seems  paradoxical  that  the  chief 
popularizer  of  the  evolutionary  idea  should 
have  proved  a hindrance  to  the  growth  of  con- 
structive sociology.  In  England,  at  least,  that 
was  the  case  in  a high  degree  in  this  way- 
evolutionism,  and  particularly  Spencer’s  vers- 
ion of  evolution,  was  understood  to  make  for 
the  conclusion  that  modification  of  the  work- 
ings of  physical  laws  by  human  volition  is  im- 
possible. It  is  an  open  question  whether  Spenc- 
er was  more  sinned  against  or  sinning  in  the 
creation  of  this  impression.  At  all  events,  soci- 
ology for  a time  almost  disappeared  in  Eng- 
land, while  the  mental  attitude  which  obstruct- 
ed sociological  progress  found  its  support  in  a 
conception  of  evolution  supposed  to  have  been 
sponsored  by  Spencer.  If  the  last  word  of 
science  was  that  evolutionary  human  improve- 
ment is  a delusion,  that  men  must  wait  for 
physical  laws  automatically  to  work  out  all 
the  human  salvation  that  is  possible,  no  suffi- 
cient motive  was  left  for  attempting  to  lay 
a scientific  foundation  for  ameliorative  effort. 
Anything  in  excess  of  mere  historical  review  of 
past  evolution  would  be  futile.  It  came  about, 
therefore,  that  sociological  initiative  in  Eng- 
land during  the  past  thirty  years  has  tended 
predominantly  either  into  superficial  em- 
pirics, or  into  the  field  of  “eugenics.”  This 
latter  development  is  quite  in  character,  be- 
cause in  the  phenomena  of  breeding,  if  any- 
where, facts  may  be  ascertained  and  inferences 
drawn  with  a minimum  of  shock  to  the  pre- 
conception that  the  conditions  concerned  are 
exclusively  physical.  The  most  convincing  pic- 
ture of  this  situation  may  be  found  in  the 
little  book  Social  Evolution  and  Political  The- 
ory (1911)  by  Hobhouse,  one  of  the  few  men 
in  England  whose  sociology  has  not  remained 
insular. 

American  Attitude  toward  Sociology. — The 
case  in  the  United  States  is  very  different. 
In  1883,  Lester  F.  Ward,  a botanist,  qualified 
as  Spencer  never  was  by  first-hand  study  of 
organic  phenomena  to  speak  as  an  evolution- 


ist, published  in  two  volumes  the  work  Dy- 
namic Sociology.  It  performed  the  service  of 
convincing  a generation  of  budding  American 
sociologists  that  the  suspected  conflict  between 
evolution  and  human  effort  was  a false  issue. 
The  fictitious  dilemma  between  evolution  and 
enterprise  has  consequently  never  visibly  em- 
barrassed sociological  thinking  in  this  country. 
In  Ward’s  preface  was  this  declaration  of  in- 
dependence : 

Just  as  Comte  could  complain  that  the  philoso- 
phy of  Hobbes,  Locke  and  Voltaire  was  negative,  so 
it  may  now  be  maintained  that  the  school  of  Mill, 
Spencer  and  Fiske  is  also  negative.  From  the 
purely  statical  stage  of  the  former  the  latter  has 
only  advanced  to  the  passively  dynamic  stage, 
which  recognizes  only  the  changes  wrought  by 
Nature  unassisted  by  Art ; but  before  the  science 
of  society  can  be  truly  founded  another  advance 
must  be  made,  and  the  actively  dynamic  stage 
reached,  in  which  social  phenomena 'shall  be  con- 
templated as  capable  of  intelligent  control  by 
society  itself  in  its  own  interest. 

Estimates  of  American  Sociology. — Con- 
tempt for  sociology  has  often  been  expressed 
in  Europe  in  the  phrase,  “The  American  Sci- 
ence.” The  slur  is  an  ungraciously  masked 
tribute.  While  sociological  work  of  the  first 
rank  has  been  done  in  Europe  during  the  past 
quarter  century,  the  most  effective  work  has 
been  done  in  the  United  States.  This  has  been 
due  less  to  the  exceptional  originality  of  de- 
tached individual  achievements,  than  to  ac- 
tual though  not  formal  division  of  labor  car- 
ried on  with  progressive  consciousness  of  com- 
mon purpose.  An  increasing  number  of  schol- 
ars prompted  by  fundamentally  identical  in- 
terests have  devoted  themselves  to  different 
phases  of  pending  problems  within  the  range 
indicated  by  our  description  of  general  so- 
ciology. They  have  subjected  one  another’s 
work  to  searching  and  stimulating  criticism. 
There  have  been  few  instances  in  the  history 
of  science  in  which  the  circumstances  were 
more  favorable  to  positive  results.  No  vested 
orthodoxy  existed  which  could  prejudice  conclu- 
sions. By  tacit  consent  the  work  to  be  done 
was  undertaken  as  search  into  relationships 
which  had  never  been  fairly  explored.  The 
very  fact  that  many  men  entered  upon  this 
search  from  almost  as  many  different  ap- 
proaches insured  multiple  checks  upon  the  re- 
turns. The  outcome  up  to  date  would  doubt- 
less be  variously  appraised  by  different  par- 
ticipants in  this  virtual  cooperation,  and  it 
would  be  impossible  to  obtain  a consensus 
about  the  relative  importance  of  different 
pieces  of  work  which  have  been  positive  or 
negative  factors  in  reaching  the  present  status 
of  the  injury.  Without  attempting  to  pass 
upon  details  of  this  sort,  we  venture  to  des- 
cribe that  which  is  today  common  to  Ameri- 
can workers  in  the  field  of  general  sociology 
as  follows. 

Present  Outlook. — We  have  arrived  at  ability 
to  state  fundamental  problems  of  sociology  in 
substantially  this  form,  viz. : Under  what  cate- 
gories is  it  necessary  to  think  human  experi- 


344 


SOCIOLOGY 


ence,  if  it  is  to  be  presented  objectively,  and 
what  are  the  typical  relationships  between  ac- 
tivities assembled  under  the  several  categories? 
Without  comment  on  the  magnitude  of  this 
achievement  in  itself,  as  a means  of  controll- 
ing and  coordinating  investigation,  it  must  be 
added  that  the  first  formal  answer  which  we 
now  give  to  the  question  is  also  of  inestimable 
methodological  importance,  viz. : we  now  say 
that  human  experience  is  chiefly  an  affair  of 
associatings  between  persons,  in  their  copings 
with  the  physical  and  psychical  conditions  to 
which  they  are  subject.  That  is,  presuppos- 
ing the  physical  factors  and  also  the  conscious- 
ness factors  into  which  personality  may  be 
resolved  (both  of  which  groups  of  factors  are 
in  the  first  instance  problems  not  of  general 
sociology  at  all  but  of  other  disciplines),  “ex- 
perience,” which  presents  the  problems  of  so- 
ciology, is  the  phenomena  of  the  lives  of 
persons  in  the  course  of  developing  and  using 
their  endowment  as  sentient  beings.  Experi- 
ence then  is  never  strictly  solipsistic ; it  is 
always  social.  Accordingly,  to  speak  after 
the  manner  of  the  Schoolmen,  the  categories 
“experience”  and  “association”  are  to  each 
other  as  substance  and  attribute.  That  is, 
they  are  interchangeable  for  certain  alterna- 
tive purposes.  The  fundamental  problem  of 
sociology  thereupon  falls  into  the  specific 
problems  of  discovering  the  categories  under 
which  the  different  orders  of  associatings  ob- 
served in  experience  must  be  subsumed. 

Process  Conception. — There  is  little  differ- 
ence of  opinion  among  American  sociologists 
today  over  the  further  proposition  that  socio- 
logical categories  will  be  adequate  in  the  de- 
gree in  which  they  connote  prevalence  of 
movement  over  status.  That  is,  experience 
reveals  to  us  more  meaning  under  the  aspect 
of  activity  than  of  fixity.  Accordingly  the 
category  “social  process”  has  become  a cardinal 
means  of  sociological  interpretation  (Ratzen- 
hofer,  Sociologische  Erkenntnis,  1898,  ch.  iv. 
Small,  General  Sociology,  Index  title,  “Process, 
social”).  “The  process  conception  of  life,”  or 
“the  social  process”,  is  a phrase  that  has  only 
recently  come  into  standard  usage  among  social 
scientists,  and  it  marks  a development  of  sqcial 
self-consciousness  which  cost  the  labors  of 
many  thinkers  during  a half  century.  Analy- 
sis of  experience  is  carried  on  by  sociologists 
today  with  reference  less  to  what  is  existing 
than  to  what  is  doing  and  becoming  in  a 
given  passage  of  experience.  Described  with 
respect  to  form  rather  than  content,  the  social 
process  is  a tide  of  separating  and  blending 
social  processes,  consisting  of  incessant  de- 
composition and  recomposition  of  relations 
within  persons  and  between  persons  in  a con- 
tinuous evolution  of  types  of  persons  and  asso- 
ciations (cf.  Ross,  Foundations  of  Sociology, 
91-99,  150). 

Function  of  the  Sociological  Categories. — All 
this  apparently  sterile  labor,  therefore,  of  de- 


termining the  categories  in  accordance  with 
which  experience  unfolds,  is  in  fact  the  most 
basic  work  thus  far  performed  for  sophistica- 
tion of  the  social  sciences.  It  marks  the  latest 
gains  of  social  self-consciousness  in  outgrow- 
ing the  condition  of  “seeing  men  as  trees 
walking.”  In  other  words,  the  social  reality 
is  a “going  affair.”  The  entities  which  men 
used  to  think  they  found  when  they  inspected 
life  turn  out  to  be  cross-sections  of  a continu- 
ity of  personal  becomings.  The  myth  “indi- 
vidual” has  given  place  to  the  socius  (Baldwin, 
Social  and  Ethical  Interpretations,  24;  Gid- 
dings,  Elements  of  Sociology,  10,  34,  161,  etc.). 
Each  grouping  of  socii  from  the  simplest  sex- 
ual mating  up  to  the  collidings  of  civilizations, 
tells  its  full  •story  not  in  terms  of  what  it  is 
at  a given  time.  That  is  merely  a moment  in 
the  process.  The  complete  report  combines 
what  the  relationship  was,  but  is  no  longer, 
what  it  is  tending  to  be,  and  what  our 
present  insight  indicates  that  it  should  be. 
Incidentally,  therefore,  “the  state”  in  the  tra- 
ditional sense,  the  sense  which  vitiated  most 
of  Spencer’s  political  reasonings,  the  sense 
which  still  frequently  confuses  the  minds  of 
legislators  and  jurists  and  executives,  falls 
into  the  rank  of  a discredited  hypothesis.  The 
concept  “state”  of  the  older  political  philoso- 
phies was  used  as  a term  in  a type  of  reason- 
ing which  authorized  transfer  of  general 
propositions  illustrated  by  the  Pharaohs’ 
“state,”  the  Sultan’s  “state”  or  the  Czar’s 
“state”  to  the  “state”  of  Englishmen,  French- 
men, Germans  or  Americans.  This  is  as  far 
from  objectivity  as  it  would  be  if  the  concept 
“matter”  were  held  to  justify  affirmations 
about  radium  or  sodium  or  oxygen,  merely 
because  the  same  had  been  illustrated  in  the 
behavior  of  ice  or  iron  or  hydrogen.  In  the 
last  analysis,  the  “state”  is  merely  a conven- 
ient term  of  inclusion  for  all  the  compulsory 
ways  in  which  the  persons  of  a more  or  less 
accidentally  determined  territory  are  cooperat- 
ing at  a given  time  in  adjustment  both  of 
their  common  and  their  particular  interests. 
This  cooperating  may  not  be  stated  as  though 
it  were  yesterday,  today  and  forever  the  same. 
It  is  always  a function  of  the  associatings  of 
past,  present  and  future  persons.  It  is  there- 
fore, like  the  rest  of  human  experience,  a con- 
geries of  relationships  in  the  course  of  evolu- 
tion. 

The  Idea  of  Social  Movement. — The  like  is 
true  of  the  category,  society.  It  is  still  a 
term  of  convenience,  but  with  less  prospect 
than  ever  of  becoming  a tool  of  precision. 
What  we  actually  find,  where  the  term 
society  was  once  supposed  to  fix  bounds,  is 
merely  an  indefinite  range  of  partially  or 
wholly  articulated  associatings,  among  which 
are  those  cooperatings  provisionally  denoted 
by  the  term  “state.”  Several  years  ago  an 
American  sociologist  crystallized  this  percep- 
tion into  the  aphorism,  “Society  is  virtually  a 


345 


SOCIOLOGY 


verbal  noun”  (Hayes,  American  Journal  of 
Sociology,  XI,  30).  We  may  generalize  the 
proposition.  If  we  should  invent  a vocabu- 
lary along  the  lines  cautiously  followed  in  this 
article,  that  is,  a terminology  to  correspond 
with  all  we  can  now  see  in  the  light  of  the 
process  concept,  we  should  probably  seem  even 
to  some  of  our  own  number  to  be  compound- 
ing pedantry.  As  we  now  interpret  experience, 
however,  each  noun  which  stands  primarily 
for  a social  situation  or  condition  would  have 
to  appear  in  a verbal  form  if  it  suggested  our 
whole  thought.  Thus,  when  we  say  “groups” 
or  “associations”  or  “functions”  or  “institu- 
tions,” or  even  “persons”  we  really  mean 
“groupings”  or  “associatings”  or  “function- 
ings” or  “institutionalizings”  or  “personaliz- 
ings,”  etc.  That  is,  experience  makes  itself 
known  to  us  in  the  form  of  incessant  reperson 
alizings  of  persons  and  rearrangings  of  ar 
rangements;  and  this  element  of  becoming  is 
the  most  decisive  factor  in  our  understanding 
of  any  portion  of  experience. 

It  should  go  without  saying  that  at  least 
embryonic  sense  of  proportion  is  assumed  as 
a precondition  of  using  sociological  categories. 
The  ratio  in  which  the  aspects  of  status  and 
of  movement  are  to  be  reckoned  as  meaning 
factors  in  a given  case  must  always  be  a 
matter  of  judgment.  A desperate  criminal  at 
large,  a starving  family,  an  epidemic,  is  first 
and  foremost  a very  present  fact,  to  be  dealt 
with  as  such.  On  the  other  hand,  the  factors 
which  predetermine  crime,  poverty,  disease,  or 
the  elements  which  should  find  their  reck- 
oning in  a national  tariff,  conservation,  or 
arbitration  policy,  reach  far  back  and  far 
forward,  and  they  call  for  consideration  and 
action  very  different  from  that  appropriate 
to  a specific  case. 

Form  vs.  Content  of  Experience. — Thus  far 
we  have  spoken  almost  exclusively  of  the  for- 
mal side  of  experience.  In  the  mere  matter  of 
terms,  sociologists  are  nearer  uniformity  in 
their  symbols  for  the  modes  of  experience  than 
in  their  categories  for  the  content  of  experi- 
ence. In  spirit,  however,  they  have  steadily 
been  approaching  unanimity  in  the  conviction 
that  the  social  process  must  be  understood  as 
of,  by  and  for  persons,  and  that  appraisals  of 
given  stages  of  the  process  must  turn  upon 
their  visible  output  in  personalizings  and  as- 
sociatings of  enlarged  scope  and  improved  qual- 
ity. “The  supreme  result  of  efficient  social 
organization,  and  the  supreme  test  of  efficiency, 
is  the  development  of  the  socius,  or  the  per- 
sonality of  the  social  man.  If  the  man  himself 
becomes  less  social,  less  rational,  less  manly, 
if  he  falls  from  the  highest  type,  which  seeks 
self-realization,  to  one  of  those  lower  types 
that  manifest  only  the  primitive  virtues  of 
power,  if  he  becomes  non-social  or  anti-social 
— the  social  organization,  whatever  its  appar- 
ent merits,  is  failing  to  achieve  its  supreme 
object.  If,  on  the  contrary,  the  man  is  becom- 


ing ever  better  as  a human  being,  more  ra- 
tional, more  sympathetic,  with  an  ever-broad- 
ening consciousness  of  kind — then,  whatever 
its  apparent  defects,  the  social  organization 
is  sound  and  efficient”  (Giddings,  Elements  of 
Sociology,  230).  “Men’s  experience  is  the 
evolution  of  human  values”  (Small,  The  Mean- 
ing of  Social  Science,  137).  Considered  on 
the  side  of  content,  some  shaping  of  the  con- 
cept human  realization,  as  a consummation  not 
to  be  defined  a priori  but  to  be  built  up  by 
accumulatings  and  expandings  and  adjustings 
of  concepts  of  personal  qualities,  is  becoming 
the  normative  category  of  experience. 

Secondary  Categories. — It  is  not  practicable 
within  the  limits  of  this  article  to  speak  of  the 
more  particular  sociological  categories.  They 
seem  to  be  more  heterogeneous  than  they  are, 
because  they  have  been  worked  out  from  the 
standpoint  on  different  planes  of  relationship 
within  the  social  process.  Some  of  the  best 
known  groups  of  categories  are  parts  of  the 
critical  apparatus  developed  in  analyzing  ex- 
perience from  the  standpoint  of  the  concepts 
‘social  genesis,”  “social  forms,”  “social  forces,” 
“social  psychology,”  “social  organization,” 
“social  control.” 

Implications  for  Applied  Sociology. — In  thus 

describing  the  distinctive  work  of  general  so- 
ciology, we  have  indirectly  expanded  our  de- 
scription of  applied  sociology.  There  either  is, 
or  there  is  developing,  a peculiar  technique  and 
technology  for  each  division  and  subdivision  of 
deliberate  effort  for  social  improvement.  The 
respective  technologies  are  systematic  pro- 
grams for  promoting  the  health,  wealth,  and 
culture  interests  of  the  groups  with  which  each 
is  primarily  concerned : the  family,  the  in- 
dustrial group,  the  urban  group,  the  rural 
group,  the  criminal  group,  etc.  (see  Sociology, 
Applied).  In  so  far  as  these  technologies 
are  scientifically  founded,  they  presuppose  the 
categories  to  which  we  have  referred,  and  they 
make  use  of  these  categories  not  only  in  an- 
alysing the  group  situations  and  tendencies, 
but  also  in  determining  the  rational  group 
purposes.  This  was  memorably  illustrated  in 
the  platform  adopted  at  its  organization  by 
the  Verein  fur  Sozialpolitik,  perhaps  the  most 
influential  voluntary  organization  in  the  world 
for  promoting  social  technology.  That  creed 
was  a particular  rendering  of  the  human 
realization  category.  It  may  be  summarized 
in  the  proposition  reiterated  by  Schmoller  in 
many  variations.  “Every  member  of  the  com- 
munity should  be  put  in  a way  to  share  in  all 
the  developing  goods  of  civilization.” 

Influence  of  the  Social  Concept. — The  most 
instructive  resume  that  has  been  written  of 
the  influence"  of  the  social  idea,  is  the  contri- 
bution of  Professor  von  Philippovich,  entitled 
the  Infusion  of  Socio-political  Ideas  into  the 
Literature  of  German  Economics,  in  the  second 
of  the  two  volumes  dedicated  on  his  seventieth 
birthday  to  Professor  Schmoller.  The  estimate 


34C 


SOCIOLOGY,  APPLIED 


is  especially  valuable  because  it  is  the  judg- 
ment not  of  a sociologist  but  of  an  economist. 
The  closing  sentences  of  the  monograph  are 
these : 

How  the  relationships  of  men  take  place  . . . 
is  no  longer  dependent  upon  economic  appraisal, 
but  it  is  a consequence  of  the  moral  ordering  of 
life.  To  have  shown  this,  and  to  have  made  it  a 
basis  of  the  actions  of  men  in  society  and  in  the 
State,  is  the  merit  of  that  change  which  has  been 
brought  about  through  the  infusion  of  the  socio- 
political ideas  into  national  economy.  New  tasks 
are  therewith  assigned  to  the  science  which  the 
older  science  did  not  recognize.  From  a mere 
theory  of  industry  it  becomes  a social  theory.  Its 
task  is  no  longer 'to  describe  the  simple  correlation 
between  goods  and  active  self-interest.  Its  busi- 
ness is  now  to  recognize  this  interdependence  as 
also  both  cause  and  effect  of  other  occurrences  ; and 
consequently  its  duty  is  to  understand  the  course 
of  industry  under  the  influence  of  nature  and  of 
moralization  in  order  that  we  may  learn  to  control 
it. 

See  Political  Philosophy;  Political  Sci- 
ence; Psychology  of  the  Crowd;  Social  Re- 
form; Sociology,  Applied;  State,  Theory  of. 

References:  L.  F.  Ward,  Psychic  Factors  of 
Civilization  (1893),  Pure  Sociology  (1903), 
Applied  Sociology  (1906)  ; J.  S.  MacKenzie, 
Introduction  to  Social  Philosophy  (1890);  F. 
H.  Giddings,  Principles  of  Sociology  (1896), 
Inductive  Sociology  (1901),  Descriptive  and 
Historic  Sociology  (1906)  ; G.  E.  Howard,  Hist, 
of  Matrimonial  Institutions  (1904);  W.  G. 
Sumner,  Folkways  (1907);  W.  I.  Thomas, 
Source  Book  of  Social  Origins  (1909);  E.  A. 
Ross,  Social  Control  (1901),  Foundations  of 
Sociology  (1905)  ; C.  H.  Cooley,  Human  Na- 
ture and  the  Social  Order  (1902),  Social  Organ- 
ization (1909)  ; G.  Simmel,  Soziologie  (1908)  ; 
C.  H.  Ellwood,  Sociology  in  Its  Psychological 
Aspects  (1912). 

Albion  W.  Small. 

SOCIOLOGY,  APPLIED.  Distinctions. — Ger- 
man economists  find  it  convenient  to  distin- 
guish between  general  (theoretical)  and  spe- 
cial (practical)  economics.  It  is  convenient 
in  sociology  to  follow  this  hint  and  cultivate 
general  and  practical  sociology.  There  is  an 
important  and  significant  difference  between 
the  divisions  of  social  technology  here  pro- 
posed and  the  divisions  commonly  used  in 
practical  economics  and  economic  politics.  In 
the  latter  the  divisions  are  based  on  the 
specialization  of  labor  and  branches  of  indus- 
try or  commerce;  as  the  economics  of  bank- 
ing, insurance,  railroads,  agriculture.  In  prac- 
tical sociology,  because  it  deals  directly  with 
humanity,  the  divisions  should  be  based  on 
natural  groups  of  persons,  as  family,  communi- 
ties, classes. 

Scope  of  Social  Technology. — Social  technol- 
ogy starts  from  the  analysis  of  social  group- 
ings and  interests  furnished  by  general  soci- 
ology ( see  Sociology),  and  it  is  modified  at 
every  step  by  advance  in  knowledge  in  all  the 
fields  of  science.  At  a given  moment,  how- 
ever, all  available  knowledge  must  be  utilized 
for  achievement;  there  is  no  final  “solution 
120 


of  social  problems.  The  physician  must  each 
day  do  the  best  he  can  in  his  science  and 
art  of  healing,  well  aware  that  tomorrow  a 
laboratory  bulletin  may  place  him  under  moral 
obligation  to  adopt  entirely  different  means. 
Herbert  Spencer  showed  that  science  is  just 
common  knowledge  carried  to  the  highest  pos 
sible  degree  of  completeness  and  accuracy 
Whenever  an  intelligent  citizen  adopts  a prin- 
ciple of  personal  conduct  he  takes  into  account 
all  the  interests  and  consequences  he  can  re- 
member or  discover.  He  may  abstract  any  one 
of  them  for  thorough  examination,  but  if  he 
consciously  omits  any  one  in  his  life  plan 
he  is  that  far  immoral,  and  knows  it.  We  can 
illustrate  the  scope  of  social  technology  by 
what  constantly  happens  in  a chance  group  of 
farmers  or  in  the  deliberate  discussions  of  a 
village  improvement  society  when  the  “general 
welfare”  is  under  consideration.  The  range 
of  topics  is  as  wide  as  the  urban  newspaper. 
The  farmer  suggests  one  set  of  phenomena, 
the  storekeeper  another,  the  doctor  another, 
the  county  editor  many  things,  and  the  visit- 
ing commercial  traveller  touches  all.  They 
may  call  in  a lawyer  to  formulate  regulations 
or  a bill  for  a law  but  their  plans  look  more 
to  future  achievements  than  to  salted  prece- 
dents. They  know  that  they  must  agree  on 
a policy  because  they  must  live  together,  and 
must  find  a practicable  method  of  realizing  the 
covenanted  end.  Thus  they  are  social  technol- 
ogists. Certainly  with  wider  and  clearer  vision 
and  fuller  knowledge  their  policy  would  be 
more  adequate;  and  it  is  here  that  applied 
social  science  can  help  them. 

Each  “socius”  has  in  his  nature  all  the 
needs  of  all  men,  without  exception,  but  feels 
them  as  wants  in  varying  degrees.  Each 
“socius”  must  use  all  the  institutions  of  so- 
ciety and  all  the  forms  of  knowledge.  He  goes 
to  specialists,  as  lawyers,  teachers,  physicians, 
for  expert  professional  service;  but  he  must 
possess  enough  “world  ideas”  to  live  in  asso- 
ciation with  his  neighbors.  Every  man  and 
woman  of  social  position  above  the  lowest 
is  compelled  to  form  some  kind  of  a judgment, 
favorable  or  adverse,  in  regard  to  scores  of 
ameliorative  and  reform  movements  started  by 
specialists  or  fanatics.  By  appeals  in  circu- 
lars, newspapers,  letters  and  interviews,  they 
are  made  to  say  yes  or  no  to  these  multi- 
farious calls.  A refusal  is  a judgment  and  a 
decision  involving  responsibility.  It  is  evident 
that  answers  to  requests  ought  to  be  as  in- 
telligent as  possible,  whether  we  help  or  de- 
cline to  help  with  time,  money,  influence,  labor. 
An  intelligent  judgment  is  possible  only  after 
a survey  of  the  entire  field,  and  this  survey 
cannot  be  made  by  any  one  person;  it  is  a 
product  of  well  coordinated  rational  labor. 
The  “practical”  man  who  despises  theory  is 
the  most  obstinate  theorist;  he  is  sure  of 
his  experience,  but  he  is  sometimes  slow  to 
learn  of  the  world’s  experience;  he  may  lose 
347 


SOCIOLOGY,  APPLIED 


years  in  trying  an  experiment  which  has  often 
been  tried  by  others.  All  forms  of  science 
culminate  in  applied  sociology.  It  is  only 
when  they  cooperate  that  they  are  fully  ra- 
tional. 

Sociology  and  History.— Sir  H.  S.  Maine 
(Village  Communities,  230)  said: 

It  is  not  the  business  of  the  scientific  historical 
enquirer  to  assert  good  or  evil  of  any  particular 
institution.  He  deals  with  its  existence  and  de- 
velopment, not  with  its  expediency. 

But  this  aspect  of  science  satisfies  only  one 
of  the  many  needs  of  humanity,  the  desire 
for  knowledge.  Social  technology  does 
deal  with  “expediency,”  if  by  that  we  mean 
the  actual  adaption  of  institutions  to  human 
welfare.  In  this  wide  sense  a course  of  con- 
duct is  ethically  “good”  when  it  actually  tends 
to  promote  all  forms  of  welfare  for  the  entire 
community  under  consideration;  and  “expedi- 
ency” rationally  interpreted,  becomes  the  su- 
preme test  of  conduct.  Where  the  “scientific 
historical  enquirer”  leaves  off,  the  practical 
sociologist  begins;  but  he  does  not  desert  the 
solid  ground  laid  in  scientific  inquiry. 

Tasks  of  Social  Sciences. — A.  Wagner  de- 
clares that  the  social  sciences  differ  from  the 
sciences  of  nature  in  the  scope  of  their  tasks. 
Grundlegung  der  politischen  Oekonomie.  All 
the  sciences  in  common  seek : ( 1 ) to  establish 

the  facts,  and  (2)  the  tendencies  of  the  phe- 
nomena studied,  and  (3)  to  explain  these  facts 
in  a causal  series.  But  the  sciences  of  society 
go  further  and  inquire:  (1)  what  is  the 

value  of  the  facts  for  human  society?  (2) 
what  ought  to  be?  and  (3)  how  can  the  end 
be  progressively  realized?  In  the  purely  the- 
oretical sciences  the  task  is  to  learn  in  order 
to  know;  in  the  social  sciences  we  learn  in 
order  to  control  means  to  ends;  but  in  both 
cases  knowledge  is  the  object  of  the  scientific 
discipline. 

The  scope  of  practical  sociology  is  indicated 
in  this  description  of  the  objects  of  the  study: 
“Those  modifications  of  society  which  are 
brought  about  by  the  social  will,  equipped  with 
adequate  knowledge,  using  appropriate  means, 
and  striving  toward  an  intelligently  conceived 
goal”  (E.  A.  Ross). 

Social  technology  must  start  with  an  anal- 
ysis of  desirable  ends  of  concerted  volition 
analyzed  by  psychology,  revealed  in  history, 
vividly  presented  in  art  and  literature,  and 
justified  by  social  philosophy.  Human  purpose 
directed  to  desirable  ends  is  an  objective  fact, 
actual  and  real  as  a star  or  a crystal.  Grant- 
ed that  not  all  social  changes  are  due  to  con- 
certed human  volition,  and  that  many  changes 
can  be  traced  to  external  nature  and  unthink- 
ing custom ; still  men  do  cooperate  consciously 
to  improve  their  condition  and  they  some- 
times succeed.  The  ends  are  in  human  nature 
and  they  come  out  in  deeds,  laws,  institutions, 
works.  These  desires  and  volitions  are  them- 
selves causal  factors.  They  act  upon  the  ma- 


terials and  forces  of  nature,  using  them  to 
accomplish  desired  ends.  Knowledge,  science, 
is  the  instrument  of  government. 

Practical  sociology  attempts  to  comprehend 
in  an  intellectual  system,  the  complex  of  con- 
ditions in  which  the  accepted  ends  of  human 
life  may  best  be  realized.  This  “theory,”  or 
intellectual  control,  is  necessary  to  furnish  the 
most  effective  and  economical  method  of  actual 
achievement. 

Classification  of  Interests. — While  the  mate- 
rial objects  of  desire  are  beyond  counting  and 
infinitely  varied,  the  ends  or  interests  them- 
selves may  be  analyzed  and  classified.  (1) 
There  are  the  desires  on  whose  satisfaction  de- 
pend the  physical  integrity  and  power  of  the 
individual  and  the  perpetuation  of  human  life, 
as  the  appetites  of  hunger,  thirst,  sex.  (2) 
The  desires  whose  satisfaction  in  control  of 
nature  is  necessary  to  all  other  satisfactions 
and  whose  activities  are  the  special  field  of 
economics.  These  are  means  to  other  ends 
but  come  to  be  almost  idealized  as  ultimate  in 
wealth,  commerce,  industry.  (3)  There  are 
the  higher  desires  which  have  been  evolved 
in  civilized  man  and  are  the  springs  of  interest 
and  achievement  in  science,  art,  companionship, 
morality,  government,  religion  and  the  social 
institutions  which  are  created  for  their  further- 
ance. 

Methods  of  Study. — The  system  of  means 
and  measures  for  the  satisfaction  of  these 
desires  may  be  studied  in  various  ways.  The 
complex  whole  must  be  viewed  in  various  as- 
pects, without  forgetting  that  society  is  one 
and  its  interests  not  divided  into  independent 
parts.  As  soon  as  we  attempt  to  invent  and 
apply  a “technique”  we  must  find  a different 
set  of  tools  for  each  achievement.  Analysis 
is  imposed  on  us  by  the  limitation  of  our  focal 
field.  The  division  here  offered  is  merely  a 
convenience,  a tentative  device,  which  may 
easily  be  rejected  for  a better.  We  may  in 
turn  inquire  how  the  ends  of  welfare  (de- 
sires, interests)  may  best  be  promoted  in  the 
family,  the  rural  community,  the  urban  com- 
munity, the  commonwealth,  the  nation,  the 
world  of  international  law  and  civilization, 
humanity.  This  study  may  be  followed  or 
accompanied  by  an  investigation  of  the  regu- 
lative principles  found  in  the  best  methods 
of  dealing  with  particular  groups  of  human 
beings  having  many  traits  in  common:  the 
depressed,  the  abnormal,  the  anti-social.  We 
may  also  isolate  for  study  the  interests  of  the 
wage-earners  and  the  “social  polities”  which 
have  grown  out  of  attempts  to  improve  their 
conditions,  a study  far  wider  than  “social 
economics.” 

Illustrations. — We  select  for  illustration  of 
the  procedure  of  practical  sociology  what 
might  be  done  by  a large  group  of  men  and 
women  of  light  and  leading  in  making  a plan 
for  their  commonwealth.  The  very  name  “com- 
monwealth” shows  that  we  are  not  making  an 


348 


SOCIOLOGY,  APPLIED 


appeal  to  credulity  but  to  common  sense;  for 
the  word  is  proof  that  Aristotle’s  definition 
still  has  vital  meaning;  the  state  is  a people 
living  a common  life  to  a noble  end.  We  can 
easily  imagine  a conference  of  persons  repre- 
senting science,  business,  art,  religion,  govern- 
ment, recreation,  wanting  to  make  a working 
programme  for  the  welfare  of  the  whole  people. 
It  is  not  necessary  that  they  should  be  formal- 
ly elected;  their  decisions  would  have  no  more 
authority  than  the  wisdom  they  embody.  Such 
a conference  would  agree  that  all  the  elements 
of  welfare  should  be  considered;  that  no  group 
of  persons  should  be  neglected;  that  health, 
wealth  and  culture  for  all  citizens  should  be 
taken  into  account.  Then  they  would  invent 
some  natural  division  of  labor.  The  physicians 
and  engineers  would  be  regarded  as  responsible 
for  leadership  in  matters  of  public  health,  and 
they  would  formulate  the  demands  of  modern 
sanitary  science.  The  teachers  would  be  re- 
quested to  standardize  the  work  of  the  schools. 
The  artists  would  agree  upon  the  requirements 
of  the  people  in  relation  to  the  works  of  beauty. 
Those  who  cared  specially  for  the  destitute, 
and  had  studied  their  needs,  would  draw  up 
one  part  of  the  programme  and  justify  it. 
Those  who  had  given  long  thought  to  the 
wage  earners  would  set  up  a standard  of  treat- 
ment for  them.  In  each  group  “practical” 
men  of  wide  vision  would  be  an  essential  fac- 
tor, as  nitrogen  in  the  atmosphere  is  neces- 
sary lest  the  oxygen,  in  a fit  of  academic  en- 
thusiasm, burn  up  the  breathing  organs.  Such 
a conference  would  bring  together  all  these 
specialists  and  experts,  from  time  to  time, 
and  with  the  help  of  a small  committee  would 
seek  to  systematize  and  combine  all  the  re- 
commendations into  a consistent  plan.  By  re- 
peated discussions  and  critical  tests  the  eco- 
nomic, physical,  and  constitutional  tests  would 
be  applied.  The  rudiments  of  such  a process 
may  be  found  already  in  the  legislative  refer- 
ence bureau  in  Wisconsin;  but  legislation  is 
only  one  method  of  furthering  the  general 
welfare.  Informally  and  drastically  the  news- 
papers and  magazines  act  as  a conference  for 
the  entire  people. 

Sociology  and  the  Law— Recent  decisions  of 
our  Supreme  Court  encourage  us  to  develope 
our  social  technology;  for  that  august  body, 
more  respected  than  any  other  in  our  land, 
has  distinctly  taught  that  ultimately  the  Con- 
stitution will  not  be  found  in  antagonism  to 
any  thoroughly  approved  measure  for  achiev- 
ing general  welfare  (F.  Kelley,  Some  Ethical 
Gains  through  Legislation ; F.  J.  Goodnow,  So- 
cial Reform  and  the  Constitution,  1911).  In- 
deed, the  Constitution  itself  was  framed  for 
this  high  purpose  and  nothing  lower.  Thus 
we  see  the  relation  of  practical  sociology  to 
law  and  to  the  teaching  of  law;  it  is  the 
discipline  which  reveals  what  law  ought  to 
become.  Courts  of  final  resort  are  not  ruled 
absolutely  by  precedents  and  legal  fictions,  I 


and  legislators  may  change  law  in  the  direc- 
tion of  improvement.  To  confine  the  study 
of  young  lawyers  entirely  to  decisions  of  cases 
and  to  precedents  is  to  render  them  incapable 
of  keeping  pace  with  the  vital  process  of  a 
noble  science.  Here  also  is  the  test  of  the 
pretensions  of  practical  sociology;  it  must  be- 
come competent  to  give  proof  beyond  reason- 
able ground  for  doubt,  that  its  programme  will 
actually  promote  the  common  welfare,  when 
accepted  in  law,  in  judicial  interpretations, 
and  in  popular  customs. 

Standards  of  Judgment.— Practical  sociology 
offers  a method  of  criticism  of  any  complex  of 
social  arrangements.  Its  standard  of  judgment 
is  the  degree  of  adaptation  of  institutions  or 
conduct  to  the  conditions  of  general  welfare. 
Thus  it  helps  to  correct  the  vision  of  the 
overman  who  regards  other  men  as  his  tools; 
the  estimate  of  the  manufacturer  who  looks 
upon  his  employees  as  only  so  many  “hands”; 
the  philosophy  of  the  exclusive  trade  unionist 
who  considers  bombs  as  fair  in  war;  the  pe- 
dantic Brahmin,  who  has  contempt  for  the  un- 
lettered. The  “economic  interpretation  of  his- 
tory” is  shown  to  be  partial,  and  the  economic 
end  as  only  a preliminary  means.  No  doubt 
all  this  involves  immense  intellectual  labor; 
but  a view  of  life  less  comprehensive  cannot 
be  accepted  as  satisfactory ; and  so  long  as  any 
interest  or  any  group  of  humanity  is  ignored, 
so  long  our  judgment  of  a tendency  of  social 
conduct  must  fall  short  of  being  scientific  as 
well  as  ethical. 

It  is  not  an  objection  to  our  claim  for 
practical  sociology  that  no  one  man  can  master 
it  in  all  its  details  and  applications.  That 
is  true  of  all  the  sciences  and  scientific  dis- 
ciplines. A scientific  discipline  is  justified  if 
it  furnish  an  instrument  of  analysis  and  syn- 
thesis and  disclose  the  fundamental  principles 
of  the  subject.  Encyclopedias  of  information 
and  monographs  of  intensive  specialists  are 
also  necessary  to  furnish  humanity  with  the 
knowledge  which  has  been  discussed  by  myri- 
ads of  investigators  in  the  republic  of  letters 
and  of  practice.  One  of  the  intellectual  needs 
of  the  world  is  also  a practical  need, 

TJm  im  Ganzen,  Quten.  Schonen 

Resolut  zu  leben. 

Problems. — The  problem  of  practical  or  ap- 
plied sociology  is  the  rational  and  just  division 
of  the  inheritance  of  civilization.  The  value  of 
the  sciences  lies  in  their  service  as  means  of 
control  of  all  forms  and  materials  for  the  sat- 
isfaction of  human  needs.  The  diffusion  of 
knowledge  of  science  is  certainly  one  of  the 
essential  methods  by  which  members  of  the 
race  can  come  into  the  enjoyment  of  what  be- 
longs, not  to  a few  men,  but  to  the  race. 
Certainly  a people  intellectually  stagnant, 
stupid,  indifferent,  can  have  neither  the  ambi- 
tion nor  the  skill  to  take  possession  of  the 
vast  material  and  ideal  wealth  which  has  come 
down  to  us  from  the  past  or  been  achieved  in 


349 


SOFTS— SOLDIERS  AND  SAILORS,  LEGAL  STATUS  OF 


rrcent  times.  The  general  diffusion  of  knowl- 
edge must,  therefore,  form  a part  of  the  pro- 
gramme upon  which  practical  sociology  is 
working. 

It  may  or  may  not  be  inconsistent  with  this 
statement,  but  only  an  application,  if  we  in- 
sist that  improvement  of  the  race  also  depends 
on  bringing  into  the  range  of  interests  of  the 
people  the  objects  of  art,  the  works  of  litera- 
ture, the  expressions  of  spiritual  vision,  the 
interpretations  of  the  values  of  existence. 

See  Political  Science;  Social  Reform;  So- 
ciology. 

References:  L.  F.  Ward,  Applied  Sociol- 
ogy (1906),  Dynamic  Sociology  (1906)  ; A.  W. 
Small,  General  Sociology  (1905)  705;  C.  D. 
Wright,  Practical  Sociology  (7th  ed.,  1909); 
C.  R.  Henderson,  “The  Scope  of  Social  Technol- 
ogy” in  Am.  Jour,  of  Sociology,  VI. (1901),  465, 
“Practical  Sociology  in  Service  of  Social  Eth- 
ics,” in  University  of  Chicago,  Decennial  Pub- 
lications, III  (1900). 

Charles  R.  Henderson. 

SOFTS.  The  “Softs,”  or  “Soft  Shells,”  were 
New  York  Democrats,  in  opposition  to  the 
regulars,  “Hunkers”  (see),  or  “Hards”  (see). 
The  “Softs”  made  efforts  to  draw  back  into  the 
Democratic  party  the  Democratic  element  of 
the  Free  Soil  party  (see).  In  the  ranks  of 
the  “Softs”  were  such  men  as  Dix  and  Marcy 
(see  Marcy,  W.  L.).  In  the  contest  over  the 
Kansas-Nebraska  Act  (see),  the  “Softs”  sup- 
ported the  popular  sovereignty  (see)  prin- 
ciple. New  York  was  represented  by  both 
factions  in  the  convention  of  1856,  each  dele- 
gate having  half  a vote.  In  1860,  the  “Softs,” 
Douglas  delegates,  were  seated.  See  Demo- 
cratic Party.  References:  E.  Stanwood,  Hist, 
of  the  Presidency  (1898),  265,  282;  J.  F. 
Rhodes,  Hist,  of  V.  S.  (1893-1906),  I,  389, 
481.  T.  N.  H. 

SOILS,  BUREAU  OF.  The  Bureau  of  Soils 
is  one  of  the  bureaus  of  the  Department  of 
Agriculture.  Its  function  is  to  study  the  soils 
and  soil-resources  of  the  United  States  through 
both  field  service  and  laboratories.  A soil 
survey  of  the  entire  United  States  was  begun 
in  1899,  and  by  June  30,  1910,  the  Bureau, 
aided  in  several  states  by  state  appropriations 
or  organizations,  had  surveyed  359,564,  square 
miles  of  agricultural  soils.  It  began  in  1908 
a reconnaissance  survey  of  the  Great  Plains 
region,  and  also  has  conducted  soil-water  in- 
vestigations in  the  arid  regions  of  the  West. 
The  laboratory  investigations  have  been  direct- 
ed with  a view  to  the  ultimate  publication  in 
final  form  of  the  more  important  facts  con- 
cerning the  soils  of  the  country.  See  Agricul- 
tural Experiment  Stations;  Agricul- 
ture, Department  of;  Agriculture,  Rela- 
tions of  Government  to.  Reference:  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture,  Annual  Reports. 

A.  N.  II. 


SOLDIERS  AND  SAILORS,  LEGAL  STAT- 
US OF.  Enlisted  men  in  the  Army  and  Navy 
in  time  of  peace  become  such  in  the  operation 
of  contracts  of  enlistment,  voluntarily  entered 
into  by  them,  in  which,  in  virtue  of  the  promise 
to  allow  them  such  bounty,  pay,  rations  and 
clothing  as  are  or  may  be  established  by  law, 
they  undertake  to  place  their  entire  time  at 
the  service  of  the  government  and  to  serve  it 
loyally  and  faithfully  against  all  its  enemies 
or  opposers  whomsoever.  In  the  operation  of 
this  undertaking  a special  status  is  created 
for  the  soldier  or  sailor,  and  he  becomes 
charged  with  duties  and  obligations  in  behalf 
of  the  public  of  which  he  cannot  divest  himself 
during  the  term  of  his  enlistment. 

The  attitude  of  the  soldier  toward  the  law 
does  not  change  by  the  mere  fact  of  his  en- 
listment in  the  military  or  naval  service,  and 
he  remains  liable  to  trial  by  civil  courts  for 
any  offense  which  he  may  commit  in  violation 
of  the  law  of  a state  or  of  the  United  States. 
He  has  no  immunity  from  the  payment  of 
debts  incurred  independently  of  the  military 
service.  Persons  who  deal  with  soldiers  or 
sailors  are  chargeable  with  knowledge  of  the 
amount  of  pay  received  by  them,  and  cannot 
plead  ignorance  where  debts  considerably  be- 
yond their  power  to  pay  have  been  contracted. 
The  War  and  Navy  Departments  are  without 
power  to  charge  themselves  with  the  collec- 
tion of  debts  incurred  by  officers  and  men,  but, 
where  a judgment  has  been  obtained  in  an 
action  which  the  officer  or  soldier  had  an 
opportunity  to  defend,  and  which  the  defend- 
ant refuses,  without  good  reason,  to  satisfy,  it 
is  within  their  power  to  proceed  against  him, 
before  a military  tribunal,  under  a charge  al- 
leging conduct  to  the  prejudice  of  good  order 
and  military  discipline,  or  conduct  unbecoming 
an  officer  and  gentleman  as  the  case  may  be. 

The  military  status  created  by  the  enlistment 
contract,  in  behalf  of  an  enlisted  man  of  the 
army  or  navy  is  normally  terminated  by  his 
discharge  at  the  expiration  of  his  term  of  en- 
listment, although  it  may  be  terminated,  for 
good  reason,  previous  to  its  expiration  by  the 
Secretary  of  War  or  of  the  Navy,  who  are  re- 
garded as  the  representatives  of  the  United 
States  in  the  execution  of  all  contracts  of 
enlistment,  and  are  charged  by  law  with  power 
to  rescind  them  where  such  a course  is  to  the 
public  interest.  The  separation  of  a soldier 
or  sailor  from  the  service  is  evidenced  by  a 
discharge  certificate,  an  instrument  having  a 
peculiar  value,  as  the  character  of  the  soldier 
is  noted  upon  it.  The  service  of  a soldier  may 
also  be  terminated  by  death,  by  discharge  on 
certificate  of  disability,  by  dishonorable  dis- 
charge in  pursuance  of  the  sentence  of  a court 
martial,  by  a discharge  without  honor,  or  by 
muster-out  or  discharge  at  the  expiration  of  a 
particular  war  in  which  the  Lhffted  States  has 
been  engaged.  The  soldiers  and  sailors  are 
among  the  few  persons  against  whom  the  spe- 


SOLDIERS’  HOMES— SOLDIERS,  QUARTERING  OF 


cific  performance  of  a contract  to  give  services 
can  be  enforced;  but  corporal  punishment 
ceased  to  be  a legal  penalty  in  the  Army  in 
1861.  The  only  legal  method  of  duress  is  im- 
prisonment, including,  if  necessary,  solitary 
confinement,  and  confinement  for  a brief  period 
on  a bread  and  water  diet. 

See  Labor  Contracts. 

References;  C.  M.  Clode,  Military  Forces  of 
the  Crown  (1860),  ch.  x;  J.  I.  C.  Hare,  Consti- 
tutional Law,  (1889),  935;  Revised  Statutes 
of  the  V.  S.  (1878),  § 123. 

George  B.  Davis. 

SOLDIERS’  HOMES.  In  1851  Congress  ap- 
propriated $118,791,  the  balance  of  a military 
contribution  from  the  city  of  Mexico  in  1848, 
as  the  foundation  of  an  asylum  at  Washing- 
ton “for  the  relief  and  support  of  invalid  and 
disabled  soldiers.”  Soldiers  of  the  regular 
Army  pay  $1.50  a year  to  the  funds  of  this 
establishment,  to  which  certain  fines  and  for- 
feitures are  also  added.  Honorable  service 
for  20  years  or  disability  not  due  to  miscon- 
duct entitles  a soldier  to  admission ; and  pen- 
sioners are  allowed  in  addition  to  dispose  of 
their  pensions.  About  $700,000  is  annually 
appropriated  for  the  maintenance  of  this  in- 
stitution. National  homes  for  soldiers  or  sai  1- 
ors  who  have  taken  part  in  any  war  of 
the  United  States  were  established  in  1866 
and  there  are  nine  of  these  in  different  parts 
of  the  country.  Inmates  surrender  half  their 
pensions  for  their  maintenance.  Congress  ap- 
propriates $4,500,000  for  these  establishments 
and  $1,150,000  for  homes  founded  by  the 
states.  Admission  is  not  equivalent  to  en- 
listment, and  statutes  making  the  inmates  sub- 
ject to  the  regulations  of  the  Army  or  Navy 
have  been  held  unconstitutional.  See  Army, 
Standing;  Enlistment,  Naval  and  Mili- 
tary ; Naval  Homes  ; Pensions,  Military  and 
Naval;  Retirement  of  Military  and  Naval 
Officers.  References:  W.  Scott,  Memoirs 
(1864),  II,  546,  583;  C.  M.  Wilcox,  Hist,  of  the 
Mexican  War  (1894),  524,  531;  U.  S.  War  De- 
partment, Military  Laws  (1908),  chs.  xli,  xlii; 
Annual  Reports,  1910,  1,  63;  Board  of  Man- 
agers, National  Home  for  Disabled  Volunteer 
Soldiers  Annual  Reports-,  U.  S.  Navy  Depart- 
ment, Laws  Relating  to  the  Navy  (1898),  58, 
380,  389;  Navy  Regulations  (1909),  173,  26S; 
Annual  Report,  1910,  16,  50,  144,  318. 

C.  G.  C. 

SOLDIERS’  ORPHANS.  Homes  for  the  or- 
phans of  soldiers  of  the  Civil  War  are  main- 
tained in  the  states  of  Maine,  Pennsylvania, 
Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Iowa  and  Kansas. 
These  homes  have  been  maintained  partly  to 
obviate  the  necessity  of  sending  the  orphans 
of  soldiers  to  orphan  asylums  or  poor  houses, 
and  partly  to  provide  for  the  temporary  care 
and  education  of  the  children  of  soldiers  while 
their  parents  are  in  temporary  distress,  with 


the  expectation  that  the  children  would  ulti- 
mately return  to  their  parents. 

As  was  to  be  expected,  the  number  of  chil- 
dren in  some  of  the  soldiers’  orphans’  homes 
has  decreased.  In  the  state  of  Maine  a law 
has  been  passed  providing  for  the  admission 
of  grand-children  of  soldiers  and  sailors  to 
the  soldiers’  and  sailors’  orphans’  home  at 
Bath.  In  Kansas,  Iowa,  and  Illinois  laws  have 
been  passed  extending  the  privileges  of  the 
soldiers’  orphans’  home  to  other  dependent  and 
neglected  children,  after  the  children  of  sol- 
diers have  been  cared  for. 

In  practice  the  soldiers’  orphans’  homes 
have  come  to  be  free  boarding  schools  for 
the  children  of  soldiers.  At  the  soldiers’  or- 
phans’ home  at  Xenia,  Ohio  it  was  learned 
that  the  majority  of  the  children  in  the  in- 
stitution go  home  for  vacation  every  year. 

The  placing  out  method  has  not  been  fol- 
lowed with  the  children  in  the  soldiers’  or- 
phans’ homes;  partly  for  the  reason  that  most 
of  the  children  have  respectable  living  par- 
ents to  whom  they  are  likely  to  return;  and 
partly  because  the  boards  of  trustees  have  not 
been  favorably  disposed  toward  the  placing 
out  method.  In  the  states  of  Kansas,  Illinois, 
and  Iowa  an  effort  has  recently  been 
made  to  develop  the  placing  out  method,  es- 
pecially for  the  children  who  are  not  soldiers’ 
children  but  are  received  under  the  newer 
laws.  But  these  efforts  have  been  only  par- 
tially successful.  It  is  to  be  anticipated  that 
within  a short  time  the  demand  for  the  care 
of  soldiers’  children  in  these  institutions  will 
cease  and  the  institution  will  be  converted  to 
some  other  purpose. 

See  Children,  Dependent,  Public  Care  of; 
Pensions,  Military  and  Naval;  Soldiers’ 
Homes. 

References:  111.  Soldiers’  Orphans’  Home, 
Normal  Biennial  Reports  (1868  to  date)  ; Ind. 
Soldiers’  and  Sailors’  Orphans’  Home,  Knights- 
town,  Biennial  Reports  (1868  to  date);  Iowa 
Soldiers’  Orphans’  Home,  Davenport,  Biennial 
Reports  (1864  to  date);  Kansas  Soldiers’  Or- 
phans’ Home,  Atchison,  Biennial  Reports 
(1888  to  date)  ; Maine  Military  and  Naval  Or- 
phan Asylum,  Bath,  Annual  Reports  (1867 
to  date)  ; Ohio  Soldiers’  and  Sailors’  Orphans’ 
Home,  Xenia,  Annual  Reports  (1870  to  date)  ; 
Penn.  Soldiers’  Orphan  Industrial  School, 
Scotland,  Annual  Reports  (1896  to  date); 
Penn.  Soldiers’  Orphans’  School,  Chester 
Springs,  Annual  Reports  (1867  to  date)  ; Penn. 
Soldiers’  Orphans’  School,  Jumonville,  Annual 
Reports  (1867  to  date)  ; Penn.  Northern  Home 
for  Friendless  Children  and  Institute  for  Sol- 
diers’ and  Sailors’  Orphans,  Philadelphia,  An- 
nual Reports  (1866  to  date);  H.  H.  Hart, 
Preventive  Treatment  of  Neglected  Children 
(1910).  H.  H.  Hart. 

SOLDIERS,  QUARTERING  OF.  One  of  the 

grievances  of  the  colonies  enumerated  in  the 


351 


SOLICITOR  GENERAL — SOUTH 


Declaration  of  Independence  was  the  quarter- 
ing of  large  bodies  of  armed  troops  in  the 
colonies,  but  the  guaranty  found  in  many  state 
constitutions  and  in  the  Federal  Constitution 
(Third  Amendment)  is  that  soldiers  shall  not 
in  time  of  peace  be  quartered  upon  private 
persons,  nor  their  maintenance  imposed  upon 
such  persons  even  in  time  of  war,  except  in 
a manner  prescribed  by  law.  The  guaranty  has 
respect  to  the  recognition  of  the  right  of  every 
man  not  to  be  unwarrantably  disturbed  or 
intruded  upon  in  his  home.  See  Bills  of 
Rights;  Houses,  Private,  Constitutional 
Protection  of.  E.  McC. 

SOLICITOR  GENERAL.  The  act  of  June 
22,  1870,  which  established  the  Department  of 
Justice,  created  the  office  of  Solicitor  General, 
who  is  to  be  an  officer  learned  in  the  law 
and  to  act  as  Attorney  General  in  case  of  the 
latter’s  absence  or  disability.  His  chief  work 
is  the  preparation  and  argument  under  the 
direction  of  the  Attorney  General  of  cases  in 
which  the  United  States  is  interested,  and  in 
this  he  has  the  help  of  several  assistant  at- 
torneys general.  Particularly  he  is  charged 
to  appear  for  the  Government  in  all  appeals 
to  the  Supreme  Court  from  the  court  of  claims. 
He  may  be  sent  by  the  Attorney  General  to 
any  part  of  the  United  States  to  appear  before 
any  court,  federal  or  state,  or  otherwise  de- 
fend the  interests  of  the  Federal  Government. 
He  may  also  assist  the  Attorney  General  in 
preparing  opinions  on  questions  of  law  for  the 
President  and  heads  of  departments.  His 
office  is  hardly  inferior  in  importance  to  that 
of  the  Attorney  General,  and  its  incumbent 
should  be  a lawyer  of  unquestioned  ability. 
His  salary  is  ten  thousand  dollars.  See  Jus- 
tice, Department  of.  L.  B.  Evans. 

SOLICITORS,  PUBLIC  OFFICIAL.  A name 
applied  to  a public  law  officer  in  various  Amer- 
ican governments.  City  solicitor  is  a name 
frequently  applied  to  an  officer  elsewhere  called 
corporation  counsel,  or  city  attorney.  In  the 
federal  service  there  is  a solicitor  general,  in 
the  Department  of  Justice,  with  some  subordi- 
nate solicitors;  and  separate  solicitors  for  the 
advocate  general,  Navy  Department  and  De- 
partment of  Agriculture.  There  are  also  so- 
licitors general  of  the  Treasury,  of  the  inter- 
nal revenue,  of  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce, and  of  the  Department  of  Labor.  See 
Attorney  General;  Justice,  Department  of; 
Treasury  Department.  A.  B.  H. 

SOLID  SOUTH.  An  expression  which 
sprang  up  after  the  recovery  of  white  supre- 
macy in  the  southern  states,  to  indicate  the 
conception  of  the  South  that  it  was  necessary 
to  stand  together  in  the  Democratic  party  in 
order  to  prevent  a revival  of  the  power  of  the 
negroes.  In  the  election  of  1864  there  was 
practically  a Republican  solid  south,  only  Ken- 


tucky and  Delaware  choosing  Democratic  elec- 
tors. In  1868,  in  addition  to  those  two  states, 
Georgia,  Louisiana,  Maryland,  chose  Demo- 
cratic electors.  In  1872  Louisiana,  Maryland, 
Missouri,  Tennessee  and  Texas  were  Demo- 
cratic. In  1876  Florida,  Louisiana  and  South 
Carolina  were  the  only  states  still  Republi- 
can, but  the  majority  of  votes  cast  in  those 
states  was  probably  on  the  other  side.  In 
1880  not  a Republican  elector  was  secured 
in  any  southern  state  but  Maryland;  and  in 
1884  the  solid  south  combined  with  Indiana, 
New  York,  Connecticut  and  New  Jersey,  made 
Grover  Cleveland  President. 

By  that  time  the  danger  of  a return  of  the 
carpet  bag  government  had  definitely  gone  by; 
but  again  in  1888  and  1892  every  southern 
state  was  democratic.  In  1896,  however,  there 
were  several  breaks,  Delaware,  Kentucky, 
Maryland  and  West  Virginia  going  Republican. 
The  result  was  substantially  the  same  in  1900. 
In  1904  Roosevelt  carried  Delaware,  Missouri 
and  West  Virginia,  and  one  vote  in  Mary- 
land. In  1908,  Taft  had  the  same  electoral 
votes,  plus  a second  elector  in  Maryland. 

Notwithstanding  the  stiff  adherence  of  near- 
ly all  the  southern  states  to  one  presidential 
ticket,  an  occasional  Republican  Senator  and 
numerous  Representatives  are  elected  from  the 
southern  states;  both  Kentucky  and  Tennessee 
recently  have  had  Republican  governors.  The 
suffrage  amendments  in  six  southern  states 
have  taken  away  any  reasonable  fear  of  negro 
supremacy;  and  many  southerners  realize  that 
the  belief  that  the  southern  states  will  under 
all  circumstances  vote  a particular  ticket  takes 
away  their  influence  in  both  party  conventions. 

See  Democratic  Party;  Negro  Suffrage; 
Presidential  Elections;  Reconstruction; 
Republican  Party. 

References;  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Commonwealth 
(4th  ed.,  1910),  II,  ch.  xciii;  A.  B.  Hart,  South- 
ern South  (1910),  oh.  xxv i ; E.  Stanwood,  Hist, 
of  the  Presidency  (1898),  passim;  H.  A.  Her- 
bert and  others,  Why  the  Solid  South  (1890). 

A.  B.  H. 

SOREHEAD.  A derisive  term  applied  to 
the  discontented  party  magnate  who,  being  dis- 
satisfied with  the  “slate”  or  the  distribution 
of  party  spoils,  withdraws  from  the  party 
caucus  and  endangers  party  harmony. 

O.  C.  H. 

SOURCES  OF  THE  CONSTITUTION  OF 
THE  UNITED  STATES.  See  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States,  Sources  of. 

SOUTH.  Topography. — Geographically  and 
historically  the  group  of  communities  south  of 
Pennsylvania  is  distinctly  marked  off  from  its 
neighbors  on  the  northeast  and  the  north- 
west. To  the  original  southern  colonies  of 
Maryland,  Virginia,  the  Carolinas,  and  Georgia 
were  eventually  associated  under  the  term 


352 


SOUTH 


of  the  South,  all  the  slave  holding  states,  ex- 
cept Delaware,  which  is  accounted  one  of  the 
middle  states.  This  group  includes  the  follow- 
ing states:  Maryland,  Virginia,  Kentucky, 
Tennessee,  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina, 
Georgia,  Florida,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  Louisi- 
ana, Arkansas,  Missouri,  Texas,  West  Virginia. 
The  total  population  of  these  states  in  1900 
was  26,476,348  and  in  1910,  30,492,049,  an 
increase  of  fifteen  per  cent.  The  District  of 
Columbia,  also  to  be  considered  with  these 
southern  states,  had  a population  of  278,718 
in  1900  and  331,069  in  1910.  The  cotton  states 
south  of  North  Carolina  and  Tennessee  and 
Arkansas,  have  often  been  called  the  Lower 
South. 

The  South  is  by  climate  and  geographical  con- 
ditions divided  by  two  lines  of  cleavage.  The 
Appalachian  range  of  mountains  practically 
separates  Kentucky  and  Tennessee  from  the 
Atlantic  coast  states,  but  immigration  easily 
passed  the  barrier  and  the  people  east  and 
west  of  the  range  are  not  divided  in  sentiment. 
More  significant  was  the  division  between  the 
Lower  South  and  the  second  tier  of  slave- 
holding states,  North  Carolina  Arkansas  and 
Tennessee,  alongside  the  actual  border  states 
Maryland,  Virginia,  Kentucky  and  Missouri. 
The  number  of  negroes  in  these  communities 
was  smaller  than  in  those  farther  south  and 
slave  labor  was  less  profitable,  so  that  there 
was  a sharp  division  of  interests  between  the 
two  subsections. 

There  is  little  flat  land  in  the  South,  except 
near  the  sea  coast  where  the  slope  is  very 
gentle.  Many  parts  are  mountainous  and  most 
other  parts  are  hilly;  and  there  is  everywhere 
abundant  rainfall  as  far  as  eastern  Texas. 
In  the  extreme  South,  Florida,  and  southern 
Texas,  tropical  fruits  can  be  grown;  but  the 
two  largest  crops  for  many  years  have  been 
corn  and  cotton.  The  middle  South  also 
abounds  in  minerals  including  magnificent  coal 
lands  and  iron  ore  and  it  still  contains  large 
areas  of  virgin  forest. 

Race  Elements. — In  two  marked  respects  the 
South  differs  from  the  other  parts  of  the 
Union:  it  has  a large  negro  element;  and 

there  is  only  a small  infusion  of  foreigners. 
With  the  exception  of  the  early  German  and 
Swiss  settlements  in  Georgia,  a small  Hugenot 
and  Highland  Scotch  element,  and  the  Seotch- 
Irish,  the  ancestors  of  most  of  whom  worked 
southwestward  from  Pennsylvania,  the  white 
population  is  of  pretty  clear  English  descent. 
In  the  southern  mountains  where  the  colonial 
conditions  still  persist,  the  people  have  been 
dubbed  “our  contemporary  ancestors.”  Eng- 
lish ballads  and  seventeenth  century  word 
forms  are  still  to  be  heard.  No  section  of  the 
Union  has  so  homogeneous  a population.  Down 
to  1912  there  were  few  colonies  of  foreigners 
except  the  descendants  of  the  French  in  New 
Orleans,  Germans  and  of  late  years  some  other 
European  races  in  Texas,  and  a few  Italians 


in  the  lower  Mississippi  Valley.  The  South 
has  not  the  problem  of  assimilating  foreigners 
or  of  carrying  on  city  governments  in  the 
midst  of  swarms  of  immigrants. 

On  the  other  hand,  from  the  end  of  the 
seventeenth  century  to  the  present  the  South 
has  carried  the  burden  of  the  negro  problem 
(see).  Thirty  years  ago  it  was  thought  that 
the  whites  were  likely  to  increase  so  much 
faster  than  the  negro  race  that  the  problem 
would  eventually  be  dwarfed ; but  recent  cen- 
suses have  not  shown  much  differences  in  the 
rate ; the  negro  continuing  to  be  over  one- 
third  of  the  population  of  the  former  slave- 
holding states — in  1910,  41.1  per  cent. 

For  both  these  elements  there  are  several 
marked  deviations  in  the  South.  The  cities  of 
Baltimore  and  Louisville  and  parts  of  Mis- 
souri and  Texas  contain  thousands  of  foreign- 
ers. The  negro  problem  is  less  intense  in  those 
places  than  in  the  greater  part  of  the  South. 

Occupations  and  Wealth. — Down  to  the  Civil 
War  the  South  lagged  in  prosperity  behind  the 
rest  of  the  Union,  principally  because  of  a 
wasteful  and  antiquated  labor  system  ( see 
Slavery  as  an  Economic  System).  By  count- 
ing the  market  value  of  the  slaves  as  wealth 
the  South  felt  itself  rich;  but  it  had  not  the 
accumulations  of  buildings,  transportation 
lines,  farm  machinery  and  stocks  of  goods 
which  made  up  the  wealth  of  the  rural  North. 
The  Civil  War  caused  a considerable  destruc- 
tion of  property,  and  broke  up  the  old  in- 
dustrial methods;  so  that  it  was  fully  1880 
before  the  South  began  to  go  forward  again. 
Great  progress  has  been  made  in  developing 
the  minerals,  including  extensive  oil  fields;  es- 
tablishing manufactures,  building  cities;  per- 
fecting excellent  railroad  facilities;  and  put- 
ting new  lands  into  culture.  The  South  is 
now  rich,  though  not  so  rich  as  the  rural  states 
of  the  middle  West  and  Northwest,  comparing 
equal  groups  of  population. 

Social  Conditions. — In  no  part  of  the  country 
are  social  distinctions  so  clearly  marked  as  the 
South.  Down  to  the  Civil  War  the  slave- 
holders and  their  younger  branches  and  asso- 
ciates were  clearly  marked  off  from  most  of 
the  rest  of  the  population,  though  in  the  bor- 
der states  there  was  always  a strong  element 
of  independent,  non-slave-holding  farmers.  In 
each  state  there  was  a body  of  a few  thousand 
families  who  knew  each  other,  intermarried 
and  constituted  the  dominant  element  of  so- 
ciety. The  descendants  of  those  families  are 
still  regarded  as  the  “first  families,”  though 
the  change  in  economic  conditions  has  brought 
about  a mixture  in  southern  society. 

The  professions  have  always  been  highly  re- 
spected in  the  South  and  as  a community  it 
has  been  interested  in  letters.  Many  of  the 
southern  public  men  have  had  good  school 
and  college  educations.  The  South  is  studded 
with  colleges  and  since  the  Civil  War  has 
developed  several  large  state  and  endowed 


353 


SOUTH  AFRICA,  UNION  OF— SOUTH  AMERICA 


universities;  and  in  the  last  two  decades  hun- 
dreds of  public  high  schools  have  been  found- 
ed. In  rural  education  the  South  has  always 
been  behind  the  North;  during  slavery  a third 
of  the  population  was  cut  oil  from  schooling; 
in  many  parts  of  the  South  the  population  is 
sparse;  and  the  per  capita  expenditure  for 
rural  schools  is  lower  than  anywhere  else  in 
the  country. 

Partly  from  its  century  of  discussion  on 
slavery,  partly  from  the  tradition  of  the  Civil 
War,  and  partly  because  of  the  influence  on  the 
mind  of  the  cotton  crop  (which  is  in  value 
less  than  half  the  agricultural  output  of  the 
section ) , the  South  has  a stronger  sense  of 
unity  than  any  of  the  other  sections.  At  pres- 
ent there  is  going  on  a shifting  of  the  popula- 
tion both  ways;  southerners  move  west  and 
northwest,  and  Texas  and  certain  parts  of  the 
gulf  coast  and  Florida  receive  numbers  of 
northern  people. 

See  Am.  Government  and  Geography; 
Boundaries  of  the  United  States,  In- 
terior; Conservation;  Indian  Policy  of  the 
United  States;  Middle  States;  Middle 
West;  Physiography  of  North  America; 
Public  Lands  and  Public  Land  Policy;  Sec- 
tionalism in  American  Government;  Terri- 
tories of  the  United  States,  Organized. 

References:  W.  G.  Brown,  Lower  South  in 
Am.  Hist.  (1902),  chs.  i,  vi;  A.  B.  Hart, 
Southern  South  (1910)  ; N.  S.  Shaler,  The 
United  States  (1874),  I,  69-201;  The  South 
in  the  Building  of  the  Nation  (1909-1910)  ; 
H.  W.  Odum,  Social  and  Mental  Traits  of  the 
Negro  (1910);  G.  C.  Eggleston,  Recollections 
of  a Varied  Life  (1910)  ; A.  H.  Stephens,  Rec- 
ollections ivith  Biographical  Studies  (ed.  by 
N.  L.  Avary,  1910)  ; H.  W.  Grady,  The  New 
South  (1890)  ; C.  D.  Warner,  Studies  in  the 
South  and  West  (1889)  ; M.  G.  Moses,  Litera- 
ture of  the  South  (1910);  N.  B.  Hammond, 
Cotton  Industry  (1897);  E.  C.  Semple,  Am. 
Hist,  and  Its  Geographical  Conditions  ( 1908 ) , 
chs.  xv,  xvi.  Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

SOUTH  AFRICA,  UNION  OF.  The  Union 
of  South  Africa  as  now  constituted  un- 
der an  act  of  the  British  Parliament  ( the 
South  Africa  Act  of  1909)  consists  of  the 
four  provinces  of  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope, 
Natal,  Transvaal  and  Orange  Free  State. 
After  the  South  African  war  the  Transvaal 
(1906)  and  the  Orange  River  Colony  (1907) 
were  granted  responsible  government.  The 
extreme  need  of  uniform  arrangement  for  tar- 
iffs, railroads,  immigration,  and  the  control 
of  the  native  races  throughout  South  Africa 
rendered  union  imperative.  A temporary  cus- 
toms union  had  already  been  formed  (1903). 
The  conference  held  at  Pretoria  (May,  1908) 
in  regard  to  the  tariff  and  railroad  rates,  rec- 
ommended the  summoning  of  a national  con- 
vention. The  four  colonial  legislatures  ap- 
pointed delegates  to  the  convention  which  met 


in  Durban  (Oct.,  1908)  and  in  Cape  Town  (Feb., 
1909).  A constitution  was  drafted,  amended 
by  the  legislatures,  revised  by  the  convention 
( Bloemfontein,  1909 ) , and  finally  accepted  by 
a vote  of  the  people  in  Natal  and  of  the  leg- 
islatures in  the  other  colonies.  Embodied  in 
a British  act  of  Parliament  (June,  1909)  the 
constitution  went  into  operation  May  31,  1910. 
The  government  of  the  union  consists  of  a 
governor  general,  with  a responsible  cabinet, 
and  a Parliament  of  two  houses.  The  Senate 
consists  of  40  members.  Eight  are  nominated 
by  the  governor  general  for  ten  years  and 
eight  elected  by  the  provincial  legislatures. 
The  house  of  assembly  consists  of  51  represent- 
atives from  the  Cape,  17  from  Natal,  36  from 
the  Transvaal,  17  from  the  Orange  Free  State. 
This  is  not  strictly  proportional  to  population 
but  provision  is  made  for  alteration  in  that 
direction  when  the  total  number  of  members 
reaches  150.  The  franchise  is  that  of  the  sep- 
arate colonies,  which  means  that  the  native 
races  can  vote  only  in  Cape  Colony.  The  House 
is  elected  for  five  years,  unless  sooner  dis- 
solved. Money  bills  must  originate  in  the 
house.  In  each  province  there  is  an  adminis- 
trator appointed  by  the  governor  general  for 
five  years,  and  a provincial  council  elected  for 
three  years,  with  an  executive  committee  of 
four,  elected  by  the  council,  who  may  or  may 
not  be  members  of  the  council. 

The  government  of  South  Africa  is  in  reality 
unitary  and  not  federal.  With  certain  excep- 
tions, the  parliament  of  South  Africa  is  su- 
preme over  the  provinces.  Certain  provisions 
of  the  constitution  can  be  altered  only  by  a 
two-thirds  majority  of  a joint  session  of  the 
legislature;  other  provisions,  if  amended, 
would  have  to  be  reserved  for  the  king’s  pleas- 
ure; other  things,  such  as  the  constitution  of 
the  senate  for  ten  years,  can  be  altered  only 
after  a lapse  of  time.  Cape  Town  is  the  seat 
of  the  parliament,  and  Pretoria  the  seat  of  the 
executive  government  of  the  union. 

See  Colonization,  Principles  of. 

References:  South  Africa  Act  (1909,  9th 
ed.,),  VII.  c.  9 ; R.  H.  Brand,  Union  of  South 
Africa  (1909)  ; W.  W.  P.  Selbourne,  Review  of 
the  Mutual  Relations  of  the  British  South 
African  Colonies  (1907). 

Stephen  Leacock. 

SOUTH  AMERICA.  This  continent  is  small- 
er than  North  America,  but  is  nearly  twice 
as  large  as  Europe  or  Australia.  Of  the  three 
continents  which  lie  wholly  or  partly  in  the 
southern  hemisphere,  this  extends  the  farthest 
southward  although  it  reaches  only  to  about 
55°  south  latitude.  Its  easterly  position  as 
compared  with  North  America  gives  a short 
ocean  passage  to  the  shores  of  Africa. 

The  most  striking  physical  feature  is  the 
Andean  mountain  system,  which  is  continuous 
from  the  Isthmus  of  Panama  to  the  southern 
extremity  of  the  continent.  The  culminating 


SOUTH  AMERICA 


peaks,  some  of  which  are  volcanic  cones,  at- 
tain altitudes  of  more  than  20,000  feet.  The 
system  is  narrow  in  the  southern,  but  broad 
in  the  central  and  northern  parts,  inclosing 
high  plateaus  in  western  Bolivia,  and  elevated 
mountain  valleys  in  Peru  and  Colombia. 

The  eastern  highlands  are  chiefly  developed 
along  the  Atlantic  coast  in  Brazil.  They  are 


ancient  and  are  the  remnants  of  mountains 
which  have  suffered  denudation  from  greater 
altitudes.  A minor  development  of  the  eastern 
highlands  is  found  in  the  Guiana  Highland, 
northward  from  the  lower  Amazon.  Between 
the  two  systems  of  upland,  east  and  west,  are 
lowlands,  as  in  North  America.  Some  are  low 
and  flat,  like  those  along  the  arteries  of  the 


355 


SOUTH  AMERICA,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS  WITH 


Amazon  and  La  Plata  river  systems,  and  some 
are  high  and  more  diversified,  like  the  Campos 
of  Brazil  and  the  sloping  and  terraced  plains 
of  southern  Argentina  between  the  Andes  and 
the  Atlantic. 

The  climate  is  mainly  determined  by  the 
tropical  position  of  the  wider  part  of  the 
continent.  The  northeast  and  southeast  trade 
winds  bring  ample  rainfall  to  the  northern 
parts  and  to  most  of  Brazil,  Uruguay,  Para- 
guay and  northeastern  Argentina.  These 
winds  are  shorn  of  their  moisture  in  passing 
the  Andes  and  render  the  coastal  parts  of 
Peru  and  of  northern  Chile  one  of  the  most 
arid  deserts  in  the  world.  The  temperate 
parts  of  the  continent  are  in  the  track  of  the 
prevailing  westerly  winds  of  the  southern  hem- 
isphere, with  the  consequence  that  southern 
Chile  is  well  watered  while  the  western  and 
southern  parts  of  Argentina  are  dry. 

The  areas  of  fertile  land  compare  well  with 
those  of  North  America,  but  it  is  to  be  ob- 
served that  the  latter  continent  was  in  the 
main  colonized  by  people  from  northern  Eu- 
rope, and  also  that  the  problems  of  living  in 
the  tropics  confront  the  white  races  which 
might  attempt  the  development  of  the  rich 
equatorial  lands.  Progressive  development  is 
recent  because  of  racial  limitations,  the  hot 
climate  and  the  remote  position  of  South  Amer- 
ica. 

The  population  is  scattered,  but  is  mainly 
found  on  the  coast  line.  Nevertheless  the 
future  is  assured  by  the  greatness  and  variety 
of  the  natural  resources.  Minerals  are  especial- 
ly characteristic  of  the  Andean  belt,  and 
agriculture  and  grazing  are  most  important 
in  the  three  La  Plata  countries.  Tropical  pro- 
ducts rule  in  Brazil  and  the  northern  countries. 
These,  such  as  rubber,  coffee,  cocoa,  and  dye 
and  cabinet  woods,  must  afford  the  basis  of 
permanent  interchange  with  peoples  of  tem- 
perate latitudes,  and  with  those  densely  peo- 
pled and  small  countries  of  Europe  which  have 
specialized  in  the  industrial  sphere. 

References:  A.  H.  Keane,  “Central  and  South 
America”  in  Stanford’s  Compendium  ( 1909 ) ; 
A.  J.  Herbertson,  “South  America”  in  Interna- 
tional Geog.  (1900),  813-823. 

Albert  Perry  Brigham. 

SOUTH  AMERICA,  DIPLOMATIC  RELA- 
TIONS WITH.  Boundary  Disputes. — One  of 

the  frequent  sources  of  South  American  con- 
flict has  been  boundary  disputes.  Venezuela 
and  Great  Britain  had  a long  standing  dispute 
over  the  boundary  of  British  Guiana.  Ven- 
ezuela, giving  up  hope  of  getting  a settlement 
unaided,  appealed  to  the  United  States.  The 
latter  offered  its  services  as  arbitrator.  Great 
Britain  declined  to  recognize  the  right  of  the 
United  States  to  be  heard  in  the  matter  and 
refused  to  arbitrate. 

President  Cleveland  asked  Congress,  Decem- 
ber 17,  1895,  for  a sum  sufficient  for  a com- 


mission to  determine  the  disputed  boundary; 
when  the  right  boundary  was  thus  determined, 
he  argued,  it  would  be  the  duty  of  the  United 
States  under  the  Monroe  Doctrine  to  see  that 
Great  Britain  did  not  take  any  Venezuelan 
territory.  Under  this  pressure  Great  Britain 
declared  herself  ready  to  arbitrate,  and  in 
February,  1897,  an  agreement  was  made  which 
accepted  fifty  years  occupancy  as  proof  of 
good  title.  Great  Britain  received  the  larger 
part  of  the  land  in  dispute. 

Claims. — The  disturbed  condition  of  Latin 
America  following  the  war  of  independence 
and  later  has  given  rise  to  many  claims  for 
wrongs  suffered  by  American  citizens.  In  the 
Chilian  revolution  in  1891  many  persons  were 
granted  asylum  in  the  American  legation — an 
act  which  created  hard  feeling  against  the 
United  States.  Later  while  soldiers  from 
the  United  States  war  vessels  were  on  shore 
they  were  assaulted  by  a mob.  The  follow- 
ing year  apology  was  made  and  payment  of 
$75,000  given  to  the  wounded  and  the  families 
of  those  killed  in  the  riot. 

In  1855  a naval  expedition  to  explore  the 
Rio  de  la  Plata  was  fired  on  from  a Paraguay- 
an fort,  though  the  Argentine  Republic,  own- 
ing one  bank  of  the  river,  had  consented  to  the 
exploration.  One  man  was  killed.  Damage 
was  claimed  to  have  been  done  previously  to  an 
American  business  enterprise.  An  expedition 
of  nineteen  vessels  in  1858  went  to  secure 
apology.  A payment  of  $10,000  for  the  family 
of  the  man  killed  was  received.  The  other 
claims  were  disallowed  by  a commission. 

Various  claims  of  the  United  States  against 
Venezuela  were  settled  in  1903-1908.  They 
related  chiefly  to  damages  to  citizens  and  vio- 
lations of  property  rights  of  American  cor- 
porations. Some  were  settled  out  of  court, 
others  by  negotiation  by  a representative  of 
the  United  States.  Still  others  after  having 
been  once  decided  by  a mixed  commission  in 
1903  were  referred  to  the  Hague  Court  which 
gave  its  decision  in  1910.  Other  claims  have 
been  settled  by  mixed  commissions  or  by  more 
formal  arbitration.  They  have  usually  in- 
volved confiscation  or  destruction  of  American 
property.  The  more  important  were  dealt  with 
by  conventions  of  the  following  dates:  Brazil 
(1870),  Chile  (1892);  Columbia  (1855  and 
1874)  ; Equador  (1865)  ; Peru  (1863  and 
1868)  and  Venezuela  (1866,  1885,  1888  and 
1892). 

Rivers. — The  United  States  has  used  its  in- 
fluence to  further  liberal  rules  as  to  the  use 
of  the  international  rivers  of  South  America. 
In  1852  the  rivers  Parana  and  Uruguay  were 
opened  to  international  commerce  by  decree. 
Paraguay  in  1859  by  treaty  gave  United  States 
vessels  the  right  to  use  the  Paraguay  river  so 
far  as  it  lay  within  that  jurisdiction. 

The  Amazon  was  also  given  attention. 
Brazil  and.  to  a lesser  degree,  Peru  were  in 
favor  of  a restrictive  policy.  Bolivia  in  1853 


SOUTH  AMERICA,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS  WITH 


declared  her  navigable  waters  open  to  all  na- 
tions. In  the  same  year  Brazil  attempted  to 
get  all  the  states  owning  land  in  the  valley  to 
confine  the  commerce  to  their  own  people. 
The  United  States  instituted  a vigorous  cam- 
paign for  the  liberal  principle.  By  treaty  with 
Bolivia  in  1858  the  United  States  was  guar- 
anteed access  to  her  ports.  Brazil  after  1866 
changed  her  policy.  Then  and  in  the  follow- 
ing year  decrees  were  issued  declaring  the 
river  and  its  more  important  tributaries  open 
to  the  commerce  of  all  nations.  A similar 
decree  was  issued  by  Peru  in  1868. 

Venezuela  has  several  times  put  restrictions 
on  the  navigation  of  parts  of  the  Orinoco.  The 
United  States  urged  the  free  use  of  the  river 
“as  an  act  of  friendliness,”  but  it  has  been 
refused  on  the  ground  that  the  rules  were 
justified  to  prevent  contraband  trade  and  revo- 
lutionary expeditions. 

Recent  Venezuelan  Troubles. — In  1902-3  the 
United  States  was  called  upon  to  lend  its 
good  offices  to  Venezuela  (see  Germany,  Dip- 
lomatic Relations  with).  A number  of  na- 
tions had  pecuniary  claims  which  Venezuela 
refused  to  settle.  Germany,  Great  Britain 
and  Italy  intervened  to  protect  the  rights  of 
their  nationals.  The  United  States  made  no 
objection,  having  been  previously  assured  by 
Germany  on  December  11,  1901,  that  the  prin- 
ciple of  the  Monroe  doctrine  would  not  be 
called  in  question.  The  hostilities  were 
brought  to  a close  in  February,  1903,  by  the 
diplomatic  intervention  of  the  United  States. 
Venezuela  agreed  to  set  apart  thirty  per  cent 
of  her  customs  receipts  for  the  payment  of 
claims,  the  justice  of  which  she  recognized. 
Other  claims  the  powers  agreed  should  be 
referred  to  mixed  commissions  which  met  in 
Caracas  in  1903.  The  greater  part  of  the 
claims  passed  upon  were  found  to  be  unjusti- 
fiable. The  question  was  raised  whether  the 
creditors  should  all  stand  on  the  same  footing 
as  to  time  of  payment  or  whether  the  nationals 
of  the  blockading  powers  should  be  given  pre- 
ferential treatment.  On  reference  of  this  ques- 
tion to  the  Hague  Court  a decision  in  favor  of 
preferential  treatment  was  given. 

Panama  Canal. — The  United  States  has  al- 
ways been  interested  in  the  promotion  of  traffic 
across  the  isthmus.  Various  projects  for 
canals  had  failed  and  it  seemed  in  1903  that, 
because  of  the  attitude  of  the  Colombian  senate, 
the  United  States,  then  about  to  undertake 
the  work,  would  have  to  choose  the  route 
through  Nicaragua.  A revolution  occurred  in 
November,  1903.  The  province  was  almost  im- 
mediately recognized  as  independent  by  the 
United  States,  and  a treaty  concluded  which 
gave  the  United  States  absolute  control  of 
a strip  of  land  ten  miles  wide  in  which  the 
canal  lies.  By  treaty  of  January,  1909,  between 
Colombia  and  Panama  and  Panama  and  the 
United  States,  the  latter  assigned  over  to 
Colombia  the  $250,000  which  was  to  have  been 


paid  yearly  to  Panama  in  return  for  the 
rights  granted  in  connection  with  the  Panama 
Canal. 

Cooperation  among  American  States. — Not 
until  the  end  of  the  nineteenth  century  were 
steps  taken  to  draw  the  American  states  into 
close  relations.  With  the  increase  in  the  im- 
portance of  her  foreign  trade,  however,  the  at- 
titude of  the  United  States  changed.  Long 
before,  by  the  Monroe  Doctrine,  a political 
bond  of  union,  undefined  but  real,  emphasized 
community  of  interest;  but  the  first  important 
step  toward  close  cooperation  was  not  taken 
till  1881,  when  the  Secretary  of  State,  James  G. 
Blaine,  planned  a Pan  American  Conference 
to  be  held  in  Washington  in  1882.  The  plan 
did  not  come  to  fruition  until  1889  when,  at 
the  invitation  of  the  United  States,  the  Ameri- 
can states,  with  the  exception  of  Santo  Domin- 
go, sent  representatives  to  the  first  Pan 
American  Confederence,  the  meeting  to  for- 
mulate recommendations.  Shortly  after  the 
conclusion  of  the  session,  however,  an  arbitra- 
tion treaty  on  the  lines  it  had  recommended 
was  signed  at  Washington  by  nine  of  the  pow- 
ers represented.  The  greatest  result  of  the  con- 
ference, however,  was  the  better  understanding 
arrived  at  between  the  states.  Subsequent 
conferences  in  Mexico  in  1901  and  at  Rio  de 
Janeiro  in  1906  have  further  emphasized  the 
community  of  American  interests. 

See  Canal  Diplomacy;  Canal  Zone; 
Claims,  International;  Drago  Doctrine; 
French  Panama  Canal;  Monroe  Doctrine; 
Navigation  of  International  Rivers;  Nica- 
ragua Canal  Policy;  Panama  Canal;  Pan- 
ama, Republic  of  ; and  countries  by  name. 

References:  J.  H.  Latam?,  Dipl.  Relations  of 
the  V.  S.  and,  Spanish  America  (1900)  ; A.  C. 
Coolidge,  The  U.  S.  as  a World  Power  (1907)  ; 
Recueil  des  actes  et  protocoles  concernant  le 
litige  entre  I’Allemagne,  VAngleterre,  et  Vltalie 
d’une  part,  et  le  Venezuela  d’autre  part. 
(Hague,  1904)  ; M.  H.  Petin,  Les  Etats  Unis 
et  la  Doctrine  de  Monroe  (Paris,  1900)  ; A. 
Viallate,  Ed.,  La  Vie  Politique  dans  les  deux 
Mondes  (Annual)  ; Adas  y documentos  de  la 
Segunda  Conferencia  Panamericana  (Mexico, 
1902)  ; II.  Drago,  La  Republica  Argentina  y 
el  caso  de  Venezuela  (Buenos  Ayres,  1903); 
J.  B.  Moore,  Arbitrations  ( 1898) , 962-89,  1396- 
47,  1469-84,  1579-92,  1659-1724,  1909-2108; 
D.  R.  Dewey,  Rational  Problems  ( 1907 ) , ch. 
XIX;  J.  B.  Henderson,  Am.  Diplomatic  Ques- 
tions (1901);  A.  Alvarez,  Le  droit  Interna- 
tional Americain  (Paris,  1910)  ; A.  B.  Kart, 
Foundations  of  Am.  Foreign  Policy  (1905)  ; 
J.  B.  Moore,  American  Diplomacy  (1905); 
G.  M.  Fisk.  Int.  Commercial  Policies  (1910); 
J.  W.  Foster,  Century  of  Am.  Diplomacy 
(1900)  ; A.  Viallate,  “Les  Etats  Unis  et  le 
Pan  Americanisme”  in  Revue  des  Deux  Mondes, 
May  15,  1909 ; L.  S.  Rowe,  “Danger  of  Na- 
tional Isolation”  in  No.  Am.  Rev.,  CLXXXV, 
June,  1907,  420-425;  Basdevant,  “La  Confer- 


357 


SOUTH  CAROLINA 


ence  de  Rio  Janeiro  de  1906”  in  Revue  Generate 
de  droit  int.  'public,  XV  (1906),  31  et  seq.; 
J.  E.  Boyd,  “La  republique  de  Panama”  in 


ibid,  VI  (1909);  R.  C.  Morse,  “Our  Contro- 
versy with  Venezuela”  in  Yale  Law  Journal, 
Feb.,  1909.  Chesteb  Lloyd  Jones. 


SOUTH  CAROLINA 


Early  History. — In  April,  1670,  about  two 
hundred  English  founded  Charleston.  The 
colony  of  South  Carolina  was  a proprietary 
colony  till  1719  when  a popular  rebellion 
placed  the  province  under  royal  government. 
South  Carolina  joined  the  Revolution  (1775) 
from  principle  and  loyalty  to  northern  neigh- 
bors, as  her  own  grievances  were  not  great. 
Her  first  constitution,  March  26,  1776,  was 
made  to  secure  order  only  until  the  settlement 
of  differences  with  England  without  separation, 
which  the  state  deprecated.  It  lasted  only  two 
years.  The  legislature  ratified  the  Articles  of 
Confederation  Feb.  5,  1778.  A convention  rati- 
fied the  Constitution  May  23,  1788. 

Constitutional  History,  1790-1860. — The  con- 
stitution of  1778  was  replaced  in  1790  by  a 
thorough  one  drafted  and  put  into  force  by  a 
convention.  It  was  marked  by  the  supremacy 
of  the  legislature,  which  chose  every  official 
from  presidential  electors  and  governor  down. 
The  governor  had  neither  veto  nor  patronage. 
Property  qualifications  were  required  for  of- 
fice holding  and  voting.  Control  lay  with 
the  rich  low  country,  though  the  poor  up 
country  had  four-fifths  of  the  white  popula- 
tion. Slavery  spreading  into  the  up  country 
removed  the  fear  of  hostile  legislation,  and  in 
1808  representation  was  reapportioned  accord- 
ing to  population  and  wealth,  giving  the  con- 
trol of  one  house  to  each  section  and  allaying 
the  previous  antagonism.  White  manhood 
suffrage  came  in  1810,  South  Carolina  and 
Maryland,  both  in  1810,  being  the  first  of  the 
original  states  to  take  this  step. 

For  a time  the  state  felt  the  general  im- 
pulse against  slavery,  a feeling  which  was  in 
part  the  product  of  the  Revolutionary  strug- 
gle. From  1775-1820  a few  favored  emancipa- 
tion; the  rigors  of  slavery  were  relaxed  and 
manumissions  increased  surprisingly  until  the 
Missouri  debates,  abolitionism  and  the  Vesey 
plot  of  1822,  which  led  to  severe  laws,  one  of 
1841  forbidding  manumission  by  transporta- 
tion to  a foreign  country. 

The  state  voted  for  Federalist  Presidents 
until  1800,  the  coast  country  being  Federalist 
even  longer,  and  national  patriotism  flourished. 
When,  however,  it  was  believed  that  agricul- 
ture was  being  sacrificed  by  the  growing  pro- 
tective tariff  policy,  doubts  arose  as  to  the 
worth  of  the  Union.  When  the  tariff  of  1832 
proved  protectionism  a permanent  policy,  the 
state,  through  a convention,  declared  it  null 
within  her  borders,  on  the  theory  that,  being 
a sovereign  who  bad  by  compact  with  other 
sovereigns  delegated  specific  powers  to  a com- 


mon agent,  she  could  not  be  bound  by  acts  of 
the  agent  which  violated  his  instructions,  the 
Constitution  ( see  Nullification).  Declaring 
that  enforcement  would  dissolve  her  connec- 
tion with  the  Union,  she  armed.  The  reduc- 
tion of  the  duties  and  the  presence  of  a 
large  body  of  armed  Unionists  within  the  state 
led  to  the  acceptance  of  the  “compromise” 
tariff  of  1833.  Extreme  bitterness  between 
Nullifiers  and  Unionists  continued  until  the 
two  elements  were  merged  in  the  forties  in 
dread  of  aggressive  abolitionism.  The  neces- 
sity of  presenting  a united  front  in  federal 
councils  led  to  the  sacrifice  of  internal  politi- 
cal development  until  after  1876.  The  people 
growing  restive,  a movement  for  the  popular 
election  of  the  governor,  giving  him  patron- 
age and  the  veto,  came  in  1838.  Calhoun  suc- 
cessfully threw  his  influence  against  it  as  lead- 
ing to  division  and  loss  of  influence  in  federal 
politics.  A similar  movement  (about  1848-56) 
for  popular  election  of  presidential  electors 
met  the  same  fate.  Though  usually  voting 
with  the  Democrats,  the  state  was  attached 
to  no  party  and  did  not  send  delegates  to  a 
national  convention  until  1860. 

Secession  and  Reconstruction. — Holding  that 
the  Constitution  guaranteed  protection  to 
slavery  in  the  territories,  South  Carolina  re- 
garded the  refusal  of  Congress  to  enforce  this 
in  1850  as  justifying  secession.  The  governor 
corresponded  with  the  governor  of  Mississippi 
for  concerted  action  and  the  legislature  planned 
a southern  convention  for  the  same  end.  The 
plan  for  her  independent  secession  failed  in  a 
popular  election  in  1851.  The  success  of  the 
Republicans  (1860),  pledged  to  prohibit 
slavery  in  the  territories,  not  to  speak  of 
ultimate  abolitionism,  required  the  state  to 
surrender  or  strike  for  her  beliefs.  She  was 
the  first  to  secede,  December  20,  1860. 

Under  President  Johnson’s  reconstruction 
plan,  South  Carolina  whites  framed  a consti- 
tution in  1865.  This  was  overthrown  by 
congressional  reconstruction  under  which  a 
convention  elected  by  whites  and  negroes 
framed  an  instrument,  modeled  upon  the  con- 
stitution of  New  York.  The  state  was  “re- 
admitted” in  1868.  Until  1876  the  negroes, 
led  by  northern  adventurers  (“carpet  bag- 
gers”) and  native  turncoats  (“scalawags”) 
robbed  and  misruled  the  state  despite  repeated 
opposition  of  the  small  reform  element  within 
their  ranks  and  the  native  whites.  Governor 
Chamberlain  (1874-6)  strove  to  reform  his 
party  and  rallied  a powerful  element  among 
the  Democrats  (whites),  who  had  come  to  re- 


358 


SOUTH  CAROLINA 


gard  independent  action  as  hopeless.  With  dif- 
ficulty the  whites  were  induced  to  make  a 
fight  for  native  white  control.  Democratic  vic- 
tory was  narrow.  Federal  troops  were  with- 
drawn and  Wade  Hampton  became  governor 
( see  Reconstruction  ) . 

Other  Constitutions. — The  constitution  of 
1776  was  adopted  by  an  irregular  provincial 
congress;  that  of  1778  by  the  legislature.  The 
courts  held  both  mere  statutes.  The  constitu- 
tion of  1790  was  efficient,  though  undemocratic, 
and  one  of  the  most  lasting  in  American  his- 
tory. The  people  did  not  vote  on  any  constitu- 
tion except  under  congressional  order  in  1868. 
Desire  for  excluding  the  illiterate  negroes 
from  the  suffrage,  and  the  prevailing  discon- 
tent with  the  “Radical  rag”  of  1868  led  to 
the  constitution  of  1895. 


3‘°  N O R T_  H* 

2°  8 

C/a“A  R O 

’lima  \ 

! 

\ 

—S— 

l 

~1787^F  h 

toi  3=1 

iS 

\ S 

O^vUVi  T 

H \ 

o \ 

\ ^ X.C 

A L 

I N A 

S \ 

o 

<?- 

o 

rP 

V?  V" 

\ v 

7 >• 

-s.  / c 

s 

„ *> 

* * 

V * 

1 c, 

0 -tf 

Boundaries  of  the  State  of  South  Carolina, 
Showing  Territorial  Changes 


Present  Government:  Legislative. — The  legis- 
lative department  is  called  the  general  as- 
sembly. Each  of  the  forty-four  counties 
(1913)  elects  a senator  for  four  years,  one- 
half  going  out  at  a time.  The  124  representa- 
tives are  elected  for  two  years;  each  county 
forms  an  election  district  and  representation 
is  apportioned  among  the  counties  on  the  basi3 
of  population.  Sessions  are  annual.  The  leg- 
islature elects  all  judges,  the  boards  of  certain 
institutions  and  a few  executive  officers.  Ttie 
usual  method  of  impeachment  is  provided  for 
and  in  addition  the  legislature  may,  after  hear- 
ing defense  of  any  official  charged  with  mis- 
behavior, by  two-thirds  vote  of  each  house, 
required  the  governor-  to  remove  him.  Neither 
state  nor  local  government  may  own  shares 
in  a private  enterprise  or  pledge  its  credit 
for  such  purposes.  Constitutional  prohibition 
of  special  legislation  is  not  extensive.  The 
legislature  is  freer  than  usual  under  recent 
constitutions.  Constitutional  amendments,  af- 
ter passing  one  legislature  by  a two-thirds  ma- 
jority, must  be  ratified  by  popular  majority 
and  by  majority  in  the  new  legislature. 

Executive. — The  governor  is  elected  for  two 
years.  A second  term  is  usual.  Acts  not  re- 
turned within  three  days,  or,  if  adjournment 
occurs,  within  two  days  after  reassembling  of 


the  legislature,  become  law  without  his  signa- 
ture. He  may  veto  an  entire  bill  or  any  item 
or  section;  but  the  legislature  by  a two-thirds 
vote  may  override  the  veto.  The  governor  may 
pardon,  commute  or  parole  after  conviction. 
The  constitution  provides  for  a Board  of  Par- 
dons, but  lie  is  not  bound  to  consult  it.  The 
governor’s  authority  over  state  and  local  of- 
ficials is  slight  except  in  directing  prosecutions 
and  conditionally  suspending  the  accused.  His 
patronage  is  not  extensive,  most  of  his  import- 
ant appointees  being  nominated  by  direct 
popular  vote  and  all  requiring  the  senate’s  con- 
firmation. His  office  is  capable  of  being  made 
one  of  great  influence  by  a strong  man,  but 
carries  comparatively  little  power  in  itself 
outside  the  pardoning  and  veto  functions.  The 
attorney  general  and  the  comptroller  general 
exercise  great  influence.  The  latter  supervises 
the  entire  assessment  and  tax-collecting  sys- 
tems and  controls  county  auditors  and  treas- 
urers. The  usual  state  officers  are  nearly  all 
elected  by  the  people  and  receive  $1900.  There 
is  a board  of  three  railroad  commissioners  with 
power  to. fix  rates.  The  governor  is  paid  $3,000. 

Judiciary.— The  supreme  court  of  five  judges 
(1912),  elected  by  the  legislature  for  eight 
years,  has  mainly  appellate  jurisdiction  in 
errors  in  law.  It  names  when  necessary  special 
circuit  judges.  The  state  is  divided  into 
twelve  circuits.  A judge,  elected  by  the  legis- 
lature for  four  years,  resides  in  each  circuit 
but  the  constitution  declares  that  the  judges 
of  circuit  courts  shall  interchange  circuits  with 
each  other,  and  the  general  assembly  shall  pro- 
vide therefor.  Since  1865  there  have  been  no 
chancery  courts;  but  equity  cases  are  frequent- 
ly referred  to  the  “master  in  equity”  or  a 
specially  appointed  “referee.”  Judges  must 
state  the  law  but  may  not  charge  the  juries 
in  respect  to  matters  of  fact.  The  “code,”  con- 
taining the  complete  statute  law  at  the  given 
date,  is  issued  every  ten  years.  A county  in 
which  a lynching  occurs  is  liable  to  the  legal 
representatives  of  the  lynched  person  for  dam- 
ages of  not  less  than  two  thousand  dollars. 

Suffrage. — During  the  two  years  preceding 
1898  every  adult  male  able  to  explain  the  con- 
stitution when  read  to  him  was  enrolled  as  a 
voter  for  life.  This  guaranteed  suffrage  to 
all  white  men  then  of  age.  Beginning  with 
1898,  to  be  registered  one  must  read  and  write 
any  section  of  the  constitution  or  pay  taxes 
on  $300  worth  of  property.  Negro  registra- 
tion is  negligible  (see  Suffrage,  Negro),  and 
the  qualifications  are  scarcely  considered  worth 
while.  The  uncontested  supremacy  of  the  Dem- 
ocratic party  renders  its  direct  primaries  (made 
state-wide  in  immitation  of  several  counties  in 
1890)  for  nominating  candidates  including 
United  States  Senators,  by  practically  univer- 
sal white  vote,  the  only  elections  of  importance. 
No  registration  is  required  but  only  enroll- 
ment in  the  club  of  the  precinct  in  which  the 
voter  resides.  Only  presidential  electors  are 


359 


SOUTH  DAKOTA 


nominated  by  convention  (see  Party  Organi- 
zation in  the  South). 

Miscellaneous. — Separate  schools  are  required 
for  whites  and  negroes.  Attendance  is  not 
compulsory.  Marriages  must  be  licensed  and 
registered.  Divorce  is  unconstitutional.  Mar- 
riage is  forbidden  between  a white  and  a per- 
son of  one-eighth  or  more  negro  blood.  In 
1892  the  state  assumed  monopoly  of  the  liquor 
traffic.  The  moral  purpose  soon  gave  way  to 
profit  seeking.  The  revelation  of  widespread 
corruption  in  central  and  local  boards  led  to 
the  abolition  of  the  “State  Dispensary”  in 
1907.  Liquor  is  legally  sold  by  a few  counties 
under  a county  board;  most  of  the  counties 
have  prohibition,  the  matter  being  decided  by 
local  vote.  The  constitution  forbids  any  sys- 
tem under  which  liquor  is  sold  in  less  quanti- 
ties than  one-half  pint  or  is  sold  at  night 
or  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises. 

Local  Government. — The  forty-four  counties 
are  divided  into  townships.  The  latter,  though 
bodies  corporate,  are  of  slight  importance  be- 
yond their  use  as  tax-assessing  and  magis- 
trates’ districts,  their  permitted  functions  be- 
ing undeveloped.  The  county  is  the  adminis- 
trative, judicial  and  political  unit.  Its  elected 
commissioners  are  solely  administrative.  The 
tax  levy  and  special  laws  for  the  county  are 
agreed  upon  by  the  legislative  delegation, 
whose  recommendations  are  usually  enacted 
without  contest  by  the  legislature.  The  new 
rural  police  in  a number  of  counties  promises 
to  become  general.  Municipalities  are  under 
limits  in  taxing  and  borrowing,  but  have  val- 
uable constitutionally  guaranteed  rights  against 
the  legislature.  Columbia  and  Stanbury  are 
under  commission  government,  sentiment 
for  which  is  growing  elsewhere  (see  Commis- 
sion System  of  City  Government).  The 
“City-Manager”  type  of  commission  govern- 
ment originated  with  Sumter  in  1912. 

Party. — The  state  has  been  overwhelm- 
ingly Democratic  except  at  exceptional  periods 
when  standing  aloof  from  parties.  For  years 
the  menace  of  negro  rule  so  overshadowed  as 
to  prevent  political  progress,  and  this  still  sets 
exacting  bounds.  About  145,000  whites  vote 
in  the  August  primaries  and  60,000  in  the 
regular  election;  about  4,000  negro  Republi- 
cans vote  in  the  latter.  The  few  hundred  white 
Republicans  are  office-holders  or  seekers  for 
offices  or  recent  arrivals  from  the  North. 
From  1890  to  1902  the  whites  were  bitterly  di- 
vided into  Reformers  (“Tillmanites”)  and  Con- 
servatives (“Anti-Tillmanites”) . Prohibition 
and  local  option  (as  the  liquor  forces  call 
themselves)  have  been  prominent  in  recent 
years. 

Population  and  Area. — South  Carolina  em- 
braces 30,570  square  miles.  The  population 
has  been  as  follows:  249,073  in  1790;  415,115 
in  1810;  502,741  in  1820;  703,708  in  1860; 
995,577  in  1880;  1,340,316  in  1900;  1,515,400 
in  1910. 


See  Constitution  Making  in  U.  S. ; Con- 
stitutions, State,  Characteristics  of;  Con- 
stitutions, State,  Limitations  in;  Govern- 
or; Reconstruction;  State  Executive; 
State  Government;  State  Legislature. 

References:  D.  F.  Houston,  “Critical  Study 
of  Nullification  in  South  Carolina”  in  Harvard 
Hist.  Studies,  III  (1896)  ; E.  McCrady,  South 
Carolina  wider  the  Proprietary  Government 
(1897),  South  Carolina  under  the  Royal  Gov- 
ernment (1899),  South  Carolina  in  the  Revolu- 
tion ( 1901 ) ; J.  S.  Reynolds,  Reconstruction  in 
South  Carolina  (1905)  ; W.  A.  Sehaper,  “Sec- 
tionalism and  Representation  in  South  Caro- 
lina” in  Am.  Hist.  Assoc.,  Annual  Report,  1900, 
I,  237-463;  W.  R.  Smith,  South  Carolina  as 
a Royal  Province  (1903)  ; F.  N.  Thorpe,  Fed- 
eral and  State  Constitutions  (1909),  VI,  3241- 
3354;  South  in  the  Building  of  the  Nation 
(1909),  II,  1-121;  D.  D.  Wallace,  Civil  Gov- 
ernment of  South  Carolina  (1911),  Constitu- 
tional Hist,  of  South  Carolina  (1899),  1725- 
75.  D.  D.  Wallace. 

SOUTH  DAKOTA.  History. — Previous  to 
the  Lewis  and  Clark  expedition  little  was 
known  of  the  region  now  called  South  Dakota. 
Up  to  1859,  when  immigration  and  settlement 
realiy  began,  the  Indians  roamed  over  the 
prairies  unchecked  by  white  men.  In  1861,  Da- 
kota Territory  (see)  was  created  and  included 
at  first  the  area  of  the  present  states  of  South 
Dakota,  North  Dakota  and  parts  of  Montana, 
Wyoming  and  Idaho.  The  rich  farming  and 
stock  raising  lands  and  especially  the  gold 
mines,  which  were  discovered  in  the  Black  Hills 
in  1874,  attracted  people.  The  population  of 
South  Dakota  amounted  in  1861  to  2,402 ; in 
1S70  to  11,776;  in  1S90  to  328,808;  in  1900  to 
401,570;  and  in  1910  to  583,788  inhabitants. 

The  agitation  for  the  division  of  Dakota 
Territory  and  the  creation  of  two  states  in- 
stead of  only  one  began  about  1879  and  grew 
so  strong  that  constitutional  conventions  were 
held  in  1883  and  1885.  Both  constitutions 
were  ratified  by  the  people.  State  officers  and 
members  to  the  legislature,  also  members  to 
Congress,  were  elected  under  the  constitution 
of  1885  and  they  even  came  together  for  the 
purpose  of  constituting  themselves  the  govern- 
ment. The  advocates  of  statehood  argued  that 
some  of  the  best  interests  of  South  Dakota 
were  at  stake.  The  reservation  of  the  public 
lands,  especially  those  for  school  purposes,  the 
removal  of  the  territorial  capitol  in  1882  from 
Yankton  to  Bismarck,  the  disadvantages  that 
would  result  from  the  vast  extent  of  the  ter- 
ritory if  organized  into  one  state  instead  of 
two  and  the  divergence  of  the  characteristics 
and  economic  interests  of  the  people  of  the 
southern  and  northern  sections,  were  grave 
matters  of  consideration  with  them.  The  Dem- 
ocratic  party  in  control  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment was  bitterly  blamed  for  not  granting  the 
numerous  petitions  in  behalf  of  statehood. 


360 


SOUTH  DAKOTA 


The  antagonism  then  engendered,  and  the  ad- 
mission into  the  Union  during  a Republican 
administration,  were  factors  in  making  South 
Dakota  so  strongly  Republican.  Only  twice 
in  its  history,  in  1896  and  1898,  was  a gover- 
nor elected  who  was  not  a Republican  and 
in  those  years  the  defeat  of  the  Republican  can- 
didates was  due  to  the  Populistic  wave. 

Constitution. — The  Enabling  Act,  passed  in 
1889,  fully  satisfied  the  people;  their  inter- 
ests were  protected.  It  stated  that  at  the  elec- 
tion of  the  members  to  the  constitutional  con- 
vention the  electors  be  allowed  to  vote  either 
in  favor  of,  or  against  the  resubmission  of 
the  “Sioux  Falls’  Constitution”  of  1885.  Since 
the  great  majority  of  the  electors  favored  re- 


respectively.  The  two  houses  had  in  1907,  89 
and  45;  in  1909,  104  and  45;  in  1911,  104 
and  45;  in  1913,  105  and  45  members,  respec- 
tively. 

South  Dakota  favors  progressive  legislation. 
“Not  more  than  five  per  centum  of  the  qualified 
electors  . . . shall  be  required  to  invoke 

either  the  initiative  (see)  or  the  referendum” 
(see).  Since  1898,  when  the  initiative  and 
referendum  amendment  was  passed,  the  initia- 
tive has  been  invoked  four  times,  one  measure 
prevailed,  two  were  defeated  by  the  voters,  and 
one  (1913)  is  still  pending.  The  referen- 
dum has  been  invoked  eleven  times,  six 
laws  were  upheld  and  five  vetoed.  No 
provision  exists  by  which  the  people  can  in- 


Boundaries  of  the  State  of  South  Dakota,  Showing  Territorial  Changes 


submission,  the  constitutional  convention  made 
only  very  few  alterations,  most  of  which  were 
necessary  because  of  the  division  of  the  ter- 
ritory into  two  states. 

The  state  government  is  divided  into  the 
traditional  executive,  legislative  and  judicial 
departments.  The  members  of  the  first  two 
branches  are  elected  biennially,  the  five  judges 
of  the  supreme  court  for  six  years,  the  twelve 
judges  of  the  twelve  circuit  courts  for  four 
years,  and  the  sixty-one  county  judges  for 
two  years.  The  governor  has  “authority  to 
require  the  opinion  of  the  judges  of  the  su- 
preme court  upon  important  questions  of  law.” 
A two-thirds  majority  vote  of  both  houses  of 
the  legislature  passes  a bill  over  the  governor’s 
veto.  The  number  of  members  of  the  house 
of  representatives  and  senate  must  not  be  less 
than  75  and  25  nor  more  than  135  and  45 


itiate  a constitutional  amendment.  The  con- 
stitution may  be  amended  in  two  ways:  (1) 
the  majority  of  the  members  of  both  houses 
of  the  legislature  may  submit  a provision  to 
the  electors;  (2)  a two-thirds  majority  of 
both  houses  may  submit  the  question  of  calling 
a convention  to  the  electors.  The  alterations 
submitted  to  the  electors  either  by  the  legisla- 
ture or  by  the  constitutional  convention  must 
be  ratified  by  a majority  of  the  voters  upon 
them.  The  first  method  only  has  been  invoked, 
and  nineteen  of  the  thirty-two  measures  have 
been  ratified.  The  primary  election  law  (see 
Primary,  Direct),  passed  in  1907,  is  used  for 
all  elective  officers,  including  that  of  United 
States’  Senator.  Women  may  vote  in  school 
elections.  The  commission  (see)  plan  of  gov- 
ernment and  the  recall  (see)  have  been  estab- 
lished in  a number  of  towns. 


361 


SOVEREIGNTY  OF  THE  PEOPLE 


References:  South  Dakota  Revised  Codes 
(1903)  ; D.  Robinson,  Complete  Hist,  of  South 
Dakota  (1904);  South  Dakota  State  Histori- 
cal Society,  Collections,  1125-1115  (1899);  F. 
N.  Thorpe,  Federal  and  State  Constitutions 
(1909),  VI,  3355-3408. 

Carl  Christophelsmeier. 

SOVEREIGNTY  OF  THE  PEOPLE.  Early 
Theories. — The  problem  of  locating  the  reposi- 
tory of  sovereignty,  especially  in  the  composite 
states  of  today,  is  not  always  a simple  task. 
The  bearer  of  the  sovereign  power  may,  in 
fact,  be  a priest  or  prophet,  a military  dicta- 
tor, an  aristocracy  of  nobles,  a king  or  prince, 
a convention,  a legislative  body,  a popular  as- 
sembly or  the  electorate  itself.  Examples  of 
all  these  have  occurred  in  the  past.  In  an- 
cient Rome,  the  idea  that  the  people  were  the 
original  source  of  political  authority  found 
expression  in  the  well  known  maxim : “The 
will  of  the  prince  has  the  force  of  law,  since 
the  people  have  transferred  to  him  all  their 
right  and  power.”  The  revival  of  interest  in 
the  Roman  law  in  the  twelfth  century,  together 
with  the  wide  spread  study  of  the  newly  dis- 
covered works  of  Aristotle,  stimulated  the 
spread  of  the  doctrine  that  the  ultimate  source 
of  political  authority  was  the  people  rather 
than  the  emperor.  So  widely  prevalent  did 
this  idea  become,  says  Gierke,  that  from  the 
end  of  the  thirteenth  century  an  axiom  of  po- 
litical theory  was  that  the  justification  of 
government  lay  in  the  voluntary  submission 
of  the  community  ruled.  The  idea,  however, 
was  vaguely  stated  and  for  a long  time  no 
attempt  was  made  to  work  out  a systematic, 
and  logical  formulation  of  the  theory.  To 
combat  the  doctrine  of  sovereignty  as  an  abso- 
lute and  unlimited  power,  a view  enunciated 
by  Bodin  in  1576  (see  Sovereignty,  Theory 
of),  there  arose  in  the  sixteenth  and  seven- 
teenth centuries  a group  of  political  writers 
known  as  “monarchomachs,”  who  maintained 
the  contract  theory  of  the  origin  of  the  state, 
the  original  sovereignty  of  the  people  and  the 
right  of  the  people  to  resist  rulers  who  were 
guilty  of  violating  the  compact.  The  best 
known  of  these  writers  were  Johannes  Althusius 
who,  in  his  Politica  Methodice  Digesta  (1609), 
developed  the  theory  that  the  state  was  found- 
ed on  contract  and  that  sovereignty  not  only 
originated  in  the  people  but  that  it  remained 
permanently  in  their  hands.  Other  writers  of 
this  school  who  defended  in  one  form  or  an- 
other the  doctrine  of  popular  sovereignty  were 
Hotman,  Buchanan,  Languet,  Mariana  and 
Suarez.  (Gierke,  Johnannes  Althusius  und  die 
Entwicklung  der  Naturrechtlichen  Staatsthe- 
orien  [1880]  123.)  In  the  seventeenth  century, 
the  idea  that  the  people  were  the  ultimate 
source  of  political  power  found  two  able  Eng- 
lish champions  in  Milton  and  Locke.  This 
doctrine  was,  indeed,  the  most  fundamental 
principle  of  Milton’s  political  philosophy  and 


it  underlay  the  contract  theory  of  the  state 
as  expounded  by  Locke  (see  Social  Compact 
Theory).  Locke  ascribed  legal  sovereignty  to 
tlie  legislature  which,  however,  was  only  a 
"fiduciary  body”  entrusted  with  the  power  of 
the  people  who  were  the  ultimate  sovereign. 
“There  remains  in  the  people,”  he  said,  “a 
supreme  power  to  remove  or  alter  the  legisla- 
tive” (see  Political  Theories  of  English 
Publicists)  . 

France. — But  the  political  writer  who  pushed 
the  theory  of  popular  sovereignty  to  its 
extreme  and  whose  influence  was,  perhaps, 
most  responsible  for  the  spread  of  the  doctrine 
was  Rousseau.  In  his  Contrat  Social  (1762), 
he  laid  down  the  proposition  that  sovereignty 
was  nothing  but  the  exercise  of  the  general 
will,  that  is,  the  will  of  the  people,  and  that 
the  sovereign  was  the  collective  mass  united 
by  the  social  compact.  The  theory  of  sov- 
ereignty thus  formulated  by  Rousseau  became 
the  basis  of  the  French  Revolution  and  it 
found  repeated  expression  in  the  several  consti- 
tutions which  followed  the  outbreak  of  the 
Revolution.  Thus  in  the  Declaration  of  Rights 
of  1789  it  was  asserted  that  “the  source  of  all 
sovereignty  resides  essentially  in  the  nation” 
( Art.  3 ) . In  the  declaration  of  war  issued  by 
the  National  Assembly  in  1792,  it  was  declared 
that  sovereignty  belongs  only  to  the  people 
who  were  limited  only  by  the  rights  of  poster- 
ity and  who  could  delegate  no  power  which  was 
irrevocable.  Again  in  the  constitution  of  1793, 
it  was  declared  that  “every  individual  who 
usurps  the  sovereignty  may  be  put  to  death 
by  freemen”  and  “when  the  government  vio- 
lates the  rights  of  tlie  people,  insurrection  is 
for  the  people,  and  for  every  portion  of  the  peo- 
ple, the  most  sacred  of  rights  and  the  most 
indispensable  of  duties”  (Art.  35). 

America. — In  America  at  the  time  of  the 
Revolution,  the  idea  that  the  people  were  the 
ultimate  source  of  all  political  authority  be- 
came a fundamental  principle  of  American 
political  theory.  The  doctrine  was  asserted  in 
the  Declaration  of  Independence  that  “govern- 
ments derive  their  just  powers  from  the  con- 
sent of  the  governed,”  and  it  was  repeatedly 
declared  in  the  political  addresses  and  pamph- 
lets of  the  time  that  the  people  were  the  source 
of  all  legitimate  political  power  and  that  the 
right  to  alter  their  governments  in  such  man- 
ner as  they  might  think  expedient  belonged  to 
them  at  all  times.  These  American  principles 
were  a natural  product  of  English  political 
theory,  and  were  based  on  the  literature  of 
the  seventeenth  century;  they  obtained  vitality 
and  strength  from  the  exigencies  of  argument 
against  the  absolute  power  of  Parliament. 

These  ideas  were  formally  embodied  in  the 
state  constitutions  adopted  after  the  outbreak 
of  the  Revolution,  a common  form  of  expres- 
sion being:  “all  government  of  right  origi- 
nates from  the  people,”  or  “all  power  is  vested 
in  and  consequently  derived  from  the  people 


362 


SOVEREIGNTY,  THEORY  OF 


and  that  magistrates  are  their  trustees  and 
servants  and  at  all  times  amenable  to  them.” 
In  several,  the  doctrine  of  non-resistance 
against  arbitrary  power  and  oppression  was 
declared  to  be  “absurd,  slavish  and  destructive 
of  the  good  and  happiness  of  mankind”  (see 
Revolution,  Right  of).  In  some  form  or 
other,  the  doctrine  of  popular  sovereignty,  the 
right  of  the  people  to  change  their  forms  of 
government  whenever  in  their  judgment  the 
public  good  requires,  and  even  the  right  of 
revolution,  are  asserted  in  many  of  the  state 
constitutions  now  in  existence,  and  whether  so 
formally  declared  or  not,  there  are  few  who 
would  dispute  these  rights,  so  deeply  rooted 
in  our  political  system  have  they  become.  It 
may  now  be  confidently  asserted  that  every- 
where in  America  and  Europe  the  sovereignty 
of  the  people  in  some  form  or  other  is  a funda- 
mental political  principle  of  almost  universal 
recognition.  Though  the  idea  has,  as  has  been 
stated  above,  had  able  defenders  almost  from 
the  beginning,  its  realization  in  practice  has 
been  the  work  of  the  past  century.  As  a liv- 
ing, working  principle,  it  came  into  existence 
with  the  rise  of  popular  government  and 
reached  its  full  fruition  with  the  triumph  of 
democracy  of  which  it  is  a logical  and  es- 
sential result. 

Differing  Meanings. — While  the  sovereignty 
of  the  people  is  now  an  almost  universally  rec- 
ognized political  fact,  the  phrase  has  a variety 
of  meanings  and  if  accepted  without  limitation 
or  condition,  it  may  lead  to  mischievous  results. 
To  hold  that  the  people  under  all  conditions 
and  circumstances  are  sovereign  would  be  to 
ignore  the  fundamental  distinction  between 
power  legally  possessed  and  exercised  and  pow- 
er unlawfully  exercised,  through  illegal  meth- 
ods. While  the  people  are  in  a sense  the  de- 
pository of  the  supreme  power  in  the  state, 
they  may  rightfully  and  lawfully  exercise  it 
only  at  the  times,  in  the  modes  and  under  the 
conditions  which  they  have  themselves  pre- 
scribed and  pointed  out  in  the  constitution  and 
statutes,  and  any  attempt  to  exercise  their 
power  in  any  other  manner  would  be  revolu- 
tionary in  character  and  should  be  resisted  by 
the  legally  constituted  authorities. 

Again  the  sovereignty  of  the  people  as  here 
understood  has  reference  to  the  people  in  their 
legally  organized  capacity,  not  as  an  unor- 


ganized mass,  for  in  the  latter  case,  the  people 
would  be  acting  as  a mob,  and  not  through 
legally  constituted  agencies.  Except  in  pure 
democracies  where  the  people  are  capable  of 
assembling  in  their  primary  capacity  for  the 
purpose  of  exercising  their  power  directly,  the 
sovereignty  of  the  people  can  be  exercised  only 
through  representatives  or,  as  where  the  in- 
stitution of  the  initiative  and  referendum  pre- 
vails, through  the  forms  of  a general  election. 
In  practice  the  sovereignty  of  the  people  has 
reference  only  to  that  portion  of  society  which 
is  politically  enfranchised,  that  is,  the  elec- 
torate. In  a still  narrower  sense,  it  might 
mean  only  that  portion  of  the  electorate  which 
actually  exercises  the  power  of  voting  in  a 
particular  case.  But  of  course  the  compelling 
influence  in  the  state  is  not  limited  to  those 
persons  who  have  a right  to  vote.  It  may 
with  truth  be  asserted  that  the  determining  in- 
fluence in  a democratic  state  is  public  opinion, 
and  this  opinion  emanates  from  those  not  pos- 
sessing the  suffrage  as  well  as  from  those  who 
do.  Thus  in  a broad  and  non-technical  sense, 
it  might  be  said  that  the  aggregate  sentiment 
of  the  community,  the  collective  opinion  of 
the  mass  of  the  population,  rather  than  that 
merely  of  the  electorate,  is  sovereign. 

That  which  from  hour  to  hour  in  every  country 
governs  despotically  or  otherwise  produces  the 
obedience,  making  political  action  possible,  is  the 
accumulated  and  organized  sentiment  felt  toward 
inherited  institutions,  made  sacred  by  traditions ; 

. . hence  it  is  undeniable  that,  taken  in  its 

widest  acceptation,  the  feeling  of  the  community 
is  the  sole  source  of  political  power. 

See  Political  Theories,  Ancient  and  Med- 
i.eval;  Political  Theories  of  Modern  Con- 
tinental Publicists;  Social  Compact  Theo- 
ry; Sovereignty,  Theory  of. 

References:  J.  C.  Bluntschli,  Theory  of  the 
State  (1892),  VII,  ch.  ii;  T.  M.  Cooley,  Con- 
stitutional Limitations  (7th  ed.,  1903),  ch. 
xvii ; C.  E.  Merriam,  Hist,  of  the  Theory  of 
Sovereignty  since  Rousseau  (1900),  introduc- 
tion and  chs.  vi-vii,  Am.  Polit.  Theories 
(1903),  ch.  ii;  H.  Sidgwick,  Elements  of  Poli- 
tics (1897),  ch.  xxi;  W.  W.  Willoughby,  The 
Nature  of  the  State  (1903),  ch.  ix;  W.  Wilson, 
Old  Master  and  Other  Essays  (1893),  ch.  iii; 
H.  L.  Osgood,  “Political  Theories  of  the  Puri- 
tans” in  Pol.  Sci.  Quart.,  VI  (1891),  1-28,  201- 
231.  James  W.  Garner. 


SOVEREIGNTY,  THEORY  OF 


General  Definition. — The  term  “sovereignty,” 
from  the  Latin  Suprema  potestus,  superan- 
us, seems  to  have  first  been  employed  by 
Bodin  in  his  celebrated  work,  De  la  Republique, 
published  in  1576,  although  the  idea  itself  is 
as  old  as  Aristotle.  Bodin  defined  sovereignty 
(Souverainete)  as  the  summa  in  owes  ac  sub- 
121 


ditos,  legibusque  soluta  potestus,  the  supreme 
power  of  the  state  over  citizens  and  subjects, 
unrestrained  by  law.  Grotius,  who  later  dis- 
cussed the  subject,  defined  it  as  “the  supreme 
political  power  vested  in  him  whose  acts  are  not 
subject  to  any  other  and  whose  will  cannot  be 
overridden.”  Blackstone  in  his  Commentaries 


363 


SOVEREIGNTY,  THEORY  OF 


on  the  Laws  of  England  conceived  it  to  be 
“the  supreme  authority  in  which  the  jura 
summi  imperii  reside,”  a definition  later  quot- 
ed with  approval  hy  Justice  Story  of  the  Unit- 
ed States  Supreme  Court.  Most  writers  agree 
that  it  is  the  original,  supreme  and  legally  un- 
limited power  which  exists  in  every  independ- 
ent political  community  to  command  and  com- 
pel obedience.  It  is  this  power  which  funda- 
mentally distinguishes  the  state  in  toto  genere 
from  all  other  associations  of  mankind  and 
which,  therefore,  constitutes  its  highest  and 
most  essential  characteristic. 

Sovereignty  may  reside  in  a single  person, 
an  assembly  of  persons  or  in  the  people  them- 
selves, depending  upon  the  form  of  organiza- 
tion of  the  state,  though  in  practice,  it  is  no 
longer  exercised  by  a single  individual  except 
in  the  few  remaining  absolute  monarchies  of 
Asia.  It  is  true  that  the  crowned  heads  of 
Europe  are  officially  designated  as  “sover- 
eigns,” but  they  are  such  only  in  a nominal 
or  titular  sense,  the  actual  sovereign  power 
being  either  in  the  parliament,  a constituent 
assembly  or  in  the  electorate. 

Legal  and  Political  Sovereignty. — As  actual 
sovereignty  may  be  distinguished  from  titular 
sovereignty,  so  legal  sovereignty  may  be  dif- 
ferentiated from  political  sovereignty,  the  dis- 
tinction being  mainly  the  difference  between 
the  juristic  and  the  popular  conceptions.  The 
legal  sovereign  is  that  authority  which  is  capa- 
ble of  formulating  and  expressing  in  legal  form 
the  supreme  will  of  the  state.  Its  commands, 
when  properly  formulated,  must  always  prevail 
even  against  the  expressed  will  of  the  elec- 
torate, the  principles  of  morality  or  the  pre- 
scriptions of  the  divine  law.  It  is  the  sover- 
eignty recognized  by  the  courts,  and  the  sov- 
ereignty to  which  the  law  attributes  legal 
force. 

But  behind  the  legal  sovereign — the  person  or 
assembly  which  alone  is  capable  of  laying  down 
supreme  legal  commands — is  a power  whose 
mandates  when  clearly  expressed  through  the 
forms  of  a general  election  will  in  practice  be 
obeyed  by  the  legal  sovereign  and  whose  will 
must  ultimately  prevail  in  the  state.  This 
is  the  political  sovereign,  that  is  the  sovereign- 
ty of  the  electorate.  Though  incapable  of 
formulating  and  expressing  in  legal  form  the 
will  of  the  state,  except  where  the  principle 
of  the  pure  democracy  prevails,  its  commands 
will,  nevertheless,  if  emphatically  pronounced 
and  fully  understood,  usually  be  obeyed  by  the 
legal  sovereign.  In  case  of  conflict  between 
the  two  wills,  that  of  the  legal  sovereign  takes 
precedence  in  practice  since  only  that  which 
has  been  embodied  in  legal  form  can  have  the 
force  of  law,  although,  in  fact,  it  may  not 
be  in  accord  with  the  actual  desires  of  the  peo- 
ple ( see  Sovereignty  of  the  People).  “The 
legal  sovereign,”  says  Professor  Ritchie,  “is 
the  lawyer’s  sovereign  qua  lawyer,  the  sovereign 
beyond  which  lawyers  and  courts  refuse  to 


look.”  With  the  wishes  or  feelings  of  the 
electors,  the  lawyer  as  such  has  nothing  to 
do.  Certain  writers,  however,  refuse  to  recog- 
nize the  distinction  between  legal  and  political 
sovereignty  on  the  ground  that  it  apparently 
involves  the  recognition  of  a dual  sovere:gnty. 
But  in  reality  what  may  appear  to  be  two 
sovereignties  is,  in  fact,  but  two  forms  ot 
manifestation  of  one  and  the  same  sovereignty, 
through  different  channels.  In  case  the  two 
do  not  harmonize,  that  is,  in  case  the  expressed 
will  of  the  legal  sovereign  is  different  from 
that  which  the  electorate  has  pronounced,  the 
legal  sovereign  should  be  reorganized  or  re- 
constituted by  means  of  a new  election  in 
order  that  the  will  of  the  electorate  may  be 
made  to  prevail. 

The  distinction  between  legal  and  political 
sovereignty  is  most  prominent  in  countries  like 
Great  Britain  where  constitutional  and  statu- 
tory enactments  emanate  from  the  same  au- 
thority and  where  there  is  no  legal  distinction 
between  constitutional  and  statutory  law. 
There  the  Parliament  is  both  legislative  body 
and  constituent  assembly.  Legally  it  is  omnip- 
otent and  may  alter  the  constitution  by  the 
same  legal  processes  that  are  followed  in  the 
enactment  of  ordinary  legislation  and  with 
the  same  ease  and  facility.  It  is  'thus  tne 
legal  sovereign  of  the  empire  and  no  legal  au- 
thority exists  which  can  restrain  it  or  over- 
rule its  acts.  Yet  over  and  above  the  Parlia- 
ment there  is  the  electorate  whose  will  when 
pronounced  at  a general  election  must  ulti- 
mately be  obeyed  by  Parliament.  The  lawyers 
do  not  recognize  this  sovereignty,  the  courts 
take  no  notice  of  it  and  even  the  Parliament 
itself  might  lawfully  ignore  and  resist  it,  but 
in  the  end  its  will  must  be  obeyed  if  the 
electorate  so  insists.  In  this  sense,  the  elec- 
torate rather  than  the  Parliament  is  the  sov- 
ereign. 

De  Facto  vs.  De  Jure  Sovereignty. — A dis- 
tinction may  also  be  made  between  the  sov- 
ereignty which  is  actually  obeyed  by  the  inhabi- 
tants, though  it  may  not  rest  on  a strict  legal 
basis,  and  the  sovereignty  which  has  legal 
right  on  its  side  but  which  may  be  temporarily 
excluded  or  disorganized  as  a result  of  revolu- 
tion or  foreign  conquest.  Numerous  examples 
of  de  facto  sovereignties  have  occurred  in  his- 
tory. Such  was  the  sovereignty  wielded  by 
Cromwell  after  the  dissolution  of  the  Long 
Parliament,  that  of  Napoleon  after  the  over- 
throw of  the  Directory,  that  of  the  English 
convention  which  bestowed  the  crown  on  Will- 
iam and  Mary,  and  that  of  the  Southern  Con- 
federacy from  1861  to  1865.  De  jure  sovereign- 
ty, on  the  other  hand,  has  its  foundation  on 
law  rather  than  upon  physical  power,  and 
the  individual  or  assembly  by  whom  it  is  ex- 
ercised can  always  show  a legal  right  to  rule, 
and  is,  therefore,  lawfully  entitled  to  the  obedi- 
ence of  the  inhabitants.  As  a matter  of  fact, 
the  sovereign  who  is  able  to  maintain  his  mas- 


364 


SOVEREIGNTY,  THEORY  OF 


tery  by  force  usually  becomes  in  the  course  of 
time  the  legal  sovereign  through  the  acquies- 
cence of  the  inhabitants  or  through  the  reor- 
ganization of  the  state.  Some  writers,  like 
Austin,  decline,  however,  to  recognize  the  dis- 
tinction between  de  jure  and  de  facto  sover- 
eignty for  the  reason  that  the  terms  “lawful” 
and  “unlawful”  cannot  properly  be  employed  to 
describe  sovereignty.  The  only  law,  says  Aus- 
tin, by  which  a person  or  body  of  persons  can 
be  sovereign  is  its  own  law  or  will,  and  to 
say  that  it  is  the  de  jure  sovereign  is  tanta- 
mount to  saying  that  it  is  legal  because  it 
declares  itself  to  be  so.  Governments,  Austin 
argues,  may  be  de  facto  or  de  jure,  but  such 
terms  cannot  properly  be  applied  to  describe 
the  nature  of  sovereignty. 

Attributes  of  Sovereignty. — The  distinctive 
characteristics  of  sovereignty  are  permanence, 
exclusiveness,  all  comprehensiveness,  inalien- 
ability, absoluteness  and  indivisibility.  Sov- 
ereignty does  not  cease  with  the  death,  dis- 
solution or  dispossession  of  the  person  or  body 
in  whom,  for  the  time  being  it  is  reposed, 
but  immediately  shifts  to  a new  bearer, 
somewhat  as  the  center  of  gravity  changes 
from  one  part  of  a physical  body  to  another 
whenever  it  undergoes  change.  By  virtue  of 
the  attribute  of  exclusiveness,  there  can  be 
but  one  sovereignty  in  the  state  at  the  same 
time.  To  hold  otherwise  would  be  to  deny 
the  principle  of  the  unity  of  sovereignty  and 
to  recognize  the  possibility  of  an  impcrium  in 
imperio.  Sovereignty  is  all  comprehensive, 
that  is,  it  embraces  all  persons  or  associations 
within  the  state,  except  such  as  for  reasons  of 
public  policy  or  international  comity  the  state 
may  voluntarily  exempt  from  its  jurisdiction. 
Examples  of  such  persons  are  diplomatic  rep- 
resentatives and  the  heads  of  other  states  who 
may  be  temporarily  within  its  territory.  Sov- 
ereignty is  generally  considered  to  be  inalien- 
able, that  is,  it  cannot  be  ceded  away  without 
self-destruction,  though  of  course  it  may  be 
shifted  to  a new  repository  or  abiding  place 
whenever  the  state  is  reorganized.  A few 
writers,  however,  hold  a contrary  view.  Sov- 
ereignty is  also  imprescriptible  that  is,  it  can- 
not be  lost  by  mere  lapse  of  time  as  property 
in  land  may  be  lost  by  prescription  at  private 
law. 

An  important  attribute  of  sovereignty  is  its 
quality  of  absoluteness,  that  is,  it  cannot  be 
legally  limited.  It  is  an  original  not  a derived 
power  and  being  supreme  there  can  be  no  au- 
ority  above  it.  To  hold  that  it  is  capable  of 
being  limited  by  a higher  power  is  a contra- 
dictio  in  adjecto.  Many  writers,  however, 
recognize  the  existence  of  certain  moral  limi- 
tations upon  sovereignty,  arising  from  the  na- 
tural and  inherent  rights  of  man.  rights  which, 
it  is  maintained,  belong  to  the  individual  in- 
dependently of  the  state  and  of  which  he  can- 
not justly  be  deprived  by  any  authority.  Other 
alleged  limitations  on  sovereignty  are  those 


arising  from  the  teachings  of  religion,  imme- 
morial custom,  long  established  traditions,  the 
rules  of  international  law,  etc.  But  in  legal 
effect  they  are  no  limitations  at  all  except  in 
so  far  as  the  state  chooses  to  recognize  them 
and  be  bound  by  their  prescriptions,  that  is, 
they  are  nothing  but  self-imposed  restrictions 
which  may  or  may  not  be  regarded.  Whatever 
authority  is  capable  of  imposing  limitations 
upon  the  power  of  the  state  is  itself  sovereign; 
supreme  power,  limited  by  positive  law,  is,  as 
Austin  remarks,  a flat  contradiction  in  terms. 
The  criticism  sometimes  made  against  the 
doctrine  of  unlimited  sovereignty,  namely,  that 
it  involves  the  legal  despotism  of  the  state  is 
not  well  founded.  Granting  that  sovereignty 
could  or  should  be  limited,  the  individual 
would  still  be  subject  to  that  which  imposes 
the  limitation.  John  Austin,  with  his  usual 
clearness  and  incisiveness,  stated  the  matter 
correctly  when  he  said: 

The  power  of  the  superior  sovereign  would  still 
he  absolutely  free  from  the  fetters  of  positive 
law.  For  unless  the  imagined  restraints  were  ulti- 
mately imposed  by  a sovereign  not  in  a state  of 
subjection  to  a higher  or  superior  sovereign,  a 
series  of  sovereigns  extending  to  infinity  would 
govern  the  imagined  community,  which  is  impos- 
sible and  absurd. 

Nothing  is  to  be  gained  by  trying  to  avoid 
the  conclusion  that  sovereignty  is  incapable  of 
being  restricted.  It  is  necessary  to  recognize 
in  the  state  the  existence  of  a power  to  which 
all  persons  and  things  are  subject,  and  the 
more  fully  sovereign  this  power,  the  more  se- 
cure and  permanent  must  be  the  rights  and 
liberties  of  the  people. 

Indivisibility  of  Sovereignty. — Sovereignty, 
as  already  stated,  is  a unity  and  cannot  be 
divided.  If  there  were  several  supreme  wills 
in  the  state,  each  empowered  to  lay  down  com- 
mands and  to  exact  obedience  from  the  inhabi- 
tants, conflicts  and  ultimate  paralysis  of  au- 
thority would  inevitably  result.  If  these  wills 
were  coordinate,  obviously  neither  could  be 
sovereign,  and  if  one  were  superior  and  the 
other  subordinate,  manifestly  the  former  would 
be  sovereign  and  the  latter  subject,  and  what 
would  appear  to  be  a division  would  in  fact 
be  no  division  at  all.  This  truth  was  clearly 
stated  by  John  C.  Calhoun  in  his  Disquisition 
on  Government  where  he  declared  that  “sov- 
ereignty is  an  entire  thing;  to  divide  it  is  to 
destroy  it.  It  is  the  supreme  power  in  the 
state  and  we  might  just  as  well  speak  of  half 
a square  or  half  a triangle  as  of  half  a sov- 
ereignty.” The  theory  of  the  unity  of  sov- 
ereignty, however,  is  not  universally  accepted 
by  political  writers  and  jurists,  many  of  whom 
defend  the  principle  of  a divided  sovereignty, 
especially  in  states  having  the  federal  system 
of  government.  In  the  United  States,  the 
doctrine  that  sovereignty  is  divided  between 
the  Union  and  the  states  which  compose  it,  was 
maintained  by  both  Hamilton  and  Madison  in 
the  Federalist  and  was  early  adopted  by  the 


365 


SPAIN,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS  WITH 


Supreme  Court.  It  has  also  received  the  ap- 
proval of  such  political  writers  as  Story, 
Cooley,  de  Tocqueville,  Wheaton,  Halleck, 
Hurd,  Bliss  and  others,  though,  as  already 
stated,  it  was  repudiated  by  Calhoun.  The 
opinion  now  generally  held  is  that  no  sucli 
division  exists,  but  what  the  states  retain  is 
mere  local  autonomy  or  local  self-government 
( see  State  Sovereignty).  Many  German 
writers  have  also  defended  the  divisibility 
theory,  among  them  being  Waitz,  von  Mohl, 
Bluntschli,  Brie,  Westerkamp,  Jellinek,  Born- 
hak,  Schulze  and  others.  But  if  we  adhere  to 
the  definition  of  sovereignty  laid  down  in  the 
beginning  of  this  article,  the  theory  of  a dual 
sovereignty  cannot  be  accepted.  Neveretheless 
while,  according  to  our  view,  sovereignty  itself 
cannot  be  divided,  its  emanations  or  manifesta- 
tions may  be  divided  and  expressed  through 
different  channels.  Calhoun  clearly  expressed 
this  truth  when  he  said: 

There  is  no  difficulty  in  understanding  how 
powers  appertaining  to  sovereignty  may  be  divided 
and  the  exercise  of  one  portion  be  delegated  to  one 
set  of  agents  and  another  portion  to  another,  or 
how  sovereignty  may  be  vested  in  one  man,  in  a 
few,  or  in  many.  Hut  how  sovereignty  itself,  the 
supreme  power,  can  be  divided  ...  it  is 
impossible  to  conceive. 

In  federal  states,  therefore,  it  is  the  powers 
of  government  rather  than  sovereignty  that  are 
divided  and  distributed  between  two  different 
sets  of  organs;  the  supreme  will  itself  is  a 
unit  undivided  and  incapable  of  division. 

Essential  Attribute  of  the  State. — Some 
writers,  notably  Germans,  maintain  that  sov- 
ereignty is  not  a necessary  constituent  of  the 
state,  in  short,  that  there  may  be  non-sovereign 
as  well  as  sovereign  states.  According  to  these 
writers,  the  primary  test  of  state  life  is  not 
sovereignty,  not  the  power  of  self-determina- 
tion and  independence  of  action,  but  the  power 
to  command  and  compel  obedience.  According 
to  this  view,  the  component  members  of  federal 
unions  may  rightfully  be  treated  as  states  since 
they  possess  all  the  marks  of  state  organiza- 
tion except  sovereignty,  and  indeed,  it  is  main- 
tained, they  possess  this  characteristic  to  a 
partial  extent.  Once  fully  sovereign,  they 
joined  themselves  together  in  a federation  and 
delegated  certain  powers  of  government  to  a 
central  organization,  but  they  did  not  cease 


thereby  to  be  states.  But  if  the  possession  of 
mere  local  autonomy  in  respect  to  certain 
matters  be  a sufficient  test  of  the  state  char- 
acter, the  distinction  between  provinces,  mu- 
nicipalities and  other  local  bodies,  on  the  one 
hand,  and  states,  on  the  other,  disappears  or 
becomes  indistinct.  If  mere  power  to  lay 
down  commands  and  exact  obedience  thereto 
be  a sound  test  of  statehood,  it  is  difficult  to 
see  why  the  self-governing  colonies  of  England 
as  well  as  the  component  members  of  federal 
unions  do  not  equally  possess  the  characteris- 
tics of  states  (see  State,  Theory  of). 

Whether  sovereignty  is  an  essential  constitu- 
ent of  the  state  must  depend  largely  upon  our 
conception  of  the  nature  of  the  state  and 
of  sovereignty  itself.  If  we  accept  the  principle 
of  a divided  sovereignty  together  with  the  idea 
that  the  state  is  merely  a community  possess- 
ing wide  powers  of  local  autonomy,  the  exist- 
ence of  non-sovereign  states  logically  follows. 
But  if  we  adhere  to  the  definition  of  the  state 
laid  down  elsewhere  in  this  work  ( see  the 
State,  Theory  of),  and  maintain  the  unity 
of  sovereignty,  the  existence  of  a state  without 
sovereignty  is  inconceivable.  Such  a commun- 
ity is  in  reality  nothing  but  a dependency  or 
part  of  another  state. 

See  Political  Science;  Popular  Sovereign- 
ty; State  Sovereignty;  State,  Theory  of; 
United  States  as  a Federal  State;  and  un- 
der Political  Theories. 

References:  J.  Austin,  Lectures  on  Juris- 
prudence (1832),  Lecture  vi;  J.  W.  Burgess, 
Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law 
(1892),  I,  Bk.  II,  ch.  i;  J.  Bryce,  The  Nature 
of  Sovereignty , Studies  in  History  and  Juris- 
prudence (1901),  II;  J.  Dewey,  “Austin’s 
Theory  of  Sovereignty”  in  Polit.  Sci.  Quart., 
IX,  1894;  A.  V.  Dicey,  Law  of  the  Constitution 
(4th  ed.,  1910),  Lecture  ii;  T.  E.  Holland, 
Elements  of  Jurisprudence  (11th  ed.,  1910), 
49-54,  365-369;  C.  E.  Merriam,  Hist,  of  Sov- 
ereignty since  Rousseau  (1900)  ; G.  C.  Lewis, 
Use  and  Abuse  of  Political  Terms  (1898),  41- 
57 ; D.  G.  Ritchie,  “The  Conception  of  Sov- 
ereignty,” in  Acad,  of  Pol.  Sci.,  Annals,  1891, 
I,  385-411;  H.  Sidgwick,  Elements  of  Politics 
(1897),  ch.  xiii;  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Nature 
of  the  State  (1903),  chs.  ix,  xi. 

James  W.  Garner. 


SPAIN,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS  WITH 


From  1775  to  1808. — The  ruling  motive  of 
Spanish  diplomacy  in  regard  to  America  was 
fear  of  Anglo-Saxon  aggressiveness.  From  the 
reconstruction  of  1783  the  North  American 
frontiers  of  Spain  marched  with  those  of  the 
United  States  from  Canada  southward  and 
thence  eastward  to  the  Atlantic.  Spain  had  res- 
olutely withheld  from  alliance  with  the  United 


States  during  the  Revolution;  and  it  was  1795 
before  a treaty  was  made  which  allowed  the 
right  of  navigation  of  the  Mississippi  through- 
out its  length.  The  treaty  of  1795  was  far  from 
settling  all  outstanding  questions.  Spain  was 
now,  and  for  twenty  years  to  follow,  under  the 
heel  of  revolutionary  France.  She  was  forced 
to  lend  herself  to  the  French  despoilment  of 


366 


SPAIN,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS  WITH 


American  shipping,  and  thus  arose  large 
claims  for  compensation.  In  addition  Spanish 
vessels  in  the  West  Indies  operated  on  their 
own  account  in  a fashion  largely  piratical.  The 
general  revolt  of  the  South  American  prov- 
inces led  to  a long  period  of  privateering 
shared  in  by  vessels  illegally  fitted  out  in  the 
United  States  to  cruise  under  the  flags  of  the 
revolted  provinces;  and  the  transfer  of 
Louisiana  kept  the  diplomacy  of  the  two 
countries  at  fever  heat  for  years.  Notwith- 
standing some  knowledge  of  the  secret  trans- 
fer to  France  by  Spain  in  1800  Jefferson,  on 
May  11,  1802,  offered  to  guarantee  to  Spain 
her  possessions  beyond  the  Mississippi  if  she 
would  cede  the  island  of  New  Orleans;  the 
whole  of  Louisiana  became  ours.  An  unfound- 
ed claim  by  the  American  Government  to 
West  Florida  led  to  taking  actual  possession 
in  1811  to  1814,  a proceeding  practically  jus- 
tified, however,  by  the  anarchy  which  prevailed 
in  the  region. 

From  1808  to  1823. — Spain,  also,  was  anar- 
chic during  the  French  occupation  from  1808 
to  1814.  During  the  War  of  1812  a British 
force,  without  consent  from  the  Spanish  au- 
thorities, occupied  Pensacola.  Jackson  drove 
out  the  British  and  in  1814  temporarily  oc- 
cupied the  place.  Spanish  sovereignty  was 
again  ignored  in  1818  when  Jackson  pursued 
the  Indians  into  Florida,  seized  St.  Marks, 
Pensacola  and  Fort  Barrancas,  and  sent  the 
garrison  to  Cuba.  Spain  vainly  protested  but 
the  vigorous  attitude  of  the  Secretary  of  State 
brought  Spain  to  renew  previously  pending 
negotiations  for  the  Floridas,  resulting  in  the 
treaty  of  Feb.  22,  1819,  by  which  Spain  gave  up 
all  claim  to  both  East  and  West  Florida.  The 
United  States  accepted  the  Sabine  as  a western 
boundary,  thence  to  its  head,  thence  north  to 
the  Red  River,  along  the  latter  to  longitude 
100°,  north  to  the  Arkansas,  following  its 
south  bank  to  its  head,  thence  north  to  latitude 
42°  and  thence  west  to  the  Pacific.  After  a 
troublesome  delay  ratifications  were  exchanged 
February  22,  1821. 

Meanwhile  the  Spanish-American  empire  had 
been  crumbling  away.  The  home  country  was 
helpless.  An  attempt  in  1823  to  extend  the 
efforts  of  the  Holy  Alliance  to  the  resubjuga- 
tion of  Spanish-America  led  to  the  declara- 
tion of  the  Monroe  doctrine  (see). 

From  1823  to  1860. — Cuba  and  Porto  Rico 
only  remained  to  Spain  and  on  the  affairs  of 
the  former  hinged  most  of  the  succeeding  dif- 
ficulties of  Spain  with  the  United  States.  At 
that  time  there  existed  a morbid  fear  of  the 
transfer  of  Cuba  to  England  or  France,  which 
would  mean  a powerful  rival  on  the  flank  of  the 
United  States,  and  freedom  to  the  blacks,  a sit- 
uation on  which  the  condition  of  Hayti  threw 
a lurid  light  and  which  offered  dangerous  sug- 
gestions of  freedom  to  the  slaves  of  the  south- 
ern states.  Hence  assurance  was  given  Spain 
in  1840  and  several  times  later,  that  she  could 


“securely  depend  upon  the  United  States  to 
aid  in  preserving  or  recovering”  the  island. 

In  1848  the  American  government  changed 
its  policy  and  made  proposals  to  purchase 
Cuba.  Now  began  an  era  of  Cuban  insurgency 
and  filibustering  which  ended  only  with  the 
war  of  1898.  The  Mexican  War  gave  impetus 
to  the  idea  of  revolt  in  Cuba  which  was  foment- 
ed by  four  unsuccessful  attempts  by  Narciso 
Lopez.  The  first  was  in  1848,  the  second  in 
1849,  against  which  President  Taylor  prompt- 
ly issued  a warning  proclamation.  In  1850 
Lopez  made  a third  attempt,  aided  moral- 
ly by  southern  sentiment  and  materially  by 
prominent  men.  His  expedition  landed,  but 
no  signs  of  support  were  shown.  Returning 
to  the  United  States  Lopez  was  tried  for  vio- 
lation of  the  neutrality  laws,  but  escaped  pun- 
ishment. A Spanish  vessel  seized  two  of  his 
vessels  in  Yucatan— not  Spanish  territory — 
and  condemned  the  crews  and  vessels,  the  Unit- 
ed States  weakly  acquiescing.  Lopez’s  fourth 
expedition  in  1851  landed  with  480  men  mostly 
Americans.  The  whole  force  surrendered. 
Lopez  and  53  others  were  garroted  at  Havana. 
This  led  to  an  attack  at  New  Orleans  on  the 
Spanish  consulate  by  a mob. 

In  1851  the  American  Government  declined 
a remarkable  proposal  for  joint  action  by 
England  and  France  “to  prevent  by  force  any 
adventurers  of  any  nation  from  landing  with 
hostile  intent  upon  the  island  of  Cuba.”  A 
tripartite  agreement  was  then  proposed.  All 
three  to  disclaim  “now  and  hereafter  all  in- 
tention to  obtain  possession  of  the  island  of 
Cuba.”  This  was  answered  (1853)  in  an  ef- 
fective note  by  Secretary  of  State  Edward 
Everett. 

In  1854  the  seizure  of  the  mail  steamer 
Black  Warrior  on  an  unjust  charge  of  violat- 
ing the  customs  regulations,  nearly  brought 
war.  The  Spanish  authorities  settled  with  the 
owners  of  the  ship,  while  the  government  recla- 
mation was  still  pending. 

The  United  States  now  began  a systematic 
policy  of  Cuban  annexation;  failing  to  bring 
it  about  by  the  Black  Warrior  episode,  the 
Pierce  administration  directed  Buchanan,  Ma- 
son and  Soul£,  ministers  to  England,  France 
and  Spain,  to  meet  and  consult  regarding  Cu- 
ba. The  outcome  was  the  so-called  Ostend 
Manifesto  (see)  which  advocated  taking  Cuba 
by  force  if  Spain  would  not  sell.  The  docu- 
ment was  not  approved  by  the  administration, 
and  the  times  did  not  favor  either  purchase  or 
seizure. 

From  1861  to  1878. — During  the  American 
Civil  War  Spain  attempted  to  reconquer  Santo 
Domingo,  which  was  naturally  disapproved  by 
the  United  States.  Not  until  1868  when  Cuba 
revolted  against  Spain  was  the  Spanish-Amer- 
ican situation  again  acute.  The  diplomatic 
difficulties  were  accentuated  by  savage  edicts 
of  the  Cuban  Governor-General,  by  the  con- 
fiscation of  property  of  American  citizens — 


367 


SPAIN,  DIPLOMATIC  DELATIONS  WITH 


mostly  of  Cuban  birth — and  by  the  general 
ruthlessness  with  which  the  war  was  waged 
on  both  sides.  When  Grant  became  President 
in  1869  he  favored  intervention  and  was  with 
difficulty  dissuaded  by  Secretary  Fish  from  a 
proclamation  recognizing  belligerency.  Never- 
theless the  United  States  made  vigorous  rep- 
resentations to  the  Spanish  Government  and 
proffered  its  good  offices  toward  a peace  based 
on  the  independence  of  Cuba.  The  Spanish 
Government  of  the  moment  was  a regency  with 
General  Prim,  practically  dictator.  He  fav- 
ored the  sale  of  Cuba  to  the  United  States,  and 
his  temporary  absence  at  a critical  time  seems 
to  have  caused  the  break  down  of  the  scheme. 
In  1870  Amadeo  was  made  king;  Prim’s  as- 
sassination almost  at  once  followed;  there- 
after there  was  no  question  of  sale. 

Filibustering  from  the  United  States  was 
active  throughout  the  war;  the  most  notable 
case  being  that  of  the  Virginias  (see).  Her 
pursuit  and  capture  on  the  high  seas,  October 
31,  1873,  and  the  slaughter  of  her  captain  and 
53  of  her  crew  at  Santiago,  created  violent 
feeling.  The  American  fleet  was  concentrated 
at  Key  West  and  the  American  minister  had 
demanded  his  passports  when  Spain  yielded 
to  the  American  demands  and  restored  the 
ship. 

The  Cuban  war  with  every  mutual  brutality 
continued.  In  November,  1875,  Mr.  Fish  sent  to 
Caleb  Cushing,  then  minister  at  Madrid,  and 
confidentially  to  all  American  ministers  in  Eu- 
rope, a despatch  which  became  famous  as  “No. 
266,”  declaring  the  necessity  of  foreign  inter- 
ference in  Cuban  affairs,  if  war  was  to  be 
avoided  between  the  United  States  and  Spain. 
This  is  the  only  suggestion  by  the  United 
States  that  Cuba  was  an  international  ques- 
tion, and  that  its  status  should  be  determined 
by  international  agreement.  War  would  cer- 
tainly have  then  occurred  had  the  President 
not  held  the  situation  firmly  in  his  hands  in- 
stead of  leaving  it  to  Congress.  January  12, 
1877,  a protocol  was  signed  at  Madrid  making 
persons  charged  with  sedition,  conspiracy,  etc., 
in  Cuba  subject  only  to  courts  of  ordinary 
jurisdiction  unless  captured  with  arms  in 
hand,  an  agreement  which  became  of  momen- 
tous importance  in  the  insurrection  of  1895. 
In  1878  Martinez  Campos,  a wise  and  large- 
minded  officer,  effected  peace  in  Cuba  on  a 
basis  of  emancipation  of  the  slaves. 

From  1879  to  1897. — During  the  next  period 
the  relations  with  Spain  turned  chiefly  on 
Cuban  commerce,  which  was  subject  to  regula- 
tions intended  to  throw  the  trade  into  the 
hands  of  Spanish  merchants.  In  1891  a com- 
mercial treaty  was  negotiated.  Its  abroga- 
tion in  1894,  which  brought  deep  distress  to 
the  Cuban  sugar  industry,  was  the  real  be- 
ginning of  the  final  revolt.  Many  Cubans  were 
now  seeking  naturalization  in  the  United 
States  and  then  returning  to  Cuba  where  they 
claimed  special  privileges. 


The  revolt  of  1895,  prepared  and  aided  by 
a Cuban  Junta  in  the  United  States,  renewed 
the  difficult  situation  of  1868-1878  though  in 
acuter  form.  The  insurgents  ruthlessly  dev- 
astated every  plantation  which  kept  in  opera- 
tion, on  the  plea  of  making  the  island  value- 
less to  Spain.  The  displaced  laborers  largely 
joined  the  insurgents.  There  was  more  humane 
treatment  of  prisoners,  by  both  sides,  than  in 
the  first  war.  The  strenuous  efforts  of  the 
United  States  to  prevent  filibustering  were  aid- 
ed but  little  by  the  Spanish  fleet  in  Cuba. 
The  devastation,  though  chiefly  by  the  Cubans, 
and  the  misery  of  the  reconcentrados,  produced 
violent  feeling  in  the  United  States.  The 
Cleveland  administration,  while  showing  admi- 
rable restraint,  upheld  firmly  the  rights  of  our 
citizens  in  Cuba,  most  of  whom  were  of  Cuban 
birth.  The  good  offices  of  the  United  States 
were  offered  in  a note  of  Secretary  Olney’s 
on  April  4,  1896.  The  rejection  of  this  offer 
proved  the  knell  of  Spanish  authority  in  Cuba. 
The  petty  ease  of  the  filibustering  schooner 
Competitor  and  the  five  unimportant  persons 
seized  on  board,  aroused  Americans  and  did  no 
good  to  Spain. 

President  Cleveland’s  last  message  ( 1897 ) 
justly  claimed  that  there  had  been  a vigorous 
patrol  against  filibusters  and  suits  in  the 
courts  against  transgressors  of  the  neutrality 
laws ; and  that  he  had,  while  maintaining 
American  rights,  preserved  not  unkindly  rela- 
tions with  Spain.  The  message  closed  with  a 
deep  note  of  warning  to  Spain. 

War  with  Spain,  1898. — The  McKinley  ad- 
ministration came  into  power  in  March,  1897, 
upon  a declaration  in  the  platform  of  the 
party,  “that  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  should  actively  use  its  influence  and 
good  offices  to  restore  peace  and  give  independ- 
ence to  the  island.”  John  Sherman,  long  one 
of  the  most  violent  in  Congress  against  Spain, 
was  appointed  Secretary  of  State,  but  the  af- 
fairs of  the  department,  on  account  of  Sher- 
man’s long  continued  bad  health,  were  mainly 
in  the  hands  of  Assistant  Secretary  Day,  soon, 
himself,  to  become  Secretary  of  State.  General 
Woodford  was  sent  as  minister  to  Spain,  with 
the  understanding  that  he  was  to  do  his  ut- 
most toward  a peaceful  solution  of  difficulties. 
On  November  25,  1897,  decrees  were  signed 
extending  to  the  Antilles  all  the  rights  of 
Spaniards  and  offering  a large  scheme  of  au- 
tonomy. President  McKinley  made  a sincere 
effort  to  keep  the  peace  and  in  his  message 
promised,  so  far  as  the  United  States  was 
concerned,  that  autonomy  should  have  a fair 
trial. 

Events,  however,  worked  for  war.  The  in- 
tensity of  American  feeling  against  Spain,  ac- 
tively fomented  by  the  greater  part  of  the 
press,  aroused  the  Cubans  anew.  They  scouted 
the  proffered  autonomy,  as  did  also  the  Span- 
ish party  represented  by  the  volunteers.  A 
private  letter  of  Seflor  Depuy  de  Lome,  the 


368 


SPAN ISH- AMERICAN  WAR-SPEAKER  OF  THE  HOUSE 


Spanish  minister  at  Washington,  criticising 
the  President,  was  purloined  and  published  in 
an  inflammatory  translation  which  caused  De 
Lome’s  withdrawal.  February  15,  the  Maine, 
(see)  was  blown  up  in  the  harbor  of  Havana. 

General  Woodford  continued  his  efforts  for 
peace  and  secured  from  the  Spanish  Govern- 
ment, on  April  9,  1898,  what  that  Government 
considered  an  acceptance  of  American  de- 
mands. A suspension  of  hostilities  (not  ac- 
cepted by  the  Cubans)  was  declared  in  Cuba, 
and  Woodford  was  now  certain  of  peace.  Two 
days  later  McKinley  sent  a militant  message 
to  Congress  which  in  effect  was  a declaration 
of  war,  made  certain  by  handing  the  sub- 
ject of  Spanish  relations  over  to  Congress. 
Only  at  the  end  did  the  President  mention  the 
yielding  of  Spain  to  all  the  demands  officially 
placed  before  her;  though  the  fact  of  Spain’s 
yielding  gives  good  ground  for  criticism  of  the 
President’s  course,  sober  judgment  will  prob- 
ably approve  his  action  as  best  in  its  results 
for  all  concerned.  It  perhaps  but  anticipated 
a necessity  which  would  probably  have  come 
after  an  harrassing  continuance  of  the  diffi- 
culties which  existed. 

A joint  resolution,  April  19,  1898,  declared 
that  the  people  of  Cuba  are,  and  of  right 
ought  to  be,  free  and  independent,  and  that 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  demand 
that  the  Government  of  Spain  relinquish  its 
authority  in  the  island.  To  this  end  the  Pres- 
ident was  “directed  and  empowered  to  use  the 
entire  land  and  naval  forces  of  the  United 
States.  . . A few  days  later  war  was  de- 

clared to  exist  from  and  including  April  21. 

After  113  days  of  hostilities  a peace  protocol 
was  signed  at  Washington  (August  12,  1898). 
As  soon  as  arrangements  could  be  made  the 
peace  commission  met  at  Paris.  The  result 
was  the  signing  of  a treaty  on  December  10, 
1898,  by  which  Spain  relinquished  sovereignty 
over  Cuba,  yielded  Porto  Rico  and  other  is- 
lands in  the  West  Indies,  and  Guam  as  by 
conquest,  and  ceded  the  Philippines,  the  United 
States  paying  $20,000,000  which  may  be  re- 
garded as  an  indemnity  for  what  was  really 
a forced  purchase,  the  United  States  having 
no  claim  upon  the  Philippines  by  conquest,  as 
the  successful  attack  upon  Manila  came  a few 
hours  subsequent  to  the  signing  of  the  peace 
protocol. 

See  Annexations  to  the  United  States; 
Commercial  Policy  and  Relations  of  the 
United  States;  Cuba  and  Cuban  Diplomacy; 
Filibusters  to  Aid  Insurrections;  Florida 
Annexation;  L’Amistad  Case;  Latin  Amer- 
ica; Louisiana  Annexation;  Mexico;  Mi- 
randa Project;  Monroe  Doctrine;  Treaties 
of  the  United  States;  West  Florida;  WesI: 
Indies,  Diplomatic  Relations  with. 

F.  E.  Chadwick. 

SPANISH-AMERICAN  WAR.  See  Wars 
of  the  United  States. 


SPEAKER  IN  STATE  LEGISLATURES. 

In  every  one  of  the  states,  the  lower  branch 
of  the  legislature  elects  its  own  presiding  of- 
ficer. His  title,  in  each  case,  is  the  “speaker.” 
For  the  most  part,  his  functions  relate  exclu- 
sively to  the  house  over  which  he  presides. 
New  York  makes  the  speaker  ex  officio  one 
of  the  commissioners  of  the  land  office.  Eleven 
of  the  states  stipulate  that  the  speaker  shall 
stand  next  to  the  president  of  the  senate  in 
the  line  of  succession,  if  the  governor’s  chair 
falls  vacant. 

Because  of  the  relatively  large  size  of  the 
lower  branch  of  the  legislature  and  because  it 
elects  its  own  presiding  officer,  the  speaker- 
ship  in  the  state  house  of  representatives  has 
developed  along  similar  lines  to  those  of  the 
speakership  in  Congress.  The  speaker  appoints 
the  house  committees,  determines  in  his  discre- 
tionary interpretation  of  parliamentary  law 
who  may  and  who  may  not  address  the  house, 
and  decides  points  of  order.  In  all  these  func- 
tions he  acts  as  a party  leader. 

In  several  state  legislatures,  notably  in  New 
York,  through  the  committee  on  rules  strong 
speakers  have  followed  their  congressional 
model  closely  in  effecting  a centralization  of 
legislative  power.  In  boss-ruled  states,  speak- 
ers have  at  times  worked  in  systematic  alliance 
with  corrupt  or  narrowly  factional  interests. 
The  Pennsylvania  and  Illinois  legislatures  have 
afforded  notable  instances  of  measures  “gaveled 
through”  by  speakers  with  a cynical  dis- 
regard not  only  of  the  opposition  but  also  of 
the  minority  within  their  own  party,  such  as 
has  never  been  shown  in  Congress.  The  speak- 
ership is  often  a stepping-stone  to  higher  of- 
fice. As  presiding  officer  and  party  leader  in 
a house  of  from  100  to  400  members,  seventy 
to  ninety  per  cent  of  whom  have  had  no  legis- 
lative experience,  a man  of  skill  and  tact  can 
build  up  a formidable  personal  following. 

See  Closure;  Filibustering  in  Legisla- 
tion ; Rules  of  Legislative  Bodies  ; Rules  of 
State  Legislatures;  State  Assembly. 

References:  P.  S.  Reinsch,  Am.  Legislatures 
(1907),  162-165,  261-263;  S.  P.  Orth,  “Our 
State  Legislatures”  in  Atlantic  Monthly,  XCIV 
(1904),  728-739.  G.  H.  Haynes. 

SPEAKER  OF  THE  HOUSE.  Colonial  Back- 
ground.— Next  to  the  President  the  Speaker 
has  for  about  a century  been  the  most  power- 
ful man  in  the  government  of  the  United 
States,  and  frequently  the  most  conspicuous. 
When  after  the  Civil  War,  there  sprang  up  a 
literature  of  criticism  on  American  institu- 
tions, one  of  the  most  frequent  was  that  the 
Speaker  was  not  an  impartial  moderator,  as 
is  the  case  in  Great  Britain.  This  was  sup- 
posed to  show  a decline  in  government;  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  the  political  status  of  the 
Speaker  is  a direct  reflection  of  the  experience 
of  the  American  colonies  and  states.  The  colo- 
nial speakers  were  commonly  heads  of  the 


369 


SPEAKER  OF  THE  HOUSE 


opposition  to  the  governor,  because  since  the 
governor  was  out  of  the  direct  control  of  the 
assembly  it  was  necessary  to  have  some  central 
point  for  the  crystallization  of  public  senti- 
ment. 

The  Speaker  of  the  national  House  was  left 
free  to  develop  this  tradition;  the  Constitu- 
tion takes  him  for  granted  in  its  clauses,  set- 
ting forth  simply  ‘‘that  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives shall  chose  their  Speaker  and  other 
officers”  (Art.  I,  Sec.  ii,  If  15).  The  Speaker 
is  hardly  known  to  the  statute  law  except  in 
a few  acts  creating  commissions  and  other 
bodies  of  which  he  shall  be  a member.  The  au- 
thority and  power  of  the  Speaker  therefore  de- 
pend entirely  upon  tradition,  in  part  system- 
atized in  formal  rules. 

Notable  Speakers. — Historically  the  great 
power  of  the  Speaker  begins  in  a vote  of  Jan- 
uary 13,  1790,  that  “all  committees  shall  be 
appointed  by  the  Speaker,  unless  otherwise 
directed  by  the  House”  which  remained  the 
almost  unvarying  practice  of  the  House  till 
1910.  The  first  distinct  party  Speaker  was 
Theodore  Sedgwick,  chosen  by  the  Federalists 
in  1795.  The  first  Speaker  who  was  legislative 
head  of  the  House  was  Nathaniel  Macon  from 
1801  to  1807.  The  first  Speaker  to  comprehend 
the  power  that  he  could  exercise  over  debates 
by  his  application  of  the  rules  was  Henry  Clay, 
first  elected  in  1811.  The  first  Speaker  to  put 
himself  at  the  head  of  an  opposition  to  a 
President  was  Clay,  in  his  advocacy  of  a more 
stirring  Latin-American  policy  during  Mon- 
roe’s presidency.  The  first  Speaker  to  under- 
take the  control  of  legislation,  through  ap- 
pointments to  the  standing  committees,  was 
Henry  Clay. 

Among  the  great  names  in  the  speakership 
since  Clay’s  last  service  in  1825,  have  been 
Andrew  Stevenson  of  Virginia;  James  K.  Polk, 
later  President;  Robert  C.  Winthrop  in  whose 
term  is  the  first  conclusive  evidence  of  a sys- 
tem of  controlling  the  floor  by  declining  to 
recognize  people  who  were  not  on  his  list;  Na- 
thaniel P.  Banks,  the  first  Republican  Speaker ; 
Schuyler  Colfax,  later  Vice-President;  James 
G.  Blaine,  six  years  Speaker,  and  later  can- 
didate for  the  presidency,  who  much  resembled 
Henry  Clay  in  his  methods;  John  G.  Carlisle 
of  Kentucky;  Thomas  B.  Reed  of  Maine  the 
so-called  “Czar  of  the  House” ; and  Joseph  G. 
Cannon  of  Illinois.  It  is  not  a mere  accident 
that  only  one  of  these  Speakers  eventually 
came  to  the  presidency;  the  Speaker  is  likely  to 
arouse  strong  antagonism  within  his  own  party 
and  thereby  weakens  his  popularity.  Mr. 
Blaine  was  defeated  for  the  presidency  in  1884 
by  the  citation  of  some  of  his  own  decisions. 

Reasons  for  Power. — For  the  importance  of 
the  Speaker  there  are  various  reasons  arising 
out  of  the  nature  of  the  Federal  Government. 
The  House  is  a large  body,  has  grown  from 
65  members  in  1789  to  434  in  1913,  and  is 
engulfed  in  a mass  of  unassorted  bills  and 


propositions.  It  is  impossible  to  carry  on  its 
business  without  the  sharp  and  steady  guid- 
ance of  a man  of  power.  In  order  to  get  any- 
where, the  members  must  concede  to  the  Speak- 
er the  right  to  make  decisions  which  distribute 
the  time  of  the  House,  affect  its  opportunity 
to  consider  and  amend  measures,  and  even 
to  select  the  measures  upon  which  they  are 
to  vote.  The  fairest  minded  Speaker  is 
obliged  to  be  quick  and  arbitrary  if  the  busi- 
ness of  the  House  is  to  go  forward. 

Another  reason  for  a powerful  Speaker  is 
the  lack  of  concentration  of  executive  and  leg- 
islative power.  The  English  have  surmounted 
that  difficulty  by  a parliamentary  system  in 
which  the  ministry  headed  by  the  prime  min- 
ister is  responsible  for  drafting,  introducing 
and  pressing  to  a vote  all  the  public  measures. 
The  prime  minister  appeals  to  the  electorate 
for  support  because  he  has  urged  or  will  urge 
a particular  kind  of  measure.  In  the  Congres- 
sional system  that  responsibility  must  be  taken 
by  a comparatively  small  body  of  legislators 
of  whom  the  Speaker  is  the  obvious  leader,  or 
it  will  be  taken  out  of  the  hands  of  the  elected 
representatives  by  the  executive  head  of  the 
Government. 

A third  reason  for  the  growth  of  the  Speak- 
er’s power  is  because  it  is  a convenient  means 
of  relating  Congress  to  the  party  system.  The 
Speaker  is  presumably  and  usually  one  of  the 
most  vigorous  members  of  the  majority  party, 
experienced  not  only  in  debate  and  in  parlia- 
mentary usage,  but  in  fighting  the  party’s  bat- 
tles before  the  voters.  He  has  at  heart  not 
only  the  doing  of  business,  but  the  restraint 
of  business,  if  what  is  proposed  is  harmful  to 
his  party.  The  Speaker,  therefore,  performs 
a function  much  needed  in  the  United  States, 
namely,  the  control  of  legislation  through  an 
official  who  holds  a great  office;  and  at  the  same 
time  takes  responsibility  for  party  views  and 
party  votes. 

The  Speaker  has  become  specially  necessary 
because  of  the  clumsy  financial  system  of  Con- 
gress: tax  bills  may  be  reported  by  several 
different  committees;  appropriation  bills  are 
invariably  reported  by  half  a dozen  different 
committees  who  act  without  concert,  and  with 
very  little  regard  to  the  probable  state  of  the 
treasury.  The  Speaker  has,  therefore  assumed 
a considerable  budgetary  responsibility  by  con- 
stituting committees  with  a view  to  their  favor- 
ing or  disfavoring  expenditures,  and  by  refus- 
ing to  allow  finance  bills  to  come  to  a vote 
unless  they  are  framed  to  suit  him. 

Election  and  Duties. — The  Speaker  is  chosen 
at  the  beginning  of  each  Congress  by  majority 
vote  and  serves  for  about  sixteen  months  un- 
less Congress  is  called  for  an  extra  session 
during  the  summer  or  fall  after  the  expiration 
of  its  predecessor.  If  the  party  remains  in 
power,  the  Speaker  expects  to  be  continued  in 
that  office  for  several  terms.  Fie  has  a salary 
of  $12,000  a year  and  some  privileges  such 


370 


SPECIAL  AGENTS,  DIVISION  OF— SPECIE  PAYMENTS 


as  the  enjoyment  of  a government  automobile. 
He  actually  presides  much  of  the  time,  though 
he  may  and  frequently  does  designate  a chair- 
man of  the  committee  of  the  whole  (see).  He 
has  the  affirmative  privileges  of  other  members, 
especially  the  right  to  introduce  measures,  take 
part  in  debate,  and  to  vote.  If  a tie  exist 
without  his  vote,  he  may  break  it.  The  great 
power  of  the  Speaker  is  exercised  chiefly 
through  the  following  prerogatives,  some  of 
which  are  not  expressed  even  in  the  rules,  but 
are  matters  of  custom: 

(1)  As  presiding  officer  he  enforces  the 
rules  of  order,  deciding  not  only  what  ques- 
tion is  before  the  House  (subject  to  re- 
versal by  a majority  vote)  but  what  per- 
son has  the  floor,  from  which  there  is  no 
appeal.  Hence,  he  may,  and  frequently 
does,  refuse  to  recognize  a member  because 
he  knows  that  he  wishes  to  propose  or  urge 
something  to  which  the  Speaker  is  opposed, 
or. simply  because  he  does  not  like  him.  (2) 
The  Speaker  has  had,  since  the  revised  rules 
of  1890  drawn  up  by  Speaker  Thomas  B.  Reed, 
the  right  to  refuse  to  entertain  dilatory  mo- 
tions, and  the  right  to  count  a quorum  by 
including  persons  present  but  not  voting.  This 
gives  the  Speaker  power  to  break  through  fil- 
ibustering tactics.  (3)  By  his  appointment 
of  committees  the  Speaker  conferred  highly 
prized  privileges,  and  at  the  same  time  kept 
his  hand  upon  legislation ; for  practically  no 
measure  is  considered  by  Congress  unless  con- 
sidered by  a standing  committee.  This  gives 
the  Speaker  something  like  the  British  pre- 
mier’s power  to  construct  legislation.  (4) 
Through  his  power  to  construe  and  apply  the 
rules,  and  to  control  the  floor,  the  Speaker  has 
practically  a veto  power  on  all  measures  that 
come  before  the  House,  and  exercises  it  as  a 
party  potentate,  presumably  in  conference 
with  brother  party  leaders  in  the  Senate,  and 
with  the  President,  if  of  the  same  party. 

Effect  of  Insurgency. — The  traditional  and 
continued  concentration  of  power  in  the  hands 
of  the  Speaker  tends  to  efficiency,  but  it  also 
tends  toward  a rigid  party  discipline.  Mem- 
bers who  oppose  the  Speaker  have  felt  that 
they  were  marked  for  poor  committee  places, 
and  harsh  treatment  of  their  bills.  In  March 
1910,  about  40  Republican  “insurgents”  joined 
with  most  of  the  Democrats  to  reverse  a formal 
decision  made  by  Speaker  Cannon.  After  a 
four  days’  contest  the  organization  of  the 
House  was  so  altered  that  the  Speaker  was 
left  off  the  committee  on  rules.  Inasmuch  as 
the  Democrats  had  voted  for  this  measure, 
when  they  organized  the  House  in  1911  and 
Champ  Clark  was  elected  Speaker,  the  appoint- 
ment of  committees  was  made  (as  in  the  Sen- 
ate) nominally  by  ballot  and  the  Speaker  was 
thus  shorn  of  two  of  his  most  important  pow- 
ers. It  remains  to  be  seen  whether  or  no  the 
House  will  drift  back  to  the  old  conditions 
which  ensure  vigor  and  despatch  of  business, 


though  at  the  cost  of  the  initiative  of  the 
individual  members. 

See  Closure;  Committee  System  in  the 
United  States;  Congress;  Congressional 
Government;  House  of  Representatives; 
Legislature  and  Legislative  Reform;  Pre- 
vious Question;  Recognition;  Reports  of 
Committees;  Representatives  in  Congress; 
Rules  of  Congress;  Rules  of  Legislative 
Bodies  ; and  speakers  by  name. 

References:  M.  P.  Follett,  Speaker  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  (1896)  ; A.  B.  Hart, 
"Speaker  as  Premier”  in  Practical  Essays  on 
Am.  Government  (1894)  ; H.  B.  Fuller,  Speak- 
ers of  the  House  (1909)  ; J.  G.  Blaine,  Twenty 
Years  of  Congress  (1884-1886)  ; S.  S.  Cox, 
Three  Decades  of  Federal  Legislation  (1885)  ; 
T.  B.  Reed,  “How  the  House  Does  Business”  in 
No.  Am.  Rev.,  CLXIV  (1897),  641,  612; 
lives  of  the  Speakers,  esp.  Macon,  Clay,  Polk, 
Winthrop,  Banks,  Colfax,  Blaine,  Carlisle, 
Reed,  Cannon;  Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  48,  138, 
165,  1911,  177,  241;  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Com- 
monwealth (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  51,  133,  140,  402; 
S.  W.  McCall,  The  Business  of  Congress 
(1911)  ; A.  C.  Hinds,  Precedents  of  the  House 
of  Representatives  (1907),  House  Manual 
(1909).  Albert  Busiinell  Hart. 

SPECIAL  AGENTS,  DIVISION  OF.  Special 
agents  are  employed  by  the  Treasury  Depart- 
ment (see)  to  check  the  work  of  the  collectors 
of  customs  and  to  perform  special  services  with 
respect  to  customs  questions  which  may  arise 
in  their  several  districts.  Special  agents  have 
been  particularly  active  in  the  detecting  of 
fraudulent  practices  in  the  customs  houses  in 
connection  with  the  appraisal  (see)  of  imports 
and  assessment  of  duties.  Reference:  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  Annual  Report. 

A.  N.  H. 

SPECIAL  SESSION.  See  Extra  Session; 
Session  of  Legislative  Bodies. 

SPECIE  PAYMENTS.  During  the  Revolu- 
tion the  redemption  of  the  federal  paper  money 
and  of  nearly  all  the  state  bills  of  credit  was 
suspended,  and  never  resumed.  From  1791, 
the  foundation  of  the  First  United  States 
Bank,  to  1814,  the  sound  banks  always  re- 
deemed their  notes  in  specie;  but  in  that  year 
every  bank  in  the  country  declined  to  redeem 
its  notes  and  it  was  not  until  1817  that  they 
came  back  to  solid  ground.  In  1837  there  was 
again  a general  suspension  of  specie  payments 
till  1838,  as  there  was  also  in  the  panic  of 
1857. 

During  the  War  of  1812  and  for  several 
years  afterward,  the  Federal  Government  issued 
treasury  notes  (see)  not  legal  tender,  which 
it  could  not  immediately  redeem.  When  the 
Civil  War  broke  out  the  sound  banks  still 
continued  to  redeem  their  notes  until  Decem- 
ber, 1861,  when  a general  suspension  gave  aid 


371 


SPECIE  PAYMENTS,  SUSPENSION  OF— SPOILS  SYSTEM 


to  the  movement  for  a federal  legal  tender 
currency.  Accordingly,  early  in  1862,  United 
States  notes  were  issued  which  were  never 
redeemed  in  specie  until  January  1,  1879:  a 
stock  of  gold  having  been  accumulated  under 
an  act  of  Congress,  the  Government  was  once 
more  in  position  to  keep  its  promises. 

The  national  bank  notes  from  their  begin- 
ning in  1862  were  exactly  on  a par  with  the 
greenbacks,  and  therefore  came  back  to  a gold 
basis,  January  1,  1879.  Since  that  time  there 
has  been  no  formal  suspension  of  specie  pay- 
ments; although  in  the  panics  of  1873,  1893 
and  1907  the  banks  paid  out  as  little  specie 
as  they  could,  and  in  some  cases,  declined  to 
allow  deposits  to  be  withdrawn  in  specie.  Ac- 
tual suspension  was  prevented  on  the  last  two 
occasions  by  a combination  of  strong  banks  in 
New  YTork,  which  advanced  clearing  house  cer- 
tificates (see)  upon  the  securities  in  the  vaults 
of  some  of  the  weaker  hanks.  Specie  pay- 
ment has  therefore,  been  substantially  main- 
tained ever  since  1879. 

See  Banking  Methods  ; Coinage  and  Specie 
Currency  in  the  United  States;  Gold  Cer- 
tificates; Legal  Tender  Controversy;  Pa- 
per Money  in  the  United  States. 

References:  D.  R.  Dewey,  Financial  Hist,  of 
the  V.  8.  (1903);  J.  J.  Knox,  U.  S.  Notes 
(1884);  E.  E.  Sparks,  National  Development 
(1907),  eh.  ix.  Albert  Bushnell  PIart. 

SPECIE  PAYMENTS,  SUSPENSION  OF. 

This  term  refers  to  a refusal  on  the  part 
of  the  government  or  banks  to  redeem  notes 
in  specie  according  to  the  pledge  made  at 
the  time  of  issue.  Banks  have  suspended  specie 
payments  at  various  periods,  as  in  1814,  1837 
and  1861.  The  Federal  Government  suspended 
between  1862  and  1879.  See  Legal  Tender 
Controversy  ; Resumption  of  Specie  Pay- 
ments; Specie  Payments.  D.  R.  D. 

SPEECH,  FREEDOM  OF.  See  Freedom  of 

Speech  and  the  Press. 

SPELLBINDERS.  A nickname  applied  to 
campaign  “stump”  speakers  who  are  said  to 
hold  their  hearers  spellbound.  Said  to  have 
first  been  applied  by  William  C.  Goodloe,  mem- 
ber of  the  Republican  national  committee  from 
Kentucky  in  1888.  O.  C.  H. 

SPENCER,  HERBERT.  See  Political 

Theories  of  English  Publicists;  Sociology. 

SPHERES  OF  GOVERNMENT.  This  is  a 

conventional  expression  often  used  to  describe 
the  fact  or  the  idea  that  a government  occupies 
a certain  field  or  a certain  portion  of  the 
total  amount  of  political  authority.  The  term 
is  especially  used  in  a system  such  as  exists 
in  the  United  States.  We  speak  of  the  sphere 
of  the  United  States  Government  and  that  of 
the  states.  Though  there  are  exceptions  to 

37 


the  general  principle,  the  rule  is  that  each 
government  has  the  right  to  exercise  its  author- 
ity within  its  own  sphere  undisturbed  by  the 
activities  of  the  other.  The  whole  field  of 
power  or  authority  is  divided  under  our  sys- 
tem as  follows : ( 1 ) powers  delegated  to  the 
Federal  Government  for  exclusive  exercise;  (2) 
powers  reserved  exclusively  to  the  states;  (3) 
powers  which  may  be  exercised  by  the  states, 
until  the  Federal  Government  acts;  (4)  pow- 
ers prohibited  to  the  Federal  Government;  (3) 
powers  prohibited  to  the  states  ( see  Const.  Art. 
I,  Secs,  viii,  ix,  x).  See  Concurrent  Powers; 
United  States  as  a Federal  State.  Refer- 
ences: C.  G.  Tiedeman,  The  Unwritten  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  (1890),  138; 
H.  von  Holst,  The  Constitutional  Law  of  the 
United  States  of  America  (1887),  56-458;  W. 
W.  Willoughby,  Am.  Constitutional  System 
(1904),  ch.  vii.  A.  C.  McL. 

SPHERES  OF  INFLUENCE.  See  Depen- 
dent States;  Most  Favored  Nation  Clause; 
Open  Door;  Protectorates,  International. 

SPLIT  TICKET.  See  Cut  Ticket. 

SPOILS  SYSTEM.  Differing  Views.— The 

name  “spoils  system”  has  been  applied  to  the 
practice  of  filling  appointive  offices  with  party 
workers  and  favorites.  This  custom  is  based 
on  the  American  theory  that  all  government 
business  can  be  done  by  citizens  of  average 
ability  and  that  rotation  in  office  is  a demo- 
cratic recognition  of  the  rights  of  citizens.  The 
idea  was  even  advanced  in  the  early  days  of 
the  system  that  talent  is  called  out  by  the 
prospect  of  employment  but  is  “smothered  by 
the  monopoly  of  experience.”  Democratic  the- 
ory implied  that  the  party  that  carried  the 
election,  since  it  was  held  responsible  for  legis- 
lative and  administrative  policies,  should  fill 
all  of  the  offices  of  government,  those  least 
connected  with  politics  as  well  as  those  most 
important.  But  the  opposite  view,  that  the 
non-partisan  functions  of  government  should 
be  carried  on  through  non-partisan  agents  and 
that  the  use  of  office  as  a reward  for  party 
service  is  a vicious  perversion  of  power,  was 
early  expressed. 

Origin. — Under  Washington’s  administra- 
tion a debate  in  Congress  arose  over  the  power 
of  the  President  to  remove  officers  of  the  civil 
sei-vice.  In  the  discussion  the  idea  was  ex- 
pressed that  a President  might  be  elected  who 
would  use  these  positions  to  reward  political 
and  personal  friends.  In  reply  to  this,  Madi- 
son said  that  a President  who  would  do  so 
would  himself  be  subject  to  impeachment  and 
removal  from  office.  But  soon,  as  opposing 
parties  developed,  tendencies  to  resort  to  par- 
tisan methods  in  the  distribution  of  office  ap- 
peared. Aaron  Burr  compared  a political  par- 
ty to  an  army.  In  the  party  as  in  the  army 
the  few  leaders  do  the  thinking  and  give 
2 


SPOILS  SYSTEM 


commands  which  the  maLses  should  be  taught 
to  obey.  Burr  acted  on  this  principle  in  New 
York  politics.  He  built  up  the  first  political 
“machine,”  using  the  ignorant  or  criminal 
masses  in  the  city  to  organize  and  control  the 
party.  The  professional  politician  developed 
because  the  spoils  system  gave  him  a living. 
Officers  in  the  federal  service  were  lined  up  to 
support  the  party  in  state  and  local  elections. 
Similar  tendencies  appeared  in  other  states. 
The  Presidents  usually  appointed  men  of  their 
own  party,  although  at  first  they  did  not  feel 
warranted  in  removing  incumbents  from  office 
in  order  to  reward  party  supporters.  This 
practically  gave  a life  tenure  in  the  public 
service. 

In  1820  Congress,  by  passing  a law  limiting 
the  tenure  of  office  to  four  years,  took  a decided 
step  in  the  direction  of  partisan  use  of  the 
public  service.  When  Andrew  Jackson  became 
President  in  1829  all  restraints  were  set  aside; 
political  opponents  were  dismissed  from  the 
federal  service  and  supporters  of  Jackson  were 
appointed  in  their  place..  Jackson  did  the 
very  thing  which  Madison,  thirty-five  years 
earlier,  had  said  would  subject  a President 
to  impeachment  and  removal  from  office. 

The  name  “spoils  system,”  first  applied  to 
Jackson’s  policy,  was  derived  from  a speech 
delivered  in  the  Senate  in  January,  1832.  Sen- 
ator Marcy  of  New  YTork,  referring  to  the  party 
conflicts  of  the  day,  declared  that  those  who 
contend  for  the  victory  avow  the  intention  of 
enjoying  the  fruits  of  it.  “They  see  nothing 
wrong  in  the  rule  that  to  the  victors  belong 
the  spoils  of  the  enemy.” 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  although  the 
principles  of  the  spoils  system  are  despotic 
and  opposed  to  liberty,  the  system  came  into 
American  politics  in  the  name  of  democracy 
and  on  the  crest  of  a movement  for  popular 
control  of  government.  The  franchise  was  be- 
ing rapidly  extended;  offices  formerly  filled  by 
appointment  were  made  elective;  terms  of  of- 
fice were  shortened;  rotation  in  office  became 
the  rule.  Every  citizen  felt  that  he  might 
be  called  to  fill  any  position.  The  common 
people  were  coming  to  their  own.  The  new 
appeal  added  interest  and  zest  to  party  con- 
tests. It  tended  to  build  up  and  strengthen 
the  convention  system  of  party  organization 
which  was  at  this  time  just  coming  into  ex- 
istence. The  patronage  of  the  government  was 
not  yet  extensive,  so  that,  except  in  a few 
large  cities,  the  corrupting  influences  of  spoils 
of  office  did  not  come  much  into  evidence  until 
after  the  Civil  War.  In  the  rural  districts 
and  smaller  towns  and  cities  nearly  all  offices 
were  filled  by  election.  If  party  organs  were 
used  to  fill  nine-tenths  of  the  offices,  why 
should  not  the  same  agency  be  used  to  select 
the  one-tenth?  If  the  party  elects  the  mayor, 
why  may  not  the  party  choose  the  postmaster  ? 
Senator  Marcy  stated  the  exact  truth  when 
he  declared  that  the  people  saw  no  reason 


why  a party  victory  should  not  be  followed 
by  partisan  office-holding.  The  people  drew  no 
subtle  distinctions  between  elective  and  ap- 
pointive offices.  It  argues  neither  corruption 
nor  a lack  of  intelligence  that  the  masses  of 
the  rural  population  accepted  the  spoils  sys- 
tem as  an  integral  part  of  the  new  democracy. 
Although  statesmen  and  reformers  pointed  to 
the  evils  inherent  in  the  system  and  although 
actual  abuses  were  already  manifest  in  the 
large  cities,  the  policy  was  adopted  by  all 
parties,  and  no  organized,  persistent  protest 
against  the  practice  arose  till  after  the  Civil 
War. 

Effects  of  Civil  War. — The  entire  party  sys- 
tem was  greatly  changed  as  a result  of  those 
four  year  of  conflict.  In  Lincoln’s  adminis- 
tration men  of  all  parties  were  appointed  to 
office.  Democrats  entered  the  Cabinet.  Par- 
ties were  broken  up  and  government  assumed  a 
military  form.  But  the  spirit  of  party  soon 
revived.  Patronage,  during  and  after  this 
period,  was  immensely  increased.  Throughout 
the  war  the  greater  part  of  the  voters  were  in 
either  military  or  civil  service.  Union  soldiers 
were  led  to  the  polls  and  voted  in  order  to 
give  support  to  the  administration.  The  habit 
of  identifying  office  with  voting  became  fixed 
in  the  popular  mind.  Political  patronage  was 
not  confined  to  persons  appointed  to  office,  it 
extended  to  multitudes  of  employees,  to  labor- 
ers and  contractors,  and  to  manufacturers  and 
merchants  furnishing  supplies  to  the  Govern- 
ment. i 

Theory.— The  spoils  system  tends  to  break 
down  all  distinctions  between  elective  and  ap- 
pointive office.  All  office-holders  of  every  sort 
are  made  to  feel  dependence  on  the  party. 
Most  officeholders  and  aspirants  for  office  are 
led  to  receive  their  opinions  along  with  their 
party  favors  from  the  few  party  leaders  who 
do  the  thinking.  Honest  citizens  who  could 
not  be  bribed  by  the  offer  of  money  are  never- 
theless lined  up  in  support  of  a corrupt  party 
machine  by  the  subtle  bribery  of  honor  and 
place.  Once  established  the  spoils  system  is 
strengthened  by  the  fact  that  some  of  the 
offices  filled  by  appointment  are  political  in 
their  nature,  since  they  have  to  do  with  the 
determination  of  policies  or  the  fulfillment  of 
party  pledges.  All  agree  that  these  should  be 
filled  by  the  party  that  carries  the  election. 
The  President  fills  his  Cabinet  with  party 
supporters.  Any  office  that  carries  with  it 
executive  responsibilities  with  a choice  of  com- 
peting policies  may  rightly  be  filled  by  the 
party  entrusted  with  the  Government.  It  is 
often  difficult  to  draw  the  line  between  politi- 
cal and  non-political  appointive  offices.  This 
is  favorable  to  the  spoilsman  who  would  break 
down  all  distinctions  in  office  and  use  them 
all  as  rewards  for  political  service.  Of  course, 
as  intimated  above,  the  effect  of  the  spoils 
system  is  the  bestowal  of  office,  not  because 
of  fitness  for  the  position,  but  in  compensa- 


373 


SQUATTER  SOVEREIGNTY— STAATENBUND 


tion  for  party  service.  Its  effect  is  to  make 
every  party  controversy  and  every  campaign 
a struggle  for  booty. 

Besides  the  general  military  training  and 
the  great  extension  of  patronage  due  in  part 
to  the  war,  other  causes  contributed  to  the 
production  of  radical  changes  in  the  party 
system.  The  result  was  a rapid  extension  over 
the  entire  country  of  the  abuses  which  had 
always  been  associated  with  the  spoils  system 
in  the  great  cities.  Everywhere  political  pow- 
er tended  to  pass  from  the  people  to  the  few 
political  leaders  who  controlled  the  machine. 
This  gave  rise  to  a persistent  and  well-organ- 
ized movement  to  substitute  the  merit  system 
for  the  spoils  system  in  the  public  service. 
The  conflict  between  the  two  systems  continues 
to  the  present  day.  The  merit  system  (see)  is 
fully  presented  in  other  articles  (see  Appoint- 
ments to  Office;  Civil  Service).  It  remains 
here  to  give  brief  explanation  of  the  spoils- 
man’s side  of  the  case. 

Defense. — The  advocates  of  partisan  appoint- 
ments in  the  civil  service  derive  great  advan- 
tage from  the  fact  that  the  system  was  in  use 
for  thirty  years  before  1860  without  great 
public  scandal.  A generation  of  politicians 
and  voters  had  grown  up  who  knew  no  other 
system.  Many  of  them  regarded  it  as  an  in- 
tegral and  necessary  part  of  the  party  system. 
To  attack  partisan  control  of  appointive  offices 
seemed  to  them  to  attack  party  government 
itself.  Besides,  they  argue,  since  party  men 
nominated  and  elected  to  party  office  are 
obliged  to  make  the  appointments,  how  can 
they  do  otherwise  than  appoint  the  men  whom 
they  know  best,  that  is — their  party  cowork- 
ers? The  reformer’s  substitute  of  a competi- 
tive examination  administered  by  a non-parti- 
san or  a “bipartisan”  commission  is  artificial, 
expensive  and  not  adapted  to  secure  a high 
degree  of  efficiency.  Since  some  of  the  ap- 
pointive offices  must  be  filled  by  members  of 
the  party  in  order  to  carry  out  party  policies 
and  fulfill  party  pledges,  would  it  not  simplify 
the  entire  system  to  fill  all  offices,  elective  and 
appointive,  with  party  supporters  and  thus 
establish  complete  and  thoroughgoing  party  re- 
sponsibility? 

Professional  politicians  have  likewise  whole- 
heartedly defended  the  spoils  system  because 
of  its  intimate  and  helpful  relation  to  party 
finance.  The  possession  of  a large  number  of 
offices  to  be  distributed  as  rewards  for  party 
service  secures  the  unpaid  efforts  of  many 
aspirants  for  favors.  The  fact  that  an  office 
has  been  given  by  the  party  makes  possible 
a levy  upon  the  salary  received.  In  the  palmy 
days  of  the  system  no  recipient  of  party 
favor  was  exempt  from  an  assessment  upon  his 
salary  or  fees.  This  exaction  was  boldly  levied 
in  the  name  of  party  loyalty  and  collected  by 
party  agents  who  called  at  the  various  de- 
partment offices  with  lists  stating  the  contribu- 
tion expected  from  each  appointee,  or  who  de- 


ducted the  percentage  of  party  dues  from  the 
amounts  in  the  various  pay  envelopes.  Re- 
fusal to  contribute  was  promptly  punished. 
From  this  source  a large  and  regular  fund 
for  campaign  purposes  flowed  into  the  treas- 
ury of  the  party  in  power.  Removal  of  the 
civil  service  from  politics  and  legislation 
against  the  collection  of  funds  from  office-hold- 
ers struck  a severe  blow  at  machine  organiza- 
tion in  the  party.  Gradually  more  and  more 
of  the  offices  have  been  removed  from  party 
influence,  although  the  President  still  has  with- 
in his  gift  political  appointments  with  a total 
annual  value  of  more  than  $12,000,000.  State 
and  city  governments  also  continue  to  offer  a 
wide  field  for  appointive  discretion. 

See  Assessments  for  Party  Purposes; 
Boss ; Civil  Service  Commission  ; Civil  Serv- 
ice, Federal;  Civil  Service,  Relation  of,  to 
Parties;  Civil  Service,  State;  Merit  Sys- 
tem; Party  Finance;  Patronage. 

References:  D.  B.  Eaton,  Civil  Service  in 
Great  Britain  (1881)  ; M.  Ostrogorski,  Democ- 
racy and  the  Party  System  (1910)  ; National 
Civil  Service  Reform  League,  Annual  Proceed- 
ings-, U.  S.  Civil  Service  Commission,  Annual 
Reports-,  C.  R.  Fish,  Civil  Service  and  the  Pat- 
ronage ( 1905 ) ; A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government 
(1903),  286-292;  L.  G.  Tyler,  Parties  and 
Patronage  (1891);  W.  G.  Sumner,  Andrew 
Jackson  (1882),  101,  103,  145-149,  162;  Gold- 
win  Smith,  V.  S.  Pol.  Hist.  (1893)  ; J.  A. 
Woodburn,  Pol.  Parties  and  Party  Problems 
(1903),  ch.  xvii;  T.  Roosevelt,  “Six  Years  of 
Civil  Service  Reform”  in  Am.  Ideals  and  Other 
Essays  (1897),  129-153;  C.  A.  Beard,  Readings 
in  Am.  Government  and  Politics  (1911),  206. 

Jesse  Macy. 

SQUATTER  SOVEREIGNTY.  A contemp- 
tuous nickname  given  by  Calhoun  to  the  theory 
of  popular  sovereignty  championed  by  Cass 
and  Douglas.  See  Popular  Sovereignty. 

O.  C.  H. 

STAATENBUND.  An  international  union 
of  sovereign  states,  which,  without  giving  up 
their  independence,  have  united  themselves  for 
the  accomplishment  of  certain  common  ends, 
above  all  for  external  protection,  and  for  the 
obtaining  of  which  they  make  common  contri- 
bution. Since  the  several  states  remain  sov- 
ereign, the  central  power  is  legally  and  actu- 
ally subordinate  to  the  members.  A common 
congress,  or  assembly  of  delegates,  occupying 
the  position  of  diplomatic  representatives, 
meets  to  secure  the  common  ends,  acting,  how- 
ever, not  on  their  own  initiative  or  at  their 
own  discretion,  but  under  instruction  from 
their  home  government.  Staatenbund  differs 
from  a mere  international  alliance  for  the  most 
part  through  the  permanent  character  of  the 
union.  It  is  formed  seriously  for  all  time, 
and  possesses  usually  a vital  national-  con- 
sciousness or  common  historical  traditions. 


374 


STAFF,  CHIEF  OF — STAMP  TAX 


Moreover,  in  a staatenbund,  the  central  govern- 
ment affects  the  individual  only  mediately, 
through  his  own  state,  to  which  his  allegiance 
primarily  attaches.  In  their  common  strug- 
gles, each  feels  the  need  of  the  other,  and 
expresses  that  need  in  enduring  political 
forms.  Not  only  do  the  members  of  a staaten- 
bund unite  to  resist  a joint  enemy,  but  they 
bind  themselves  to  adjust  their  own  differences 
equitably,  without  resort  to  war.  A staaten- 
bund is  a league  on  the  way  to  become  a 
bundestaat  (see).  See  Bundestaat;  Confed- 
eration; Federal  State;  States,  Classifi- 
cation of.  References:  H.  von  Treitschke, 
Politik  (1900),  II,  311;  J.  W.  Garner,  Intro, 
to  Pol.  Sci.  (1910),  142-148.  B.  E.  H. 

STAFF,  CHIEF  OF.  The  Chief  of  the  Gen- 
eral Staff  of  the  United  States  Army  is  the 
highest  trained  officer  in  the  military  service, 
subject  only  to  the  President,  who  is  the  Com- 
mander-in-chief under  the  Constitution  (Art. 
II,  Sec.  ii.  If  1),  and  his  representative,  the 
Secretary  of  War.  See  Army,  Standing;  Of- 
ficers, Military  and  Naval.  Reference: 
Secretary  of  War,  Annual  Report.  A.  N.  H. 

STALWARTS.  The  Stalwarts  were  the 
New  York  Republicans  who  favored  the  renom- 
ination of  Grant  in  1880,  and  afterwards  op- 
posed the  administration  of  Garfield.  See 
Half  Breeds:  Republican  Party.  References: 
E.  Stanwood,  Hist,  of  the  Presidency  (1898), 
419;  E.  E.  Sparks,  National  Development 
(1907),  182-187.  T.  N.  H. 

STAMP  ACT  AGITATION.  The  Stamp  Act 
was  not  a new  device  of  Grenville’s,  but  had 
been  proposed  several  times  before,  most  re- 
cently by  Townshend  two  years  earlier.  Gren- 
ville proposed  a much  more  moderate  tax  than 
Townshend’s,  and  even  asked  the  agents  of 
the  colonies  to  suggest  a better  form  of  tax- 
ation, if  they  disliked  the  one  offered.  When 
the  plan  became  known  in  the  colonies  there 
were  ominous  protests.  No  heed  was  paid  to 
these  remonstrances  except  that  the  Lords  of 
Trade  denounced  as  “indecent”  the  resolves  of 
the  Massachusetts  and  New  York  legislatures. 
In  Parliament  there  was  little  debate  on  the 
measures,  no  attention  being  given  to  the  pleas 
of  Conway  and  Barre  in  favor  of  the  colonists. 
When  the  bill  had  passed  the  Commons  and 
the  Lords,  a commission  signed  it  in  behalf 
of  the  insane  king,  March  22,  1765.  The  act 
provided  for  stamps  on  newspapers,  bills,  re- 
ceipts, college  diplomas  and  all  legal  docu- 
ments. 

The  formation  of  parties  in  America  now 
received  a new  impetus.  Opponents  of  the 
act  were  called  Whigs  (see),  the  supporters, 
Tories  ( see  Loyalists).  After  a short  lull 
before  the  storm,  the  opposition  burst  in  full 
force.  The  act  antagonized  the  lawyers,  and 
these  natural  political  leaders  took  up  the 


gauntlet.  Patrick  Henry  (see)  began  the 
struggle  in  Virginia.  In  a legislative  com- 
mittee, he  offered  seven  resolutions,  one  of 
which  declared  that  the  colonists  had  the  ex- 
clusive privilege  of  taxing  themselves.  Though 
opposed  by  the  seaboard  aristocracy,  he  carried 
most  of  his  resolutions  with  the  aid  of  the 
democratic  western  members.  Copies  of  all 
these  resolutions  were  spread  abroad  and 
aroused  great  excitement.  Meanwhile,  the 
Massachusetts  general  court  issued  a circular 
letter  urging  a congress  of  all  colonies  in  New 
York  in  October  to  implore  relief  from  the  king 
and  Parliament.  Replies  came  slowly,  but  pub- 
lic wrath  was  rising,  and  finally,  August  2, 
1765,  South  Carolina  accepted  the  suggestion, 
Rhode  Island,  Pennsylvania,  Connecticut  and 
Maryland  following  in  her  wake.  New  York 
sent  its  committee  of  correspondence,  and  Dela- 
ware and  New  Jersey  sent  informally  chosen 
delegates.  Local  organizations  in  the  mean- 
time were  agreeing  to  non-importation,  and 
were  refusing  to  use  British  goods.  “Sons  of 
Liberty”  societies  came  at  last  openly  to  advo- 
cate forcible  resistance.  Riots  began  and  mob 
violence  against  the  Stamp  agents.  On  the 
first  day  that  the  act  was  in  force,  bells  tolled, 
flags  waved  at  half  mast,  and  the  Stamp  Act 
was  burned  or  buried.  Business  was  stopped 
and  the  courts  closed.  Finally,  the  law  was 
simply  defied. 

The  Stamp  Act  Congress  met  October  7, 
1765.  After  eleven  days’  debate,  they  issued 
a declaration  of  rights  and  grievances,  ad- 
dressed the  King,  memorialized  the  Lords  and 
petitioned  the  Commons.  Meanwhile  the  Gren- 
ville ministry  fell,  but  not  because  of  the 
Stamp  Act.  The  matter  came  up  in  Parlia- 
ment, however,  and  after  a memorable  debate 
with  Conway,  Camden  and  Pitt,  for  the  colon- 
ists, against  Mansfield,  Bedford  and  Grenville 
in  opposition,  the  act  was  repealed. 

See  Revolution,  American,  Causes  of. 

References:  R.  Frothingham,  Rise  of  the 
Republic  (6th  ed.,  1895),  158-200;  W.  H. 
Lecky,  American  Revolution  (J.  A.  Woodburn, 
Ed.,  1898 ) ; G.  E.  Howard,  Preliminaries  of 
the  Revolution  (1905),  121-173;  text  of  act 
in  W.  MacDonald,  Select  Charters  (1899),  281- 
305;  Resolutions  of  Stamp  Act  Congress  in 
ibid,  313-315.  C.  H.  Van  Tyne. 

STAMP  TAX.  This  term  refers  rather  to 
the  method  of  collecting  a tax  than  to  a special 
kind  of  tax.  It  was  introduced  in  Holland 
in  1624,  borrowed  by  England,  and  introduced 
into  America  in  the  colonial  period.  By  re- 
quiring certain  stamps,  sold  by  the  Govern- 
ment, to  be  affixed  to  certain  documents  in 
order  to  make  them  valid,  it  is  possible  to 
secure  revenue  from  a large  number  of  trans- 
actions, many  of  them  petty,  which  otherwise 
would  not  be  reached.  Bastable  makes  the  fol- 
lowing classification  of  the  system:  (1)  on 
law  proceedings  and  judicial  acts;  (2)  on 


375 


STAMPEDE— STANDARDS,  BUREAU  OP 


commercial  instruments,  stocks  and  shares; 
(3)  on  the  sale  of  property,  especially  im- 
moveables; (4)  on  gratuitous  transfers,  such 
as  duties  on  succession  after  death. 

In  1703  the  English  Government  imposed  a 
tax  upon  the  colonies  through  stamp  duties 
levied  upon  certain  legal  and  commercial  pa- 
pers; owing  to  its  unpopularity  it  was  soon 
abandoned  (see  Stamp  Act).  The  stamp  tax 
was  tried  for  brief  periods  in  1797  and  1814, 
but  it  was  during  the  Civil  War  that  it  ob- 
tained its  widest  application.  The  term  in- 
cluded not  only  commercial  processes,  and 
bank  checks  but  taxes  on  commodities,  such  as 
perfumery,  playing  cards,  and  patent  medi- 
cines. Such  taxes  were  among  the  first  to  go 
in  the  revision  of  the  internal  revenue  system 
after  the  war.  Stamp  taxes  were  introduced  in 
1898  to  provide  revenue  for  the  Spanish  War. 
Stamp  taxes  on  legal  and  commercial  trans- 
actions while  not  burdensome  and  willingly 
accepted  if  there  be  financial  necessity,  are 
regarded  with  disfavor,  because  of  the  annoy- 
ance occasioned  and  the  possibility  of  commit- 
ting unintentional  error.  See  Revenue,  In- 
ternal. References:  F.  C.  Howe,  Taxation 
in  the  U.  S.  under  the  Internal  Revenue  Sys- 
tem (1896),  28-31,  119-124,  275;  J.  N.  Pome- 
roy, Introd.  to  Const.  Law  of  the  V.  S.  (3d 
ed.,  1888),  239-242;  U.  S.  Commissioner  of 
Internal  Revenue,  Annual  Reports  ( 1898- 
1902).  Davis  R.  Dewey. 

STAMPEDE.  A term  used  to  denote  the 
wild  scene  in  a nominating  convention  when 
after  a long  contest  delegates  break  away 
from  their  candidate  and  hasten  to  join  the 
ranks  of  the  apparent  winner.  The  first  stam- 
pede resulted  in  the  nomination  of  James  K. 
Polk,  1844.  See  Convention,  Political;  Nom- 
ination of  the  President.  0.  C.  H. 

STAND  PAT.  A term  probably  first  used  in 
its  political  sense  by  Mark  Hanna  in  1900  in 
advising  the  Republican  leaders  to  stand  firm- 
ly by  the  high  protective  tariff  policy.  It  soon 
gained  general  currency  as  characterizing  the 
high  protectionist  principles,  and  recently  sig- 
nifies particularly  the  policy  of  the  ultra-con- 
servative wing  of  the  Republican  party  in 
contra-distinction  to  that  of  the  Insurgent 
or  Progressive  (see)  wing.  See  Progressive 
Party;  Republican  Party.  O.  C.  H. 

STANDARD  MONEY.  The  principal  or 
standard  money  in  any  system  of  moneys  is 
the  money  to  which  all  others  are  subordinate; 
its  value  is  independent  of  its  relation  to  any 
other  money.  “The  standard  money,”  says 
Professor  Taylor,  “must  be  that  one  among 
the  moneys,  which  are  constantly  at  par,  which 
alone  has  its  value  fixed  independently  of  its 
relations  to  any  other  money  forming  a part 
of  the  circulation.”  The  ultimate  standard  is 
the  substance  or  substances  to  which  the  stan- 


dard money  is  required  to  bear  a certain  re- 
lation. Thus  with  the  free  coinage  of  gold, 
where  gold  coin  is  fixed  as  the  standard  mon- 
ey, gold  bullion  is  the  ultimate  standard.  In 
the  United  States  the  standard  unit  is  a gold 
dollar  composed  of  25-8/10  grains  of  gold, 
nine-tenths  fine;  the  amount  of  fine  gold  is 
23-22/100  grains.  See  Bimetallism;  Coinage, 
Free;  Money;  Monometallism;  References: 
F.  M.  Taylor,  Chapters  on  Money  (1906)  ; F. 
A.  Fetter,  Principles  of  Economics  ( 1911) , 432- 
4.  A.  C.  McL. 

STANDARD  OIL  CASES.  See  Reason- 
ableness in  Restraint  of  Trade;  Sherman 
Anti-Trust  Act. 

STANDARD  TIME.  The  common  unit  of 
time  is  the  mean  solar  day — the  average  inter- 
val from  noon  to  noon.  The  day  begins  180 
degrees  east  of  Greenwich,  and  at  midnight  at 
Greenwich  it  is  midday  on  the  date  line.  Stand- 
ard time  is  an  arbitrary  convenience  adopted 
in  1883  to  simplify  corrections  for  sun  time 
for  small  changes  in  longitude.  The  railroads 
divided  the  United  States  into  four  standard 
time  belts  each  15  degrees  wide.  Throughout 
each  belt  the  mean  sun-time  of  its  central 
meridian  prevails — adjacent  belts  differ  by  ex- 
actly one  hour.  The  belts  are  called  “Eastern,” 
“Central,”  “Mountain,”  and  “Pacific”  and  are 
bisected  approximately  by  the  75th,  90th, 
105th,  and  120th  meridians.  H.  D.  H. 

STANDARDS,  BUREAU  OF.  The  Bureau  of 

Standards  was  one  of  the  bureaus  of  the 
Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor  until  the 
division  of  that  department,  March  4,  1913, 
when  it  became  part  of  the  Department  of 
Commerce.  It  is  charged  with  testing  measur- 
ing instruments  of  all  kinds,  in  order  that  they 
may  conform  to  the  public  standards  as  defined 
by  law  and  preserved  at  Washington.  This 
work  is  distributed  among  the  following  divi- 
sions: (1)  electricity,  which  tests  electrical, 
magnetic,  and  photometric  measuring  instru- 
ments; (2)  weights  and  measures,  which  tests 
instruments  for  measuring  length,  mass,  vol- 
ume, and  time;  (3)  thermometry,  pvrometry, 
and  heat  measurements,  which  tests  thermom- 
eters, calorimeters,  etc;  (4)  optics  (including 
radiometry,  spectrometry,  polarimetry,  and  in- 
terferometry), which  tests  lenses  and  other 
optical  instruments;  (5)  chemistry,  which 
tests  government  supplies  chiefly.  All  the 
divisions  also  undertake  researches  for  the  de- 
termination of  physical  constants  and  the  prop- 
erties of  materials.  During  the  year  1909  the 
Bureau  made  25,629  tests  for  the  Government, 
and  12,460  for  the  public.  The  total  expendi- 
ture of  the  Bureau  during  the  fiscal  year  1909, 
amounted  to  $196,527.92.  See  Commerce,  De- 
partment of;  Weights  and  Measures. 
Reference:  Dept,  of  Commerce,  Annual  Reports. 

A.  N.  H. 


376 


STANTON,  EDWIN  McMASTERS— STATE  ASSEMBLY 


STANTON,  EDWIN  McMASTERS.  Edwin 
M.  Stanton  (1814-1869)  was  born  at  Steuben- 
ville, Ohio,  December  19,  1814.  He  was  ad- 
mitted to  the  bar  in  1836,  and  from  1837  to 
1839  was  prosecuting  attorney  for  Harrison 
county.  From  1842  to  1845  he  was  reporter 
of  the  Ohio  supreme  court.  In  1847  he  re- 
moved to  Pittsburgh,  Pa.,  and  in  1856  to 
Washington,  where  he  had  an  important  prac- 
tice, including  notable  cases  before  the  Supreme 
Court.  In  1857-58  he  was  in  California  as 
special  counsel  for  the  United  States  in  Mexi- 
can land  grant  cases.  December  20,  1860,  lie 
became  Attorney  General  in  Buchanan’s  Cabi- 
net. January  15,  1862,  he  entered  Lincoln’s 
Cabinet  as  Secretary  of  War,  succeeding  Simon 
Cameron,  and  devoted  himself  with  extraordi- 
nary energy  to  the  reorganization  and  manage- 
ment of  the  department.  He  was  entirely 
opposed  to  Johnson’s  views  on  reconstruction 
(see),  and  allowed  himself  to  be  used  by  Re- 
publican leaders  to  thwart  the  President.  Au- 
gust 5,  1867,  Johnson  demanded  his  resigna- 
tion, which  was  refused ; he  was  then  removed 
from  office  and  Grant  appointed  Secretary  ad 
interim.  January  14,  1868,  the  Senate  de- 
clined to  approve  the  removal;  Grant  at  once 
withdrew,  and  Stanton  was  reinstated.  On 
February  21  he  was  again  removed  by  Johnson, 
but  did  not  relinquish  the  office  until  May  28, 
when  the  impeachment  of  Johnson  having  inter- 
vened, he  retired  after  the  trial.  In  1869  he 
was  appointed  associate  justice  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  but  died  December  24,  at  Washington, 
before  qualifying.  See  War,  Depaetmext  of: 
Wars  of  the  United  States.  References: 
G.  C.  Gorham,  Life  and  Public  Services  of  Ed- 
win M.  Stanton  (1899)  ; J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist, 
of  the  U.  S.  (1893-1905),  III-VTI;  J.  W.  Bur- 
gess, Reconstruction  and  the  Constitution 
(1903);  G.  Welles,  Diary  (J.  T.  Morse,  Jr., 
Ed.,  1911).  W.  Ma'cD. 

STARE  DECISIS.  To  abide  by  or  adhere  to 
decided  cases.  The  “doctrine  of  stare  decisis” 
is  that  when  a point  of  law  has  been  decided 
by  a court  of  competent  jurisdiction,  the  de- 
cision becomes  a precedent  which  should  be 
followed  in  future  cases  before  the  same  court, 
and  those  inferior  to  it.  This  is,  however,  but 
a rule  of  policy,  which  may  be  and  often  is 
departed  from.  Reference:  J.  Kent,  Commen- 
taries (14th  ed.,  1896).,  I.  H.  M.  B. 

STAR  ROUTE  TRIALS.  The  trials  during 
the  Garfield-Arthur  administration  of  Thomas 
W.  Brady,  second  assistant  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral, Senator  Dorsey  of  Arkansas  and  others 
on  the  charge  of  defrauding  the  government 
out  of  large  sums  of  money  by  increasing  the 
compensation  on  a large  number  of  the  “star” 
routes — the  non-remunerative  postal  routes — 
on  which  the  mail  was  carried  by  private  con- 
tract. Those  charged  with  conspiracy  were  not 
convicted. 


STATE  ADJUTANT  GENERAL.  See 

Adjutant  General,  State. 

STATE  ASSEMBLY.  The  assembly,  house 
of  representatives,  and  house  of  delegates  are 
varying  names  applied  to  the  more  numerous 
branch  of  the  state  legislature.  The  member- 
ship varies  from  35  in  Delaware  to  nearly  400 
in  New  Hampshire.  In  the  newer  states,  usu- 
ally after  the  decennial  census,  the  state  is 
redistricted  for  the  election  of  the  fixed  num- 
ber of  representatives.  The  majority  party  in 
the  legislature  often  improves  the  opportunity 
to  gerrymander  the  state.  In  some  of  the  older 
states,  particularly  in  New  England,  the  town 
is  the  unit  of  representation.  Thus,  in  Ver- 
mont each  town  elects  one  and  only  one,  rep- 
resentative; in  Connecticut  no  town  or  city 
sends  more  than  two,  and  no  town  which  in 
1818  had  two,  lias  had  its  representation  re- 
duced. The  result  is  that  in  the  house  of 
representatives  New  Haven’s  population  of 
nearly  150,000  is  balanced  by  Union’s  of  400. 
Such  “rotten-borough”  representation  puts  the 
control  of  the  political  and  industrial  inter- 
ests of  a state  of  rapidly  growing  cities  in  the 
control  of  decadent  country  towns.  In  Illinois 
from  each  senatorial  district  are  chosen  three 
representatives,  by  a system  of  cumulative 
voting. 

Aside  from  brief  preliminary  residence  in  the 
state,  no  different  qualifications  are  usually 
required  for  a representative  than  for  an  elec- 
tor. Half  a dozen  states  stipulate  that  the 
representative  must  be  twenty-four  or  more 
years  of  age.  In  39  states  the  term  of  the 
representative  is  two  years;  in  Alabama,  Louis- 
iana and  Mississippi  it  is  four  years ; Massa- 
chusetts, New  York,  and  New  Jersey  still 
cling  to  their  annual  elections  in  the 
belief  that  thereby  legislative  responsibility 
is  better  secured.  But  an  inevitable  conse- 
quence is  the  utter  lack  of  legislative  experi- 
ence on  the  part  of  most  of  the  members  of  the 
assemblies. 

The  average  age  of  representatives  is  well 
over  40.  The  personnel  is  affected  greatly  by 
the  system  of  representation.  In  the  states 
where  the  town  is  the  unit,  farmers  often 
constitute-  the  largest  element.  In  the  Vermont 
house  (1899)  57  per  cent  were  farmers  and 
three  per  cent  lawyers;  in  New  York,  the  same 
year,  eight  per  cent  were  farmers  and  30  per 
cent  lawyers.  Members  are  elected  as  Republi- 
cans and  Democrats,  although  most  of  the  prob- 
lems of  state  government  are  outside  the  field 
of  national  politics.  Several  of  the  states  still 
require  that  bills  for  the  raising  of  revenue 
shall  originate  in  the  lower  house,  to  which  is 
also  assigned  the  power  to  impeach  state  of- 
ficers. 

See  Debates  in  Legislatures  ; Legist.ature 
and  Legislative  Reform;  Rules  of  Legisla- 
tive Bodies;  Senate,  State;  State  Legisla- 
ture. 


O.  C.  H. 

377 


STATE  ATTORNEY  GENERAL— STATE,  DEPARTMENT  OF 


References:  P.  S.  Reinseli,  Am.  Legislatures 
(1907);  James  Bryce,  Am.  Commonwealth 
(4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  481-497;  A.  Shaw,  “The 
American  State  Legislatures”  in  Contemporary 
Review,  LVI,  Dec.,  1889,  555;  I.  P.  Orth,  “Our 
State  Legislatures”  in  Atlantic  Mont  lily,  XCIV 
(1904),  728-739;  G.  H.  Haynes,  Representa- 
tion in  State  Legislatures  (1900);  T.  Roose- 
velt, Am.  Ideals  (1897),  63-101;  Am.  Year 
Boole,  1910,  and  from  year  to  year. 

G.  H.  Haynes. 


. STATE  ATTORNEY  GENERAL.  See  At- 
torney General,  State. 

STATE  AUDITOR.  See  Auditor,  State. 

STATE  COMPTROLLER.  See  Comptrol- 
ler, State. 

STATE  CONSTITUTIONS,  CHARACTER- 
ISTICS OF.  See  Constitutions,  State, 
Characteristics  of. 


STATE,  DEPARTMENT  OF 


Origin. — The  Department  of  State  combines 
two  great  functions  of  executive  government — - 
the  conduct  of  the  country’s  international  re- 
lations and  the  performance  of  those  duties  of 
state  which  fall  to  the  custodian  of  the  su- 
preme mark  of  executive  authority,  the  seal  of 
the  United  States.  In  the  Continental  Con- 
gress a committee  of  secret  correspondence 
was  formed  November  29,  1775,  to  corre- 
spond with  friends  of  the  American  cause  in 
“Great  Britain,  Ireland  and  other  parts  of  the 
world.”  This  gave  way,  on  April  17,  1777, 
to  a Committee  of  Foreign  Affairs,  which  in 
turn  was  superseded  on  January  10,  1781,  by 
the  Department  of  Foreign  Affairs,  whose  head 
was  denominated  the  “Secretary  of  Foreign 
Affairs.”  In  the  new  Congress  the  act  of 
April  27,  1789,  created  a Department  of  For- 
eign Affairs  to  have  supervision  under  the 
President’s  direction  of  our  diplomatic  and 
consular  agents  abroad  and  to  conduct  corre- 
spondence with  representatives  of  foreign  gov- 
ernments in  the  United  States. 

The  Continental  Congress  had  promulgated 
its  own  acts  through  the  Secretary  and  he 
had  been  the  custodian  of  the  seal  of  the 
United  States.  The  debate  in  the  new  Congress 
on  establishing  executive  departments  indicat- 
ed that  the  prevailing  opinion  at  first  was  that 
the  Secretary  of  Foreign  Affairs  should  keep 
the  seal  and  that  Congress  itself  should  pro- 
mulgate the  laws.  On  July  27,  1789,  joint 
rules  of  the  House  and  Senate  “for  enrollment, 
attestation,  publication  and  presentation  of  the 
acts  of  Congress,  and  to  regulate  the  mode  of 
presenting  addresses  and  other  acts  to  the 
President  of  the  United  States”  were  consid- 
ered in  the  House  and  rules  for  enrolling, 
comparing  and  presenting  bills  were  agreed 
to.  The  remainder  of  the  question  was  re- 
ferred to  a committee  to  bring  in  a bill,  and 
it  reported  the  bill,  “to  provide  for  the  safe 
keeping  of  the  acts,  records  and  seal  of  the 
United  States,  and  for  other  purposes,”  which 
became  a law  September  15,  1789,  and  en- 
larged the  Department  of  Foreign  Affairs  into 
the  Department  of  State,  and  put  it  under  the 
Secretary  of  State.  He  was  to  receive  and 


publish  the  laws  of  the  United  States,  to  keep 
the  seal  and  to  affix  it  to  presidential  com- 
missions and  other  executive  instruments,  and 
to  have  custody  of  all  records  that  had  been 
in  the  office  of  the  secretary  of  Congress,  these 
being  duties  additional  to  those  pertaining  to 
foreign  affairs  provided  for  by  the  act  of  July 
27.  Thomas  Jefferson,  the  first  Secretary, 
described  the  department  as  embracing  “the 
whole  domestic  administration  (war  and  fi- 
nance excepted).” 

The  Secretary  of  State  was  recognized  as 
the  ranking  executive  officer,  next  to  the  Pres- 
ident, and  Washington  inaugurated  the  custom 
which  has  since  maintained  of  making  him 
the  organ  or  mouthpiece  of  the  President  in 
state  affairs  of  general  concern.  The  organic 
act  made  him,  under  the  President,  the  Govern- 
ment’s representative  in  all  dealings  with  for- 
eign governments  and  in  communicating  with 
them  he  speaks  for  the  head  of  the  state. 
They  can  reach  this  Government  through  no 
other  channel;  but  foreign  envoys  of  ambassa- 
dorial rank,  being  in  a peculiar  sense  the  em- 
bodiment of  the  supreme  sovereignty  of  their 
countries,  may  and  sometimes  do  have  per- 
sonal interviews  with  the  President,  always, 
however,  after  requesting  an  audience  through 
the  Secretary  of  State.  The  great  dignity  and 
prestige  of  the  office  have  attracted  to  it  the 
foremost  political  characters.  Thomas  Jeffer- 
son, James  Madison,  James  Monroe,  John 
Quincy  Adams,  Martin  Van  Buren  and  James 
Buchanan  served  in  it  before  being  elected  to 
the  presidency.  Henry  Clay,  Edward  Everett, 
Lewis  Cass  and  James  G.  Blaine,  Secretaries  of 
State,  were  nominated  for  the  presidency.  Dan- 
iel Webster,  who  twice  served.  1841-1843,  and 
1850-1852,  negotiated  the  Webster-Ashburton 
treaty,  fixing  the  northeastern  boundary  of 
the  United  States  in  1842 ; Abel  P.  Upshur, 
1843-1844,  and  John  C.  Calhoun,  1844-1845, 
negotiated  the  treaty  annexing  Texas  which 
failed  of  ratification  by  the  Senate,  but  was 
the  immediate  precursor  of  annexation  by 
joint  resolution  of  Congress;  William  H.  Sew- 
ard, 1861-1869,  conducted  our  foreign  affairs 
successfully  through  the  Civil  War,  and  pre- 
78 


STATE,  DEPARTMENT  OF 


vented  foreign  recognition  of  the  Confederacy; 
Hamilton  Fish,  1869-1877,  negotiated  the 
treaty  of  Washington  with  Great  Britain  in 
1871,  under  which  claims  against  that  country 
for  depredations  upon  American  commerce 
(see  Alabama  Controversy)  were  arbitrated; 
John  Hay,  1898-1905,  formulated  the  policy 
of  the  United  States  with  reference  to  the  far 
East  which  checked  European  advance  in 
China  and  kept  an  open  door  for  American 
trade. 

Duties. — As  the  magnitude  of  the  functions 
of  the  national  government  has  increased,  the 
domestic  functions  of  the  department  have  be- 
come fewer  by  distribution  among  other  de- 
partments— the  most  important  thus  trans- 
ferred being  patents,  copyrights,  the  census, 
territorial  affairs  and  correspondence  with  fed- 
eral officers  of  justice.  The  department  has 
certain  contingent  duties  which  it  has  never, 
or  rarely,  been  called  upon  to  perform.  The 
act  of  March  1,  1792,  provided  that  in  case 
the  offices  of  President  and  Vice-President 
should  both  become  vacant  the  Secretary  of 
State  should  notify  the  governors  of  the  states 
and  publish  the  fact  in  the  newspapers,  stating 
that  there  would  be  a new  election  within  a 
certain  time;  but  there  has  never  been  a va- 
cancy in  the  offices  of  President  and  Vice-Presi- 
dent (see  Presidential  Succession).  The 
same  act  provided  that  one  elected  to  the  pres- 
idency or  the  vice-presidency  might  decline 
to  serve  or  resign  by  a written  instrument 
“delivered  into  the  office  of  the  Secretary  of 
State.”  No  one  has  ever  declined  an  election 
to  these  offices,  and  only  once  has  there  been 
a resignation — that  of  John  C.  Calhoun  as 
Vice-President  dated  December  28,  1832,  and 
sent  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  as  the  law  re- 
quired. The  same  act  required  that  whenever 
the  vote  of  any  state  for  President  or  Vice- 
President  has  not  been  received  at  Washington 
by  the  first  Wednesday  in  January  after  the 
election,  the  Secretary  of  State  shall  send  a 
special  messenger  to  receive  the  vote,  and 
messengers  have  been  dispatched  for  the  vote, 
in  accordance  with  this  act,  on  several  occa- 
sions (see  Electoral  College;  Presidential 
Elections). 

Hardly  second  in  importance  to  the  duties 
in  connection  with  the  election  of  the  Presi- 
dent are  the  duties  of  the  department  with 
reference  to  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 
The  ratifications  of  the  first  ten  amendments, 
proposed  in  the  House  of  Representatives  June 
8,  1789,  were  sent  to  the  department  by  the 
President,  who  communicated  the  fact  of  rat- 
ification by  each  state  as  it  was  received  with 
a separate  message  to  Congress  in  each  case; 
but  the  amendments  proposed  in  1793  and 
1804  were  communicated  to  the  states  by  the 
Secretary  of  State  who  also  informed  Congress 
of  the  ratification.  The  act  of  April  20,  1818, 
confirmed  this  practice,  and  required  also  that, 
when  he  should  be  apprised  of  the  adoption 
122 


of  a proposed  amendment  to  the  Constitution 
by  three-fourths  of  the  states,  he  should  pub- 
lish the  amendment  in  the  newspapers  author- 
ized to  publish  the  laws  and  it  should  then 
become  effective.  This  is  now  the  law,  and 
since  its  passage  it  has  been  customary  for 
the  Secretary  of  State  to  announce  the  ratifica- 
tion of  an  amendment  by  proclamation  over 
his  name  and  the  seal  of  his  department,  news- 
paper publication  of  the  laws  having  ceased. 

Subdivisions. — The  subdivisions  or  bureaus 
of  the  department  have  grown  naturally  from 
the  division  of  labor.  The  second  officer  was 
the  chief  clerk  who  acted  as  head  of  the  de- 
partment when  the  Secretary  was  absent,  un- 
til the  act  of  March  3,  1853,  provided  for  an 
assistant  secretary.  The  act  of  July  25,  1866, 
created  the  office  of  second  assistant  secre- 
tary, and  that  of  June  30,  1875,  of  third  as- 
sistant secretary.  Ordinarily  the  assistant 
secretary  has  general  supervision  of  the  de- 
partment, the  second  assistant  secretary  of 
diplomatic  affairs,  the  third  assistant  secre- 
tary of  consular  affairs  and  the  chief  clerk 
of  departmental  administration ; but  this  ar- 
rangement is  not  fixed.  The  act  of  1866 
provided  for  an  Examiner  of  Claims, 
whose  title  became,  by  act  of  1891,  Solici- 
tor of  the  Department  of  State.  He  is 
under  the  nominal  jurisdiction  of  the 
Department  of  Justice,  as  his  duties  are 
those  of  an  assistant  attorney  general.  The 
first  systematic  division  of  the  department  into 
bureaus  was  made  in  a memorandum  made  by 
Secretary  Louis  McLane  to  President  Andrew 
Jackson  August  29,  1833,  who  approved  it.  It 
divided  the  department  into  eight  bureaus,  an 
arrangement  which  has  continued  with  modifi- 
cations and  expansions  to  the  present  day : 
but  the  bureaus  did  not  receive  legal  recogni- 
tion until  the  act  of  March  3,  1873,  provided  a 
salary  for  each  chief.  January  1,  1911,  the 
organization  of  the  department  was:  the  Sec- 
retary of  State,  the  Assistant  Secretaries,  the 
Solicitor,  two  Assistant  Solicitors,  the  Chief 
Clerk,  the  Diplomatic  Bureau,  Consular  Bu- 
reau, Bureau  of  Indexes  and  Archives,  Bureau 
of  Accounts,  Bureau  of  Rolls  and  Library,  Bu- 
reau of  Appointments,  Bureau  of  Trade  Rela- 
tions, Bureau  of  Citizenship,  and  Translators. 
By  the  act  of  August  15,  1909,  the  Secretary  of 
State  was  given  authority  to  select  employees 
and  fix  their  compensation  “in  connection  with 
foreign  trade  relations  which  come  within  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Department  of  State,  under 
tariff  legislation  and  otherwise,  and  in  nego- 
tiation and  preparation  of  treaties,  arrange- 
ments and  agreements  for  the  advancement  of 
commercial  and  other  interests  of  the  United 
States.”  The  arrangement  made  under  this 
act  was  given  congressional  sanction  by  the 
appropriation  act  of  June  17,  1910.  There 
are  now,  therefore,  in  addition  to  the  regular 
force  of  the  Department  the  following  special 
officers:  the  Counselor,  the  Resident  Diplo- 


379 


SECRETARY 


STATE,  DEPARTMENT  OF 


380 


CHART  OF  THE  INTERNAL 


STATE  DEPARTMENTS,  HEADS  OF 


matic  Officer,  the  Director  of  the  Consular 
Service,  chiefs  of  the  division  of  Far  Eastern 
Affairs,  of  Latin-American  Affairs,  of  Near 
Eastern  Affairs,  of  Western  European  Affairs 
and  of  Information. 

See  Cabinet  of  the  President;  Executive 
Departments  ; Foreign  Policy  of  the  United 
States;  Treaties  of  the  United  States. 

References:  G.  Hunt,  The  Department  of 
State,  Hist,  and  Functions  (1893),  Outline 
of  Organization  and  Work  of  Department  of 
State  (1911),  The  Hist,  of  the  Department  of 
State  in  Am.  Journal  of  International  Law, 
as  follows:  “The  Department  of  Foreign  Af- 
fairs,” I,  868,  “Creation  of  the  Department  of 
State,”  II,  591;  “The  New  Department,  III, 
137 ; “Sometime  and  Occasional  Duties  of  the 
Department,”  III,  909;  “Occasional  Duties  of 
the  Department,”  IV,  384;  “Subdivisions  of 
the  Department,”  IV,  597,  V,  118;  “Duties  of 
the  Department  of  State,”  V,  414,  V,  987, 
VI,  119;  VI,  679;  VI,  910;  “Department 
Buildings,”  VI,  924;  M.  L.  Hinsdale,  Hist,  cf 
the  Presidents’  Cabinet  (1911)  ; H.  B.  Learned, 
The  President’s  Cabinet  (1911). 

Gaillard  Hunt. 

STATE  DEPARTMENTS,  HEADS  OF.  Sel- 
ection.—Heads  of  departments  under  the  exec- 
utive differ  in  number  there  being  usually  fewer 
than  in  the  President’s  Cabinet.  In  many  ways 
the  states  have  used  the  Federal  Constitution 
as  a model,  but  in  this  case,  not  one  state 
has  accepted  the  Cabinet  system.  In  a very  few 
states  a few  heads  of  departments  are  appoint- 
ed by  the  governor.  The  usual  method  of 
selection  is  by  election.  An  effort  to  secure 
the  appointment  of  a few  such  officers  failed 
in  the  Ohio  constitutional  convention  of  1912. 
In  Maine,  some  of  the  members  are  appointed 
by  the  legislature.  In  Delaware,  the  governor 
appoints  the  secretary  of  state.  In  Mary- 
land, the  secretary  of  state,  state  librarian, 
and  commission  of  law  office  are  appointed  by 
the  governor,  with  the  advice  and  consent  of 
the  senate.  In  New  Hampshire,  a few  are 
elected  on  joint  ballot  of  the  general  court. 
In  New  Jersey  the  treasurer  is  selected  by  the 
general  assembly,  the  attorney  general  and  sec- 
retary of  state  are  nominated  by  the  governor, 
with  the  consent  of  the  senate.  In  Pennsyl- 
vania, the  governor  appoints,  with  the  advice 
and  consent  of  two-thirds  of  all  the  senate, 
the  secretary  of  state,  attorney  general,  and 
superintendent  of  public  instruction.  The 
other  members  are  elected. 

In  Tennessee,  the  secretary  of  state  is  ap- 
pointed by  the  general  assembly,  and  the  at- 
torney general  by  the  judges,  and  in  Texas  the 
secretary  of  state  is  appointed  by  the  governor 
There  is  an  element  of  weakness  in  the  selec- 
tion of  the  heads  of  departments.  They  are 
often  selected  at  different  times  and  for  differ- 
ent terms.  It  is  not  uncommon  to  have  a chief 
executive  of  one  party,  and  his  subordinates  or 


part  of  them,  of  another.  This  makes  coop- 
eration among  the  departments  very  difficult. 
It  is  also  difficult  to  get  rid  of  an  officer  who 
is  incompetent  or  inefficient. 

Secretary  of  State. — First  on  the  list  is  the 
secretary  of  state,  whose  duties  are  usually 
prescribed  by  law.  This  official  is  the  keeper 
of  the  archives.  He  may  be  called  upon  to 
give  opinion  in  writing  to  the  governor,  on 
matters  pertinent  to  his  office.  In  many  states 
he  sits  on  boards  of  different  kinds.  This 
position  is  often  looked  upon  as  a stepping 
stone  to  the  governorship  or  a senatorship,  or 
to  a position  in  the  federal  service.  He  has 
important  functions  in  connection  with  elec- 
tions, and  certification  of  the  result  of  elec- 
tions, both  for  state  and  national  officials. 

Attorney  General. — The  attorney  general  is 
the  legal  adviser  of  the  state.  He  represents 
the  state  in  many  cases,  and  on  many  more 
questions  he  gives  opinions,  which  may  be 
reversed  by  the.  courts,  but  are  usually  sus- 
tained. The  opinions  are  usually  published 
by  the  state. 

Superintendent  of  Education. — The  state 
school  commissioner  or  superintendent  is  com- 
monly a member  of  the  state  executive.  In 
some  states,  he  is  at  the  head  of  a board, 
having  control  of  the  entire  educational  af- 
fairs of  the  state.  He  usually  prepares  the 
questions  for  state  examinations  for  teachers, 
but  does  not  correct  the  papers.  This  is  done 
by  the  state  examiners.  In  some  states,  the 
work  of  the  state  commissioner  is  almost  lim- 
ited to  collecting  a few  statistics,  and  thus 
making  the  school  report  for  the  year. 

Treasurer. — The  treasurer  of  a state  has  the 
responsible  position  of  handling  the  public 
funds.  The  system  is  very  cumbersome  in  some 
states.  The  greatest  difficulty,  perhaps,  is  in 
keeping  the  different  funds  for  the  different  in- 
stitutions in  proper  condition.  The  keeping 
of  the  funds  in  banks  is  also  important ; and 
has  often  given  room  for  suspicion  of  graft 
in  the  payment  of  interest  to  the  treasurer. 
The  state  treasurer  is  dependent  very  largely 
upon  the  county  treasurers.  Often  a state 
treasurer  has  been  unable  to  meet  the  demands 
upon  the  treasury  because  of  the  lack  of 
promptness  on  the  part  of  the  county  treasur- 
ers. 

Other  Heads. — There  is  frequently  an  audi- 
tor whose  duties  are  those  of  bookkeeper,  but 
he  usually  performs  other  duties  by  law,  and 
some  constitutions  provide  that  he  shall  be  a 
member  of  certain  executive  boards.  One  ot 
his  most  important  functions  is  in  relation  to 
fixing  the  valuation  of  property  for  taxation. 
The  adjutant  general  (see)  is  a member  of  the 
executive  department  in  but  a few  states.  His 
duties  are  military.  A board  of  public  works 
composed  of  elective  members,  sometimes  only 
a single  commissioner,  has  been  a part  of  the 
. executive  department  in  some  states.  It  has 
not  been  a complete  success,  because  of  the 


381 


STATE  EXAMINERS— STATE  EXECUTIVE 


mismanagement  of  public  business  by  a few 
men,  elected  for  short  terms,  often  because  of 
their  political  activity  rather  than  their  busi- 
ness administrative  capability. 

Responsibility. — Mostly  elected  by  popular 
vote  and  in  very  few  cases  placed  under  the 
direction  of  the  governor,  the  heads  of  state 
departments  are  difficult  to  control  except  by 
declining  to  reelect  them.  They  are  almost 
invariably  subject  to  impeachment  or  to  re- 
moval by  joint  vote  of  the  two  houses  of 
legislature  but  impeachment  is  a long  and 
difficult  process  and  removal  on  address  of  the 
houses  is  extremely  rare.  They  are  sometimes 
compelled  to  resign  by  a storm  of  adverse 
public  opinion.  New  York  has  given  to  the 
governor  the  important  power  of  investigating 
the  workings  of  any  state  department,  includ- 
ing the  appointment  of  special  counsel  for  that 
purpose.  In  New  York  also,  the  governor  has 
the  power  of  removal  of  certain  heads  of  de- 
partments, for  instance,  the  insurance  com- 
missioner, with  the  consent  of  two-thirds  of 
the  state  senate,  but  in  practice  this  has  been 
found  almost  an  unworkable  method.  The  re- 
call, in  the  few  states  which  adopted  it  up  to 
1912,  can  be  applied  to  the  heads  of  the  state 
departments.  As  yet  there  has  been  no  ex- 
ample. 

Defects. — Some  state  officials,  particularly 
the  secretary  of  state  and  occasionally  the  fi- 
nancial officers,  are  reelected  or  reappointed 
for  a long  period ; but  the  average  term  of 
service  is  certainly  not  above  four  years.  This 
means  that  there  is  a contant  stream  of  men 
unacquainted  with  the  duties  of  their  offices 
coming  in,  and,  since  the  public  business  must 
be  performed  somehow,  they  are  obliged  to 
take  the  advice  of  clerks  and  subordinates. 
Many  such  officials  are  put  in  by  and  follow 
the  directions  of  an  occult  outside  influence — 
“the  organization”  or  “the  boss.”  Inasmuch  as 
the  heads  of  departments  are  responsible  in 
many  cases  for  public  property,  for  the  direc- 
tion of  public  interests,  and  for  the  execution 
of  important  statutes,  this  irregularity  and 
uncertainty  of  service  reduces  the  state  serv- 
ice below  similar  service  either  federal  or 
municipal.  Moreover,  the  lack  of  coordina- 
tion between  executive  officers  is  even  more 


serious  and  has  given  rise  to  the  astonishing 
growth  of  executive  boards  (see). 

See  Adjutant  General,  State;  Attorney 
General,  State;  Auditor,  State;  Comptroll- 
er, State;  Secretary  of  State  in  States; 
Treasurer,  State. 

References:  A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government 
(1908),  ch.  viii;  C.  H.  Beard,  Am.  Govern- 
ment and  Politics  (1910),  ch.  xxiv;  F.  N. 
Thorpe,  Federal  and  State  Constitutions 
(1909);  J.  H.  Finley  and  J.  F.  Sanderson, 
Am.  Executive  (1908),  ch.  viii. 

Thomas  N.  Hoover. 

STATE  EXAMINERS.  A state  board  of 
examiners  exists  in  some  17  states.  Created 
as  an  aid  to  the  state  superintendent  of  public 
instruction  or  to  the  state  board  of  education, 
its  chief  functions  are  to  prepare  the  papers 
for  examination  of  persons  seeking  teachers’ 
certificates  through  examination,  to  rate  the  an- 
swers, and,  in  some  states,  to  issue  certificates 
of  various  grades.  This  board  is  usually  com- 
posed of  from  3 to  10  members  appointed  by 
the  state  superintendent  or  the  state  board  of 
education  for  terms  reaching  as  high  as  5 
years.  The  payment  for  services  is  usually  on 
a per  diem  basis.  The  New  York  State  Ex- 
aminations Board  has  the  planning  and  super- 
vision of  the  examinations  for  the  thousands 
of  pupils  in  the  graded  and  high  schools  of  the 
state,  in  cooperation  with  the  state  education 
department  (see  Regents’  Examination).  It 
is  a body  of  members  appointed  by  the  Regents 
of  the  University  of  the  State  of  New  York 
for  a term  of  5 years.  In  many  states  there 
are  boards  created  by  law  for  examining  per- 
sons desiring  license  to  practice  professions 
like  law,  medicine,  and  pharmacy,  e.  g.,  the 
New  York  State  Board  of  Law  Examiners,  ap- 
pointed by  the  Court  of  Appeals.  See  Exami- 
nations for  Employment  and  Professions; 
Professions  and  Callings,  Public  Regula- 
tion of;  Regents’  Examination;  Schools, 
Public,  Legal  Rights  of  Teachers  in  ; 
Teachers,  Legal  Qualifications  of.  Refer- 
ences: H.  Updegraff,  “Teacher^’  Certificates”  in 
U.  S.  Bureau  of  Education,  Bulletins,  No.  18 
(1911);  N.  Y.  Education  Dept.,  Itli  Annual 
Report,  1910,  89-108.  K.  C.  B. 


STATE  EXECUTIVE 


Genesis  of  Power. — The  principles  of  Ameri- 
can executive  power  and  particularly  of  the 
state  executive,  are  derived  from  the  practice 
of  Great  Britain  and  of  the  English  colonies  in 
North  America.  The  long  struggle  between  the 
Tudor  and  Stuart  sovereigns  and  Parliament 
developed  a theory  that  the  interests  of  the 
executive  and  legislative  parts  of  the  govern- 
ment were  antagonistic  (see  Separation  of 


Powers).  In  the  colonies  this  idea  was 
strengthened  by  the  practice  (except  in  two 
colonies)  of  appointing  the  governor  from  Eng- 
land, and  binding  him  by  royal  instructions 
to  stand  out  against  many  things  which  the 
colonists  desired,  as  for  instance  against 
taxes  on  the  slave  trade.  In  the  disturbances 
preceding  the  Revolution,  the  governors  were 
the  agents  of  the  British  authorities. 


STATE  EXECUTIVE 


In  the  formation  of  the  new  state  govern- 
ments, therefore,  the  legislative  power  was 
emphasized,  and  the  executive  was  correspond- 
ingly weakened:  some  of  the  governors  were 
appointed  by  the  legislatures,  all  were  lim- 
ited in  powers  of  appointment  and  administra- 
tion; only  one  of  the  first  set  of  constitutions, 
that  of  Massachusetts,  had  even  a suspensory 
veto  power. 

The  colonists  had  also  been  accustomed  to 
appoint  some  colonial  executive  officer,  such  as 
the  treasurer,  without  the  action  of  the  gover- 
nor; and  in  working  out  their  state  govern- 
ments, they  followed  this  practice  of  subdivid- 
ing the  executive  power.  The  Federal  Govern- 
ment during  the  Revolution  consisted  of  a 
Congress,  representing  states,  which  were  very 
jealous  of  the  authority  of  individuals  and  of 
any  special  power  given  to  the  delegate  of  a 
particular  state;  hence  the  president  of  Con- 
gress was  simply  a chairman,  and  under  the 
Confederation,  the  only  constitutional  execu- 
tive was  a board  of  nine  members  which  never 
worked  at  all.  The  only  executive  power  con- 
sisted of  committees  and  heads  of  departments 
and  commissions  appointed  by  Congress,  and 
entirely  responsible  to  Congress.  The  states, 
therefore,  had  no  model  of  a vigorous  and  well 
organized  executive,  till  the  Federal  Constitu- 
tion of  1787 ; and  by  that  time  every  state  had, 
or  was  about  to  adopt,  a single  governor,  and 
had  worked  out  a system  of  balanced  govern- 
ment. 

Executive  Head  of  the  State. — The  early  rev- 
olutionary governments  had  temporary  com- 
mittees at  their  head.  In  Pennsylvania  until 
1790,  the  executive,  which  was  a weak  one,  was 
made  up  of  a council,  the  chairman  of  which 
was  called  the  president  of  Pennsylvania.  In 
every  other  state  constitution,  provision  was 
made  for  a single  governor.  Gradually  choice 
by  the  legislature  fell  away,  till  in  1865  all  the 
governors  became  elected  by  popular  vote. 
Some  states,  from  the  first,  accepted  a plural- 
ity vote;  others  required  a majority  vote  and, 
if  none  appeared  on  the  election,  the  legisla- 
ture, on  joint  ballot,  was  authorized  to  elect — 
a system  which  still  prevails  in  New  Hamp- 
shire, Vermont,  Connecticut,  Rhode  Island  and 
Georgia. 

The  governor  (see)  is  the  official  head  of 
the  state,  sends  and  receives  communications 
in  the  name  of  the  state;  issues  proclamations 
to  the  people  of  the  state,  either  giving  public 
notice  of  a legal  measure  or  expressing  his 
opinion  ( see  Messages,  Executive).  The 
governor  is  the  official  representative  of  the 
state  in  its  relations  to  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment: hence  he  issues  writs  for  elections  to 
fill  vacancies  (see)  in  the’ House  of  Representa- 
tives; appoints  to  vacancies  in  the  federal 
senatorships  from  his  state;  transmits  ratifica- 
tion of  constitutional  amendments,  and  other 
acts  of  the  state  legislature  which  concern 
federal  matters. 


The  governor  possesses  a body  of  powers, 
varying  much  from  state  to  state:  he  is  the 
head  of  the  military  system  of  his  state;  ap- 
points military  officers  and  calls  out  and  gives 
orders  to  the  militia  when  needed;  he  has  a 
considerable  patronage,  chiefly  of  the  members 
of  boards  (see)  and  commissions  (see),  and 
some  of  the  less  important  officials;  he  has  a 
removal  power,  in  most  cases  smaller  than  his 
appointing  power;  and  by  the  veto  which  is 
now  employed  in  all  the  states  but  North  Car- 
olina he  has  a share  in  the  legislation  of  his 
state.  About  three-fourths  of  the  states  have 
also  a lieutenant  governor  (see),  who  succeeds 
the  governor  in  case  of  a vacancy;  and,  in 
some  states,  in  case  of  the  absence  of  the 
governor  from  his  commonwealth. 

Subdivision  of  Executive  Power. — In  every 
state  of  the  Union,  there  are  state  executive 
officials,  not  appointed  by  or  responsible  to 
the  governor : such  are — the  secretary  of  state 
of  the  state  (see)  ; the  adjutant  general  of 
the  state  (see)  ; the  state  treasurer  (see)  ; the 
attorney  general  (see)  ; the  superintendent  of 
public  instruction  (see)  ; the  state  comptroller 
or  auditor  (see).  In  Pennsylvania,  several 
of  these  officials  are  appointed  by  the  gover- 
nor; but  the  general  rule  is  that  they  are 
elected  by  popular  vote,  their  terms  and  the 
time  of  their  election  often  differing  from 
those  of  the  governor;  so  that  they  often 
belong  to  another  political  party  than  the 
governor,  and  in  any  case  are  not  respon- 
sible to  him. 

Large  areas  of  executive  power  are  given 
to  state  boards  and  commissions  (see)  ; in 
Massachusetts  there  are  about  300  members  of 
such  commissions.  The  majority  of  the  states 
have  boards  of  railroad  commissioners,  boards 
of  health,  and  bureaus  of  labor.  Some  have 
public  utilities  commissions  (see),  prison  com- 
missioners, state  boards  of  education.  In 
most  states,  there  are  separate  boards  of  trus- 
tees for  each  public  insane  hospital,  normal 
school,  state  jail,  reformatory  and  institution 
for  the  defective.  A movement  is  going  for- 
ward for  the  consolidation  of  most  of  these 
local  boards  into  one  board  of  control  (see) 
or  board  of  affairs.  Every  variety  can  be 
found  in  the  organization  of  these  boards — 
some  elected  by  popular  vote;  some  chos- 
en by  the  legislature;  most  of  them  ap- 
pointed by  the  governor,  sometimes  with  and 
sometimes  without  the  power  of  removal; 
some  paid  and  some  unpaid. 

The  one  characteristic  common  to  the  execu- 
tive system  of  all  the  states  is  that  the  execu- 
tive power  is  diffused  among  many  individuals 
and  boards,  not  selected  on  any  uniform  sys- 
tem, not  responsible  to  any  central  authority, 
not  regulated  by  one  statute,  nor  one  system 
of  statutes,  acting  in  disharmony  and  fre- 
quently at  cross  purposes.  The  whole  system 
is  inspired  by  two  principles:  that  the  execu- 
tive is  something  to  be  feared;  and  that  as 


383 


STATE  EXECUTIVE 


many  people  as  possible  ought  to  have  the 
joys  of  office. 

There  is  a marked  tendency  to  enlarge  the 
powers  of  the  governor  by  giving  him  the  ap- 
pointment of  a larger  number  of  these  of- 
ficials, by  conferring  upon  him  a removal 
power,  and  by  giving  him  powers  of  inquiry 
and  supervision  over  some  of  the  state  officers. 
On  the  other  hand,  in  several  states,  notably 
Massachusetts,  the  governor  is  surrounded  by 
an  executive  council,  which  shares  in  his  ap- 
pointments, removals,  pardons  and  other  func- 
tions. 

Minor  Executive  Service. — From  the  colonial 
period  on,  there  has  been  a small  force  of 
bureaus  and  clerks  connected  with  the  legis- 
latures and  the  executive  officers.  As  the 
functions  of  the  states  have  grown,  these  min- 
or officials  have  multiplied.  Every  state  in- 
stitution has  its  clerical  force,  besides  the 
necessary  wardens,  keepers,  nurses,  attendants 
and  other  employees.  The  modern  development 
of  state  activity  and  state  regulation  has  en- 
larged this  body  of  persons  by  a great  num- 
ber of  inspectors,  accounting  officers  and  clerks, 
district  nurses,  health  officials  and  the  like. 
The  growth  of  the  public  schools  has  made 
necessary  an  army  of  teachers,  employees  of  the 
state,  or  of  the  cities,  and  subject  to  super- 
vision of  the  state.  Probably  the  number  of 
state  employees  throughout  the  Union  is  not 
less  than  400,000. 

Outside  of  New  York,  Massachusetts,  and  a 
few  other  states,  these  employees  are  chosen 
by  favor  in  most  cases,  because  of  political 
service  to  the  party  in  power,  and  are  subject 
to  removal  for  trivial  reasons,  or  when  a new 
party  gets  possession  of  the  appointing  power. 
Many  such  officials  serve  for  years  because 
they  occupy  confidential  or  expert  positions  in 
which  there  has  to  be  some  regularity.  Many 
cities  have  been  brought  under  civil  service 
rules,  so  that  their  clerical  force  is  reasonably 
constant;  even  there  the  heads  of  offices  and 
of  minor  departments  are  subject  to  frequent 
change. 

The  one  great  exception  to  this  fluid  condi- 
tion of  state  service  is  the  schools.  Though  the 
state  superintendents  are  in  most  states  still 
political  officers  with  short  service,  the  city 
superintendents  serve  for  long  periods  and 
are  likely  to  be  transferred  on  their  merits. 
In  most  of  the  city  schools  throughout  the 
Union,  the  teachers  have  a steady  tenure;  in 
many  places  a life  tenure;  in  some  places,  a 
legal  right  to  a retiring  allowance  after  a 
stated  number  of  years’  service  ( see  Teachers, 
Legal  Rights  of).  The  rural  teachers  are 
much  more  subject  to  change  and  disturbance; 
but  in  many  states,  a system  of  county  super- 
intendents is  growing  up  in  which  the  super- 
intendents are  out  of  politics  and  protect  the 
teachers  from  arbitrary  removal.  The  system 
of  state  examinations  and  certificates  ( see 
Teachers,  Legal  Qualifications  for)  is  a 


precaution  against  unfit  persons  being  appoint- 
ed, and  establishes  a standard,  however  low, 
of  capacity  and  character. 

Administrative  Power. — The  theory  of  Amer- 
ican governments,  both  national  and  state,  is 
based  on  the  separation  of  powers  (see)  ; and 
all  the  state  constitutions  attempt  to  set  legis- 
latures and  all  executive  authorities  in  two 
separate  compartments  of  authority.  In  prac- 
tice, the  principle  is  defective  on  both  sides. 
The  legislatures  do  a large  amount  of  execu- 
tive business  through  committees  which  make 
decisions  as  to  executive  matters,  and  through 
their  control  of  appropriations  which  is  used 
to  undercut  executive  responsibility  by  pre- 
scribing the  numbers,  salaries  and  duties  of 
subordinate  officials. 

The  executive  trenches  on  legislative  power 
by  such  constitutional  devices  as  the  veto;  by 
the  influence  of  governors  and  other  executive 
officers  over  the  drafting  and  enactment  of 
legislation;  and  by  the  power  of  executive  of- 
ficers to  pass  votes  and  make  rules  which  have 
the  force  of  law.  American  constitution  mak- 
ers and  jurists  have  a theory  that  legislative 
power  cannot  be  delegated,  which  is  not  borne 
out  by  the  practice  of  the  governments.  Legis- 
lative power  is  constantly  delegated  by  the 
people  of  the  legislature  of  the  state  to  city 
and  other  local  governments;  and  legislatures 
constantly  give  to  executive  bodies  the  power 
to  make  rules  which  have  the  force  of  law,  in 
the  relations  between  executive  officials  and 
their  subordinates;  as,  for  example,  to  draw 
up  rules  for  the  competitive  examinations  for 
candidates  of  minor  office.  In  a great  number 
of  cases,  also,  legislatures  empower  governors, 
and  particularly  boards,  to  make  rules  which 
are  law  for  the  citizen  not  employed  by  the 
state;  as  for  instance,  rules  for  the  use  of 
public  grounds  and  the  forms  of  declaration 
for  taxes.  Even  so  serious  a matter  as  the 
making  of  rates  for  transportation  has  been 
delegated  by  many  legislatures  to  railroad  com- 
missions (see)  • and  health  regulations,  which 
seriously  affect  the  public,  are  frequently 
drawn  by  state  boards  of  health. 

No  other  way  is  adequate  to  secure  legis- 
lation in  detail  for  the  advancing  economic 
and  social  functions  of  the  state.  The  prac- 
tice of  issuing  executive  ordinances  (see),  and 
of  executive  regulations,  exists  in  every  govern- 
ment and  is  a substantial  function  of  the  state 
executives  of  the  United  States. 

Remedies  and  Probable  Development. — The 
evils  of  the  subdivision  of  executive  power  are 
recognized  in  many  states;  and  the  attempt  is 
being  made  to  give  the  governor  a wider  ap- 
pointing power;  to  relieve  him  from  the  con- 
firmation of  his  appointments  by  the  state  sen- 
ate; to  recognize  his  unrestricted  removal 
power;  and  to  reduce  the  number  of  coordinate 
elected  officials  ( see  Ballot,  Short).  No  state 
in  the  Union  has  ever  had  a cabinet  system 
in  which  all  the  heads  of  departments  are 


384 


STATE  EXECUTIVE 


appointed  by  the  governor,  except,  for  a short 
time,  Florida;  though  the  example  of  the 
United  States  Government  proves  its  efficiency 
and  the  public  interest  which  it  arouses. 

The  suggestion  has  been  made  by  some  state 
officials  that  the  single  board  government 
which  has  been  successful  in  many  cities  (see 
Commission  System  of  City  Government) 
would  be  fully  as  advantageous  in  states ; that 
the  whole  executive  might  be  put  into  the 
hands  of  a board,  one  of  whom  with  a little 
greater  authority,  might  be  called  governor; 
and  that  that  board  might  appoint  all  state 
subordinate  officials,  or  provide  for  their  ap- 
pointment. 

Before  either  of  these  proposed  reforms  is 
realized,  the  state  executive  can  be  made  more 
vital  by  giving  to  the  governor  the  power  to 
investigate  the  workings  of  any  executive  de- 
partment, and  to  remove  the  head  of  any 
department,  whether  appointed  or  elected,  for 
reasons  that  seem  good  to  the  governor. 

Another  practical  reform  is  to  concentrate 
the  boards  into  fewer  units,  if  possible,  putting 
all  state  institutions  under  one  body  (see 
Boards  of  Control  ) . Questions  arise,  how- 
ever, as  to  the  authorities  of  such  boards  over 
the  state  educational  institutions,  which  in 
most  states  are  well  out  of  politics;  and  which 
feel  that  they  have  an  educational  policy  wide- 
ly separated  from  mere  considerations  of  fi- 
nance and  administration. 

Another  proposed  reform  is  the  recall  (see) 
of  executive  officials,  which  has  become  a part 
of  the  law  of  some  states,  but  has  as  yet 
(1913)  not  been  applied  in  the  case  of  any 
governor.  The  recall  is  intended  to  be  a 
form  of  removal  of  executive  officials  quicker 
than  impeachment ; but  it  may  be  simply  a 
political  measure;  and  the  recall  does  not  bring 
about  the  desirable  close  relations  and  har- 
mony of  action  between  the  high  officials  of  the 
state. 

Control  of  the  State  Executive. — The  popular 
fear  of  executive  power  is  reflected  in  the 
various  means  of  checking  and  restraining  exe- 
cutive officials.  In  the  first  place  almost  all 
tne  important  well-paid  offices  are  filled  by 
popular  election,  and  for  brief  terms,  nowhere 
exceeding  about  four  years.  Governors  almost 
never  serve  more  than  two  terms,  and  there 
are  frequent  changes  in  other  state  officers. 
The  system  of  recall,  already  legal  in  some 
states,  makes  it  possible  to  cut  short  the  al- 
ready brief  terms,  and  thus  to  resume  and  to 
reassign  executive  authority. 

The  state  executive  is  much  restrained  by 
the  state  legislatures,  which  fix  the  terms  and 
salaries  of  almost  all  the  minor  officials,  and 
of  many  of  the  heads  of  departments.  By  their 
control  of  appropriations  also,  they  can  prevent 
the  executive  from  carrying  out  plans  of  in- 
vestigation or  change;  and  they  can  paralyze 
almost  any  executive  department  by  cutting 
off  or  by  minutely  limiting  the  appropriation. 


This  forces  many  executive  officers  to  make 
appointments  to  please  members  of  the  legis- 
lature, upon  whose  good  will  the  efficiency  of 
the  office  depends. 

Executive  officials  are  subject  to  investiga- 
tion by  legislative  committees,  which  are  often 
searching  and  sometimes  hostile.  Accounts, 
contracts,  appointments  and  removals  of  sub- 
ordinates, discipline  of  institutions,  relations 
with  corporations  and  powerful  individuals, 
such  matters  are  searched  to  the  bottom. 

All  executive  officials  are  subject  to  judicial 
control,  first,  through  the  authority  of  the 
judges  to  hold  executive  acts  unconstitutional 
and  therefore  void;  that  is  the  courts  may  de- 
cline to  apply  executive  decisions,  on  the 
ground  that  they  are  beyond  the  authority  of 
the  official  making  them.  Appointments  and 
removal  of  officials  are  thus  frequently  set 
aside  by  the  courts.  In  addition,  the  courts 
have  authority  to  summon  executive  officials 
as  witnesses  except  the  governor  who  as  the 
head  of  the  state  is  exempt  from  such  process; 
and  to  compel  the  testimony  of  officials  in 
pending  suits.  The  courts  also  freely  apply 
writs  of  injunction  (see)  and  mandamus  (see) 
to  executive  officials,  and  thus  inhibit  or  com- 
pel the  performance  of  executive  functions. 

See  Adjutant  General,  State;  Attorney 
General,  State;  Appointments  to  Office; 
Ballot,  Short;  Boards  of  Control,  State; 
Boards,  State  Executive;  Civil  Service, 
State;  Commissions  in  Am.  Government; 
Council,  Governor’s;  Executive  and  Execu- 
tive Reform  ; Governor  of  the  State  ; Gover- 
nors, Conference  of;  House  of  Governors; 
Influence  in  Government;  Institutions, 
State  Administration  of  ; Lieutenant  Gover- 
nor; Office;  Ordinances,  Executive;  Pat- 
ronage; Popular  Government;  Proclama- 
tions, Executive;  Qualifications  for  Of- 
fice; Removal  of  Public  Officials;  Separa- 
tion of  Powers;  Spoils  System;  State  Gov- 
ernments, Characteristics  of;  Veto  Power. 

References:  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Government 
and  Politics  (1910),  chs.  xxiii,  xxiv;  A.  B. 
Hart,  Actual  Government  (1903),  ch.  viii;  F. 
J.  Goodnow,  Comparative  Administrative  Law 
(1893),  I,  74-82,  102-106,  134-161,  II,  1-100, 
Principles  of  Administrative  Law  (1910),  II, 
1-100;  H.  C.  Croly,  Promise  of  Am.  Life 
(1903)  ; S.  E.  Baldwin,  Modern  Pol.  Institu- 
tions, (1898)  ; T.  M.  Cooley,  Treatise  on  Con- 
stitutional Limitations  (1898);  James  Bryce, 
Am.  Commonwealth  (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  ch.  xi; 
J.  H.  Finley  and  J.  F.  Sanderson,  Am.  Execu- 
tive and  Executive  Methods  (1908)  ; J.  A.  Fair- 
lie,  Centralization  o.f  Administration  in  New 
York  State  (1898),  “The  State  Governor”  in 
Mich.  Law  Review,  X (1911)  ; W.  W.  Willough- 
by, Constitutional  Law  (1912)  ; L.  A.  Blue,  Re- 
lation of  the  Governor  to  the  Organization  of 
Executive  Power  in  the  States  (1902)  ; W. 
Bondy,  Separation  of  Government  Powers  in 
History  and  Theory  and  in  the  Constitutions 


385 


STATE  FARMS  AND  AGRICULTURAL  STATIONS— STATE  GOVERNMENTS 


(1896);  C.  Z.  Lincoln,  Ed.,  Messages  of  the 
Governors,  New  York,  1683-1906  (1909)  ; E.  F. 
Shambaugh,  Edi,  Messages  of  the  Governors  of 
Iowa  (1903-1905)  ; Conference  of  Governors 
at  the  White  House,  Proceedings,  1909;  R.  H. 
Whitten,  Public  Administration  in  Massa- 
chusetts (1898);  P.  S.  Reinsch,  Legislatures 
and  Legislative  Methods  (1907),  ch.  viii; 


bibliography  in  A.  B.  Hart,  Manual  ( 1908 ) , 
§ 106  (lects.  28,  29)  ; Am.  Year  Book,  1910, 
and  year  by  year. 

Albert  Bushnexl  Hart. 

STATE  FARMS  AND  AGRICULTURAL 
STATIONS.  See  Agricultural  Experiment 
Stations. 


STATE  GOVERNMENTS,  CHARACTERISTICS  OF 


Powers  of  the  National  and  State  Govern- 
ments Contrasted.— The  United  States  of 
America,  being  a federation,  has  a government 
made  up  of  two  distinct  parts:  a national 
government  voiced  by  its  three  great  depart- 
ments; and  the  several  governments  of  the 
forty-eight  states  or  commonwealths  compos- 
ing the  Union.  Under  the  control  of  the  na- 
tional government  are  the  territories  and  col- 
onies of  the  United  States  including  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia.  Under  the  control  of  the 
states  are  the  counties,  towns,  townships,  cities 
and  villages  within  their  borders.  Each  state 
under  the  national  constitution  may  organize 
its  governmental  system  as  it  pleases,  provided 
only  it  be  republican  in  form,  that  is,  organized 
so  that  the  will  of  its  citizens  can  be  ascer- 
tained and  enforced  (see  Constitutions, 
State,  Characteristics  of). 

The  powers  vested  in  the  states  in  accord- 
ance with  the  national  Constitution  may  be 
summarized  as  the  sum  total  of  all  sovereign 
powers,  except  those  delegated  to  the  national 
Government,  or  expressly  forbidden  to  the  states 
(Art.  I,  Secs,  viii,  ix,  x).  If  doubt  arises  as 
to  whether  or  not  some  exercise  of  power  be- 
longs to  the  national  or  to  the  state  govern- 
ments, the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States, 
in  a case  brought  before  it  on  appeal,  marks 
the  boundary  line  between  the  two  fields  of 
conflicting  jurisdiction.  The  states  collectively 
in  their  relations  to  the  national  Government 
are  in  theory  neither  subordinate  nor  superior 
to  it  but  rather  are  coordinate  with  it.  The 
true  theory  of  the  Union  is  that  the  sovereign 
powers  of  the  United  States  of  America  are  by 
the  Constitution  divided,  the  exercise  of  cer- 
tain specific  powers  being  delegated  to  the 
Federal  Government;  the  residue,  excepting  a 
few  prohibitions  expressly  named,  belonging  to 
the  states.  Each  division,  therefore,  federal 
or  state,  may  use  the  inherent  powers  of  sov- 
ereignty, such  as  the  powers  of  police,  taxation, 
and  eminent  domain,  provided  that  each  con- 
fines itself  to  its  own  field  as  defined  by  the 
Constitution.  In  point  of  fact  the  powers  of 
the  states  unitedly  are  much  greater  than  those 
exerted  by  the  Federal  Government.  The  na- 
tional organization  possessing  the  powers  in- 
volved in  international  relations,  including  war 
and  diplomacy,  represents  the  personality  and 


dignity  of  the  sovereign  state  and  is  the  only 
government  officially  known  to  foreign  states. 
But  in  domestic  matters  its  powers  are  chiefly 
in  regulation  of  general  economic  interests. 
The  states  by  contrast  control  the  mass  of 
governmental  power  in  respect  to  life,  property 
and  education  and  legislate  freely  on  property 
rights,  occupations,  crimes,  charities,  sanita- 
tion, and  schools.  Each  state  may  levy  what 
taxes  it  pleases  except  import  and  export 
taxes ; and  it  may  legislate  for  the  general 
welfare  of  its  citizens,  subject  only  to  the 
few  restrictions  of  the  national  Constitution. 
As  the  states  also  through  their  electorates 
control  directly  or  indirectly  the  personnel  and 
policy  of  the  national  Government,  and  have 
the  right  to  amend  by  a three-fourths  vote  the 
national  Constitution  (Art.  V)  the  weight  of 
power  lies  with  them  collectively  as  against 
the  Federal  Government,  though  admittedly  no 
state  singly  or  in  combination  has  the  legal 
right  to  withdraw  from  the  Union  ( see  State 
Sovereignty;  United  States  as  a Federal 
State ) . 

Local  Administrative  Bodies. — Under  its 
powers  each  state  formulates  for  itself  a con- 
stitution in  which  is  set  forth  the  organization 
of  the  several  governmental  departments  and 
their  respective  powers.  These  more  general 
provisions  are  then  elaborated  into  statutes 
by  the  legislature  and  then  again  still  further 
detailed  through  ordinances  passed  by  inferior 
law  making  or  administrative  bodies.  As  each 
state  determines  for  itself  the  nature  of  its 
local  subdivisions,  there  are  wide  variations 
in  detail,  though  there  is  approximately  a com- 
mon type.  Every  state,  for  example,  is  sub- 
divided into  counties,  but  the  county  may  be 
a carefully  organized  body  politic  of  large 
autonomous  power,  as  in  the  South;  or  it 
may  be  a mere  judicial  district,  as  in  Rhode 
Island.  Within  the  county,  urban  centers  are 
incorporated  under  charters,  general  or  special ; 
rural  communities  are  in  some  states  organized 
as  administrative  districts  for  such  purposes 
ns  education  or  elections;  in  other  states  as 
townships,  and  in  New  England  as  towns.  In 
New  England  the  county  is  relatively  unim- 
portant and  the  town  with  its  large  local  pow- 
ers is  the  really  important  body  politic  next 
to  the  state  itself.  The  township  system,  pre- 


STATE  GOVERNMENTS,  CHARACTERISTICS  OF 


valent  chiefly  in  the  northern  half  of  the  Unit- 
ed States,  combines  in  general  the  purely  local 
powers  of  the  town  with  service  as  an  admin- 
istrative division  of  the  county.  It  should  be 
said,  however,  that  there  are  many  varieties  of 
township  government  ( see  County  Govern- 
ment; Towns  and  Townships). 

All  of  these  subdivisions,  county,  city,  town- 
ship or  town,  and  the  local  districts  or  villages 
included  within  these,  derive  their  powers 
either  directly  from  the  state  through  its  con- 
stitution, or  from  the  authority  of  the  legis- 
lature. They  are  therefore  entirely  subject  to 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  state  and  have  no  of- 
ficial relationship  whatsoever  with  the  Federal 
Government.  Those  powers  derived  from  the 
state  constitution  cannot  be  altered  by  the  leg- 
islature; but  powers  held  from  the  legislature 
are  subject  to  revocation  or  amendment  by  or- 
dinary processes  of  legislation.  In  general 
these  local  bodies  politic  throughout  the  states 
are  granted  large  powers  of  local  autonomy, 
in  accord  with  the  principle  of  decentralization 
prevalent  throughout  the  United  States.  In 
powers  general  in  kind  though  local  in  prac- 
tice, such  as  taxation,  assessment,  policing, 
education  and  roads,  there  is  a strong  tendency 
to  bring  about  uniformity  through  constitu- 
tional requirements  or  through  supervisory 
state  administrative  boards.  There  is,  how- 
ever, no  well  defined  system  of  general  super- 
vision over  localities  such  as  that  of  France  or 
Great  Britain.  For  this  reason  the  details  of 
local  government  in  each  state,  or  even  in 
each  county,  city  or  township  of  the  state, 
must  be  obtained  by  a separate  study  in  each 
case. 

Judicial  Department. — In  all  the  state  con- 
stitutions provision  is  made  for  the  separation 
or  differentiation  of  the  three  departments  of 
government.  The  separation  is  merely  formal 
in  many  states  since  the  legislatures  retain  a 
large  control  over  administration,  and  the  gov- 
ernor through  his  veto  power  has  a fairly 
large  influence  over  legislation.  The  judicial 
department  is  the  one  at  present  most  free 
from  the  control  of  the  other  two  departments, 
though  in  the  eighteenth  century  it  was  largely 
under  the  control  of  the  legislature.  Constitu- 
tional conventions  have  steadily  reduced  this 
control,  and  constitutions  now  regularly  pro- 
vide in  quite  full  detail  for  the  organization, 
functions  and  powers  of  the  several  grades  of 
courts  (see  State  Judiciary). 

The  American  type  of  judicial  organization 
is  a three  grade  system  of  courts,  consisting  of : 
(1)  a supreme  court;  (2)  a series  of  inter- 
mediate courts  usually  known  as  circuit,  dis- 
trict, or  county  courts;  (3)  many  petty  courts 
of  local  jurisdiction,  such  as  the  courts  of  the 
justices  of  the  peace.  The  supreme  court  is 
regularly  a court  of  appeals  and  has  as  a rule 
only  slight  original  jurisdiction.  The  other 
courts  of  the  state  exercise  original  jurisdic- 
tion only,  in  accord  with  requirements  laid 


down  in  constitution  or  statutes.  From  this 
general  type  of  judicial  organization  there  is 
wide  diversity,  especially  in  the  older  states, 
in  respect  to  names,  organization  and  juris- 
diction of  the  several  courts.  In  some  of  the 
larger  states,  a series  of  circuit  courts  of  ap- 
peal may  relieve  the  supreme  court  of  its  less 
important  business,  or  there  may  be  a series 
of  courts  above  the  county  courts,  having  origi- 
nal jurisdiction  over  the  more  important  cases. 
County  courts  also  are  often  charged  with  ad- 
ministrative functions,  especially  in  the  South. 
In  thirty-seven  of  the  states,  judges  are  elected 
at  the  polls  but  in  the  eleven  other  states  are 
named  by  the  legislature,  or  executive,  or  by 
both  jointly.  There  are  many  variations  in 
their  tenure  of  office.  In  three  states  there  is 
a life  tenure;  but  as  a rule  the  term  varies 
from  two  to  twelve  years.  The  periods  set 
by  over  twenty  states  are  six,  four,  and  two 
years  respectively  for  the  three  grades  of 
courts.  A class  system  is  usually  in  use  so 
that  one  half  or  one  third  only  of  the  supreme 
bench  is  elected  at  each  election. 

The  judicial  department  has  jurisdiction  over 
all  cases  that  arise  under  the  constitution  and 
laws  of  the  state,  and  from  the  final  decision 
of  its  supreme  court  on  questions  involving 
only  state  law,  provided  there  is  no  “federal 
question”  (see),  there  is  no  appeal  to  the 
federal  courts.  State  courts,  however,  have  in 
many  cases  that  arise  under  federal  law  con- 
current jurisdiction  with  the  federal  courts, 
and  decisions  in  such  cases  as  involve  an  au- 
thoritative interpretation  of  the  national  Con- 
stitution may  be  reviewed  by  the  national 
Supreme  Court.  Criminal  cases  are  presented 
to  the  courts  through  either  the  grand  jury 
( see  Jury,  Grand)  or  the  state’s  attorneys 
( see  Law,  Criminal).  The  common  law  jury 
is  used  in  both  civil  and  criminal  trial  cases, 
but  when  specified  in  the  constitution  may  be 
waived  in  civil  cases  or  abolished  in  petty  or 
misdemeanor  cases.  Provision  is  sometimes 
made  for  a jury  of  less  than  twelve  or  for  a 
verdict  rendered  by  a vote  not  unanimous. 
Thirteen  state  constitutions  expressly  au- 
thorize the  supreme  court  to  supervise  inferior 
courts  and  six  states  provide  that  judges  may 
suggest  improvements  in  the  law  for  legisla- 
tive action.  Six  other  states,  mostly  in  New 
England,  also  allow  the  governor,  or  the  legis- 
lature, or  both  combined,  to  ask  the  supreme 
court  for  opinions  on  important  questions  of 
law.  The  personnel  of  the  judiciary  is  regular- 
ly high  and  the  judgeship  is  a position  of 
honor  and  dignity.  The  chief  defect  in  the 
judicial  system  lies  in  the  unscientific  char- 
acter of  state  law  and  procedure,  so  often  con- 
tradictory and  so  productive  of  frequent  mis- 
carriages of  justice  through  useless  and  pro- 
tracted litigation  ( see  Judiciary  and  Judicial 
Reform) . 

Executive  Department. — The  power  of  the 
executive  department  is  in  form  centered  in 


387 


STATE  GOVERNMENTS,  CHARACTERISTICS  OF 


the  governor,  who,  in  about  half  of  the  states, 
is  elected  for  a term  of  four  years;  in  nearly 
all  the  others  a two  year  term  prevails.  In 
general  he  is  required  to  be  over  thirty  years 
of  age,  a citizen  of  the  United  States,  and  a 
resident  of  his  state.  About  two-thirds  of  the 
states  have  lieutenant  governors  (see),  also, 
whose  only  function  is  to  preside  over  the 
senate,  or  to  act  as  governor  in  case  of  neces- 
sity. In  about  twenty  states  the  governor’s 
salary  is  $5000  or  more  annually.  In  the 
other  states  it  rarely  falls  below  $2000.  There 
are  occasional  restrictions  against  his  reelec- 
tion for  two  successive  terms,  or  against  his 
becoming  a candidate  for  any  other  office  dur- 
ing his  term  as  governor.  The  governor  has 
certain  routine  duties  common  to  all  states; 
he  represents  his  commonwealth  in  its  dealings 
with  other  states,  he  may  summon  the  legis- 
lature in  special  session  or  adjourn  it  in  case 
of  disagreement,  he  “must  take  care  that  the 
laws  be  faithfully  executed,”  may  commission 
officers  and  fill  vacancies  pro  tempore,  and  is 
the  commander  of  the  military  forces  of  the 
state.  He  regularly  has  large  powers  of  par- 
doning often,  however,  shared  with  a board  or 
with  the  senate.  He  has  the  right  to  make 
formal  recommendations  to  the  legislature, 
and  may  request  information  or  opinions  from 
the  several  officers  of  administration.  In  very 
few  of  the  states  is  there  a governor’s  cabinet 
or  a council,  and  this  must  necessarily  be  so 
while  the  governor  has  so  small  a control  over 
administration.  In  addition  to  his  ordinary 
powers  every  state  but  one  (North  Carolina) 
authorizes  its  governor  to  exercise  a suspensive 
veto  over  legislation.  In  about  two-thirds  of 
the  states  the  governor  may  use  this  power 
against  items  of  appropriation  bills  or  in  two 
states  even  against  the  items  of  any  bill.  In 
most  of  the  states  the  veto  may  be  overridden 
by  a two-thirds  vote  as  in  the  national  Con- 
stitution, others  require  a majority  or  else  a 
three-fifths  vote.  In  many  states,  at  the  end 
of  a legislative  session,  the  governor’s  power 
over  legislation  increases,  since  he  may  “kill” 
a bill  by  refusing  to  sign  it  before  adjourn- 
ment, or  he  may  by  law  be  allowed  from  five 
to  thirty  days  after  adjournment  to  decide 
whether  or  not  to  sign.  This  power  of  veto 
lodged  in  the  executive,  especially  when  coupled 
with  the  power  to  veto  items  and  to  disapprove 
after  adjournment  has  become  a most  effective 
restraint  on  legislative  action,  and  has  been 
vigorously  used  to  enlarge  executive  powers 
and  to  conserve  public  interests  (see  Execu- 
tive and  Executive  Reform  in  American 
System;  Governor;  State  Executive). 

In  state  administration  the  chief  depart- 
ments have  functions  broadly  indicated  by 
the  titles  of  their  heads.  These  are:  (1)  the 
secretary  of  state;  (2)  the  state  treasurer: 
(3)  the  state  auditor  or  comptroller;  (4) 
the  attorney  general;  (5)  a superinten- 
dent of  public  instruction.  Other  depart- 


ments with  varying  names  and  functions  exist, 
along  with  numerous  boards  and  commissions 
more  or  less  permanent  in  tenure.  These  num- 
ber in  some  states  from  thirty  to  fifty,  and 
being  poorly  supervised  form  a chaos  of  ad- 
ministration ( see  State  Departments,  Heads 
of)  . 

Administrative  Reorganization. — The  govern- 
nor’s  power  over  state  administration  is  legally 
insignificant  though  steadily  increasing.  Dur- 
ing the  revolutionary  period  legislatures  con- 
trolled and  at  times  carried  on  through  com- 
mittees, administrative  business.  Yet  as  this 
responsibility  multiplied  through  the  growth 
of  population  and  wealth,  it  was  found  to  be 
increasingly  difficult  to  handle  so  many  details 
through  temporary  or  even  permanent  com- 
mittees. At  first  the  problem  was  solved  by 
the  organization  of  boards,  commissions  or  de- 
partments charged  with  specific  duties,  whose 
heads  were  appointed  by  and  responsible  to 
the  legislature.  These  bodies,  however,  have 
gradually  become  so  numerous  that  state  ad- 
ministration is  unwieldy,  wasteful,  and  thor- 
oughly unbusinesslike.  Each  drifts  along  nom- 
inally controlled  by  the  legislature  but  in  reali- 
ty is  unsupervised  and  irresponsible.  The  evils 
of  this  system  are  so  clearly  manifest  that  rem- 
edies are  sought  after  and  in  part  adopted. 
In  substance  these  changes,  as  indicated  by 
recent  legislation  and  constitutional  amend- 
ment, are  as  follows:  (1)  legislative  control 
over  administration  is  minimized  by  provisions 
inserted  in  the  constitution  fixing  the  organiza- 
tion and  powers  of  administrative  boards  and 
departments;  (2)  the  power  of  appointment 
is  either  transferred  to  the  governor,  or  to 
the  governor  by  and  with  the  advice  of  the 
senate,  or  the  heads  of  the  principal  depart- 
ments are  elected  by  the  voters;  (3)  there  is 
a slowly  increasing  tendency  to  require  the 
several  departments  and  boards  to  report  semi- 
annually to  the  governor,  to  make  him  ex- 
officio  a member  of  all  boards  or  commissions, 
to  authorize  him  to  investigate  at  his  discre- 
tion any  department  or  office,  especially  those 
handling  the  finances  of  the  state,  or  to  suspend 
or  remove  those  officials  who  seem  to  be  de- 
relict in  their  duties.  In  about  ten  states  the 
governor  is  also  charged  with  the  duty  of 
presenting  to  the  legislature  at  the  opening  of 
each  session  a budget  of  anticipated  receipts 
and  expenditures.  In  short,  the  loosely  or- 
ganized administrative  system  of  the  revolu- 
tionary period  is  slowly  disappearing  and  in 
its  place  the  states  are  centralizing  adminis- 
trative powers  in  the  governor’s  hands,  as  in 
the  national  system,  thereby  enhancing  the 
dignity  and  prestige  of  the  office.  In  future 
years  much  more  attention  will  probably  be 
paid  to  the  proper  organization  of  the  admin- 
istration by  consolidating  its  functions  into 
a few  well  organized  coordinated  departments 
under  the  supervision  of  the  governor,  who 
also  should  have  the  power  of  appointment 


388 


STATE  GOVERNMENTS,  CHARACTERISTICS  OF 


and  removal  over  the  heads  of  these.  Civil 
service  rules  providing  for  the  merit  system 
of  appointment  and  tenure  would  also  remove 
the  danger  of  a possible  “spoils”  system  ( see 
Executive  and  Executive  Reform;  State 
Executive)  . 

Legislative  Department. — The  lawmaking 
body  is  the  most  important  department  in  a 
democratic  system  of  government.  In  it  is 
centered  that  mass  of  sovereign  power  in- 
herent in  the  state  under  the  national  Con- 
stitution. Especially  was  this  true  in  the 
revolutionary  period,  during  which  the  legis- 
lature was  considered  the  bulwark  of  popular 
liberties  and  was  exalted  at  the  expense  of 
the  other  two  departments.  For  the  last  hun- 
dred years  the  trend  has  been  otherwise,  since 
the  legislature  has  steadily  lost  prestige  and 
is  today  the  least  trusted  of  the  three  depart- 
ments of  government.  In  consequence  of  this 
distrust  the  constitutional  convention  has  slow- 
ly risen  into  importance;  by  its  power  to 
formulate  the  fundamental  law  of  the  state 
it  is  able  to  reduce  legislative  authority  to  com- 
parative insignificance.  This  it  accomplishes 
by  detailing  in  the  constitution  the  entire  or- 
ganization and  powers  of  government,  leaving 
as  little  as  possible  to  legislative  discretion. 
It  furthermore  enlarges  as  much  as  possible 
the  powers  of  the  other  two  departments  and 
places  in  the  constitution  long  lists  of  limita- 
tions on  legislative  authority.  The  electorate 
also  has  the  power  of  referendum  in  respect  to 
revisions  or  amendments  to  state  constitutions, 
and  since  the  opening  of  the  twentieth  century 
has  gained  in  many  states  important  powers  of 
initiative  and  referendum  in  respect  to  all 
sorts  of  legislation.  The  states  of  Oregon  and 
Oklahoma  are  the  chief  exponents  of  these 
experiments  in  direct  democracy.  The  legis- 
lature, shorn  of  its  old  time  powers  through 
these  rival  lawmaking  bodies,  has  become  in- 
significant in  fact  if  not  in  theory  and  must 
soon  be  radically  reorganized  if  it  is  to  main- 
tain its  place  in  state  government  ( see  Legis- 
lature and  Legislative  Reform;  Referen- 
dum). 

A constitutional  convention  is  always  a uni- 
cameral body  with  a membership  usually 
made  up  of  delegates  elected  by  popular  vote 
from  districts  of  equal  population.  It  exists 
only  for  the  purpose  of  formulating  or  revising 
a constitution  and  adjourns  sine  die  when  its 
work  is  completed  (see  Convention,  Constitu- 
tional). By  contrast  a legislature  is  a bi- 
cameral body — a senate  and  a house  of  repre- 
sentatives— meeting  in  most  states  biennially 
for  a session  the  length  of  which  is  usually 
fixed  by  the  constitution  at  from  forty  to  nine- 
ty days.  The  members  of  both  houses  are  in 
nearly  all  cases  elected  by  popular  vote  from 
districts  of  a single  member  each.  Since  the 
house  has  a membership  from  two  to  three 
times  that  of  the  senate,  its  members  repre- 
sent proportionately  smaller  districts.  There 


is  no  uniform  rule  in  regard  to  the  number 
of  members  in  each  house,  but  the  average 
membership  is  about  thirty-five  and  ninety 
respectively,  though  there  are  some  wide  varia- 
tions. In  all  the  states  taken  together  there 
are  about  seven  thousand  legislators  in  the 
legislatures.  The  usual  tenure  of  office  is  four 
years  for  senators  and  two  for  members  of 
the  house.  In  all  states  salaries  are  paid  to 
legislators  but  in  only  a few  states  is  this 
at  all  generous.  As  a rule  payment  varies 
from  $5.00  to  $10.00  per  legislative  day,  with 
mileage  added  for  traveling  expenses.  Each 
member  by  law  and  custom  must  reside  in  the 
district  he  represents;  and  each  district  is  in 
theory  supposed  to  be  equal  in  population  to 
similar  districts  within  the  state.  In  most 
states  a reapportionment  is  ordered  by  the 
constitution  after  every  decennial  national 
census.  In  dividing  up  the  state  into  equal 
districts,  a legislature  will  not  infrequently 
use  the  “gerrymander”  (see),  that  is,  it  will 
endeavor  to  form  the  districts  in  such  a man- 
ner that  the  party  in  power  will  gain  more 
seats  in  the  election  than  it  would  legitimately 
expect  from  its  voting  strength.  Reapportion- 
ment committees  by  long  practice  have  become 
expert  in  the  gerrymander,  and,  so  far,  no 
successful  device  has  yet  been  developed  as  a 
check  on  this  evil. 

Legislation. — A state  statute  is  not  a formu- 
lation of  principles  or  fundamentals  to  be  elab- 
orated in  detail  by  administrative  depart- 
ments or  local  governments,  for  these  details 
are  regularly  included  in  the  law  itself,  which 
thereby  becomes  verbose,  technical  and  com- 
plicated to  the  last  degree.  Since  also  it  is 
often  hastily  passed  without  much  attempt  to 
relate  it  to  existing  legislation,  the  statutes 
of  any  given  state  become  so  confused  within 
a few  years  that  even  the  courts  often  cannot 
tell  what  is  or  is  not  law,  and  thus  arises  a 
mass  of  useless  litigation.  The  remedies  de- 
veloping for  such  conditions  at  present  are: 
( 1 ) the  use  of  trained  experts  for  the  prepara- 
tion of  bills;  (2)  periodical  revisions  of  stat- 
utes by  expert  commissions;  (3)  the  legisla- 
tive reference  bureau  (see),  which  aims  to 
place  at  the  service  of  legislators  desirous  of 
preparing  bills  complete  information  in  respect 
to  existing  legislation  (see  Legislature  and 
Legislative  Reform;  Statutes,  State). 

One  of  the  chief  causes  for  legislative  in- 
efficiency is  due  to  the  fact  that  for  partisan 
and  selfish  reasons,  special,  local  or  private 
legislation  is  handled  and  passed  by  the  same 
procedure  as  general  legislation.  This  is  a 
prolific  source  of  corruption  and  unduly  com- 
plicates legislative  processes,  since  legislatures 
collectively  pass  every  legislative  year  about 
15,000  laws,  only  about  two-fifths  of  which 
are  general  in  their  nature  (see  Legislative 
Output).  It  must  be  remembered  also  that 
the  laws  passed  are  a fraction  only  of  the 
total  number  of  bills  introduced.  Obviously 


389 


STATE  GOVERNMENTS,  CHARACTERISTICS  OF 


such  a mass  of  legislation  can  be  handled 
neither  wisely  nor  effectively,  so  that  one  may 
readily  comprehend  why  American  state  legis- 
lation is  so  inferior  in  quality  to  that  formu- 
lated by  the  leading  states  of  Europe  ( see 
Legislative  System  in  Europe). 

At  the  opening  of  a legislative  session  each 
house  is  organized  by  the  election  of  officers 
and  the  adoption  of  rules.  Each  house  elects 
its  own  presiding  officer,  except  in  those  states 
where  by  constitution  the  lieutenant-governor 
presides  in  the  senate.  An  elected  presiding 
officer  is  always  a party  leader  and  he  is  ex- 
pected to  further  his  party’s  bills  even  to  the 
extent  of  being  strongly  partisan,  if  necessary, 
in  his  rulings.  When  organized,  the  two  houses 
in  a joint  session  listen  to  a message  presented 
by  the  governor,  in  which  he  makes  formal 
recommendations  in  respect  to  possible  legis- 
lation. Unless  the  governor  is  a powerful  per- 
sonality in  close  sympathy  with  the  dominant 
party,  or  backed  by  a strong  popular  support, 
his  recommendations  have  small  influence  on 
future  legislation.  His  message,  however,  is 
referred  to  suitable  committees  for  considera- 
tion. Administrative  heads  often  make  recom- 
mendations through  the  medium  of  the  gover- 
nor’s message  or  in  their  annual  reports;  but 
they  have  no  right  of  initiation,  nor  have  they 
the  right  of  presence  and  debate  in  either 
house.  Legislation  is  fully  initiated  by  the 
members  themselves  in  either  house,  though,  in 
about  half  the  states,  money  bills  must  origi- 
nate in  the  larger  house.  Important  legislation 
naturally  is  initiated  by  the  leaders  of  the 
dominant  party  who  also  are  regularly  chair- 
men of  the  principal  committees.  These  com- 
mittees exist  in  every  state  legislature  and 
are  formed  after  the  familiar  pattern  of  those 
in  the  national  Congress.  They  are  numerous, 
large  in  membership,  and  virtually  control  leg- 
islation. They  are  usually  appointed  by  the 
presiding  officer,  who  sees  to  it  that  his  party 
members  are  placed  so  as  to  dominate  legisla- 
tive policy.  Members  of  the  other  party  are 
placed  on  the  committees  but  are  always  in 
the  minority  so  as  not  to  impede  action  de- 
sired by  the  majority.  Every  bill  initiated  is 
referred  to  a committee  which  in  its  discre- 
tion may  ignore  it  or  amend  it  and  finally 
report  it  to  the  house  with  a suitable  recom- 
mendation. Many  bills  are  never  reported  or 
even  considered  by  the  committees,  but  what 
bills  they  recommend  for  passage  are  generally 
adopted,  though  occasionally  amended  as  the 
result  of  discussion.  The  sessions  of  the  com- 
mittees are  secret,  though  at  request,  public 
hearings  may  be  granted  so  as  to  allow  those 
interested  for  or  against  a bill  to  discuss  its 
provisions  before  the  committee.  Members  of 
committees  are  often  also  influenced  by  “lob- 
byists,” persons  who  as  a rule  are  paid  to 
further  some  special  bill,  too  often  suspicious 
in  kind.  Legislative  action  in  one  house  must 
of  course  be  duplicated  in  the  other  and  then 


must  pass  the  ordeal  of  the  governor’s  scrutiny 
and  possible  veto.  The  constitution  usually 
sets  a day  on  which  bills  passed  shall  go  into 
effect  (see  Committee  System;  Rules  of  Leg- 
islative Bodies). 

State  Politics. — A sketch  of  state  govern- 
ment would  not  be  complete  without  a short 
summary  of  party  organization.  No  state  has 
permanent  parties  organized  for  the  promotion 
of  local  issues  mainly.  The  parties  are  na- 
tional and  in  electoral  campaigns  discuss  na- 
tional more  frequently  than  local  policies.  A 
national  party  finds  it  to  its  interest  to  push 
its  organization  into  each  state,  city  or  county, 
so  as  to  get  control  of  all  offices  for  party 
purposes;  and  this  becomes  possible  since  citi- 
zens regularly  become  absorbed  in  national 
issues  to  the  neglect  of  local  necessities  and 
issues. 

A dominant  party  in  a state  naturally  seeks 
to  arrange  the  system  so  as  to  perpetuate  it- 
self in  power  and  conversely  to  weaken  its 
opponents  as  much  as  possible.  Hence  it  seeks 
by  efficient  organization  to  develop  a system 
whereby  it  may  further  such  legislation  as  will 
strengthen  its  own  interests.  If  the  two  chief 
parties  are  fairly  even  in  numbers,  the  party 
in  power  must  legislate  on  the  whole  for  popu- 
lar interests,  lest  it  be  overthrown  at  the  next 
election.  If  the  two  parties  are  quite  unequal, 
the  dominant  party  easily  develops  a “boss,” 
who  controls  the  party  organization  and  uses 
it  for  selfish  purposes  or  for  the  sake  of  power- 
ful economic  interests  anxious  to  get  favors 
from  the  state  through  legislation. 

Even  if  the  parties  are  fairly  equal  in  num- 
bers, a party  in  power  can  often  manipulate 
legislation  in  such  a way  as  to  interfere  seri- 
ously with  the  other’s  chance  of  success.  This 
may  be  by  gerrymandering,  or  by  inefficient  bal- 
lot and  primary  laws  or  even  by  bribery  or 
other  corrupt  devices,  since  a party  in  power 
can  always  rely  on  large  contributions  from 
the  “interests,”  to  be  used  ostensibly  for  the 
legitimate  expenses  of  electoral  campaigns. 
The  numerous  reform  movements  of  recent 
years  have  in  the  main  busied  themselves  with 
remedies  for  such  evils  as  these;  and  hence 
agitation  and  discussion  have  centered  about, 
for  example,  the  alphabetical  Australian  bal- 
lot, the  short  ballot,  registration  laws,  pri- 
mary elections,  corrupt  practices  acts  including 
lobbying,  and  regulations  of  party  organiza- 
tions. Comparatively  little  has  yet  been  done 
in  respect  to  such  vital  reforms  as  the  reor- 
ganization of  the  legislature  itself  and  of  the 
chaotic  administrative  system,  or  in  respect 
to  the  simplification  of  law  and  procedure. 
Conditions,  however,  are  by  no  means  hopeless. 
What  evils  exist  are  due  more  to  neglect  and 
incompetency  rather  than  to  corruption,  and 
present  indications  point  to  the  winning  of 
many  civic  reforms  in  state  and  municipal 
government  through  a growing  intelligent  in- 
terest in  public  questions. 


390 


STATE  GOVERNMENTS  DURING  THE  REVOLUTION 


See  Election  System  in  the  United 
States;  Executive  and  Executive  Reform; 
Executive  Power,  Theory  of;  Government, 
Theory'  of;  Governor;  Judicial  Power, 
Theory  of;  Judiciary  and  Judicial  Reform; 
Legislative  Power,  Theory  of;  Legislature 
and  Legislative  Reforms;  Party,  Place 
and  Significance  of;  Popular  Government; 
Representative  Government;  Separation  of 
Powers  ; State  Departments,  Heads  of  ; 
State  Executive;  State  Judiciary;  State 
Legislature;  State,  Theory  of. 

References:  R.  L.  Ashley,  Am.  Federal  State 
(1902),  clis.  xviii-xix;  S.  E.  Baldwin,  Am. 
Judiciary  (1905);  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Govern- 
ment and  Politics  (1910),  Pt.  Ill,  Read- 


ings in  Am.  Government  and  Politics  (1909), 
Pt.  Ill;  James  Bryce,  Am.  Commonwealth  (4th 
ed.,  1910),  I,  Pt.  II;  Herbert  Croly,  Promise  of 
Am.  Life  (1909),  ch.  xi;  J.  Q.  Dealey,  Our 
State  Constitutions  (1907)  ; J.  A.  Fairlie,  Lo- 
cal Government  in  Counties,  Towns,  and  'Vil- 
lages (1906)  ; J.  H.  Finley,  and  J.  F.  Sander- 
son, Am.  Executive  and  Executive  Methods 
(1908)  ; A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government  (rev. 
ed.,  1910),  Pt.  Ill;  P.  S.  Reinsch,  Am.  Legisla- 
tures and  Legislative  Methods  (1907),  Read- 
ings on  Am.  State  Government  (1911)  ; F.  J. 
Stimson,  Law  of  the  Federal  and  State  Con- 
stitutions of  the  U.  S.  (1908)  ; Woodrow  Wil- 
son, The  State  (1898),  469-523;  Am.  Year 
Book,  1912,  171-190.  James  Q.  Dealey. 


STATE  GOVERNMENTS  DURING  THE  REVOLUTION 


Period  of  Transition. — When  the  royal  gov- 
ernors fled  to  a man-of-war,  as  in  Virginia 
or  North  Carolina,  or  were  seized  and  confined, 
as  in  the  case  of  Governor  Franklin  of  New 
Jersey,  or  in  some  manner  ceased  to  govern, 
the  government  in  the  several  colonies  fell  into 
the  control  of  revolutionary  organizations  of 
various  characters.  In  Connecticut  alone  was 
the  colonial  governor  not  displaced  by  the 
success  of  the  revolutionary  party.  There,  the 
administration,  after  the  break  with  England, 
was  conducted  by  the  governor  and  a council 
of  safety  elected  each  year  to  assist  the  gover- 
nor in  executive  work.  A house  of  representa- 
tives and  a council,  differing  from  the  council 
of  safety,  formed  the  legislative  body,  or  gen- 
eral assembly.  It  was  this  assembly  that 
passed  a resolution  (October  10,  1776)  chang- 
ing the  colony  to  a state,  but  leaving  the  frame- 
work of  government  as  it  had  been  of  old. 
Rhode  Island,  too,  retained  its  charter  govern- 
ment in  its  old  form,  though  its  loyalist  gover- 
nor fled,  and  was  replaced  by  one  favorable  to 
tne  Revolution.  With  these  two  exceptions, 
there  was  much  confusion  and  danger  of  an- 
archy before  a new  government  deriving  its 
powers  directly  from  the  people  could  be  set 
up.  In  New  Hampshire  when  the  governor 
fled  leaving  the  colony  “destitute  of  legislation, 
and  no  executive  courts  being  open  to  punish 
criminal  offenders,”  the  lower  house  called  a 
congress,  which  after  being  duly  elected  as- 
sumed the  lately  abandoned  powers  of  govern- 
ment. In  Massachusetts,  the  action  of  the 
governor  annulling  the  writs  of  election  of  a 
new  rebellious  assembly  was  ignored,  and  the 
representatives  met  in  spite  of  the  governor’s 
orders,  assuming  full  powers  of  government  in 
that  province.  In  North  Carolina  a congress, 
and  in  Virginia  a convention,  was  called  by 
the  revolutionary  leaders,  acting  through  the 
committees  of  correspondence,  and  these  as- 
semblies, or  deliberative  meetings  of  delegates 


elected  by  men  opposed  to  the  regularly  or- 
ganized government,  took  up  the  task  of  pre- 
serving social  order.  In  other  cases,  as  in 
Pennsylvania,  the  old  assembly,  purged  of  loy- 
alist members,  continued  the  work  of  govern- 
ment. In  this  manner  either  revolutionary 
conventions  or  congresses,  or  old  assemblies 
having  become  revolutionary,  took  up  the  work 
of  regulating  society,  the  administrative  side 
of  the  work  being  in  most  cases  carried  on 
by  committees  of  safety  (see)  chosen  out  of 
the  body  of  the  revolutionary  assembly.  The 
old  colonial  judiciary  had  been,  in  some  prov- 
inces, thrown  into  as  much  confusion  during 
the  early  days  of  the  Revolution,  as  had  the 
other  branches  of  government,  and  in  some 
cases  the  revolutionary  legislatures  suspended 
the  administration  of  justice  for  a year  at  a 
time.  During  these  periods  the  provincial 
committees  of  safety,  and  their  subordinate 
committees  in  counties  and  districts  of  the 
provinces,  administered  such  rude  justice  as 
became  imperative. 

Recommendations  of  Congress. — In  Novem- 
ber, 1775,  the  Continental  Congress  recommend- 
ed the  making  of  temporary  governments,  and 
in  May  1776,  new  permanent  governments,  and 
that  work  began  immediately,  Virginia,  New 
Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  Maryland, 
Georgia  and  New  York  drafting  new  instru- 
ments of  government  before  the  expiration  of 
the  year. 

Constitutional  Conventions. — This  work  was 
done  at  first  by  conventions  not  specially  cho- 
sen for  the  purpose,  and  the  constitutions  thus 
produced  were  foisted  on  the  people  without 
asking  their  approval,  but  gradually  the  ideal 
way  was  worked  out,  and  in  1780  Massa- 
chusetts attained  the  perfected  method,  the 
convention  being  specially  chosen  and  the  con- 
stitution being  submitted  to  the  people  for 
their  approval  ( see  Constitutional  Conven- 
tions ) . 


391 


STATE  GOVERNMENTS  DURING  THE  REVOLUTION 


Philosophy  of  Government. — Embodied  in 
these  constitutions  were  many  expressions  of 
the  American  theory  of  government.  In  stat- 
ing these,  the  makers  of  new  constitutions  were 
much  influenced  by  a letter  of  John  Adams, 
later  printed  with  the  title:  “Thoughts  on 
Government  applicable  to  the  Present  State 
of  the  American  Colonies.”  The  constitution 
makers  held  that  the  object  of  government  was 
to  secure  to  the  people  their  happy  existence. 
The  power  is  the  people’s,  and  the  magistrates 
are  merely  trustees  and  servants  to  whom  pow- 
ers are  delegated  for  brief  terms.  A standing 
army  in  times  of  peace  is,  they  declared,  a 
menace  to  the  people’s  freedom.  The  powers 
of  government  must  be  balanced  between  exec- 
utive, legislative  and  judiciary,  so  that  each 
may  restrain  and  correct  the  other.  Finally, 
in  their  efforts  to  restrain  government,  the 
creators  of  the  constitution  placed  in  the  in- 
strument a bill  of  rights — natural  rights  of 
the  individual,  which  were  to  be  protected 
against  the  encroachments  of  government.  In 
the  constitutions,  too,  there  appeared  the 
thinking  which  accompanied  the  radical  move- 
ment, ever  keeping  pace  with  the  growtli  of 
the  desire  and  the  struggle  for  independence  of 
Great  Britain.  Dislike  of  privilege  and  heredi- 
tary rank  appeared  in  some  constitutions.  Of- 
fice was  never  to  be  hereditary,  and  even  here- 
ditary social  rank  was  not  to  be  bolstered  by 
primogeniture  and  the  entailment  of  estates. 
There  was,  moreover,  to  be  no  privileged  class. 
All  of  this  seems  to  indicate  that  nothing  but  a 
republican  form  of  government  was  thought 
of,  but  there  were  men  even  among  the  revolu- 
tionists who  thought  with  Zubly,  of  Georgia, 
who  declared  in  Congress  that  a republican  gov- 
ernment was  “little  better  than  a government 
of  devils.”  In  truth,  but  for  the  fact  that  the 
great  conservative  loyalist  element  in  each 
province  had  been  eliminated  by  persecution, 
the  advocates  of  democratic  forms  of  govern- 
ment would  have  had  no  easy  triumph.  As  it 
was,  there  were  men  who  helped  to  make  these 
state  governments  republican  in  form,  who 
dreamed  of  the  ultimate  formation  of  a na- 
tional government  over  all  the  states  which 
should  be  monarchical  in  form. 

Frame  of  Government. — All  of  the  new  con- 
stitutions provided  for  three  branches  of  gov- 
ernment, executive,  legislative,  judicial.  With 
one  exception  they  provided  a single  governor, 
from  whom  were  taken  many  sources  of 
strength  possessed  by  governors  of  the  present 
day.  The  legislatures  elected  him  in  eight 
states,  and  in  eleven  he  was  not  allowed  a 
veto.  In  ten  states  his  terms  of  office  was  but 
a year,  and  lest,  even  in  that  time,  he  should 
become  too  powerful  some  of  the  states  con- 
trived a council  of  state  to  advise  him.  This 
“fifth  wheel  to  a wagon,”  as  Jefferson  called 
it  in  derision,  was  chosen  by  the  legislature 
so  that  the  men  who  were  interred  in  this 
“grave  of  useful  talents”  were  also  creatures 


of  the  legislature.  In  some  cases  the  governor 
could  not  adjourn  or  prorogue  the  legislative 
body.  This  fear  of  the  executive  was,  of  course, 
the  result  of  the  colonial  experience  with  royal 
governors.  Some  of  the  wiser  leaders  saw 
the  folly  of  this  jealousy  of  a governor  of  their 
own  choice,  and  Jefferson  complained  that  too 
much  power  was  lodged  in  the  legislature  of 
Virginia.  He  did  not  like  its  power  to  elect 
the  governor  and  appoint  the  judges.  The 
only  check  on  the  legislature  in  most  states 
was  that  there  were  two  houses,  one  being  con- 
structed as  a rule  on  a more  aristocratic  basis 
than  the  other;  and  thus  the  upper  house 
often  checked  the  more  radical  tendencies  of 
the  lower.  Two  states,  however,  Pennsylvania 
and  Georgia  tried  the  experiment  of  a single 
house,  but  this  plan  was  soon  abandoned. 
Massachusetts,  until  the  making  of  her  new 
constitution  in  1780,  had  a most  irregular 
government,  in  that  she  had  no  governor,  but 
only  a House  of  Representatives  and  a council 
of  eighteen  members  elected  by  the  House.  The 
council  and  various  committees  shared  the  ex- 
ecutive work.  The  judiciary  (as  well  as  the 
executive  in  most  states)  w7as  appointed  by  the 
legislature  or  one  branch  of  it,  but  there  were 
exceptions,  notably  in  Pennsylvania,  where 
judges  were  elected  by  the  people.  In  New 
York,  the  judges  as  well  as  other  officers  of 
government  were  chosen  by  a council  of  ap- 
pointment. The  tenure  of  the  judges  was  dur- 
ing good  behavior  in  most  of  the  southern 
states,  but  wras  limited  at  the  north,  seven 
years  being  the  tenure  in  Massachusetts  and 
New  Hampshire. 

Powers  of  the  Governments. — To  these  new 
governments  were  given  many  pow'ers  not 
granted  at  a later  day  after  the  creation  of  a 
federal  government.  South  Carolina  for  ex- 
ample, specifically  endowed  its  government  with 
the  power  to  provide  an  army  and  navy,  to 
make  war,  conclude  a peace,  enter  into  treaties 
and  to  lay  embargoes.  Other  states  specified 
some  of  these  powers  and  implied  the  rest. 
Nor  did  the  governments  hesitate  to  exercise 
these  pow'ers.  So  great  wras  Virginia’s  diplo- 
matic activity  that  she  established  a clerkship 
of  foreign  correspondence.  Through  diplomatic 
agents  she  sought  arms  and  money  from 
France  and  Spain,  and  with  the  latter  pow'er 
negotiated  for  consent  to  erect  a fort  on  the 
border  between  Virginia  and  Spain’s  territory 
in  the  Mississippi  Valley.  Embargoes  were  laid 
and  ports  throw'n  open  to  the  world  upon  the 
action  of  state  legislatures.  Nine  states  fitted 
out  navies,  and  all  organized  armies,  offering 
bounties  for  enlistments  in  defiance  of  Con- 
gress’ urgent  appeals  that  they  should  not. 
Paper  money  was  issued  in  ruinous  rivalry  to 
that  issued  by  Congress.  Post  routes  were 
established  and  Indian  affairs  regulated  by 
state  action.  Finally,  the  states  alone  had 
the  pow'er  of  collecting  revenues  and  taxes, 
keeping  the  social  order  and  administering  jus- 


STATE  GOVERNMENTS  DURING  THE  REVOLUTION 


tice.  The  state  legislatures  instructed  their 
delegates  to  Congress,  and  limited  and  defined 
their  powers.  The  delegates  to  Congress  were 
elected  by  the  state  legislatures  except  in  New 
Hampshire  and  Georgia.  Recommendations 
by  Congress  had  first  to  be  approved  by  state 
authorities  before  a state  officer  would  obey. 

Character  of  the  Governments. — Although 
the  radical  political  movement  which  had  ac- 
companied the  revolution  had  succeeded  to  the 
extent  of  setting  up  a republican  form  of  gov- 
ernment, there  were  many  remnants  of  the  old 
government  by  the  upper  classes.  Government 
still  derived  its  “just  powers”  from  the  con- 
sent of  the  property  owners  and  tax  payers, 
since  they  alone  enjoyed  the  franchise.  In 
addition,  there  were  some  remaining  religious 
tests,  as  in  South  Carolina,  where  voters  must 
believe  in  a future  state  of  reward  and  pun- 
ishment. Moreover,  in  most  of  the  states  there 
were  suffrage  laws  so  framed  as  to  prevent  all 
men  of  suspected  loyalist  tendencies  from  vot- 
ing. During  the  Revolution  manhood  suffrage 
existed  only  in  Vermont.  Moreover,  the  priv- 
ilege of  office-holding  was  denied  to  those  who 
did  not  believe  in  certain  creeds  and  doctrines, 
and  certain  property  qualifications  were  de- 
manded, increasing  with  the  dignity  of  the 
office.  From  governmental  positions,  too,  all 
suspected  loyalists  were  debarred.  Finally, 
proportional  representation  in  the  legislature 
did  not  exist,  but  a county  or  town  was  repre- 
sented on  the  basis  of  its  taxpayers,  or  its 
property  valuation,  and  not  on  the  basis  of 
the  number  of  human  beings  it  contained.  The 
senate  in  three  states  contained  an  equal  num- 
ber of  representatives  from  each  county,  re- 
gardless of  their  proportional  population.  The 
government  in  the  new  states  had,  therefore, 
a somewhat  more  conservative  character  than 
the  radical  spirit  of  the  time  would  seem  to 
have  tolerated. 

Activities  of  Governments. — The  existence  of 
war  brought  to  these  newly  launched  govern- 
ments a heavy  burden  of  extra  duties  the 
records  of  which  crowd  the  printed  volumes 
of  revolutionary  documents.  The  governors, 
who  were  usually  commanders-in-chief  of  the 
state  armies,  were  specially  burdened,  though 
they  were  aided  in  their  onerous  administrative 
duties  by  councils  and  committees  of  safety. 
Some  of  the  especially  famous  war  governors 
were  Jonathan  Trumbull  of  Connecticut, 
George  Clinton  of  New  York,  Patrick  Henry 
and  Thomas  Jefferson  in  Virginia,  and  John 
Rutledge  of  South  Carolina,  and  the  correspon- 
dence of  each  reveals  a tremendous  activity. 
After  organizing  armies  and  navies  they  were 
constantly  occupied  with  securing  the  neces- 
sary supplies,  urging  the  clothier  general,  the 
commissioner  of  hides,  the  naval  commissioner, 
or  the  naval  agent  to  greater  activity.  Added 
to  this  was  the  necessity  of  collecting  the 
quotas  asked  for  by  the  Continental  Congress. 
Then  there  was  a constant  demand  for  detach- 


ments to  be  sent  to  danger  points,  to  frustrate 
the  plans  of  the  British  or  the  loyalists.  Of- 
ficers of  the  Continental  troops  were  always 
pleading  for  state  troops  to  reinforce  their 
attenuated  lines.  In  some  states  the  uprisings 
of  loyalists  were  so  feared  as  to  make  neces- 
sary “Commissioners  of  Conspiracies”  or  other 
committees  charged  with  defeating  their  plans. 
The  Indian  frontiers  were  a constant  care. 
Besides  these  troubles  there  was  the  unusual 
difficulty  in  maintaining  public  order,  prevent- 
ing robberies,  murders,  and  riotous  attacks 
upon  unpopular  persons.  Finally,  there  was 
the  need  of  attention  to  financial  disturbances, 
attempts  to  prevent  the  depreciation  of  paper 
money,  the  soaring  of  prices,  and  the  pernicious 
efforts  of  forestallers  and  monopolists.  There 
was,  too,  a needed  supervision  of  the  con- 
fiscation of  loyalist  estates  to  prevent  dis- 
honest commissioners  from  appropriating  a 
large  part  of  the  proceeds. 

Relations  Between  State  Governments. — A 
study  of  the  relations  of  state  governments 
reveals  some  interesting  friendships  and  an- 
imosities. Early  in  the  struggle,  Virginia  and 
Massachusetts  discovered  an  affinity  in  their 
political  desires,  which  led  to  a warm  friend- 
ship throughout  the  war.  New  Hampshire 
showed  her  high  regard  for  Massachusetts  by 
closely  imitating  in  1784  the  Massachusetts 
constitution  of  1780,  and  there  are  other  cases 
where  one  constitution  had  a great  influence 
upon  the  character  of  a later  one.  In  general, 
the  New  England  state  governments  were  able 
to  preserve  harmony  in  their  relations,  as  in 
the  main  the  governments  in  the  southern 
group  of  states  were  also  able  to  do.  There 
were,  however,  some  very  notable  cases  of  deep 
animosities  between  state  governments.  Of 
these  perhaps  the  most  bitter  were  those  be- 
tween Pennsylvania  and  Connecticut  due  to 
the  quarrel  over  the  Wyoming  territory,  and 
between  New  York  and  New  Hampshire  over 
the  so-called  New  Hampshire  (see)  Grants  or 
the  Vermont  territory.  On  some  issues  like 
that  of  the  western  lands,  the  states  grouped 
themselves  into  hostile  camps,  the  small  state 
governments  or  those  without  western  land 
claims  holding  together  in  opposition  to  those 
who  had  such  claims. 

The  importance  and  dignity  of  the  state 
governments  throughout  the  revolutionary 
period  is  attested  by  many  significant  facts 
Strong  men  preferred  to  serve  in  state  govern- 
ments rather  than  to  serve  in  Congress.  The 
Revolutionary  leaders  hastened  to  make  state 
constitutions  and  to  launch  state  governments, 
but  dawdled  along  for  years  in  the  matter  of 
the  Articles  of  Confederation.  There  was  evi 
dence  in  plenty  of  a firmer  belief  in  the  per- 
petuity of  the  state  governments  than  in  that 
of  Congress.  It  was  in  these  state  organiza- 
tions rather  than  in  the  federal  Congress  that 
the  affections  of  men  of  the  revolutionary  era 
were  rooted. 


393 


STATE  JUDICIARY 


See  Constitutional  Convention;  Consti- 
tution Making  in  the  U.  S. ; Revolution, 
American,  Causes  of;  Suffrage. 

References:  C.  H.  Van  Tyne,  American  Rev- 
olution (1905),  342;  University  of  the  State 
of  New  York',  State  Library  Bulletin,  No.  2 
(November  1894),  266,  278;  W.  C.  Webster, 
“State  Constitutions  of  the  American  Revolu- 
tion” in  Am.  Acad.  Pol.  and  Soc.  Sci.,  Annals, 
IX  (1897);  380-420;  S.  B.  Harding,  “Party 
Struggles  Over  the  First  Pennsylvania  Con- 
stitution” in  Am.  Hist.  Assoc.  Annual  Report, 
1894,  371-402;  E.  W.  Sykes,  “Transition 
of  North  Carolina  from  Colony  to  Common- 
wealth” in  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.,  Studies,  XVI, 


(1898),  Nos.  10,  11;  B.  W.  Bond,  “State  Gov- 
ernment in  Maryland”  in  ibid,  XXIII  (1905)  ; 
J.  A.  Silver,  “The  Provisional  Government  of 
Maryland”  in  ibid,  XIII  (1895),  No.  10;  H.  A. 
Cushing,  “History  of  the  Transition  from  Pro- 
vincial to  Commonwealth  Government  in  Mass- 
achusetts” in  Columbia  Univ.,  Studies  in  His- 
tory, VII  (1896),  No.  1;  C.  R.  Lingley,  “Tran- 
sition of  Virginia  from  Colony  to  Common- 
wealth” in  ibid,  XXXVI  (1910),  No.  2;  P.  L. 
Ford,  “The  Adoption  of  the  Pennsylvania  Con- 
stitution of  1776”  in  Pol.  Sci.  Quart.,  X 
(1895);  B.  P.  Poore,  Charters  and  Constitu- 
tions (1878)  ; F.  N.  Thorpe,  Federal  and  State 
Constitutions  (1909).  C.  H.  Van  Tyne. 


STATE  JUDICIARY 


Colonial  Development. — The  judiciary  of  the 
American  states  has  developed  from  that  set 
up  in  the  colonies,  which  in  turn  followed  the 
model  of  the  English  system.  Above  the  local 
justices  of  the  peace  were  usually  found  the 
county  courts,  composed  of  the  justices  of  the 
county.  The  court  of  general  jurisdiction, 
called  the  superior  or  supreme  court,  was,  in 
some  colonies,  composed  of  a distinct  body  of 
judges,  appointed  by  the  governor;  but  was 
often  composed  of  the  governor  himself,  with 
his  council  or  assistants. 

Many  judicial  functions  were  exercised  by 
executive  and  legislative  bodies.  Thus,  equit- 
able jurisdiction  in  those  colonies,  which  had 
no  formal  chancellor,  was  exercised  either  by 
the  legislative  assembly  or  by  the  governor. 
Judges  of  the  colonial  courts  were  usually  ap- 
p:  inted  by  the  Crown  or  by  the  governor  alone, 
or  by  the  governor  and  council,  and  some- 
times held  office  during  life  or  good  behavior, 
but  in  other  colonies  they  might  be,  and  oc- 
casionally were,  arbitrarily  removed  by  the 
governor. 

Revisory  and  controlling  authority  over  the 
colonial  judiciary  rested  with  the  judicial  com- 
mittee of  the  privy  council,  which  might  re- 
verse the  decisions  of  the  highest  colonial 
courts. 

Revolutionary  Epoch. — In  the  first  state  con- 
stitutions the  colonial  judicial  system  was,  in 
the  main,  retained.  It  became  necessary,  how- 
ever, to  provide  some  substitute  for  the  ap- 
pellate jurisdiction  hitherto  exercised  over  the 
colonial  courts  by  king  and  council.  Courts 
of  last  resort  were  therefore  set  up  in  New 
York  and  Maryland,  but  in  most  of  the  other 
states  appellate  powers  were  vested  either  in 
the  legislature  or  in  the  governor  and  council. 
The  dominating  position  of  the  legislature  over 
the  other  departments  of  government  is  illus- 
trated both  in  the  judicial  power  thus  actual- 
ly vested  in  that  body  and  also  in  its  control 
over  the  selection  of  state  judges.  In  seven 

394 


of  the  original  thirteen  states  ( Connecticut, 
Rhode  Island,  New  Jersey,  Virginia,  North  Car- 
olina, South  Carolina,  Georgia)  the  selection 
of  judges  was  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the 
legislature,  while  in  two  other  states  (Penn- 
sylvania and  Delaware)  the  legislature  par- 
ticipated with  the  executive  in  the  choice.  In 
Massachusetts,  New  Hampshire  and  Maryland 
judges  were  appointed  by  the  governor  and 
council,  and  in  New  York  by  a special  “Coun- 
cil of  Appointment.” 

In  most  of  the  original  states,  the  tenure  of 
the  judges  of  the  highest  court  was  at  first 
during  good  behavior  or  until  the  attainment 
of  the  age  limit,  usually  seventy  years.  In 
Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey,  however,  they 
served  for  a seven  year  term,  but  were  negligi- 
ble, while  Georgia,  in  the  constitution  of 
1793,  prescribed  a term  of  three  years.  In 
nearly  all  the  states,  judges  were  removable 
by  impeachment  in  the  ordinary  way.  In 
Maryland  they  could  be  removed  only  for  mis- 
behavior on  conviction  in  a court  of  law,  while 
in  Massachusetts  and  New  Hampshire  they 
might  be  removed  by  the  governor,  with  the 
consent  of  the  council,  upon  the  address  of 
the  two  houses.  In  many  states  the  legisla- 
ture could  also  remove  the  judges. 

The  first  state  constitutions  left  much  power 
to  the  legislature  over  judicial  action.  Large 
discretion  upon  the  legislature  in  prescribing 
by  statute,  the  details  of  organization  and 
jurisdiction  was  conferred.  In  some  states,  the 
legislatures  might  abolish  courts  or  absorb 
judicial  functions,  or  increase  or  decrease  the 
salaries  of  the  judges,  an  authority  which 
might  be  used  as  a means  for  intimidation 
of  the  judges. 

Elective  Judiciary. — During  the  first  half  of 
the  nineteenth  century,  the  state  judiciary 
underwent  significant  changes.  Short  terms  of 
office  were  provided  by  a number  of  new  states 
upon  their  admittance  into  the  Union  or  sub- 
equently,  anu  were  adopted,  also,  by  some  of 


STATE  JUDICIARY 


the  older  states,  as  was  the  case  in  New  York 
in  1846.  This  tendency  was  partly  due  per- 
haps to  instances  in  which  judges  holding  of- 
fice for  life  became  infirm,  but  is  principally  a 
part  of  the  democratic  wave  which  swept  over 
the  country  including  the  doctrine  of  quick 
rotation  in  elective  offices,  which  was  applied 
by  analogy  to  appointed  judges. 

This  democratic  wave  is  also  responsible  for 
the  system  of  choosing  judges  by  popular  vote, 
an  innovation  said  to  have  first  been  suggested 
by  Jefferson.  It  was  employed  by  Georgia  and 
Indiana  as  early  as  1812  anft  1816  for  inferior 
judges.  Mississippi,  in  her  constitution  of 
1832,  extended  it  to  all  judges.  From  1845 
to  1860  twenty-three  states,  in  various  sections, 
adopted  this  system  either  in  whole  or  in  part. 
It  thus  became  the  distinctive  American  sys- 
tem, has  since  been  steadily  extended,  and 
seldom  departed  from.  The  only  reaction  since 
1860  has  been  a tendency  to  increase  the  length 
of  the  judicial  term.  In  1869  New  YTork 
lengthened  the  term  of  judges  of  the  higher 
courts  from  eight  to  fourteen  years,  and  four 
years  later  Pennsylvania  increased  that  of  her 
supreme  court  judges  from  fifteen  to  twenty- 
one  years.  This  lead  has  since  been  followed 
by  a number  of  other  states. 

Organization  of  the  Lower  State  Courts. — 
Each  state  is  possessed  of  judicial  powers 
which  are  completely  independent  and  self- 
sufficient,  except  in  so  far  as  they  are  limited 
by  federal  law.  In  the  exercise  of  these  broad 
and  undefined  powers,  each  state  has  estab- 
lished a hierarchy  of  judicial  tribunals.  Pro- 
vision for  this  purpose  is  now  usually  made 
in  the  constitution.  At  the  bottom  of  the 
scale  stand  local  courts  of  inferior  and  limited 
jurisdiction,  such  as  the  justices  of  the  peace 
(see),  the  municipal  courts,  and  the  county 
courts.  Next  above  these  inferior  courts  stands 
a court,  known  variously  as  the  circuit,  su- 
perior, or  district  court,  which  is  usually  pre- 
sided over  by  a single  judge,  who  holds  court 
successively  at  different  places  in  his  circuit 
or  district.  The  boundaries  of  this  district 
are  determined  by  the  legislature,  subject 
sometimes  to  the  proviso  that  it  must  be  com- 
posed of  compact  territory  and  contiguous 
counties,  and  that,  in  changing  the  boundaries, 
the  legislature  shall  not  thereby  affect  the 
tenure  of  office  of  any  judge. 

This  court,  under  whatever  name,  is  the 
principal  trial  court  of  the  state,  in  which  most 
cases  of  any  importance  are  litigated.  Leav- 
ing aside  specific  differences,  it  may  be  said 
to  have  general  original  jurisdiction  of  the 
widest  character  in  all  cases  both  civil  and 
criminal,  irrespective  except  in  a few  states, 
of  the  amount  of  money  involved  or  of  the 
degree  of  the  offense.  It  also,  in  general,  hears 
appeals  from  the  inferior  courts,  is  author- 
ized, in  a number  of  states,  to  issue  certain 
original  and  remedial  writs  (see).  In  most 
states  the  circuit  judges  are  elected  by  the 
123  3! 


voters  of  their  judicial  circuits;  in  a few, 
they  are  appointed  by  the  governor,  with  the 
consent  of  the  state  senate.  In  two  states 
they  hold  office  during  good  behavior,  in  the 
others  for  a term  varying  from  four  to  fifteen 
years,  the  average  being  six  years.  Circuit 
courts  are  no  longer  held  by  members  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  as  was  once  a frequent  custom. 

State  Supreme  Courts. — At  the  apex  of  the 
hierarchy  of  state  courts  stands  one  appellate 
court  of  last  resort  in  every  state,  in  forty 
states  known  as  the  supreme  court,  in  the  other 
eight  as  the  court  of  appeals,  court  of  errors, 
or  the  court  of  errors  and  appeals.  A few 
states  interpose  courts  of  appeal  (in  two  states 
called  supreme  courts)  between  the  highest  and 
the  circuit  courts.  In  addition  to  the  regular 
courts,  provision  is  also  made  in  a number 
of  states  for  the  creation  of  certain  special 
courts,  such  as  courts  of  claims  and  courts 
of  conciliation.  There  are  a few  separate 
chancery  courts. 

The  supreme  court,  as  the  highest  court  of 
the  state  may  be  generically  called,  is  invari- 
ably organized  upon  the  collegiate  principle. 
The  number  of  judges  varies  from  three  to 
sixteen,  but  is  usually  odd;  in  thirty-eight 
states,  the  judges  of  the  supreme  court  were, 
in  1900,  elected  by  popular  suffrage.  In  the 
other  states  they  were  appointed  either  by  the 
legislature  (Vermont,  Rhode  Island,  Virginia, 
South  Carolina)  ; or  by  the  governor,  with  the 
consent  of  the  senate,  council,  or  legislature 
(Maine,  New  Hampshire,  Massachusetts,  Con- 
necticut, New  Jersey,  Delaware.)  Elected 
judges  in  a few  states  are  chosen  by  districts; 
usually  renewal  is  gradual.  Among  the  vari- 
ous qualifications  prescribed  for  judges  are 
that  they  shall  be  “learned  in  the  law,” 
shall  have  been  practicing  attorneys,  and 
residents  of  the  state  for  a stated  length 
of  time.  In  some  states,  such  as  In- 
diana, the  judges  of  the  supreme  court  are 
also  required  to  be  residents  of  the  respective 
judicial  districts  into  which  the  state  is  di- 
vided. Among  disqualifications  are  the  hold- 
ing of  any  other  office  of  trust  or  profit  under 
the  state  or  Federal  Government. 

One  of  the  justices  of  the  supreme  court 
serves  as  chief  justice,  either  because  longest 
in  service,  or  by  special  designation  by  the 
voters,  or  by  the  governor’s  appointment  with 
the  consent  of  the  senate,  or  by  the  selection 
of  the  justices  themselves.  The  chief  justice 
usually  distributes  the  cases  to  the  different 
justices  for  the  preparation  of  opinions. 

It  is  not  necessary  that  all  of  the  judges  of 
the  supreme  court  should  hear  every  case  ar- 
gued; a majority  of  them,  constituting  a quo- 
rum, is  usually  competent  to  sit.  In  some 
states,  as  in  New  York,  Ohio,  Missouri,  and 
California,  provision  is  made  whereby  the  court 
may  sit  in  separate  coordinate  divisions.  The 
jurisdiction  of  the  two  divisons  may  be  con- 
current, or,  as  in  Missouri,  one  division  may 


STATE  JUDICIARY 


have  exclusive  cognizance  of  criminal  cases. 
In  Ohio,  cases  involving  the  constitutionality 
of  an  act,  and  those  in  which  the  judges  of 
one  division  fail  to  agree  as  to  the  judgment 
to  be  rendered  must  be  referred  to  the  whole 
court  for  adjudication.  This  device  is  designed 
to  facilitate  the  disposal  of  cases,  but  is  apt 
to  make  the  law  uncertain  through  inconsisten- 
cy in  the  line  of  decisions  rendered. 

The  salaries  of  the  judges  of  the  supreme 
court  vary  from  $2500  in  Vermont  to  $14000 
in  New  Y'ork,  the  chief  justice  usually  receiv- 
ing $500  more  than  his  colleagues.  They  often 
receive  also  a liberal  expense  allowance  but  are 
usually  forbidden  to  accept  any  fees  outside 
of  their  salaries. 

Tenure  and  Removal  of  State  Judges. — The 
almost  universal  rule  now  is  that  the  judges 
of  the  supreme  court  hold  office  for  a term  of 
years.  In  only  three  states  (Massachusetts, 
Rhode  Island,  New  Hampshire)  do  they  still 
hold  during  good  behavior  or  until  the 
attainment  of  the  age  limit.  In  all  the 
others  the  terms  range  from  two  years 
in  Vermont  to  21  years  in  Pennsylvania,  with 
an  average  length  of  eight  years.  Vacancies 
occurring  in  the  office  of  judges  of  the  supreme 
court,  as  well  as  in  those  of  judges  of  inferior 
courts,  are,  in  the  majority  of  states,  filled 
through  appointment  by  the  governor,  to  hold 
until  a successor  is  chosen  at  the  next  regular 
election,  or  a special  election  may  be  held  to 
fill  the  vacancy.  All  state  judges  are  generally 
removable  by  impeachment,  carried  out  in  the 
usual  manner  by  the  two  branches  of  the  legis- 
lature; but  impeachments  are  unusual,  seldom 
successful,  and  beset  with  technicalities.  In 
about  half  of  the  states,  judges  may  also  be 
removed  by  concurrent  resolution  of  the  legis- 
lature, or  by  the  governor  upon  the  address 
of  the  legislature,  but  only  when  the  vote  is 
larger  than  a bare  majority  and  after  due 
notice  and  opportunity  of  defense.  Judges 
have  occasionally  been  removed  from  office 
through  the  abolition  of  the  court  by  the  legis- 
lature. 

Recall  of  Judges. — A movement,  due  in  large 
part  to  dissatisfaction  with  the  unfriendly  at- 
titude of  state  judges  toward  social  and  in- 
dustrial legislation,  has  led  to  the  suggestion 
of  the  recall  (see)  of  judges  by  popular  vote. 
Constitutional  provisions  to  that  effect  were 
adopted  in  Oregon  in  1908,  in  California  in 
1911,  and  seem  likely  to  spread.  A recall  is 
initiated  by  a petition  signed  by  a certain 
percentage  of  the  voters.  Thereupon,  a speedy 
special  election  is  held  at  which  the  issue  may 
be  simply  removal  or  the  choice  of  a successor. 

This  recall  of  judges  differs  from  that  al- 
ready practiced  in  states  where  judges  are 
subjected  every  four  years  to  the  test  of  re- 
election,  only  in  that  the  recall  may  take 
place  at  any  time  after  the  judge  has  served 
for  a few  months,  instead  of  at  the  end  of 
his  term. 


Theoretically,  popular  recall  appears  to 
strike  a blow  at  the  independence  of  the  judi- 
ciary, but,  under  the  system  of  popular  elec- 
tion, judges  have  not  seldom  been  dependent 
upon  the  favor  of  political  managers  both  for 
their  nomination  and  election.  Perhaps  recall 
elections  will  prove  equally  subject  to  the 
manipulation  of  the  party  manager.  The  re- 
call seems  to  be  aimed  at  remedying  a symp- 
tom rather  than  the  cause  of  the  difficulty.  So 
far  as  the  judges  have  accepted  political  meth- 
ods to  secure  and  retain  office,  and  have  exer- 
cised political  power  through  their  power  to 
declare  laws  unconstitutional  they  should  be 
subject  to  coextensive  political  responsibility. 
The  whole  question  of  the  method  of  election 
and  the  tenure  of  office  of  judges  is  one  of  the 
most  difficult  problems  of  statecraft  waiting 
for  solution. 

Jurisdiction  of  the  Supreme  Court. — The  ju- 
risdiction of  the  highest  court  embraces  the 
whole  state  and  is  to  a large  extent  appellate 
in  character,  though  original  jurisdiction  is 
sometimes  exercised  in  special  cases,  particu- 
larly in  the  issuance  of  original  prerogative 
writs,  such  as  mandamus,  quo  warranto,  ha- 
beas corpus,  injunction,  certiorari,  procedendo, 
etc.  The  cases  in  which  the  supreme  court  may 
exercise  appellate  jurisdiction  are  in  some 
states  enumerated  in  the  constitution,  but  in 
others  left  to  be  defined  by  statute.  In  gen- 
eral, the  supreme  court  hears  appeals  from 
the  lower  courts  in  all  cases  of  whatever  kind, 
except  those  involving  small  amounts  of  money 
or  in  which  the  offense  is  of  minor  character. 
Where  there  is  a court  of  appeals  above  the 
supreme  court,  it  has  only  appellate  jurisdic- 
tion. Cases  are  brought  up  from  the  lower 
courts  to  the  highest  state  court  by  way  of 
appeal  or  upon  writ  of  error,  and  the  decision 
of  the  latter  court  is  final  and  conclusive,  ex- 
cept that,  if  one  of  the  parties  in  a case 
in  the  highest  state  court  claims  a right  or 
immunity  under  the  Federal  Constitution  or 
laws,  and  the  court  decides  against  his  con- 
tention, an  appeal  will  lie  to  the  federal  courts. 

In  six  states  separate  courts  of  equity  held 
by  a chancellor  are  still  maintained,  and  equi- 
table relief  may  be  sought  in  such  courts.  In 
other  states  the  regular  courts  hear  causes 
both  in  law  and  in  equity,  but  keep  them  in 
separate  dockets.  In  most  states,  the  distinc- 
tion between  law  and  equity  has,  for  prac- 
tical purposes,  been  abolished,  and  the  two 
classes  of  cases  may  be  merged  and  both  legal 
and  equitable  remedies  obtained  in  the  same 
suit. 

The  greater  part  of  the  suits  and  actions 
brought  within  the  United  States  come  before 
the  state  courts.  The  law  administered  there 
is  the  statute  law  of  the  states,  sometimes  the 
statutes  of  the  United  States,  sometimes  in- 
ternational law,  and  the  laws  of  foreign  states 
(see  Law,  International.  Private),  and  the 
) common  law  which  was  transplanted  from  Eng- 


396 


STATE  JUDICIARY 


land  so  far  as  not  inapplicable  to  American 
conditions  and  in  so  far  as  not  modified  by 
statute.  The  common  law  has  been  greatly 
developed  by  the  accretion  of  precedents  and 
modified  by  written  law.  In  deciding  cases 
brought  before  them,  state  courts  apply  all 
the  law  or  laws  that  bear  upon  the  ease.  State 
judges  are  bound  by  the  provisions  of  the  Fed- 
eral Constitution,  as  well  as  by  those  of  their 
own  state  constitution. 

Special  Provinces  of  the  State  Courts. — Since 
the  Revolution,  the  courts  have  exercised  the 
power  of  refusing  to  apply  to  a case  a statute, 
state  or  federal,  which  they  deem  in  excess  of 
the  power  of  the  particular  legislature  to  enact. 
This  function  may  be  exercised  by  the  lower 
state  courts,  but  is  a weapon  of  so  large  a 
calibre  that  it  is  usually  left  to  be  handled 
by  the  higher  courts,  and  particularly  by  the 
Supreme  Court. 

There  is  a certain  range  of  inherent  judicial 
power,  not  well  defined,  which  cannot  be 
abridged  by  legislative  action.  Thus  it  has 
been  held  that  the  legislature  cannot  curtail 
the  power  of  the  courts  to  punish  for  direct 
contempt,  nor  compel  the  judges  to  state  in 
writing  the  reasons  for  a decision,  nor  to  pre- 
pare syllabi  of  their  decisions.  It  has  also 
been  held  that  the  legislature  cannot  impose 
upon  judges  duties  other  than  those  of  a ju- 
dicial nature.  Numerous  instances  have  oc- 
curred, however,  in  which  the  legislature  has 
imposed  upon  them  functions  of  a ministerial 
character. 

In  six  states,  by  constitutional  provision, 
and  in  one  or  two  others,  by  statute  or  custom, 
the  supreme  court  is  required  to  render  an 
advisory  opinion  upon  questions  of  law  sub- 
mitted to  them  by  the  governor  or  the  legis- 
lature. In  as  much  as  no  actual  case  involving 
the  matter  in  question  is  before  the  court  for 
decision,  the  opinion  is  not  rendered  in  the 
light  of  opposing  arguments,  and  has  not  the 
weight  of  a precedent. 

The  decisions  of  the  various  courts  of  the 
state  are  integrated  and  unified  through  the 
process  of  appeals  from  the  lower  to  the  high- 
er courts.  In  addition  to  this  means  whereby 
the  higher  courts  may  exercise  control  over 
the  lower  courts,  it  is  expressly  provided  by 
the  constitutions  of  about  a dozen  states  that 
the  supreme  court  may  exercise  supervisory 
control  over  inferior  courts,  and  in  three  other 
states  (New  York,  Indiana,  Texas)  the  su- 
preme courts  may  remove  from  office  judges 
of  lower  courts.  In  several  states  trial  courts 
are  directed  by  the  constitution  to  report  to 
the  supreme  court  any  defects  which  they  may 
discover  in  the  laws,  and  such  information  is 
then  transmitted  to  the  legislature  for  con- 
sideration. 

In  the  trial  of  cases  in  equity,  the  judge  de- 
termines both  law  and  fact,  and  a jury  is 
dispensed  with.  In  the  trial  of  cases  at  law, 
both  civil  and  criminal,  % jury  is  employed  in 


state  courts  of  general  jurisdiction.  In  crim- 
inal cases,  the  accused  is  indicted  by  the  grand 
jury,  or,  in  some  states,  information  is  filed 
against  him  by  the  prosecuting  attorney,  and 
he  is  then  held  for  court,  unless  bailed  out. 
For  the  purpose  of  the  trial,  a petit  jury  is 
impaneled,  which  hears  such  evidence  as  may 
be  admitted  by  the  court.  The  verdict  of  the 
jury  is  usually  required  to  be  unanimous, 
though  in  some  states  this  is  no  longer  neces- 
sary. The  verdict  may  be  set  aside  for  certain 
irregularities  and  a new  trial  ordered,  unless 
the  accused  has  been  acquitted,  in  which  case 
he  cannot  again  be  put  in  jeopardy.  A jury 
trial  may  also  be  had  in  civil  cases,  but  is 
frequently  waived  by  agreement  of  the  parties 
to  the  suit,  and  the  judge  then  determines 
both  law  and  fact. 

Final  judgment  rendered  by  the  court  is, 
unless  appealed  from,  enforced  by  a writ  of 
execution  directed  to  the  sheriff  or  other  ex- 
ecutive officer.  If  resistance  is  met  in  execut- 
ing process,  the  posse  comitatus  (see)  may  be 
called  upon  and  the  whole  strength  of  the  gov- 
ernment employed  to  enforce  the  judgments 
and  decrees  of  the  court. 

Judicial  procedure  in  the  state  courts  is  full 
of  technicalities  which  cause  numerous  and 
excessive  delays  in  the  disposal  of  cases.  The 
cumbrousness  of  judicial  machinery  and  the 
inordinate  delays  in  the  administration  of 
justice  are  among  the  principal  reasons  for 
the  widespread  dissatisfaction  with  the  courts. 

The  opinions  rendered  by  the  highest  state 
courts  are  usually  furnished  with  head-notes 
by  the  clerks  of  the  courts  and  published  in  a 
series  of  reports.  They  form  precedents  of 
binding  authority  upon  the  lower  courts  of  the 
particular  state,  and,  on  the  principle  of  stare 
decisis,  are  generally,  but  not  invariably,  fol- 
lowed by  the  court  rendering  the  opinion. 
The  opinions  of  the  courts  of  one  state  may 
be  cited  in  the  courts  of  another,  but  are,  of 
course,  not  binding.  Each  state  is  to  every 
other  a foreign  jurisdiction,  except  as  limited 
by  the  Federal  Constitution,  which  requires 
that  “full  faith  and  credit  shall  be  given  in 
each  state  to  the  public  acts,  records,  and  ju- 
dicial proceedings  of  every  other  state.” 

See  Appeals  from  Legal  Decisions;  Cases, 
Significance  of,  in  Constitutional  Law; 
Concurrent  Powers;  Constitutions,  State, 
Characteristics  of;  Constitutions,  State, 
Limitations  in;  Courts  and  Unconstitu- 
tional Legislation;  Government,  Theory 
of;  Law,  Administrative;  Law,  Common; 
Law,  Constitutional;  Judiciary  and  Judi- 
cial Reform. 

References:  S.  E.  Baldwin,  Am.  Judiciary 
(1905),  chs.  i,  viii,  xi;  J.  Schouler,  Con- 
stitutional Studies  (1897),  Pt.  Ill,  ch. 
vii;  E.  McClain,  Constitutional  Law  in  U.  S. 
(2d  ed.,  1910),  chs.  xxiv,  xliii;  F.  J.  Stimson, 
Law  of  the  Federal  and  State  Constitutions 
(1908),  III,  Pt.  IV;  W.  F.  Dodd,  “Recall  and 


397 


STATE  LEGISLATION,  UNIFORM— STATE  LEGISLATURE 


the  Political  Responsibility  of  Judges”  in 
Mich.  Law  Review,  X (1911);  A.  B.  Hart, 
Actual  Government  (1908),  j[j[  73-78;  R.  L. 
Ashley,  Am.  Federal  State  (1911),  434-437  ; 

J.  Bryce,  Am.  Commonwealth  (4th  ed.,  1910), 
I,  ch.  xliii,  II,  clis.  ci,  cii;  J.  A.  Smith,  Spirit 
of  Am.  Government  (1907),  ch.  ix;  A.  L. 


Lowell,  Essays  on  Government  (1889),  No.  3; 
A.  De  Toqueville,  Democracy  in  America 
(1898),  I,  clis.  vi,  vii. 

J.  M.  Mathews. 

STATE  LEGISLATION,  UNIFORM.  See 

Uniform  State  Legislation. 


STATE  LEGISLATURE 


Organization. — The  state  legislature  in  all 
states  consists  of  two  houses,  the  senate  and 
the  house  of  representatives,  or  assembly.  The 
members  are  chosen  by  the  qualified  voters  at 
the  regular  state  elections.  The  senates  have 
from  17  to  63  members  and  the  house  from 
35  to  390.  The  house  usually  has  about  three 
times  as  many  members  as  the  senate.  The 
term  of  senators  in  a large  number  of  states 
is  twice  as  long  as  that  of  members  of  the 
lower  house.  The  more  usual  terms  are  four 
years  for  the  upper  and  two  for  the  lower; 
or  two  for  the  upper  and  one  for  the  lower 
house.  In  Massachusetts  and  Rhode  Island  all 
the  members  of  both  houses  are  elected  annual- 
ly. In  practically  all  states  the  members  of 
both  houses  are  elected  from  single  member 
districts,  intended  to  be  substantially  equal  in 
population.  The  boundaries  of  the  districts 
are  usually  revised  after  each  decennial  census, 
which  furnishes  an  opportunity  for  political 
manoeuvring  and  has  given  rise  to  the  gerry- 
mander (see).  The  members  of  the  legislature 
receive  a fixed  amount  for  each  regular  session 
of  from  $200  to  $1500  or  a per  diem  allowance 
which  is  often  limited  to  a certain  number  of 
days,  so  as  to  tend  to  restrict  the  length  of 
the  session.  The  compensation  is  much  too 
small  to  secure  a good  type  of  men,  at  least 
for  any  length  of  time.  To  the  men,  however, 
who  join  the  legislative  combine  and  share  in 
its  perquisites  the  amount  of  their  official  com- 
pensation is  comparatively  unimportant. 

Sessions. — Only  six  states  hold  annual  ses- 
sions. In  Alabama  the  legislature  meets  every 
four  years.  In  all  the  other  states  the  ses- 
sions are  biennial.  In  addition  to  the  regular 
session,  the  governor  may  summon  the  legisla- 
ture to  meet  in  special  or  extraordinary  ses- 
sions. Special  sessions  are  particularly  fre- 
quent in  states  that  do  not  hold  annual  ses- 
sions. Most  states  having  biennial  sessions 
hold  them  in  the  odd  numbered  years.  There 
are,  therefore,  but  few  legislatures  meeting 
in  the  even  years.  In  most  states  the  sessions 
begin  in  January;  in  Vermont,  in  October. 
In  a considerable  number  of  states  the  sessions 
are  limited  to  from  40  to  90  days;  and  in 
many  other  states  the  members  are  not  paid, 
or  not  paid  at  full  rates,  for  more  than  40  to 
90  days.  The  period  from  January  to  March 
in  the  old  numbered  years  is  the  period  when 


the  legislative  output  is  greatest.  Most  of  the 
legislatures  have  adjourned  by  the  last  of 
April;  though  in  Massachusetts,  Connecticut 
and  Wisconsin,  the  session  often  lasts  into 
June  or  July. 

Committees. — The  senate  is  presided  over  by 
the  lieutenant  governor  and  the  lower  house 
by  a speaker  chosen  by  the  members.  The 
speaker  is  like  the  speaker  of  the  House  of 
Representatives  (see)  in  his  power  over  legis- 
lation. He  organizes  the  committees  to  bring 
in  or  prevent  particular  legislation.  He  uses 
and  twists  the  rules  of  the  house  to  bring  in  or 
prevent  votes ; he  exercises  his  right  of  recog- 
nition so  as  to  give  or  refuse  the  floor  as  he 
wills.  Either  acting  as  an  agent  for  powerful 
unseen  influences  or  carrying  out  his  own  will, 
the  speaker  can  actually  prevent  a vote  or  any 
measure  to  which  he  is  opposed. 

The  senate  committees  are  often  named  by 
the  lieutenant  governor,  but  if  he  is  not  of  the 
same  party  as  the  majority  of  the  senate  mem- 
bers, the  committees  are  usually  elected  by  the 
senate  or  named  by  the  president  pro  tem 
who  acts  as  leader  of  the  majority  party.  The 
speaker  invariably  names  the  committees  of 
the  lower  house.  In  the  New  England  states 
there  are  many  joint  committees.  The  major- 
ity of  the  members  of  each  committee  is  as- 
signed to  the  majority  party.  Though  the 
number  of  committees  is  very  large  most  of 
them  have  practically  nothing  to  do.  The  fi- 
nance committee,  or  committee  on  ways  and 
means,  is  usually  the  most  important.  The 
chairman  of  this  committee  in  the  lower  house 
is  often  the  floor  leader  of  his  party.  Others 
are  the  judiciary  committee,  the  cities  com- 
mittee, and  the  committee  having  charge  of 
public  service  corporation  matters.  Practical- 
ly all  bills  are  referred  to  committees.  In  a 
few  states  all  bills  must  be  reported  either 
with  or  without  recommendation.  Commonly, 
however,  no  bill  is  reported  which  has  not  the 
approval  of  a majority  of  the  committee  con- 
sidering it;  most  bills  die  in  committee.  The 
committees  hold  public  hearings  and  discuss 
and  amend  the  bill  and  if  they  deem  desirable, 
report  it  to  the  house.  The  chairman  of  an 
important  committee  wields  great  power,  be- 
cause usually  able  to  dominate  his  committee, 
and  this  control  gives  him  great  influence  in 
other  matters  of  legislation. 


398 


STATE  LEGISLATURE 


Discussion. — The  real  work  of  the  legislature 
is  for  the  most  part  done  in  committee.  There 
is  very  little  consideration  of  the  merits  of  a 
measure  in  open  session.  When  an  important 
measure  comes  up  for  final  passage,  the  only 
discussion  is  likely  to  be  a statement  for  po- 
litical effect  or  an  explanation  of  a member’s 
vote.  Little  effort  is  made  to  throw  light  on 
the  merits  of  the  subject  with  a view  to  in- 
fluencing the  thought  and  vote  of  other  mem- 
bers. No  official  record  of  debates  is  kept  or 
published  similar  to  the  Congressional  Record. 
For  the  most  part  the  debates  are  not  worth 
preserving,  but  for  historical  purposes  and  for 
use  in  the  interpretation  of  statutes  it  would 
often  be  of  advantage  to  have  a full  record 
of  discussions.  The  Journals  published  for 
each  house  contain  only  the  bare  minutes  of 
official  action.  Nor  are  the  proceedings  in 
committee  usually  preserved,  even  to  a bare 
record  of  action  taken,  though  the  committee 
hearings,  if  recorded,  would  often  be  of  great 
service. 

Machine  Methods. — The  degree  to  which  the 
members  of  the  legislature  are  actually  repre- 
sentative of  the  wishes  of  the  electorate  is 
largely  bound  up  in  the  question  of  political 
parties  and  party  organization.  The  causes 
which  tend  to  make  the  party  organization  ir- 
responsible and  unrepresentative  are  accentu- 
ated in  the  legislature,  which  is  therefore  a 
favorable  field  for  the  perfection  of  machine 
methods.  The  large  membership,  the  multi- 
plicity of  measures  to  be  considered,  the  in- 
tricacy of  procedure,  the  varied  interests  seek- 
ing recognition,  the  opportunity  for  deals  and 
log-rolling,  all  work  to  make  machine  rule  easy. 
Often  the  real  control  is  not  held  by  the 
majority  party  but  by  a bipartisan  combine, 
composed  of  the  kindred  souls  of  both  parties 
who  make  it  their  business  to  serve  those  in- 
terests that  can  afford  to  pay  liberally  in  some 
way,  either  direct  or  indirect,  for  the  favors 
they  receive.  Thus  economic  “interests”  gain 
and  retain  control  over  parties  and  legislatures, 
because  control  is  simply  a question  of  the 
most  effective  organization ; and  the  most  ef- 
fective permanent  organization  is  almost  al- 
ways secured  by  financial  backing.  The  “in- 
terests” can,  and  do,  contribute  liberally  and 
these  contributions  constitute  the  cohesive  pow- 
er that  holds  the  legislative  machine  together. 
Of  course  these  contributions  are  not  for  the 
most  part  in  the  form  of  direct  bribes.  They 
may  be  contributions  to  the  party  campaign 
funds,  to  election  or  nomination  expenses  of 
the  member,  or  in  the  form  of  payment  for 
legal  or  other  services,  or  patronage,  or  some 
business  opportunity  or  advantage. 

Lobbyists. — An  anti-lobbying  act  requiring 
the  registration  of  all  legislative  agents  was 
passed  by  Wisconsin  in  1898  and  has  since 
spread  to  Massachusetts,  New  York,  and  a num- 
ber of  other  states.  These  acts  usually  require 
corporations  or  individuals  employing  agents 


to  influence  legislation  to  make  a sworn  report 
at  the  end  of  the  session  covering  all  expenses 
in  connection  with  legislation.  Such  laws  can- 
not be  strictly  enforced  and  little  attempt  is 
made  to  do  so,  but  they  serve  to  secure  publici- 
ty concerning  a few  unobjectionable  expendi- 
tures of  associations  and  corporations  and 
perhaps  serve  to  make  them  a little  more  cau- 
tious and  clever  in  incurring  expenditures  for 
questionable  or  illegitimate  purposes. 

Distrust  of  Legislatures. — With  the  memory 
of  the  royal  governors  and  judges  fresh  in 
mind,  when  the  state  governments  were  first 
organized  popular  distrust  centered  on  the 
executive  and  the  judiciary;  the  legislature 
was  esteemed  the  special  representative  of  the 
people  and  relied  on  to  guard  against  official 
corruption  and  tyranny.  Most  of  the  state 
executive  and  judicial  officers  were  chosen  by 
the  legislature.  The  governor  had  no  veto  and 
with  the  extremely  decentralized  system  of  ad- 
ministration, had  little  direct  authority.  The 
legislature,  however,  early  began  to  show  its 
incapacity  for  the  work  assigned.  The 
great  industrial  and  commercial  development 
necessitated  a great  mass  of  legislation.  The 
rapid  development  of  banking,  insurance,  turn- 
pike, canal,  railroad,  telegraph,  mining  and 
manufacturing  corporations  and  the  constant 
changes  in  town,  county  and  municipal  gov- 
ernment attendant  on  the  industrial  growth 
and  development,  necessitated  a great  mass  of 
legislation.  The  legislatures  were  unable  to 
adapt  their  methods  to  the  requirements  of 
the  new  situation.  The  result  was  inefficiency, 
irresponsibility,  machine  control  and  domina- 
tion by  the  interests.  Consequently,  the  orig- 
inal trust  in  legislative  assemblies  soon  dis- 
appeared and  the  people  began  to  search  for 
means  of  protecting  themselves  from  the  in- 
efficiency of  their  own  representatives.  A first 
step  was  the  transfer  from  the  legislature  to 
the  people  themselves  of  the  power  to  select 
state  officers.  Then  the  governor  was  given 
the  veto  power  (see).  At  present  a two-thirds 
vote  is  usually  required  to  override  a veto. 
Ordinarily  the  right  of  veto  applied  only  to 
acts  as  a whole,  but  now  many  states  have 
given  the  governor  the  right  to  veto  specific 
items  in  appropriation  bills. 

Ill  Effects  of  Short  Sessions. — At  first  the 
sessions  of  the  legislature  were  held  annually, 
but  beginning  about  1850,  all  but  six 
states  abolished  annual  sessions  and  adopted 
biennial  sessions,  and  one  state,  Alabama, 
later  abolished  biennial  sessions  and  sub- 
stituted quadrennial  sessions.  Many  states 
also  limited  the  duration  of  the  biennial 
session  to  60  or  90  days.  Although 
biennial  and  short  sessions  are  now  popular 
— though  in  Alabama  the  legislature  meets 
only  once  in  four  years — this  process  tends  to 
the  further  deterioration  of  the  legislative  out- 
put. To  be  sure,  it  decreases  slightly  the 
number  of  laws  passed,  serves  to  relieve 


STATE  LEGISLATURE 


the  minds  of  those  to  whom  legislative  changes 
may  prove  detrimental,  and  gives  business  a 
long  respite  from  disturbing  legislation.  But 
the  crowding  of  an  immense  mass  of  legisla- 
tion into  one-half  or  one-fourth  the  time  for- 
merly allotted  can  only  increase  the  amount 
of  hasty,  slipshod  and  inefficient  legislation. 
It  also  tends  to  increase  the  number  of  laws 
passed  to  serve  some  private  interest.  It  is 
easy  to  slip  such  laws  through  in  the  hurry 
and  confusion  of  a short  and  crowded  session. 
Such  sessions  are  especially  conducive  to  the 
placing  of  all  legislation  in  the  absolute  con- 
trol of  the  “organization”  or  “machine”  and 
the  “organization”  is  usually  the  creature  of 
the  “interests”  and  particularly  inimical  to 
progressive  legislation.  It  makes  no  difference 
how  short  the  session,  anything  approved  by 
the  machine  will  have  time  to  be  railroaded 
through ; but  with  a short  and  crowded  session, 
any  law  opposed  by  the  machine  will  have  no 
chance  at  all.  There  will  be  no  chance  to 
bring  pressure  to  bear  through  an  aroused  pub- 
lic opinion  and  the  proposed  reform  will  go 
to  committee  and  never  see  the  light  of  day. 
Then,  too,  there  is  no  time  in  the  short,  crowd- 
ed session  properly  to  consider  important  meas- 
ures. There  is  insufficient  time  for  their  study 
by  civic  and  other  associations  interested,  or 
to  perfect  them  as  a result  of  criticism  re- 
ceived. 

Constitutional  Restrictions. — Another  method 
of  taking  power  away  from  the  legislature 
has  been  through  the  legislative  enactments 
of  the  constitutional  convention.  The  first 
state  constitutions  were  brief  documents  con- 
taining a bill  of  rights  and  setting  forth  the 
fundamental  constitution  and  relations  of  the 
three  departments  of  government.  At  present 
many  state  constitutions  are  documents  of  75 
or  100  pages,  and  prescribe  with  much  detail 
the  organization  and  functions  of  different  de- 
partments and  officers  and  contain  regulations 
on  numerous  subjects  formerly  left  entirely 
to  legislative  control.  Another  restraint  on 
legislative  inefficiency  and  irresponsibility  has 
been  recently  developed  in  a number  of  states 
through  the  application  of  the  initiative  and 
the  referendum. 

Perhaps  the  most  effective  remedies  for  legis- 
lative evils  have  been  the  constitutional  re- 
strictions on  local  and  special  legislation.  This 
movement  originated  about  the  same  time  as 
that  for  biennial  sessions,  and  at  present  al- 
most all  state  constitutions  have  more  or  less 
stringent  and  effective  restrictions  on  special 
legislation.  Certain  subjects  can  only  be  legis- 
lated on  by  means  of  general  laws;  and  general 
laws  must  be  passed  to  govern  local  and  mu- 
nicipal matters.  Often  these  absolute  restric- 
tions prove  very  inconvenient  and  result  in 
unsatisfactory  expedients,  or  the  impossibil- 
ity of  satisfying  some  real  governmental  need. 
If  the  legislature  had  had  the  vitality,  intel- 
ligence and  self-control  to  discover  for  itself 


the  natural  remedy  for  the  evils  of  special 
legislation,  the  result  would  certainly  have 
been  better  than  the  inflexible  restraint  of  a 
constitutional  prohibition. 

Legislative  Product.— And  yet  with  all  the 
decline  in  the  standing  of  legislative  bodies 
and  in  the  importance  of  their  debates  as 
moulders  of  public  opinion,  and  with  all  the 
restrictions  on  their  powers  due  to  distrust 
of  their  capacity  and  efficiency,  it  must  be 
acknowledged  that  progress  is  being  made  con- 
tinuously through  the  agency  of  these  same 
legislatures.  Our  statutes  are  much  superior 
to  those  of  fifty  or  one  hundred  years  ago. 
For  this  improvement  no  credit  is  due  to 
the  legislatures  themselves,  but  rather  to  the 
outside  forces  that  have  conceived  and  drafted 
more  effective  standards  and  have  succeeded 
in  inducing  the  legislatures  to  enact  them  into 
law. 

The  making  of  a statute  is  by  no  means  the 
simple  matter  that  it  was  in  the  eighteenth 
century,  or  even  in  the  early  part  of  the  nine- 
teenth, a period  of  exceedingly  crude  and  in- 
effective statutes  consisting  largely  of  a simple 
enumeration  of  direct  commands  and  prohibi- 
tions. Such  prohibitions,  even  though  accom- 
panied by  the  most  drastic  penalties,  are  for 
the  most  part  inadequate  to  cope  with  the  com- 
plex conditions  now  demanding  regulation. 
Moreover,  many  devices  and  expedients  have 
been  evolved  by  which  the  legislative  intent 
can  be  more  easily  and  effectively  carried  out, 
such  as  publicity,  uniformity,  registration,  ex- 
amination, licensing,  inspection. 

While  statutes  have  become  vastly  more 
complicated  in  order  to  meet  present  day  con- 
ditions, and  while  outside  factors  have  assisted 
the  legislature  in  their  conception  and  draft- 
ing, the  legislature  itself  has  done  very  little 
to  improve  its  processes  and  methods  to  meet 
more  exacting  requirements.  Recently  some 
progress  has  been  made  through  the  creation 
of  legislative  reference  bureaus  and  the  em- 
ployment of  official  draftsmen.  Besides  a 
thorough  going  reform  of  technical  pro- 
cedure, the  legislature  must  adopt  a meth- 
od and  form  the  habit  of  securing  a scien- 
tific investigation  of  each  measure  by  one 
or  more  men  who  have  expert  knowledge 
in  relation  to  the  particular  subject  treated. 
For  the  construction  of  a house  we  employ  an 
architect;  for  the  building  of  a bridge  we  em- 
ploy an  engineer,  but  for  the  conception  and 
drafting  of  an  intricate  and  technical  statute 
no  expert  knowledge  is  deemed  essential.  Leg- 
islative committees  should  employ  experts  of 
all  kinds — engineers,  accountants,  economists, 
statisticians,  pfivsicians,  actuaries,  and  in  fact 
specialists  of  every  class  who  are  capable  of 
disinterested  scientific  investigation.  When, 
for  example,  a new  problem  m banking  regula- 
tion comes  up  for  consideration  the  sensible 
course  would  be  for  the  committee,  after  in- 
forming itself  in  a general  way  concerning  the 


400 


STATE  LEGISLATURES,  RULES  IN— STATE  LIBRARIES 


proposed  measure,  to  employ  one  or  more  dis- 
interested banking  experts  to  make  a thorough 
investigation  of  the  measure.  They  would  take 
one  month  or  six  months  to  go  over  the  propo- 
sition and  consider  it  in  all  its  phases.  They 
would  consider  the  practical  effect  of  similar 
legislation  in  this  or  other  lands.  They  would 
consider  the  probable  effects  of  the  regulation, 
direct  and  indirect,  beneficial  and  otherwise. 
They  would  determine  as  near  as  possible  how 
it  would  work  in  actual  practice,  what  difficul- 
ties it  would  meet  and  what  changes  would  be 
advisable  in  order  to  overcome  the  same.  They 
would  probably  suggest  a draft  of  a bill  that 
would  accomplish  the  intended  result  deftly 
and  effectively  and  without  the  crudities,  evils 
and  unworkable  features  of  the  original  bill. 

See  Boss  and  Boss  System;  Caucus,  Legis- 
lative, for  Legislation;  Committee  System 
in  United  States;  Constitutions,  State, 
Limitations  in;  Contracts,  Impairment  of; 
Corruption,  Legislative;  Courts  and  Uncon- 
stitutional Legislation;  Debates  in  Legis- 
latures; Election  System  in  U.  S.;  Expul- 
sion of  Members  of  Legislative  Bodies;  Fil- 
ibustering in  Legislation;  Investigations, 
Legislative;  Legislation,  Direct;  Legisla- 
ture and  Legislative  Reform  ; Private 
Bills;  Rules  of  Legislative  Bodies;  Stat- 
utes, State;  Uniform  State  Legislation; 
Voting  in  Legislative  Bodies. 

References:  A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government 
(rev.  ed.,  1908),  60-65;  P.  S.  Reinsch,  Am. 
Legislatures  and  Legislative  Methods  (1907), 
ch.  iv-x,  Readings  in  Am.  State  Government 
(1911),  41-139;  E.  McClain,  Constitutional 
Law  (2d  ed.,  1910),  ch.  viii;  Theodore  Roose- 
velt, Am.  Ideals  (1897);  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Com- 
monwealth (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  chs.  xl,  xliv; 
J.  Ordronaux,  Constitutional  Legislation 
(1891),  chs.  iii— x;  S.  N.  Patten,  “The  Decay  of 
State  and  Local  Government”  in  Am.  Acad.  Pol. 
and  Soc.  Sci.,  Annals  (1890),  I,  26-42;  R.  L. 
Ashley,  Am.  Federal  State  (rev.  ed.,  1911), 
§§  417,  429;  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Government  and 
Politics  (1910)  ; F.  J.  Stimson,  Federal  and 
State  Constitutions  (1908),  249-345;  bibliog- 
raphy in  A.  B.  Hart,  Manual  (1908),  § 151. 

Robert  H.  Whitten. 

STATE  LEGISLATURES,  RULES  IN.  See 

Rules  in  State  Legislatures. 

STATE  LIBRARIES.  A state  library  is  part 
of  the  official  equipment  of  every  American 
commonwealth.  The  earliest  were  those  in 
Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey  (1796),  Ohio 
(1817),  and  New  York  (1818).  In  most  states 
admitted  to  the  Union  since  1800  the  library 
was  established  very  soon  after  admission ; in 
many  of  them,  territorial  libraries  existed  for 
some  years  before  statehood. 

The  province  of  the  state  library  is  usually 
formally  defined  by  law  and  it  is  clear  that 
the  early  notions  of  this  province  would  to- 


day appear  narrow  and  inadequate.  From  the 
thought  of  a library  chiefly  or  solely  designed 
for  the  state’s  official  family,  the  legislature, 
courts,  administrative  departments  and  of- 
ficers— in  brief  all  state  employees — the  con- 
ception latterly,  and  in  many  states,  has  grown 
to  mean  a library  which,  without  dropping  any 
of  its  original  functions  shall  hold  much  the 
same  relation  to  all  library  endeavor  in  the 
state  as  the  department  of  public  instruction 
holds  toward  all  educational  endeavor.  In 
addition  to  the  functions  of  advice,  inspection, 
organization,  extension  and  supervision  which 
this  comparison  suggests,  the  state  library 
should  supplement  all  other  libraries  by  serv- 
ing as  a central  storehouse;  ready  to  send  to 
any  part  of  the  state  the  unusual  books  that 
local  libraries  can  not  supply.  At  the  state 
library  should  be  centered  all  library  work 
done  in  the  state’s  name;  the  distribution  of 
its  public  documents,  the  allotment  of  library 
subsidies  or  grants,  library  instruction,  corre- 
spondence, reference  work,  traveling  libraries, 
etc.  It  should  be  in  the  fullest  sense  what  was 
directed  by  the  act  establishing  the  New  York 
State  Library,  “a  public  library  for  the  use 
of  the  government  and  of  the  people  of  the 
state.” 

In  the  government  of  state  libraries  there 
is  a strange  variety  of  methods.  There  seems 
to  have  been  no  doubt  as  to  the  need  for  such 
an  institution,  but  great  uncertainty  as  to 
what  to  do  with  it  and  just  where  to  attach 
it  to  the  governmental  machinery.  It  appears 
to  have  been  variously  regarded  as  an  educa- 
tional appurtenance,  an  annex  to  the  courts, 
and  a separation  institution;  for  in  New  York, 
Indiana  and  Virginia  it  is  in  charge  of  the 
state  board  of  education,  in  Illinois,  Iowa  and 
North  Carolina,  of  a board  of  state  officers 
including  the  superintendent  of  public  instruc- 
tion, while  in  Colorado  this  officer  is  ex  officio 
state  librarian.  In  Georgia,  Idaho,  Kansas, 
Maryland,  Minnesota,  Missouri,  Nebraska, 
Oklahoma,  Oregon,  West  Virginia  and  Wyo- 
ming the  supreme  court  manages  the  state 
library,  and  in  Utah  and  Nebraska  the  clerk 
of  the  court  is  ex  officio  state  librarian.  In 
most  other  states  a separate  governing  board 
is  appointed  by  the  governor  or  formed  by  law 
of  state  officers. 

The  appointment  of  librarian  is  equally  ir- 
regular. There  is  a popular  election  in  Ne- 
vada; election  by  the  legislature  or  supreme 
court  in  several  states;  and  appointment,  us- 
ually by  the  governing  board,  but  in  a dozen 
states  by  the  governor  or  (in  Louisiana  and 
Rhode  Island)  by  the  secretary  of  state. 

Besides  state  libraries  proper,  there  are 
many  important  collections  of  books  gathered 
by  state  learned  societies  (chiefly  historical) 
which  must  be  included  in  the  broad  category 
of  state  libraries. 

See  Education  as  a Function  of  Govern- 
ment; Learned  Societies;  Libraries,  Public. 


401 


STATE  RIGHTS— STATE  SOVEREIGNTY 


References:  Nat.  Assoc,  of  State  Libraries, 
Proceedings,  1898-1912,  J.  I.  Wyer,  Jr., 
“State  Libraries”  in  A.  L.  A.  Manual  of  Li- 
brary Economics  (1913);  State  Libraries,  An- 
nual and  Biennial  Reports-,  Public  Libraries 
in  the  U.  S.  (1876),  292-311. 

J.  I.  Wyek,  Jr. 

STATE  RIGHTS.  The  doctrine  or  principle 
of  state  rights  has  not  always  been  clearly 
distinguished  from  the  doctrine  of  state  sov- 
ereignty (see).  On  the  contrary  it  has  not 
been  uncommon  to  use  the  two  expressions 
as  practically  conveying  the  same  idea.  Some- 
times, however,  the  phrase  used  has  been  as 
referring  to  the  principle  of  strict  construc- 
tion of  the  Constitution  (see  Construction 
and  Interpretation).  After  the  Civil  War. 
the  expression  fell  into  disrepute  and  has  not 
been  used  much  in  recent  years.  But,  although 
the  phrase  generally  recalls  the  Civil  War  and 
the  struggle  against  national  authority,  the 
word  “rights”  does  not  necessarily  signify  sov- 
ereignty ; and  moreover  until  our  constitution- 
al system  is  all  made  over,  the  states  must 
be  recognized  as  having  rights  safe  from  the 
intrusion  of  the  national  Government.  In  the 
earlier  years  of  the  twentieth  century  the 
old  problem,  which  federalism  always  presents 
— the  problem  of  maintaining  local  autonomy 
and  liberty  and  of  furthering  general  and  com- 
mon interests — has  been  a very  real  one.  As 
the  doctrines  of  new  nationalism  and  of  in- 
herent sovereignty  of  the  national  Government 
are  advocated  more  and  more  freely,  there 
may  be  a recurrence  to  the  old  expression  and 
an  insistence  upon  the  principle  that,  though 
the  states  are  not  sovereign,  they  are  possessed 
of  great  powers  of  sovereignty  which  only  the 
nation  by  constitutional  amendment  can  take 
away.  See  State  Sovereignty;  United 
States  as  a Federal  State.  A.  C.  McL. 

STATE  SCHOOL  FUNDS.  See  School 
Funds,  State. 

STATE,  SECRETARIES  OF.  Under  the 
Articles  of  Confederation,  Robert  R.  Livingston 
held  the  office  of  Secretary  of  Foreign  Affairs 
from  1781  to  Oct.  20,  1783.  He  was  succeeded 
in  1784  by  John  Jay,  who  was  then  made  Secre- 
tary of  State  in  1789,  when  the  department 
was  established  under  the  Constitution.  Fol- 
lowing is  a list  of  the  secretaries  of  state: 


1789-1790  (March  21),  John  Jay. 

1789  (Sept.  26 ) -1793  (Dec.  31),  Thomas  Jefferson 
(assumed  office  Mar.  22,  1790). 

1794  (Jan.  2)-1795  (Aug.  20),  Edmund  Randolph. 

1795  (Aug.  20),  Timothy  Pickering  (Sec.  of  War; 

ad  int.). 

1795  (Dec.  10)-1800  (May  12),  Timothy  Pickering. 
1800  (May  13),  Charles  Lee  (Atty.  Gen.;  ad  int.). 

1800  (May  13)-1801  (Mar.  4),  John  Marshall. 

1801  (Mar.  5),  Levi  Lincoln  (Atty.  Gen.:  ad  int.). 
1801  (Mar.  5 ) —1809  (Mar.  3),  James  Madison. 

1809  (Mar.  6 ) —1811  (April  ll,  Robert  Smith. 

1811  (Apr.  2)-1817  (Mar.  3 i , James  Monroe  (re- 
commissioned, 1811,  Nov.  26 ; 1815,  Feb.  28 ; Sec. 
of  War;  ad  int.,  from  Oct.  1,  1814,  to  Feb.  28,  1815). 
1817  (Mar.  4),  John  Graham  (Chief  Clerk  ; ad  int.). 
1817  (Mar.  5 ) — 1S25  (Mar.  3),  John  Quincy  Adams. 
1817  (Mar.  10),  Rich.  Rush  (Atty.  Gen.;  ad  int.). 
1825  (Mar.  4).  Daniel  Brent  (Chief  Clerk  ; ad  int.). 
1825  (Mar.  7 ) —1829  (Mar.  3),  Henry  Clay. 

1829  (Mar.  4),  James  A.  Hamilton  (ad  int.). 

1829  (Mar.  6) -1831  (May  23 1,  Martin  Van  Buren. 
1831  (May  24 ) —1833  (May  29),  Edward  Livingston 
(recommissioned,  1832,  Jan.  12). 

1833  (May  29 ) — 1S34  (June  30),  Louis  McLane. 

1834  (June  27 ) —1841  (Mar.  3),  John  Forsyth. 

1841  (Mar.  4),  J.  L.  Martin  (Chief  Clerk  ; ad  int.). 
1841  (Mar.  5) -1843  (May  8),  Daniel  Webster. 

1843  (May  9),  Hugh  S.  Legare  (Atty.  Gen.;  ad 

int.) . 

1843  (June  21),  Wm.  S.  Derrick  (Chief  Clerk;  ad 
int.). 

1S43  (June  24),  Abel  P.  Upshur  (Sec.  of  Navy;  ad 
int, ) . 

1843  (July  24 ) —1844  (Feb.  28),  Abel  P.  Upshur  (re- 
commissioned, 1844,  Jan.  2). 

1844  (Feb.  29),  John  Nelson  (Atty.  Gen.;  ad  int.). 

1844  (Mar.  6 ) -18-15  (Mar.  6),  John  C.  Calhoun. 

1845  (Mar.  6 ) —1849  (Mar.  7),  James  Buchanan. 

1849  (Mar.  7)-1850  (July  22),  John  M.  Clayton. 

1850  (July  22 ) -1852  (Oct.  24).  Daniel  Webster. 

1852  (Oct.  25),  Charles  M.  Conrad  (Sec.  of  War; 

ad  int.). 

1852  (Nov.  6)-1853  (Mar.  3),  Edward  Everett  (re- 
commissioned, 1852,  Dec.  9). 

1853  (Mar.  4),  Wm.  Hunter  (Chief  Clerk;  ad  int.). 
1853  (Mar.  7 ) —1857  (Mar.  6),  William  L.  Marcy. 
1857  (Mar.  61-1860  (Dec.  14),  Lewis  Cass. 

1860  (Dec.  15),  Wm.  Hunter  (Chief  Clerk  ; ad  int.). 

1860  (Dec.  17) -1861  (Mar.  5),  Jeremiah  S.  Black. 

1861  (Mar.  5) -1869  (Mar.  4).  William  H.  Seward. 
1869  (Mar.  5 ) — 1S69  (Mar.  11),  Elihu  B.  Washburne. 
1869  (Mar.  ID-1877  (Mar.  12),  Hamilton  Fish  (re- 
commissioned. 1873,  Mar.  17). 

1877  (Mar.  12) -1881  (Mar.  5),  William  M.  Evarts. 
1881  (Mar.  51-1881  (Dec.  12),  James  G.  Blaine. 
1881  (Dec.  12) -1885  (Mar.  6.1,  Frederick  T.  Freling- 
hu.vsen. 

1885  (Mar.  6 ) —1889  (Mar.  5),  Thomas  F.  Bayard. 
1889  (Mar.  5 ) —1892  (June  4),  James  G.  Blaine. 

1892  (June  4),  Wm.  F.  Wharton  (Asst.  Sec.; 

ad  int.). 

1892  (June  29 ) -1893  (Feb.  23),  John  W.  Foster. 

1893  (Feb.  23),  Wm.  F.  Wharton  (Asst.  Sec.; 

ad  int.). 

1893  (Mar.  6 ) -1S95  (May  28),  Walter  Q.  Gresham. 
1895  (May  28),  Edwin  F.  Uhl  (Asst.  Sec.;  ad  int.). 
1895  (June  8) -1897  (Mar.  5),  Richard  Olney  (re- 
commissioned. 1895,  Dec.  3). 

1S97  (Mar.  5 ) -1898  (April  26).  John  Sherman. 

1898  (April  26)-lS98  (Sept.  16).  William  R.  Day. 
1898  (Sept.  17),  Alvey  A.  Adee  (2d  Asst.  Sec.;  ad 
int.). 

1898  (Sept.  20)-1905  (July  1),  John  Hay  (recom- 
missioned, 1898,  Dec.  7:  1901,  March  5). 

1905  (July  71-1909  (.Tan.  27),  Elihu  Root. 

1909  (Jan.  27)-1909  (Mar.  5).  Robert  Bacon. 

1909  (Mar.  5)-1913  (Mar.  5).  Philander  C.  Knox. 
1913  (Mar.  5),  William  J.  Bryan.  A.  B.  H. 


STATE  SOVEREIGNTY 


Arguments  in  Support. — The  doctrine  of 
state  sovereignty  as  a working  principle  in 
American  politics  was  first  definitely  worked 
out  and  presented  by  John  C.  Calhoun  (see) 
in  the  days  when  South  Carolina  was  intent 
upon  nullifying  the  tariff  acts  of  Congress 


( see  Nullification  ) . Calhoun  had  predeces- 
sors, to  one  of  whom,  John  Taylor  (see),  he 
probably  was  indebted  for  a portion  of  the 
method  of  his  argument;  but  no  one  before 
him  put  forth  the  principle  with  clarity  and 
r>roCision.  In  later  years  Calhoun  developed 


402 


STATE  SOVEREIGNTY 


his  argument  somewhat,  although  he  did  not 
add  much  to  its  cogency.  Next  to  Calhoun 
in  fullness  and  force  of  statement,  we  should 
probably  place  Alexander  H.  Stephens  who 
in  his  Constitutional  View  of  the  War  be- 
tween the  States,  written  after  the  Civil  War, 
enters  into  an  elaborate  exposition  of  the  doc- 
trine of  state  sovereignty  and  an  elaborate  de- 
fense of  the  right  of  secession  (see  Secession 
Controversy  ) . 

Sovereignty  Before  1788. — In  all  arguments 
defending  state  sovereignty  particular  atten- 
tion is  paid  to  the  conditions  before  1788,  that 
is  to  say  before  the  adoption  of  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States;  for,  if  the  states 
were  not  sovereign  and  independent  before 
that  time,  one  would  scarcely  venture  to  de- 
clare that  they  became  so  as  a result  of  the 
formation  and  adoption  of  the  Constitution. 
Moreover  the  general  philosophy  of  the  argu- 
ment necessitates  an  assertion  of  the  separate 
existence  of  the  states  and  likwise  necessi- 
tates a denial  of  the  existence  of  any  superior 
body  or  of  any  political  being  made  up  of 
individuals  save  the  states  themselves;  for 
it  is  necessary  to  make  out  that  the  Consti- 
tution was  not  the  work  of  the  American  peo- 
ple collectively  but  the  result  of  independent 
action  of  the  separate  state  sovereignties. 
Calhoun  says: 

So  far  from  the  Constitution  being  the  work  of 
the  American  people  collectively,  no  sucli  political 
body  either  now,  or  ever  did,  exist.  In  that  char- 
acter the  people  of  this  country  never  performed 
a single  political  act  nor,  indeed,  can,  without  an 
entire  revolution  in  all  our  political  relations. 

Constitutional  Convention. — Having  conclud- 
ed that  the  states  existed  as  separate  entities 
before  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  the 
advocate  of  state  sovereignty,  naturally,  de- 
clared that  the  Constitutional  Convention  in- 
tended to  make  no  substantial  change  in  the 
relationship  of  the  states,  and  also  that  in 
adopting  the  Constitution  the  states  acted 
entirely  separately  and  independently.  In  this 
connection  attention  is  called  to  the  fact 
that  the  Convention  dropped  the  word  “na- 
tional” which  for  a time  appeared  in  the 
Virginia  Resolutions  (see  Federal  Conven- 
tion) and  also  gave  up  the  plan  of  coercion 
and  the  device  of  a veto  on  state  acts.  It 
must  be  remembered  that  for  all  discussions 
concerning  the  nature  of  the  Union  in  the 
earlier  days,  there  was  little  published  mate- 
rial concerning  the  work  of  the  Convention. 
Even  the  Journal,  the  bare  formal  outline  of 
the  Convention’s  work,  was  not  printed  till 
1819,  and  the  Madison  Papers  not  till  1840. 
Had  the  materials,  now  in  print,  been  in  the 
hands  of  the  early  defenders  of  state  sover- 
eignty, they  might  have  had  somewhat  great- 
er difficulty  in  reaching  the  conclusion  that  the 
Federal  Convention  did  not  intend  to  make  a 
radical  alteration  of  the  system  of  the  Con- 
federation. 


Adoption. — Advocates  of  state  sovereignty 
on  the  whole  lay  very  little  stress  upon  the 
conscious  or  express  purpose  of  the  framers 
of  the  Constitution  or  of  those  that  adopted 
the  Constitution.  Calhoun,  as  well  as  later 
advocates  of  the  doctrine,  did,  however,  lay 
stress  on  one  of  the  resolutions  passed  by  Vir- 
ginia when  adopting  the  Constitution,  and 
reference  is  sometimes  made  to  the  resolutions 
of  New  York  and  Rhode  Island.  The  Virginia 
resolution  is  as  follows: 

We  the  Delegates  of  the  people  of  Virginia. 
. . . Do  in  the  name  and  in  behalf  of  the  People 

of  Virginia  declare  and  make  known  that  the 
powers  granted  under  the  Constitution  being  de- 
rived from  the  People  of  the  United  States  may  be 
resumed  by  them  whensoever  the  same  shall  be 
perverted  to  their  injury  or  oppression  and  that 
every  power  not  granted  thereby  remains  with 
them  and  at  their  will. 

This  clause  has  been  interpreted  to  mean 
that  Virginia  expressly  reserved  the  right  of 
secession  from  the  Union. 

Central  Statement. — The  center  of  argument 
is  the  fact  that  the  states  accepted  the  Con- 
stitution separately.  In  as  much  as  they  did 
so  act  in  isolation  and  independently,  they 
necessarily  continued — such  is  the  contention 
— separate  and  independent;  no  amount  of 
separate  action  could  result  in  the  establish- 
ment of  unity;  no  agreement  could  result  in 
the  establishment  of  a law  superior  to  and 
binding  upon  the  contracting  parties.  In  as 
much  as  there  was  no  political  being,  such  as 
a people  of  the  United  States  forming  a politi- 
cal entity,  before  the  adoption  of  the  Con- 
stitution, there  could  have  been  none  after 
adoption  and  as  a result  of  it;  for  the  result 
of  agreeing  could  be  nothing  more  or  less 
than  agreement.  In  fact  it  would  appear  that, 
if  this  form  of  political  metaphysics  is  con- 
sistently maintained,  no  amount  of  conscious 
intention  in  forming  the  agreement  to  form 
an  indissoluble  union  could  have  been  effective 
in  the  establishment  of  a national  political 
unity  superior  to  the  contracting  parties,  or  in 
depriving  the  states  of  essential  self-determina- 
tion as  sovereignties. 

Calhoun’s  Assertion. — To  speak  of  the  Con- 
stitution as  if  it  were  merely  an  agreement 
between  sovereignties,  similar  to  any  treaty  or 
articles  of  alliance,  has  been  common  enough. 
Calhoun,  however,  more  closely  viewed  the 
facts;  he  saw  clearly  and  admitted  that  the 
United  States  Government  was  a real  govern- 
ment and  that  it  came  in  contact  with  men 
immediately;  this  contact  resulted,  however, 
only  because  of  the  acquiescence  of  the  state 
or  with  its  consent.  He  declared  “that  there 
is  no  direct  and  immediate  connection  between 
the  individual  citizens  of  a state  and  the  Gen- 
eral Government.  The  relation  between  them 
is  through  the  state.  The  Union  is  a union 
of  states  as  communities  and  not  a union  as 
individuals.”  He  saw  moreover  that  the  people 
of  each  individual  state  in  adopting  the  Con- 


403 


STATE  SOVEREIGNTY 


stitution  of  the  United  States  acted  much  as 
they  did  in  adopting  the  constitution  of  their 
own  state  and  thus  established  a second  gov- 
ernment immediately  over  themselves. 

Both  governments — that  of  the  United  States  and 
those  of  the  separate  States — derive  their  powers 
from  the  same  source,  and  were  ordained  and  es- 
tablished by  the  same  authority;  the  only  differ- 
ence being,  that  in  ordaining  and  establishing  the 
one,  the  people  of  the  several  States  acted  with 
concert  or  mutual  understanding;  while  in  ordain- 
ing and  establishing  the  others,  the  people  of  each 
State  acted  separately  and  without  concert  or  mu- 
tual understanding  as  has  been  fully  explained. 

( Works  1.  1G7 ) . 

It  should  be  pointed  out  in  this  connection 
that  the  only  thing  in  the  Constitution  or  in 
the  forms  used  in  adopting  it  which  would 
appear  to  indicate  that  the  Constitution  was 
the  result  of  agreement  and  of  “mutual  under- 
standing” are  the  words  of  Article  VII: 

The  ratification  of  the  Conventions  of  nine 
States  shall  be  sufficient  for  the  establishment  of 
this  Constitution  between  the  States  so  ratifying 
the  same. 

To  the  simple  minded  reader  there  may  ap- 
pear to  be  a considerable  difference  between 
the  assertion  that  the  people  of  each  state 
thus  established  a government  and  the  asser- 
tion that  therefore  the  Constitution  was  a con- 
tract; but  if  he  would  understand  the  doctrine 
of  state  sovereignty,  he  must  not  hesitate  to 
accept  the  connection  or  to  take  the  step  called 
for.  Calhoun  thus  stated  the  case  in  his 
“Letter  to  Governor  Hamilton:” 

Thus  viewed,  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  with  the  government  it  created,  is  truly 
and  strictly  the  Constitution  of  each  state,  as 
much  so  as  its  own  particular  Constitution  and 
government,  ratified  by  the  same  authority,  in  the 
same  mode,  and  having,  as  far  as  its  citizens  are 
concerned,  its  powers  and  obligations  from  the 
same  source,  differing  only  in  t lie  aspect,  under 
which  I am  considering  the  subject,  in  the  plighted 
faith  of  the  state  to  its  co-states,  and  of  which,  as 
far  as  its  citizens  are  considered,  the  state,  in  the 
last  resort,  is  the  exclusive  judge  (Jenkins, 
Life  of  Calhoun,  201). 

Sovereignty  and  Compact. — Calhoun  and 
those  that  thought  with  him  adopted  the  view 
of  undivided  and  indivisible  sovereignty: 
“Sovereignty  is  an  entire  thing — to  divide,  is 
...  to  destroy  it”  (Works,  I,  146).  They  also 
referred  to  the  use  of  the  word  “compact’''  by 
the  men  of  the  eighteenth  century  in  describing 
the  Constitution  and,  of  course,  to  the  Virginia 
and  Kentucky  Resolutions  (see)  as  support- 
ing the  doctrine  of  complete  state  sovereignty; 
they  failed  to  notice  that  “compact”  was  the 
most  solemn  word  of  the  eighteenth  century 
statesmen,  who  believed  that  the  state  and 
society  itself  rested  on  consent. 

Criticism  of  the  Doctrine. — In  the  space  here 
available  it  is  perhaps  impossible  to  present 
an  argument  and  cite  facts  that  effectually 
disprove  the  doctrine  of  state  sovereignty,  but 
the  consideration  of  a few  fundamental  facts 
and  principles  may  at  least  raise  doubts  con- 
cerning its  truth.  It  must  be  remembered 
that  the  argument  in  its  most  cogent  form 


does  not  rest  primarily  on  the  express  inten- 
tion of  the  fathers  to  establish  a new  union 
in  which  the  states  would  continue  sovereign. 
Any  list  of  assertions  that  the  fathers  did  not 
mean  to  take  away  the  sovereignty  of  the 
states  is,  to  say  the  least,  not  convincing  and 
lacks  historical  confirmation.  In  fact  the  stu- 
dent of  the  convention  period  is  forced  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  idea  of  state  sovereignty 
was  met  in  the  Convention,  and  that  it  was 
the  intention  to  form  a national  system  in 
which  the  states  would  no  longer  have  complete 
sovereignty.  Probably  the  orthodox  idea  of 
the  time,  so  far  as  it  dealt  with  sovereignty 
at  all,  was  that  the  states  were  deprived  of  a 
portion  of  their  sovereignty.  Madison  in  his 
Writings  (1840,  IV,  390),  says: 

It  has  hitherto  been  understood  that  the 

supreme  power,  that  is,  the  sovereignty  of  the 
people  of  the  States,  was  in  its  nature  divisible, 
and  was,  in  fact,  divided  . . .;  that  as  the 

States  in  their  highest  sovereign  character,  were 
competent  to  surrender  the  whole  sovereignty  and 
form  themselves  into  a consolidated  State,  so 
they  might  surrender  a part  and  retain,  as  they 
have  done  the  other  part. 

Madison  was  right;  such  was  the  idea  of 
the  men  that  framed  the  Constitution  and  it 
must  be  borne  in  mind  by  those  that  would 
go  back  and  interpret  their  words  and  acts. 

Moreover  the  men  of  1787  believed  that  gov- 
ernment and  society  rested  on  compact;  they 
did  not  have  in  their  thinking  the  conception 
that  the  result  of  individual  consent  was  to 
leave  the  individual  as  independent  as  before; 
they  believed  that  a new  unity  could  be  made 
by  consent  and  agreement  and  that  individuals 
or  communities  were  bound  by  their  consent 
and  legally  bound  to  the  extent  of  their  con- 
sent or  agreement.  It  is,  therefore,  somewhat 
beside  the  mark — scarcely  reasonable,  one 
might  say — to  insist  that,  because  men  did 
not  act  with  full  consciousness  of  the  meta- 
physics of  the  nineteenth  century,  they  did 
not  and  could  not  do  what  they  intended  to 
do — form  a real  national  government  the  power 
of  which  could  not  be  altered  or  finally  deter- 
mined by  action  on  the  part  of  the  individual 
states. 

Virginia’s  Resolutions. — In  a preceding  para- 
graph of  the  article,  reference  is  made  to  one  of 
the  resolutions  which  Virginia  used  in  adopt- 
ing the  Constitution.  Such  a resolution  con- 
tained the  thinking  of  the  American  Revolu- 
tion ; it  was  not  an  announcement  of  the  right 
to  secede;  it  was  a proclamation  that  was  as 
old  as  John  Milton  or  the  English  revolution 
of  the  seventeenth  century;  it  was  the  embodi- 
ment of  the  philosophy  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury and  of  the  American  philosophy  of  the 
eighteenth : governments  do  not  have  innate, 
divine  and  inherent  power;  they  are  created  by 
the  people  and  those  that  create  governments 
can  take  away  power  as  well  as  grant  it.  As- 
sertions of  this  kind  had  no  particular  refer- 
ence to  the  make-up  of  a federal  government, 


404 


STATE  STATUTES— STATE  SUPPORT  OF  PRIVATE  INSTITUTIONS 


nor  were  they  made  with  any  intention  of 
reserving  the  right  of  state  secession  ( see 
Revolution,  American,  Significance  of  ) . 

Virginia  and  Kentucky  Resolutions. — The 
argument  for  state  sovereignty  cannot  receive 
sustenance  from  the  Virginia  and  Kentucky 
Resolutions  (see)  ; for  here  plainly  enough 
was  the  idea  of  divided  sovereignty  and  the 
right  of  a state  to  judge  of  the  extent  of  the 
power  granted  and  to  defend  its  reserved 
rights.  The  doctrine  of  the  resolutions  may 
not  be  orthodox;  but  it  is  based  on  a mode 
of  thinking  quite  different  from  Calhoun’s.  In 
fact,  though  the  full  material  is  difficult  to 
get  and  to  interpret,  it  appears  only  reason- 
able to  say  that  in  all  probability  the  states 
before  1830,  in  the  various  disputes  that  arose 
concerning  their  rights,  with  possibly  one  or 
two  exceptions,  did  not  intend  to  assert  more 
than  that  the  United  States  was  not  a “con- 
solidated government”  and  that  the  individual 
states,  or  the  states  in  concert,  having  retained 
a portion  of  sovereignty,  had  a right  to  judge 
of  the  extent  of  the  power  they  had  not  sur- 
rendered— a position,  it  should  be  noticed, 
quite  different  from  that  of  asserting  that 
each  state  remained  wholly  sovereign  and 
granted  power  to  an  agent. 

Metaphysical  Basis. — It  is  evident  that  to  a 
remarkable  extent  the  argument  for  state  sov- 
ereignty rests  on  metaphysical  supposition. 
There  are  in  fact  a series  of  propositions  on 
which  it  rests:  (1)  sovereignty  is  in  its  nature 
indivisible;  (2)  unity  cannot  be  made  by  the 
consent  or  agreement  of  isolated  states  or  be- 
ings; (3)  law  is  the  result  of  the  will  of  a 
preexisting  superior  being;  (4)  the  people  of 
the  United  States  did  not  exist  as  a single 
entity  before  1788.  The  last  of  these  we  might 
call  the  statement  of  an  historical  fact  or  what 
the  defender  of  state  sovereignty  believed  to 
be  an  historical  fact;  the  first  three  are  pure 
metaphysics.  Now  one  might  deny  the  meta- 
physics and  accept  the  history,  or  he  might 
deny  the  history  and  accept  the  metaphysics. 
If  he  followed  either  of  these  two  alternatives, 
he  would  probably  deny  the  existence  of  state 
sovereignty  after  the  establishment  of  the 
Constitution;  certainly  he  would  not  follow 
the  route  commonly  taken  by  the  defenders  of 
the  doctrine.  Moreover,  if  we  insist  on  apply- 
ing metaphysics  to  the  problem,  it  appears 
necessary  to  be  sufficiently  metaphysical  in  the 
interpretation  of  history  to  see  that  there  was, 
in  1788,  a reality,  a real  entity,  superior  to 
the  states,  and  that,  though  the  people  were 
not  fused,  geographically  speaking,  into  one 
mass  in  adopting  the  Constitution,  they  formed 
in  fact  a body  declaring  their  will  in  the  Con- 
stitution. On  the  other  hand,  if  we  eschew 
metaphysics,  there  would  seem  to  be  good 
reason  for  thinking  that  the  people  of  the 
states  by  this  solemn  enactment  irrevocably 
bound  themselves  and  that,  by  their  action, 
they  constituted  a national  government.  In 


other  words,  untrammeled  by  metaphysical 
postulates,  we  find  no  difficulty  in  believing 
that  the  fathers  did  what  there  appears  good 
reason  for  thinking  they  wished  and  intended 
to  do,  viz.,  establish  a real  government,  form 
an  indissoluble  union,  and  take  power  from 
the  states.  Loosed  from  the  trammels  of  a 
particular  branch  of  metaphysics  we  have  no 
difficulty  in  seeing  that  the  states,  by  entering 
the  Union  and  adopting  the  Constitution,  lost 
their  unalloyed  sovereignty  and  independence, 
if  they  had  sovereignty  to  lose. 

Two  Lines  of  Attack. — The  argument  against 
state  sovereignty  as  it  was  stated  over  and 
over  again  from  the  time  of  Webster  and 
Marshall  through  the  Civil  War,  generally 
followed  one  of  two  lines  which  are  somewhat 
similar  to  those  suggested  in  the  preceding 
paragraph.  On  the  one  hand,  it  was  denied 
that  the  states  were  in  essence  sovereignties 
before  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution ; the 
states  were  always  subject  in  part  to  some 
other  authority,  or  were  in  a union  whose  real 
nature  precluded  the  idea  that  they  were  actu- 
ally self-determining;  the  union  was  older 
than  the  states.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was 
declared  that  the  independence  of  the  states 
before  the  Constitution,  if  they  were  independ- 
ent, has  no  bearing  on  what  they  were  after- 
ward; the  Constitution  settles  that  matter 
and  it  is  plainly  a constitution;  the  Constitu- 
tion declares  itself  a supreme  law  and  it  is 
folly  to  say  that  when  the  states  adopted  the 
instrument  they  were  not  bound  by  its  terms 
and  its  plain  expressions. 

See  Federal  Convention;  Nullification 
Controversy;  Secession  Controversy;  Sov- 
ereignty, Theory  of;  United  States  as  a Fed- 
eral State;  Virginia  and  Kentucky  Resolu- 
tions. 

References:  J.  C.  Calhoun,  Works  (1851),  I, 
VI ; A.  H.  Stephens,  Constitutional  View  of  the 
War  between  the  States  (1868),  I;  C.  E.  Mer- 
riam,  History  of  American  Political  Theories 
(1903),  ch.  vii;  C.  W.  Loring,  Nullification, 
Secession  (1893);  J.  C.  Hurd,  The  Theory  of 
our  National  Existence  (1881);  J.  Taylor, 
Construction  Construed  (1820),  New  Views  of 
the  Constitution  (1823);  D.  Webster,  Works 
(1851),  III,  270  et  seq.;  A.  Jackson,  “Procla- 
mation” in  J.  D.  Richardson,  Messages  and 
Papers  of  the  Presidents  (1896),  II,  640-658; 
R.  Foster,  Commentaries  (1895),  I,  61-298; 
J.  Davis,  Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Confederate 
Government  (1881),  I;  A.  C.  McLaughlin, 
“Social  Compact  and  Constitutional  Construc- 
tion” in  Am.  Hist.  Review  (1900),  V,  467- 
490,  The  Courts,  the  Constitution  and  Parties 
(1912),  ch.  iv.  Andrew  C.  McLaughlin. 

STATE  STATUTES.  See  Statutes,  State. 

STATE  SUPPORT  OF  PRIVATE  INSTITU- 
TIONS. See  Subsidies  to  Private  Insti- 
tutions. 


STATE,  THEORY  OE 


STATE,  THEORY  OF 


Definition. — Definitions  of  the  state  are  nec- 
essarily conditioned  largely  by  the  point  of 
view  from  which  the  state  is  considered.  Thus 
some  writers  lay  special  emphasis  upon  its 
spiritual  or  moral  nature,  others  upon  its 
character  as  a juristic  or  legal  personality. 
Again,  it  may  be  viewed  either  as  a concept 
of  international  law  or  as  a concept  of  con- 
stitutional law.  The  state  as  conceived  by  the 
international  lawyer  is  not  necessarily  identi- 
cal with  the  state  as  viewed  by  the  political 
scientist.  For  the  purposes  of  this  discussion, 
we  may  define  a state  as  a community  of  per- 
sons, more  or  less  numerous,  permanently  oc- 
cupying a definite  portion  of  territory,  inde- 
pendent of  external  control  and  possessing  an 
organized  government  to  which  the  great  body 
of  inhabitants  render  habitual  obedience. 

Distinctions. — The  state  must  be  distin- 
guished from  the  government,  which  is  merely 
the  organized  machinery  or  magisterial  agency 
through  which  the  will  of  the  state  is  formu- 
lated and  carried  out.  The  state  is  rather  an 
abstract  conception  while  the  government  is 
a concrete  organization  or  contrivance  through 
which  the  state  manifests  itself.  Governments 
do  not  possess  the  attribute  of  sovereignty, 
that  is,  original  unlimited  authority,  but  only 
derivative  power,  such  as  they  may  receive 
from  the  state,  which  alone  is  the  source  and 
repository  of  sovereignty.  The  two  are  no 
more  identical  than  the  board  of  directors  of 
a corporation  is  identical  with  the  corpora- 
tion itself.  States  possess  the  quality  of  per- 
manence and  continuity ; they  are  what  the 
Germans  call  eine  dauernde  Einrichtung.  Gov- 
ernments, on  the  contrary,  are  not  immortal ; 
they  are  constantly  undergoing  change,  as  a 
result  of  revolution  or  alteration  through  legal 
processes,  and  such  changes  have  no  effect  upon 
the  existence  or  continuity  of  the  state  life 
as  such.  France,  for  example,  within  the  space 
of  a century  changed  its  form  of  government 
from  a monarchy  to  a republic,  then  to  an 
empire,  again  to  a monarchy,  again  to  a re- 
public, then  to  a monarchy,  and  finally  to 
a republic,  but  the  continuity  of  the  state  as 
such  remained  unaffected  through  all  the  suc- 
cessive political  transformations. 

Again  the  state  must  be  distinguished  from 
the  nation  (see),  a term  popularly  employed 
by  many  writers  to  describe  the  collective  ac- 
tion of  organized  society.  The  two  terms  are, 
however,  by  no  means  synonymous  or  identical. 
Strictly  speaking,  the  state  is  a legal  or  po- 
litical concept  while  the  nation,  as  the  ety- 
mological derivation  of  the  terms  suggests 
(nasci,  natio ) is  an  ethnic  concept.  A nation 
is  not  necessarily  a state,  that  is,  it  is  not 
a portion  of  society  politically  organized  but 


(in  its  perfect  form)  it  is  an  aggregate  of 
persons  speaking  the  same  language,  having  a 
common  racial  origin  or  united  by  other  bonds, 
and  who,  according  to  some  writers,  possess 
a common  literature,  common  customs,  a com- 
mon consciousness  of  rights  and  wrongs  and 
who  inhabit  a territory  constituting  a geo- 
graphic unity,  that  is,  a territory  definitely 
separated  from  the  rest  of  the  world  by  nat- 
ural geographic  boundaries.  Some  writers, 
however,  do  not  consider  community  of  descent 
or  even  identity  of  race  as  an  essential  mark 
of  a nation,  but  regard  community  of  speech 
and  geographic  unity  as  the  essential  elements. 
Gumplowicz,  a distinguished  Austrian  publi- 
cist, considers  community  of  civilization  ( Kul - 
turgemevnschaft ) and  identity  of  language, 
rather  than  community  of  ethnic  origin  to  be 
the  test  of  a nation  (Allgemeine  Staatsrecht, 
111).  States  and  nations  rarely  coincide  ter- 
ritorially, though  the  tendency  during  the  last 
century  has  been  more  and  more  in  the  direc- 
tion of  identification,  that  is,  toward  the  or- 
ganization of  states  with  boundaries  embrac- 
ing, as  far  as  possible,  populations  having  the 
same  ethnic  origin  and  speaking  the  same 
language.  Wherever  geographic  and  ethnic 
lines  coincide,  there  is,  naturally,  a strong 
impulse  to  political  organization  within  these 
limits,  that  is,  the  nation  tends  to  organize 
itself  into  a state.  Some  writers,  indeed,  go  to 
the  length  of  contending  that  considerations  of 
political  solidarity  and  stability  require  that 
political,  ethnic  and  geographical  lines  should 
coincide,  that  is,  there  should  be  a state  for 
every  nation.  Those  who  contend  for  this 
principle  argue  that  “non-national”  states 
possess  greater  elements  of  strength  and  are 
freer  from  the  danger  of  disruption  than  “polv- 
national”  states,  or  those  composed  of  several 
nationalities.  Austria  and  Hungary  are  fre- 
quently cited  as  examples  of  states  in  which 
ethnic  heterogeneity  is  a constant  source  of 
weakness.  Nevertheless,  it  may  be  shown  that 
lack  of  ethnic  homegeneity  is  not  necessarily 
an  evil,  since  as  Bluntschli  remarks,  the  pres- 
ence of  foreign  elements  may  be  a means  of 
“keeping  open  connection  with  the  civilization 
of  other  states”  and  may  serve  as  an  “alloy 
to  give  strength  and  currency  to  the  nobler 
metal”  (Garner,  Introduction  to  Political 
Science,  55-56). 

In  countries  having  the  federal  system  of 
government,  the  term  state  has  a dual  appli- 
cation; that  is,  it  is  employed  to  denote  both 
the  federation  as  a whole  and  the  constituent 
communities  of  which  it  is  composed  ( see  Fed- 
eral State).  But  strictly  speaking,  the  lat- 
ter divisions  are  not  states  though  they  may 
retain  a good  deal  of  the  dignity,  the  historical 


406 


STATE,  THEORY  OF 


traditions  and  even  some  of  the  powers  of 
sovereign  states.  Lacking  the  essential  ele- 
ment of  sovereignty,  they  are,  for  the  political 
scientist,  at  least,  merely  dependencies  of  the 
state  of  which  they  are  a part,  differing  from 
the  administrative  circumscriptions  of  a uni- 
tary state  only  in  their  larger  autonomy  and 
powers  of  local  self-government  (see  State 
Government,  Characteristics  of),  neverthe- 
less, some  writers  hold  a contrary  view. 
They  maintain  that  the  test  of  state 
existence  is  not  sovereignty  but  the  power  to 
command  and  enforce  obedience,  and  since  tbe 
component  members  of  a federal  union  possess 
this  power  they  may  properly  be  treated  as 
states  (Laband,  Staatsreclit  des  deutschen 
Reiches,  I,  75;  Jellinek,  Lehre  von  den  Staaten- 
verbindungen,  298,  307).  But  if  a non-sover- 
eign community  may  be  rightfully  treated  as 
a state,  the  distinction  between  states  and 
mere  administrative  districts  or  local  organiza- 
tions disappears,  since  the  latter  also  possess 
the  power  to  command  and  compel  obedience 
(Burgess,  Political  Science  Quart.,  Ill,  128). 

Forms  of  Manifestation. — The  state  mani- 
fests itself  under  different  forms  and  reveals 
various  qualities  and  attributes  according  to 
the  point  of  view  from  which  it  is  considered. 
Viewed  subjectively,  it  appears  as  a condition 
or  status,  as  the  etymology  of  the  word  im- 
plies. Again,  it  reveals  itself  as  a dynamic 
institution  animated  with  life  and  action. 
Viewed  from  the  sociological  standpoint,  it  is 
a social  plienomonon  for  the  realization  of  so- 
cial interests.  Many  German  writers  dwell 
upon  its  juristic  character — its  character  as  a 
juridical  personality,  a corporation  of  public 
law  ( Korperschaft  des  offentlichen  Rechts). 
Others  distinguish  between  its  character  as  a 
public  corporation  and  its  character  as  fiscus, 
that  is,  as  a concept  of  private  law,  in  which 
capacity  it  acquires,  owns  and  administers 
property,  brings  suits  in  the  courts,  and  enters 
into  contractual  relations  very  much  as  a 
private  individual  or  corporation  does.  Still 
others  distinguish  between  the  concept  of  the 
state  ( Staatsbegriff ) and  the  idea  of  the  state 
(Staatsidee) . The  state  as  a concept  is  the 
state  viewed  as  a particular  plienomonon;  the 
picture  of  an  actual  state  as  it  exists  or  has 
existed  in  history;  the  idea  of  a state  is  that 
of  the  state  abstractly  considered,  no  particu- 
lar state  but  the  state  in  general,  the  state  in 
the  splendor  of  imaginary  perfection,  not  yet 
realized  but  towards  which  mankind  is  ever 
striving  (Bluntschli,  Allgemevne  Staatslehre) . 

Constituent  Elements. — The  essential  con- 
stituent elements  which  enter  into  a state  are: 
(1)  people;  (2)  land;  (3)  government. 

Concerning  the  number  of  persons  necessary 
to  form  the  basis  of  state  organization,  there 
is  no  law  or  rule  of  practice  and,  as  a matter 
of  fact,  tbe  populations  of  the  existing  states 
of  the  world  vary  in  amount  quite  as  widely 
as  their  geographical  areas.  Some  writers 


have  essayed  to  lay  down  certain  general  prin- 
ciples concerning  the  number  of  persons  neces- 
sary to  give  the  state  character  to  a commu- 
nity and  a few  like  Aristotle  have  even  gone 
so  far  as  to  indicate  with  more  or  less  pre- 
cision the  maximum  and  minimum  limits. 
Aristotle  thought  the  population  should  be 
sufficiently  large  to  be  self-sufficing  and  yet 
not  too  numerous  to  be  well  governed  ( Politics , 
Jowett,  Ed.,  214-215).  Rousseau  was  of  the 
opinion  that  there  should  be  a certain  propor- 
tion between  the  amount  of  population  and 
the  extent  of  territory.  The  extent  of  terri- 
tory, he  said,  should  be  sufficient  to  support 
the  population  and  the  number  of  inhabitants 
should  not  be  so  great  as  to  reduce  the  share 
of  each  person  in  the  determination  of  the 
sovereign  power  to  an  insignificant  minimum 
(Contrat  Social,  Bk.  II,  ch.  x;  Bk.  Ill,  ch. 
i).  Obviously,  however,  any  but  the  most 
general  rule  must  be  arbitrary  and  valueless. 
About  all  that  can  be  said  is,  that  the  popula- 
tion should  be  sufficiently  numerous  to  support 
a state  organization  and  if  the  other  elements 
are  present  this  need  not  be  considerable. 

In  the  land  occupied  by  the  inhabitants,  we 
have  the  physical  basis  of  the  state.  A com- 
munity cannot  well  become  organized  into  a 
state  until  its  members  have  acquired  a fixed 
abode,  that  is,  until  they  have  attached  them- 
selves to  a definite  portion  of  territory.  Mi- 
gratory bands  and  wandering  hordes  may  obey 
their  leaders  and  indeed  possess  the  rudi- 
mentary elements  of  state  organization,  but 
until  they  become  settled  upon  a definite  area 
of  land,  they  are  not  states,  though  they  may 
be  communities  in  the  process  of  becoming 
states.  Some  writers,  however,  do  not  consider 
territory  as  an  indispensable  constituent  in  the 
make  up  of  the  state.  Thus  Hall  (Interna- 
tional Law,  20)  says,  “Abstractly,  there  is  no 
reason  why  even  a wandering  tribe  should  not 
feel  itself  bound  as  stringently  as  a settled 
community  by  definite  rules  of  conduct  toward 
other  communities,”  though  he  admits  that 
“circumstances  of  modern  civilization  which 
associate  sovereignty  with  land  make  the  pos- 
session of  a fixed  territory  a practical  neces- 
sity.” So  Holland  defines  a state  as  a “numer- 
ous assemblage  of  persons  generally  occupying 
a certain  territory,”  thus  conceiving  the  possi- 
bility of  a non-territorial  state. 

Regarding  the  extent  of  territory  necessary 
to  constitute  the  home  of  a state,  there  is  no 
rule  or  practice  any  more  than  there  is  in 
regard  to  the  requisite  amount  of  population. 
As  a matter  of  fact,  states  have  varied  in  area 
all  the  way  from  the  petty  city  commonwealths 
of  antiquity  to  the  vast  empires  of  the  present 
day.  Rousseau  in  his  Contrat  Social  attempt- 
ed to  lay  down  certain  general  principles  re- 
garding the  size  of  states  as  he  did  in  regard 
to  their  population.  Nature,  he  said,  has  fixed 
a limit  to  the  territory  of  a state:  it  ought 
not  to  be  too  vast  to  be  well  governed  nor 


STATE,  THEORY  OF 


too  small  to  maintain  its  population.  John 
Stuart  Mill  likewise  pointed  out  that  there 
is  a limit  to  the  extent  of  country  which  can 
be  advantageously  governed  or  whose  govern- 
ment can  be  “advantageously  superintended 
from  a single  center”  (Considerations  on  Repre- 
sentative Government,  ch.  xvii;  see  also  De 
Tocqueville,  Democracy  in  America,  I,  171). 
There  is  a difference  of  opinion  among  writers 
as  to  whether  vastness  of  territorial  domain  is 
a source  of  strength  or  weakness  to  a state, 
especially  when  portions  of  it  are  non-contigu- 
ous,  remotely  situated  and  inhabited  by  alien 
races,  but  in  practice  it  has  been  the  ambition 
of  most  modern  states  to  increase  their  terri- 
torial areas  whenever  the  opportunity  was  af- 
forded. It  is  undoubtedly  true,  as  Bluntschli 
has  remarked,  that  the  power  of  a state  is  not 
always  to  be  measured  by  its  mere  extent  of 
territory  as  some  of  the  ancient  city  states 
clearly  showed. 

A third  essential  element  of  the  state  is 
the  existence  of  an  organized  agency  through 
which  the  will  of  the  state  may  be  formulated 
and  carried  out.  This  agency  or  magistracy 
we  call  government.  A mere  aggregate  of 
people,  however  numerous,  does  not  constitute 
a state  until  they  have  effected  a political 
organization  and  established  a civil  authority 
capable  of  laying  down  commands  and  compel- 
ling obedience.  The  body  politic  is  thus  the 
social  body  plus  the  political  organization. 
There  is  no  exact  principle  of  political  science 
by  which  the  existence  of  this  test  may  be 
determined.  The  political  machinery  of  prim- 
itive states,  of  course,  is  necessarily  simple 
and  rudimentary  but  so  long  as  there  is  an 
authority  legally  constituted,  generally  recog- 
nized and  capable  of  enforcing  its  will  upon 
those  subject  to  its  jurisdiction,  the  essential 
tests  of  state  life  are  fully  present. 

Origin. — The  facts  regarding  the  establish- 
ment of  new  states  by  men  already  subject 
to  political  authority  are  a matter  of  authen- 
tic historical  record  but  the  circumstances  un- 
der which  primitive  men  unaccustomed  to  po- 
litical life  first  developed  a political  conscious- 
ness, and  the  procedure  by  which  they  estab- 
lished over  themselves  civil  authority,  are  facts 
upon  which  authentic  history  throws  little 
light.  Several  theories  regarding  the  origin 
of  state  life,  however,  have  been  advanced  by 
political  writers  and  these  may  be  briefly 
stated.  The  oldest  is  that  which  attributed 
the  institution  of  the  state  mediately  or  im- 
mediately to  God  or  some  other  superhuman 
power.  Throughout  the  middle  ages  this  view 
was  powerfully  supported  by  theologians,  who 
were  also  the  leading  political  writers  of  the 
time.  In  the  sixteenth  century'  this  doctrine 
was  taught  by  Bossuet,  the  Protestant  mo- 
narcliomachs,  the  Spanish  Jesuits,  the  noted 
Filmer  in  his  “Patriarchia”  and  many  others, 
their  arguments  being  for  the  most  part  drawn 
from  the  Holy  Scriptures.  They  taught  that 


not  only  was  the  civil  power  established  by  an 
ordinance  of  God,  but  that  magistrates  were 
divinely  appointed  and  that  they  were  ac- 
countable to  no  authority  but  God,  who  alone 
was  the  Supreme  Law  Giver.  Invented  large- 
ly to  defend  the  claims  of  certain  rulers  to 
govern  their  people  without  accountability  to 
any  authority  except  such  as  they  might  choose 
to  render  to  God,  the  theory  received  its  death 
blow  at  the  hands  of  Hobbes,  Grotius  and  Locke 
and  no  longer  has  any  supporters  (see  Divine 
Right  of  Kings;  Monarchy;  Theocracy). 

Compact  Theory. — The  compact  theory  is 
also  old  ( see  Political  Theories,  Ancient 
and  Medieval).  It  was  advocated  with  spe- 
cial force  during  the  seventeenth  and  eigh- 
teenth centuries  and  powerfully  influenced  the 
political  thought  of  Europe  during  these  cen- 
turies. It  ascribed  the  institution  of  political 
authority  to  compact  or  convention,  that  is,  to 
deliberate  and  voluntary  agreement  of  the 
people  among  themselves.  As  a theory  of 
state  origin  ( it  was  also  employed  to  describe 
the  procedure  by  which  a people  already  po- 
litically organized  chose  their  magistrates  as 
well  as  the  relation  which  existed  between 
them),  it  assumed  the  existence  of  a presocial 
or  precivil  condition  of  mankind  who  were 
said  to  be  in  a state  of  nature,  unrestrained 
by  the  prescriptions  of  any  positive  human 
law,  being  subject  only  to  those  of  the  moral 
law,  the  law  of  nature,  and  the  instincts  of 
reason.  This  state  of  nature,  as  Hobbes  con- 
ceived it,  was  a condition  of  perpetual  strife 
among  the  members  of  the  community,  a war 
of  all  against  all  ( helium  ominum  contra 
omnes) . The  transition  from  the  natural  to 
the  civil  state  took  place,  we  are  told,  through 
the  process  of  compact  or  covenant,  that  is, 
each  person  agreed  to  surrender  to  some  mag- 
istrate or  assembly  his  right  to  govern  him- 
self upon  condition  that  every  other  man 
should  do  likewise,  and  each  was  to  receive 
in  return  the  assurance  of  protection  and  se- 
curity. This  was  in  substance  the  explanation 
given  by  Hooker,  Hobbes,  Locke,  Rousseau,  and 
Blackstone. 

The  social  compact  (see)  theory  as  an  ex- 
planation of  the  origin  of  the  state  was  largely 
undermined  during  the  nineteenth  century  by1 
such  writers  as  Sir  Henry  Maine,  Thomas 
Hill  Green,  J.  C.  Bluntschli,  D.  G.  Ritchie  and 
others.  First  of  all,  the  theory  lacks  histori- 
cal evidence  to  support  it.  The  few  instances 
cited  of  states  said  to  have  originated  in  com- 
pact were,  in  fact,  not  examples  of  new  com- 
monwealths founded  by  men  in  a state  of 
nature,  but  were  merely  the  transplanting  to 
new  lands  of  political  institutions,  by  men 
already  living  under  state  organization.  Such, 
for  example,  was  the  celebrated  Mayflower 
Compact  (see),  cited  by  some  writers  as  an 
instance  of  the  founding  of  a new  state  by 
covenant.  In  the  second  place,  the  theory 
must  be  rejected  upon  grounds  of  philosophy 


408 


STATE  UNIVERSITIES 


and  reason.  Political  writers  now  generally 
agree  that  men  in  a state  of  nature  are  in- 
capable of  founding  a state  by  mere  conven- 
tion. The  theory  assumes  the  existence  of  that 
which  men  in  a state  of  nature  manifestly  do 
not  possess,  namely,  an  already  highly  devel- 
oped political  consciousness.  The  contractual 
element  manifestly  belongs  to  a later  stage  of 
social  development.  It  may  play  an  impor- 
tant part  in  creating  or  changing  existing 
forms  of  government  or  in  extending  the  or- 
ganization of  the  state  to  territories  not  al- 
ready under  political  organization,  but  that 
is  a different  thing  from  the  original  institu- 
tion of  the  state  by  perso'ns  unaccustomed  to 
political  authority. 

Patriarchal  Theory. — A third  explanation  of 
how  the  state  was  originally  instituted  is 
found  in  the  so  called  “patriarchal”  theory 
advocated  by  Sir  Henry  Maine  in  his  Ancient 
Law  and  in  his  Early  History  of  Institutions. 
This  theory  represents  the  state  as  merely  an 
expansion  of  the  family  under  the  authority 
of  the  eldest  male  descendant.  The  elementary 
group,  says  Maine,  is  the  family  connected  by 
common  subjection  to  the  highest  male  descend- 
ant. The  aggregation  of  families  forms  the 
gens  or  house.  The  aggregation  of  houses 
makes  the  tribe.  The  aggregation  of  tribes 
constitutes  the  commonwealth.  This  theory 
has  in  recent  years  been  exploded  by  McLen- 
nan in  his  Patriarchal  Theory,  by  Morgan  in 
his  Ancient  Society,  by  Edward  Jenks  in  his 
History  of  Politics,  and  others.  The  theory, 
observes  McLennan,  is  so  simple  and  natural 
that  it  used  to  be  accepted  as  palpably  true 
like  the  fact  of  the  sun  moving  daily  around 
the  earth.  No  one  thought  of  proving  it  and 
but  few  of  seriously  doubting  it.  Like  the 
compact  theory,  it  lacks  historical  proof  to 
substantiate  it.  Recent  historical  and  an- 
thropological research  has  clearly  shown  that 
the  family  related  only  through  males  and 
ruled  over  by  a patriarch  was  not  universal 
in  ancient  society,  nor  even  among  modern 
primitive  peoples.  The  theory  of  McLennan 
and  Jenks  is  that  the  genesis  of  civil  society 
is  found  back  of  the  patriarchal  family  and 
belongs  to  the  stage  of  polyandry  and  the 
matriarehial  family.  The  earliest  social  group, 
they  maintain,  was  not  the  patriarchial  family 
but  a loosely  connected  group  known  as  a 
pack  or  horde  in  which  promiscuity  of  sexual 
relations  prevailed  and  in  which  kinship  was 
traced  not  through  the  father  but  through  fe- 
males. Examples  of  such  societies  are  found 
among  the  primitive  races  of  Australia,  the 
Malay  Archipeligo,  and  to  some  extent  among 
the  early  Celtic  tribes  of  England  and  Scot- 
land. Most  writers,  however,  reject  both  the 
patriarchal  and  matriarchal  theories.  The 
idea  that  the  state  developed  out  of  the  fam- 
ily in  any  form  or  that  there  is  any  con- 
nection between  the  two  is  not  supported 
either  by  historical  or  sociological  evidence. 


The  family  and  the  state  are  totally  different 
in  essence,  organization,  functions  and  pur- 
poses, and  the  view  that  one  is  a mere  expan- 
sion or  development  of  the  other  is  unsubstan- 
tiated by  satisfactory  evidence. 

Historical  Theory. — The  theory  of  state  or- 
igin now  generally  accepted  is  that  which  re- 
gards the  state  not  as  a formal  artificial  crea- 
tion but  as  a product  of  history,  that  is,  the 
outgrowth  of  long  and  gradual  development 
of  human  society  from  rudimentary  forms. 
Political  consciousness,  at  first  wholly  lacking, 
appeared  in  the  minds  of  a few  of  the  natural 
leaders  and  slowly  spread  by  degrees  among 
the  mass  of  the  population.  In  short,  the  state 
first  existed  in  idea  only,  then  as  the  common 
consciousness  developed,  it  became  clothed  with 
the  external  forms  of  organization,  that  is,  it 
acquired  an  objective  existence  in  institutions 
and  laws.  Historically,  this  may  be  considered 
the  starting  point  for  the  state  but  for  political 
philosophy,  it  is  but  a state  in  the  transition 
from  the  natural  to  the  civil  state,  it  is  but 
the  act  by  which  the  state  passes  from  its 
subjective  to  its  objective  form  and  from  which 
it  goes  on  developing  and  expanding  as  po- 
litical consciousness  spreads  among  the  people. 

See  Government,  Theory  of;  Nation;  Po- 
litical Theories;  Social  Compact  Theory; 
Sovereignty,  Theory  of. 

References:  J.  C.  Bluntschli,  Theory  of  the 
State  (Eng.  trans.  1892),  I,  ch.  i,  II,  clis.  ii- 
iv,  III,  chs.  i-iii,  IV,  clis.  vii-ix;  J.  W.  Bur- 
gess, Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law 
(1891),  I,  chs.  i-iv,  II,  chs.  i-ii;  L.  Duguit, 
Droit  Constitut  ionel  (1907),  secs,  viii-xiii, 
xx-xxii,  xxiv-xxvi;  J.  W.  Garner,  Introduc- 
tion to  Political  Science  (1910),  chs.  ii-iv; 
T.  E.  Holland,  Elements  of  Jurisprudence  (6th 
ed.,  1893),  ch.  iv;  G.  Jellinek,  Recht  des 
Modernen  Staates  (1905),  II,  chs.  vi-vii,  TIT, 
ch.  xiii ; S.  Leacock,  Elements  of  Political  Sci- 
ence (1906),  chs.  i-iii;  J.  Locke,  Two  Treatises 
of  Government  (Morley’s  ed.,  1887),  II;  H.  S. 
Maine,  Early  History  of  Institutions  (1886), 
ch.  iii,  Early  Law  and  Custom  (1875),  ch. 
vii;  J.  F.  McLennan,  The  Patriarchal  Theory 
( 1885 ) , ch.  i ; R.  von  Mold,  Encyclopedia  der 
Staatswissenschaften  (1859),  secs,  xviii-xix; 
J.  J.  Rousseau,  Contrat  Social  (1762),  I,  chs. 
vi-viii;  J.  R.  Seeley,  Introduction  to  Political 
Science  (1896),  Lectures  i-iii;  W.  W.  Wil- 
loughby, The  Nature  of  the  State  (1903),  chs. 
i-vi;  T.  D.  Woolsey,  Political  Science  (2d  ed., 
1886),  I,  pt.  II,  chs.  i-iii. 

James  W.  Garner. 

STATE  UNIVERSITIES.  In  this  article 
all  state  institutions  will  be  considered  which 
are  called  universities,  whatever  their  grade 
or  character,  excluding  the  state  agricultural 
colleges  which  are  attached  to  fifteen  state  uni 
versifies  ( see  Education,  Agricultural  ) . 

Colonial  Public  Colleges. — Higher  education 
in  the  United  States  began  in  the  eastern  sec- 


409 


STATE  UNIVERSITIES 


tion  of  the  country,  where  the  following  nine 
colleges  were  founded  before  the  Revolution: 
Harvard  (1636);  William  and  Mary  (1602); 
Yale  (1701);  Princeton  (1746);  Pennsylvania 
(1749);  Columbia  (1754);  Brown  (1764); 
Rutgers  (1766);  and  Dartmouth  (1769). 
Some  of  these  in  early  days  were  in  part  pub- 
licly supported;  to  Harvard  College  the  colony 
of  Massachusetts  contributed  regularly  for 
fifty  years,  and  at  intervals  down  to  the  pres- 
ent time  William  and  Mary  has  been  nur- 
tured by  Virginia.  To  Columbia,  when  found- 
ed as  King’s  College,  the  colony  contributed 
support,  and  the  trustees  were  mainly  ex  officio 
colonial  officials. 

Early  State  Universities. — In  the  southeast- 
ern part  of  the  United  States  soon  after  the 
Revolution  appeared  a group  of  state  univer- 
sities, which  have  retained  their  status. 

(1)  The  University  of  North  Carolina  was 
chartered  in  1789;  the  first  session  was  held  in 
1795.  It  was  governed  by  self-perpetuating 
trustees,  and  the  funds  were  derived  from 
private  sources,  but  the  state  was  their  cus- 
todian and  made  certain  special  grants.  In 
1876  trustees  appointed  by  the  state  came 
into  power;  and  in  1881  the  state  began  direct 
appropriations. 

(2)  The  University  of  Georgia  was  char- 
tered in  1784  and  formally  opened  in  1801, 
receiving  40,000  acres  of  land  from  the  state. 

(3)  The  University  of  Virginia,  chartered 
in  1819  and  opened  to  students  in  1825  was 
the  creation  of  Thomas  Jefferson,  its  first  rec- 
tor. The  controlling  visitors  were  appointed  by 
the  governor  of  the  state.  From  the  outset 
the  state  made  an  annual  appropriation  begin- 
ning with  $15,000;  and  this  fund  was  supple- 
mented by  grants  for  constructional  work. 

First  Land  Grant  Universities. — The  second 
great  impulse  to  state  university  education 
was  the  land  grants  under  the  Ordinance  of 
1787  for  educational  purposes,  including  high- 
er institutions  of  learning.  Under  this  ordi- 
nance the  states  as  organized  each  received 
land  for  its  state  university.  The  amount 
of  this  grant  varied  from  less  than  one  town- 
ship, in  the  case  of  Indiana,  to  more  than 
twenty  townships,  in  the  case  of  Ohio  State 
University.  Ohio  also  made  gifts  of  land  to 
the  Ohio  University  at  Athens  and  Miami 
University  at  Oxford,  which  have  led  to  money 
grants  to  those  institutions  in  recent  years. 

With  the  federal  land  grants  as  a basis, 
as  the  states  west  of  the  Appalachian  Moun- 
tains were  admitted  to  the  Union,  provision 
was  made,  usually  in  the  constitution,  for  the 
foundation  of  a university.  Money  from  the 
sale  of  lands  was  almost  the  sole  source  of 
income  of  the  newly  founded  universities; 
hence,  the  land  was  sold  rapidly  and  at  low 
prices.  In  the  few  states  where  the  lands, 
or  a part  of  them,  were  retained,  they  are 
now  the  basis  of  important  endowments. 

Of  this  group  the  University  of  Michigan 


was  the  first  to  gain  large  influence.  This  in- 
stitution founded  in  1837,  began  work  in 
1841.  With  the  exception  of  $100,000  given 
by  the  state  for  buildings,  the  univer- 
sity was  supported  from  the  land  grants 
until  1867,  at  which  time  an  annual  appro- 
priation began.  Similarly  the  University  of 
Wisconsin,  chartered  in  1848  and  beginning 
work  in  1851,  received  its  first  grant 
from  the  state  for  buildings  in  1871,  and  its 
first  annual  appropriation  for  support  in  1873. 

It  was  the  theory  in  early  days  that  the 
land  grants  given  by  the  government  would 
be  sufficient  to  support  the  state  universities; 
and  public  financial  responsibility  was  assumed 
only  after  the  universities  had  begun  to  per- 
form service  to  the  states. 

Definition. — By  1908,  the  state  universities 
had  sufficiently  developed  so  that  the  Associa- 
tion of  American  Universities  representing 
them,  formulated  definite  criteria  as  to  what 
should  constitute  a university.  These  includ- 
ed: (1)  .a  college  resting  on  a four  year 

high  school  course  and  offering  two  years 
of  general  or  liberal  work,  and  two  years  of 
work  of  a university  type;  (2)  professional 
schools,  such  as  law,  medicine,  engineering, 
agriculture,  at  least  one  of  which  shall  be 
based  upon  the  completion  of  two  years  of 
college  work;  (3)  a graduate  school  properly 
equipped  for  research  work. 

Purposes. — The  purpose  of  the  state  univer- 
sity, founded  first  in  the  southern  states  and 
later  extending  to  the  middle  and  far  west,  is 
to  provide  opportunities  for  the  same  kinds 
of  work  that  the  private  foundations  of  the 
east  were  performing;  indeed  the  development 
of  the  two  classes  of  institutions  has  been  in 
a large  measure  parallel.  The  fundamental 
purposes  of  each  are:  (1)  to  give  a liberal 
education  to  the  youth  of  the  country;  (2) 
to  give  training  for  various  professions ; ( 3 ) 
to  give  advanced  work  to  those  expecting  to 
become  scholars;  and  (4)  to  increase  the  sum 
of  human  knowledge. 

In  the  first  of  these  purposes  the  state  uni- 
versity patterned  after  the  endowed  Institu- 
tion. In  the  second,  the  state  university  fol- 
lowed the  endowed  institution  so  far  as  medi- 
cine and  law  are  concerned,  but  was  a leader 
in  the  development  of  science  and  especially 
the  applied  sciences  of  engineering  and  agri- 
culture; also  in  applying  the  group  of  modern 
humanities,  political  economy,  political  sci- 
ence, and  history  in  the  professional  schools 
or  colleges  of  commerce.  In  the  third  and 
fourth  lines  of  work,  those  of  the  graduate 
school  and  advancement  of  knowledge,  except 
in  applied  science,  the  endowed  institutions 
have  been  and  still  are  in  the  leading  posi- 
tion; although  the  development  of  graduate 
schools  in  the  state  universities  has  been  very 
rapid  in  recent  years. 

Statistics. — Some  facts  as  tc  the  foundation, 
location  and  conditions  of  the  state  univer- 


410 


TABLE  A— STATE  UNIVERSITIES,  1910-11 


STATE  UNIVERSITIES 


(S0.I3V) 

luu.i;) 

puu'i 

ams 

1 1 I I IS  I 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 IS  1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IS  IS  8 II 

1 1 1 1 l=a  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 It-*  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 lg  lefogo  1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 lq  1 S || 

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i ; ; i | i i i i i i i ; i i | i i«  i ;| 

2,237,361 

(sajoy) 
quujo  punq 
sajujg  pejma 

§11111  illlll!lllgllllll°lll§ll  ill  11  nil 

" r'*  w , 

1 1 

5.956.642 

^uaraaAOJdaii 
judUBtn.iaj  paw 

Snipiing  Joj 
snoij  ui  jciojaay 

inn  illSIs  i i i if  ii  i|IIIS§lll  isl  i il  i il  i§§ 

§3  338  jsg'spg  ; | j i§  ;g  | |S3  iggS 

! ^ } 1 1 r r | ^ j i i | i i 

2,482,978  | 

amoauj 

gui^jOAi 

IBIOl 

19,133.979  1 

spun^ 

;naiuA\opna 

ii  iiiiigiiiissisi  \mm  \m  ;§i  ;i  i in  iigisn 
s’*  inn^n'gif  'Mm  lit  ill  l®  i l§i  iiiisi-’ 

|-*  -f  |rt'  ; ~ i i i | « | 

25,818.706 

sSnrpiina 
jo  an [uy 

J ^ Csf  tHtH  (Nj'cO  tH  i-H  rH  tHt-4  <TQ 

i 

36.765,903 

CUJBa 
Sutpnpui 
‘spunojQ 
jo  an[BA 

33.000 

25.000 
’2,078,799 

180,000 

15.000 

475.000 
57,775 

410.000 

36.000 
870.330 

100.000 

275.000 
151,040 

11.000 
404,015 

1.834.000 

75.000 
534,237 

50.000 

550.000 
83,892 

10.000 

70.000 

118.000 
480,813 

1.540.000 

50.000 

75.000 

300.000 

275.000 

2S5.475 

147.000 

34.500 

76.000 

600.000 

1.059.000 

250.000 

1.804.540 

110.000 

15.534.425 

SpoJS-OAJT 

jo  aniBy 

1,545 

5.000 

2 

"""500 

4.000 
10.010 

8,085 

22,152 

200 

400 

6,639 

.. .0 

40.000 
650 

25,406 

200 

31.800 

8,225 

20.000 

50,000 

7,383 

"To.OOO 

800 

750 

5.000 

30.508 

9.000 

§ 

1 

aanjiuany  pan 
iueniquBit 
•snjB.'iBddy 
oijijnepg 
jo  an[BA 

iii?iiiii§smmigii§iiiisii§iiii§ii§iii 

GC 

1 

saiJB-iqiT 
jo  an[BA 
ajnmixojddy 

lllllll§IISIg|lillllllllllgllllllllllllll 

i 

1 

U“ 

* jnamno.ina 
juapnjg 
IBJOX 

SiSSgaSsiaiSgg8gS!g§8S5ilSSsliSSliSSg§Sia 

t-h  tt  <m'  01  ci  -*fid  w n cvj  i-h  <m* 

8 

l- 

8 

0.3.10A  Sui 
-qoBax  [Bjox 

1 

id 

°.S 

<v  a 

ii 

1831 

1891 

1872 
1808 
1877 
1905 
1801 

1892 
1808 
1824 
1855 
1806 
1866 
1860 
1868 
1841 
1869 
1848 
1841 
1895 
1871 
1885 

1892 
1795 
1884 
1809 

1873 

1824 

1893 
1876 

1883 

1794 

1883 

1850 
1800 

1825 
1861 
1867 

1851 
1887 

[ 

ja}.n?qD 
jo  ajua 

1820 

1885 

1871 
1808 
1861 
1905 
1785 
18S9 
1807 
1820 

1847 

1864 

1865 
1859 
1865 

3 

1868 

1844 

1839 

1893 

1S69 

1873 

1889 

1789 

1883 

1804 
1870 
1809 
1892 

1872 

1805 
1883 
1794 
1881 
1850 
1791 
1819 
1862 
1867 

1848 
18S6 

Location 

Tuscaloosa  

Tuscon  

Fayetteville  — 

Berkeley  

Boulder  

Gainesville  

Athens  

Moscow  

Urbana  

Bloomington  .. 

Iowa  City  

Lawrence  

Lexington  

Baton  Rouge  -- 

Orono  

Ann  Arbor  

Minneapolis  ... 

Oxford  

Columbia  

Missoula  

Lincoln  

Reno  

Albuquerque  .. 
Chapel  Hill  — 
Grand  Forks  — 

Athens  

Columbus  

Oxford  

Norman  

Eugene  

Columbia  

Vermillion  

Knoxville  

Austin  

Salt  Lake  City 

Burlington  

Charlottesville 

Seattle  

Morgantown  .. 

Madison  

Laramie  

1 

1 

1 

1 

l 

noinn.  o j 

ajujg  jo  nois 
-spupy  jo  ajca 

i 

Name 

of 

University 

Alabama  

Arizona  

Arkansas  

California  

Colorado  

Florida  

Georgia  

Idaho  

Illinois  

Indiana  

Iowa  

Kansas  

Kentucky  

Louisiana  

Maine  

Michigan  

Minnesota  

Mississippi  — 

Missouri  

Montana  

Nebraska  

Nevada  

New  Mexico  ... 
North  Carolina 
North  Dakota. 

Ohio  

Ohio  State 

Ohio  ( Miami ). 

Oklahoma  

Oregon  . . . 
South  Carolina 
South  Dakota. 

Tennessee  

Texas  

Utah  

Vermont  

Virginia  

Washington  ... 
West  Virginia. 

Wisconsin  

Wyoming  

Totals  ._  _ 1 

124  411 


♦Excluding  summer  session  and  short  course  students.  1 Estimated  valuation.  2 In  eluded  in  estimated  valuation  of  grounds,  buildings  and  equipment.  3 No 


STATE  UNIVERSITIES 


sities  make  clear  how  rapid  has  been  the 
growth  of  these  institutions  during  the  first 
decade  of  the  present  century.  On  an  average 
the  teaching  force  nearly  doubled;  the  students 
increased  by  56.52  per  cent;  the  value  of  the 
physical  properties  and  the  total  working  in- 
come increased  more  than  threefold. 

Table  A shows  how  widely  the  state  universi- 
ties vary  among  themselves  in  their  strength. 
The  totals  presented  are  impressive ; for  the 
year  1910-11  an  instructional  force  of  5,646, 
a student  enrollment  of  58,760,  property  val- 
ued at  $69,546,163,  and  a working  income  of 
$19,133,979. 

Table  B presents  comparative  statistics  of 
the  five  largest  state  universities  for  the  years 
1900-1901  and  1910-1911. 


Characteristics. — Although  the  development 
of  the  state  universities  has,  in  many  respects, 
been  closely  analogous  to  that  of  the  endowed 
institutions,  certain  differentiating  tendencies 
early  appeared  in  the  former  because  the  state 
universities  feel  special  obligations  toward  the 
states  which  support  them ; whereas  most  of 
the  endowed  institutions  feel  no  exceptional 
obligation  to  the  commonwealths  in  which  they 
are  located.  Some  of  the  special  features  are 
as  follows: 

(1)  The  state  universities  are  mainly  sup- 
ported by  direct  taxation ; definite  sums  for  a 
biennium;  a definite  annual  amount  continu- 
ing without  action  of  the  legislature;  a defi- 
nite tax  levy;  or  a combination  of  these.  The 
tax  levy  appeared  in  the  first  legislative  appro- 


TABLE  B.  GEOWTff  OF  THE  FIVE  LARGEST  STATE  UNIVERSITIES 


Institution 

Year 

Teaching 

Force 

Total 

Attendance 

Value  of 
Libraries, 
Scientific 
Apparatus, 
Machinery 
and 

Furniture 

Buildings 

and 

Grounds 

Total 

Working 

Income 

University 

1900-01 

1S8  2 

3,337 

560,000 

1,816,600 

472,304 

of  California 

1910-11 

421 

4,314 

2,6S3,747  1 

6,804,375  1 

1,672,716 

University 

1900-01 

242 

2,505 

385,803 

1,000,000 

457.5S4 

of  Illinois 

1910-11 

615 

4,896 

1,779,283 

2,503,500 

1,560,040 

University 

1900-01 

233 

3,482 

1,035,000 

1,400,000 

576,650 

of  Michigan 

1910-11 

311 

4,751 

1,656,025 

2,810,965 

1,637,624 

University 

1900-01 

275 

3,413 

290,000 

1,420,000 

421,871 

of  Minnesota 

1910-11 

296 

5,622 

1,175,000 

4,855,000 

1,806,800 

University 

1900-01 

183 

2,393 

477,396 

1.443.S07 

539,656 

of  Wisconsin 

1910-11 

486 

4,099 

1,102,941 

4,526.623 

1.789,470 

Totals 

1900-01 

1.121 

15,130 

2,748,199 

7.080,407 

2,468,065 

1910-11 

2,129 

23,682 

8,396,996 

21,500,463 

8,466.650 

1 Estimate. 

2 Not  including  assistants. 

Students. — It  is  frequently  supposed  that  the 
universities  bearing  the  names  of  states  are 
necessarily  local ; but  for  this  supposition  there 
is  no  foundation.  The  number  of  extra-state 
students  compares  well  with  that  of  Harvard, 
Yale,  Columbia  and  Chicago,  which  vary  from 
44  per  cent  to  65  per  cent.  The  smaller  state 
universities,  like  the  smaller  endowed,  are 
largely  local,  but  the  stronger  state  universi- 
ties have  become  national  and  to  some  extent 
international,  as  is  shown  by  the  rapid  in- 
crease of  percentage  of  non-resident  students 
and  these  percentages  are  steadily  increasing. 
For  some  of  the  institutions  the  distributions 
for  the  year  1910-11  are  as  follows: 


priation  made  for  the  University  of  Michigan. 
In  1911-1912  a tax  levy  for  support  or 
for  building,  varying  from  a small  fraction 
of  a mill  to  one  mill,  was  provided  by  fourteen 
states.  Under  this  system  the  income  of  an 
institution  increases  as  the  assessed  valuation 
of  the  state  grows. 

(2)  The  state  universities  frankly  recognize 
that  they  are  a part  of  the  public  educational 
system,  and  the  graduates  of  public  approved 
high  schools  are  admitted  to  the  universities 
without  examination  in  practically  all  state 
universities.  Some  elements  of  this  plan  have 
been  accepted  by  important  endowed  institu- 
tions, notably  Chicago. 


State  Universities 

Non-resident  Students 

Foreign  Students 

Number 

Percentage 

Number 

Percentage 

California  

448 

9.07 

93 

1.87 

Illinois  

903 

19.C9 

148 

3.23 

Michigan  

2.416 

44.90 

148 

2.75 

Minnesota  

305 

5.30 

7 

.12 

Wisconsin  . -.  - 

1.509 

27.24 

110 

1.98 

412 


STATES,  ADMISSION  OF 


(3)  The  state  universities,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  a few  southern  institutions,  are  coedu- 
cational, not  in  consequence  of  a theoretical 
belief,  but  because  women  were  demanding 
equal  opportunities  with  men  for  higher  edu- 
cation. As  there  were  not  sufficient  funds 
to  found  separate  women’s  colleges,  coeduca- 
tion was  gradually  adopted.  At  the  present 
time  there  are  hundreds  of  women  in  each  of 
the  larger  state  universities. 

(4)  The  state  universities  have  undertaken 
direct  services  to  the  state,  such  as  investiga- 
tions directed  to  the  solution  of  local  prob- 
lems along  many  lines;  the  service  of  the  stall 
as  scientific  advisers;  the  carrying  of  knowl- 
edge direct  to  the  people.  The  state  university 
aims  to  become  the  instrument  of  the  state 
in  its  upbuilding,  material,  intellectual,  and 
spiritual,  one  expression  of  this  ideal  being 
the  university  extension  (see).  In  1911-12, 
for  example,  the  University  of  Wisconsin 
appropriated  $160,000  for  extension  work  of 
all  kinds,  in  addition  to  the  fees  received  from 
students. 

Although  the  achievements  of  the  state  Uni- 
versity already  are  great,  their  recent  im- 
provement and  expansion  give  promise  of  po- 
tentialities far  beyond  present  achievements. 
These  institutions,  mainly  supported  through 
taxation  imposed  by  a democracy  upon  itself, 
are  for  the  sons  and  daughters  of  the  state, 
poor  and  rich  alike,  and  without  regard  to  sex. 
Until  state  universities  had  developed,  the  ad- 
vantages of  educational  institutions  of  the 
highest  rank  had  been  mainly  restricted  to 
the  well  to  do,  who  in  fees  contribute  in  con- 
siderable measure  to  the  support  of  the  uni- 
versity. In  the  state  university  tuition  for 
residents  of  the  state  was  abolished. 

It  is  the  aim  of  the  state  universities  to 
find  a way  for  the  boy  and  girl  of  parts, 
whatever  may  be  the  condition  of  birth;  to 
lend  a hand  to  all  the  people  of  the  state 
by  carrying  to  them  knowledge  which  they 
can  assimilate  to  their  benefit.  Only  slowly 
was  elementary  education  democratized  and 
still  more  slowly  was  this  true  of  secondary 
education ; it  is  the  aim  of  the  state  university 
to  democratize  higher  education. 

See  Agriculture,  Relations  of  Govern- 
ment to;  Coeducation  and  Coordinate  Ed- 
ucation; Education,  Agricultural;  Educa- 
tion as  a Function  of  Government;  Edu- 
cation of  Women;  Education,  Technical; 
Educational  Land  Grants;  Learned  Socie- 
ties ; Morrill  Grant  for  Agricultural 
Colleges;  School  Funds,  State;  Schools, 
Public,  Professional;  Social  Reform  Prob- 
lems: Universities  and  Colleges,  Endowed 
and  Private;  University  Extension. 

References:  H.  S.  Pritchett,  Spirit  of  State 
Universities  (1910)  ; Carnegie  Foundation  for 
the  Advancement  of  Teaching,  Annual  Reports ; 
U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Education,  Annual  Re- 
ports. Charles  R.  Van  Hise. 


STATES,  ADMISSION  OF.  Origin  of  the 

System. — On  October  15,  1777,  the  delegates 
of  Maryland  in  the  Continental  Congress  in- 
troduced the  first  public  formulation  of  the 
policy  of  expanding  the  Federal  Union  by  pro- 
viding for  the  incorporation  of  new  members. 
The  resolution  was  as  follows: 

That  the  United  States  in  Congress  assembled 
shall  have  the  sole  and  exclusive  right  and  power 
to  ascertain  and  fix  the  boundaries  of  such  States 
as  claim  to  the  Mississippi;  and  lay  out  the  ter- 
ritory so  ascertained  into  separate  and  inde- 
pendent States,  from  time  to  time,  as  the  num- 
bers and  circumstances  of  the  people  thereof 
may  require. 

In  November,  1777,  when  the  Articles  of 
Confederation  were  submitted  for  adoption, 
Maryland  refused  to  ratify  them  unless  all 
the  states  claiming  lands  in  the  West  would 
cede  them  to  the  Union.  Congress  thereupon 
appealed  to  the  states  to  make  the  desired 
cession,  and  by  its  resolution  of  September  6, 
1780,  set  forth  the  policy  which  it  would  pur- 
sue in  disposing  of  the  land  ceded  to  the 
Confederacy.  Adopting  the  principle  of  the 
Maryland  resolution  of  October,  1777,  it  pro- 
vided that  the  territory  so  ceded  should  be 
laid  out  into  states  which  should  be  republican 
in  form  and  admitted  as  members  of  the  Fed- 
eral Union  with  the  same  rights  of  sovereignty, 
freedom  and  independence  as  were  possessed 
by  the  other  states.  When  Virginia,  the  most 
important  of  the  claimant  states,  ceded  her 
claims  to  the  Union,  she  embodied  the  resolu- 
tion of  Congress  in  her  deed  of  cession  and 
made  its  observance  a condition  upon  which 
her  cession  rested.  The  lands  therefore  in 
which  the  first  territorial  government  was 
erected  were  received  by  the  United  States 
subject  to  the  condition  that  states  should 
ultimately  be  organized  therein  and  admitted 
to  the  Union.  A similar  stipulation  was  made 
by  North  Carolina  in  her  cession  of  1790. 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  the  Articles  of 
Confederation  (see),  under  which  Congress 
acted  in  receiving  Virginia’s  cession  and  in 
pledging  the  national  faith  to  the  erection  of 
new  states  therein  which  should  ultimately  be 
admitted  to  the  Union,  conferred  no  authority 
for  such  action.  The  Articles  provided  that 
Canada  might  be  admitted  to  the  Union,  but 
stated  that  “No  other  colony  shall  be  admitted 
into  the  same,  unless  such  admission  be  agreed 
to  by  nine  States.”  No  provision  was  made 
for  the  formation  of  new  states  in  territory 
belonging  to  the  Union,  and  the  action  of 
Congress  in  attempting  to  pledge  itself  to  such 
a disposition  of  the  lands  received  from  Vir- 
ginia and  other  states  was  unauthorized.  But 
the  subject  is  fully  covered  in  the  present  Con- 
stitution in  this  clause  (Art.  IV,  See.  iii,  H 1)  : 

New  States  may  be  admitted  by  the  Congress 
into  this  Union  : but  no  new  State  shall  be  formed 
or  erected  within  the  jurisdiction  of  anv  other 
State,  nor  any  State  be  formed  bv  the  junction 
of  two  or  more  States,  or  parts  of  States,  with- 
out the  consent  of  the  legislatures  of  the  States 
concerned,  as  well  as  of  the  Congress. 


STATES,  ADMISSION  OF 


This  clause  should  be  read  in  connection 
with  another  which  says,  “The  United  States 
shall  guarantee  to  every  State  in  this  Union 
a republican  form  of  government”  (Art.  IV, 
Sec.  iv. ).  There  are  no  provisions  as  to  whether 
the  new  states  should  be  formed  from  terri- 
tory already  belonging  to  the  United  States, 
or  from  territory  that  might  thereafter  be  ac- 
quired, or  from  communities  previously  inde- 
pendent. States  of  each  description  have  been 
admitted  and  have  been  the  occasion  of  much 
controversy. 

Procedure. — The  Constitution  makes  no  pro- 
vision concerning  the  procedure  to  be  followed 
in  the  admission  of  new  states,  and  in  dealing 
with  the  thirty-five  states,  which  have  been 
added  to  the  original  thirteen,  Congress  has 
employed  several  methods  of  admission.  Cer- 
tain conditions  however  must  always  exist. 
There  must  be  an  organized  community  with 
a population  capable  in  point  of  numbers  and 
character  of  maintaining  self-government. 
Congress  is  the  final  judge  of  the  fulfillment 
of  these  requirements,  and  its  decisions  have 
often  been  influenced  quite  as  much  by  par- 
tisan considerations  as  by  the  merits  of  the 
question.  In  1872  Congress  enacted  that  no 
state  should  thereafter  be  admitted  unless 
“having  the  necessary  population  to  entitle  it 
to  at  least  one  representative  according  to  the 
ratio  of  representation  fixed  by  this  bill.”  But 
a Congress  cannot  bind  succeeding  Congresses 
in  such  a matter,  and  several  states,  including 
Nevada,  Wyoming  and  Idaho,  have  been  ad- 
mitted in  contravention  of  this  act. 

In  the  process  of  admission  the  first  step  is 
usually  a petition  to  Congress  from  the  com- 
munity concerned.  If  the  request  is  favorably 
regarded,  Congress  then  passes  an  enabling 
act.  The  contents  of  these  acts  vary  consider- 
ably, but  they  usually  describe  the  boundaries 
of  the  new  state,  authorize  its  people  to  frame 
a state  constitution,  fix  the  mode  of  its  forma- 
tion and  adoption,  prescribe  rules  of  suffrage 
in  the  elections  held  in  connection  therewith, 
set  forth  such  provisions  as  Congress  requires 
to  be  inserted  in  the  document  and  provide  for 
its  submission  to  the  Congress  or  the  President 
for  approval.  When  all  the  terms  of  the  en- 
abling act  have  been  complied  with,  the  Presi- 
dent by  proclamation,  or  Congress  by  resolu- 
tion, takes  note  of  the  fact  and  declares  the 
new  state  admitted  to  the  Union. 

Several  times  it  has  happened  that  the  people 
of  a territory  have  organized  a state  govern- 
ment and  applied  for  admission  without  wait- 
ing for  the  authorization  of  Congress.  As  the 
essence  of  the  act  of  admission  is  the  assent 
of  Congress,  that  assent  when  given  ratifies 
whatever  has  been  done.  While  in  such  cases 
there  is  no  enabling  act.  Congress  has  fre- 
quently required  alteration  in  the  constitu- 
tions adopted  as  the  price  of  admission.  Among 
the  states  which  were  admitted  in  this  way  are 
Arkansas,  Michigan,  Oregon,  Idaho  and  Wy- 


oming. The  case  of  South  Dakota  was  an  even 
more  radical  departure  from  the  usual  pro- 
cedure. In  1885,  before  the  Territory  of  Da- 
kota had  been  divided,  the  people  of  that  part 
which  is  now  included  in  the  state  of  South 
Dakota  elected  a constitutional  convention 
which  submitted  a constitution  to  the  people. 
The  instrument  was  ratified,  a state  govern- 
ment organized,  and  federal  Senators  and  Rep- 
resentatives were  elected.  Four  years  later 
Congress  enacted  a law  requiring  the  resub- 
mission of  this  constitution  of  1885,  and  in 
case  of  rejection  authorizing  the  election  of 
a constitutional  convention.  The  constitution 
of  1885  was  ratified  and  under  it  South  Da- 
kota was  admitted  to  the  Union. 

Several  states  have  been  formed  from  other 
states,  as  were  Vermont  (see),  Maine  and 
Kentucky.  In  each  instance  the  state  which 
had  formerly  exercised  jurisdiction  over 
the  area  concerned  gave  its  consent  as 
required  by  the  Constitution.  The  case 
of  West  Virginia  (see)  presents  some 
peculiarities.  When  Virginia  seceded,  the 
western  counties  organized  a government  which 
was  loyal  to  the  Union  and  was  recognized  by 
the  federal  authorities  as  the  lawful  govern- 
ment of  the  state.  It  was  this  government 
speaking  in  the  name  of  Virginia  that  gave 
its  consent  to  the  erection  of  the  western 
counties  into  a new  state. 

Constitutional  Problems. — Several  important 
constitutional  questions  have  arisen  in  con- 
nection with  the  admission  of  new  states.  One 
of  the  most  exciting  grew  out  of  the  debate 
on  the  admission  of  Louisiana  (see)  the  first 
state  to  be  formed  in  territory  which  did  not 
belong  to  the  Union  when  the  Constitution  was 
adopted.  The  question  arose  again  in  a dif- 
ferent form  when  Texas,  an  independent  repub- 
lic, was  annexed  to  the  United  States  and 
provision  made  for  its  admission  to  the  Union 
by  the  same  act.  There  is  now  general  ac- 
quiescence in  the  power  of  Congress  to  admit 
new  states  without  regard  to  the  previous 
status  of  the  territory  from  which  they  are 
organized. 

A question  as  to  which  there  is  still  differ- 
ence of  opinion  is  as  to  how  far  Congress 
may  impose  conditions  upon  the  admission  of 
new  states.  The  resolution  of  1780  pledged 
Congress  to  accord  to  the  new  states  “the 
same  rights  of  sovereignty,  freedom  and  inde- 
pendence as  the  other  States.”  This  pledge 
was  repeated  in  the  Ordinance  of  1787  (see). 
But  when  Ohio,  the  first  state  formed  in  the 
Northwest  Territory,  was  admitted,  it  was 
required  to  give  a pledge  to  exempt  from  taxa- 
tion for  five  years  all  public  lands  sold  by 
tbe  United  States.  When  Missouri  sought 
admission  iu  1821,  its  constitution  required  its 
legislature  to  enact  laws  “to  prevent  free  ne- 
groes and  mulattoes  from  coming  to  and  set- 
tling in  this  State  under  any  pretext  whatever.” 
Congress  thereupon  required  a pledge  that  no 


414 


STATES,  ALLIANCES  BETWEEN— STATES  AS  PARTIES  TO  SUITS 


act  should  be  passed  depriving  citizens  of  other 
states  of  any  rights  or  immunities  guaranteed 
to  them  by  the  Federal  Constitution.  Michi- 
gan was  admitted  on  condition  that  she  would 
surrender  to  Ohio  certain  territory  in  dispute 
between  them,  and  Nebraska  on  condition  that 
there  should  be  no  denial  of  the  elective  fran- 
chise or  any  other  right  to  any  person  because 
of  race  or  color,  while  Utah  was  required  to 
provide  “by  ordinance  irrevocable  without  the 
consent  of  the  United  States  and  the  people 
of  said  State,  that  perfect  toleration  of  reli- 
gious sentiment  shall  be  secured,  and  that  no 
inhabitant  of  said  State  shall  ever  be  molested 
in  person  or  property  on  account  of  his  or  her 
mode  of  religious  worship:  Provided,  that 
polygamous  or  plural  marriages  are  forever 
prohibited.” 

The  restrictions  which  Congress  has  sought 
to  impose  are  of  two  kinds:  those  forming 
ordinary  contractual  relations  affecting  prop- 
erty, such  as  the  arrangement  regarding  the 
Michigan  boundary;  and  those  which  restrict 
the  political  action  of  the  state,  such  as  the 
anti-polygamy  clause  which  was  required  of 
Utah.  There  can  be  no  question  as  to  the 
validity  of  restrictions  of  the  first  class;  but 
if,  as  provided  in  the  Tenth  Amendment,  all  the 
powers  not  conferred  upon  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment are  reserved  to  the  states,  it  would 
seem  that  Congress  could  not  restrict  a state’s 
freedom  of  action  by  imposing  upon  it  political 
conditions  which  do  not  weigh  equally  upon 
all  the  states.  Utah  in  order  to  obtain  ad- 
mission to  the  Union  had  to  yield  to  the  de- 
mand of  Congress  for  an  anti-polygamy  clause, 
but  when  once  admitted,  her  power  to  amend 
her  constitution  is  the  same  as  that  of  the 
other  states. 

The  restoration  of  the  states  of  the  Southern 
Confederacy  to  their  constitutional  position 
in  the  Union,  and  particularly  to  representa- 
tion in  Congress,  is  often  spoken  of  as  their 
readmission  to  the  Union  ( see  Recoxstruc- 
tion  ) . But  since  the  Supreme  Court  has  held 
that  these  states  were  never  out  of  the  Union, 
it  cannot  correctly  be  said  that  they  were 
again  admitted.  What  was  done  was  to  allow 
them  to  resume  their  constitutional  functions 
as  members  of  the  Union — a right  which  they 
had  forfeited  because  of  the  disloyalty  of 
their  inhabitants  during  the  period  of  seces- 
sion. 

See  Concurrent  Powers;  United  States 
as  a Federal  State. 

References:  B.  P.  Poore,  Charters  and  Con- 
stitutions (1877)  ; F.  N.  Thorpe,  Federal  and 
State  Constitutions  (1909)  ; J.  Bryce,  Am. 
Commomoealth  (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  589-595; 
A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government  (1908), 
116-119;  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Government 
and  Politics  (1910),  443-445;  W.  W.  Wil- 
loughby, Am.  Constitutional  System  (1904), 
ch.  xviii;  L.  B.  Evans,  Handbooks  of  Am. 
Government  (1901)  ; W.  A.  Dunning,  Essays 


on  the  Civil  War  and  Reconstruction  (1898), 
304-352;  J.  C.  Monnet,  “Violation  by  a State 
of  the  Conditions  of  its  Enabling  Act”  in 
Columbian  Law  Review,  X (1910),  591;  Van 
Brocklin  vs.  Tennessee,  117  U.  S.  151;  Escan- 
ba  Co.  vs.  Chicago,  107  U.  S.  678;  Huse  vs. 
Glover,  119  TJ.  S.  543,  546;  Sands  vs.  Manistee 
River  Improvement  Co.,  123  TJ.  S.  288,  296 ; 
Willamette  Iron  Bridge  Co.  vs.  Hatch,  125  TJ. 
S.  1,  9;  Boyd  vs.  Thayer,  143  TJ.  S.  135,  170; 
Ward  vs.  Race  Horse,  163  TJ.  S.  504,  511;  Bolin 
vs.  Nebraska,  176  TJ.  S.  83,  89;  Stearn  vs. 
Minnesota,  179  TJ.  S.  223;  United  States  vs. 
United  States  Express  Co.,  180  Fed.  Rep.  1006; 
Coyle  vs.  Oklahoma,  221  TJ.  S.  559. 

Lawrence  B.  Evans. 

STATES,  ALLIANCES  BETWEEN.  See 

Interstate  Law  and  Relations;  States, 
Compacts  between. 

STATES  AS  PARTIES  TO  SUITS.  Rule  of 

Sovereignty. — It  is  a principle  of  both  the  civil 
and  the  common  law  that  a sovereign  state 
or  the  sovereign  representing  such  state  may 
call  into  exercise  the  judicial  functions  of  its 
courts  by  instituting  suits  therein  against  any 
party  over  whom  the  court  can  exercise  ju- 
risdiction, and  by  comity  such  state  or  its  sov- 
ereign in  its  behalf  may  be  allowed  to  main- 
tain suits  in  the  courts  of  other  sovereign 
states ; but  that  on  the  other  hand  such 
state  or  its  sovereign  in  his  public  capacity 
can  not  be  sued  in  its  courts  nor  in  the  courts 
of  any  other  sovereign  state.  The  sovereign 
state  may,  as  a matter  of  grace,  allow  ques- 
tions of  its  legal  liability  to  be  determined  in 
its  courts  ( see  Court  of  Claims). 

Under  the  Federal  Constitution. — Although 
it  was  at  one  time  held  that  with  reference 
to  suits  in  the  federal  courts  the  attribute  of 
sovereignty  was  denied  to  the  states  ( see 
Chisholm  vs.  Georgia)  and  the  Eleventh 
Amendment  was  thereupon  adopted  prohibit- 
ing suits  in  those  courts  against  a state  by 
citizens  of  another  state  of  the  Union  or  by 
citizens  or  subjects  of  any  foreign  state,  never- 
theless when  the  question  arose  whether  by 
virtue  of  the  nature  of  the  subject  matter 
citizens  of  a state  could  maintain  in  the  federal 
courts  suits  against  their  own  states,  it  was 
finally  decided  that  the  general  rule  of  non- 
suability of  a state  had  not  been  abrogated  by 
the  Federal  Constitution  ( see  Eleventh 
Amendment).  But  the  amenability  of  states 
to  suits  in  the  Supreme  Court  brought  by 
other  states  has  been  maintained  (South  Da- 
kota vs.  North  Carolina,  192  TJ.  S.  286). 

Suits  Against  Officers  or  Agents  of  a State. 
— It  was  at  one  time  thought  that  the  exemp- 
tion of  a state  from  suit  applied  only  to  cases 
in  which  the  state  was  formally  a party  to  the 
record  and  that  suits  might  be  maintained 
in  the  federal  court  against  the  officers  or 
agents  of  a state  although  they  were  acting 


415 


STATE’S  ATTORNEY— STATES,  CLASSIFICATION  OF 


under  its  authority  and  were  exercising  its  i 
powers  (see  Osborn  vs.  Bank  of  United 
States)  ; but  it  subsequently  became  apparent 
that  such  a suit  might  be  in  effect  a suit 
against  a state  and  thus  result  in  an  evasion 
of  the  Eleventh  Amendment,  and  the  conclu- 
sion was  reached  that  if  the  practical  result 
of  a suit  against  officers  or  agents  of  a state 
is  to  restrict  it  in  the  exercise  of  its  lawful 
powers  then  it  can  not  be  maintained.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  is  held  that  if,  in  suits 
against  persons  who  claim  to  act  under  state 
authority,  the  authority  itself  on  which  they 
rely  is  not  valid,  then  it  furnishes  to  them  no 
defense. 

Suits  by  States  Representing  the  Public. — 

It  seems  that  a state  government  as  a repre- 
sentative of  the  people  of  the  state  may  main- 
tain a suit  in  a federal  court  for  the  protec- 
tion of  their  general  interests,  as,  for  instance, 
to  prevent  the  depletion  of  the  water  supply 
of  the  state  or  the  contamination  of  its  general 
water  supply  by  an  adjoining  state. 

See  Cohens  vs.  Virginia;  Courts,  Federal. 

References:  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Constitu- 
tional Law  (1910),  chs.  liii,  1 i v ; Tindal  vs. 
Wesley,  167  V.  8.  204;  Fitts  vs.  McGhee,  172 
U.  S.  516;  Missouri  vs.  Illinois,  180  U.  8.  208; 
Kansas  vs.  Colorado,  206  V.  8.  46. 

Eailin  McClain. 

STATE’S  ATTORNEY.  See  Attorney 

General,  State. 

STATES,  CLASSIFICATION  OF.  The 

State. — A state,  in  the  sense  of  modern  po- 
litical science,  includes  a body  of  people, 
inhabiting  a given  territory,  organized  for  com- 
mon purposes,  independent  of  external  control 
and  supreme  in  the  enactment  and  enforce- 
ment of  law  within  the  state  territory. 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  status  of  no- 
madic tribes  in  the  past,  a state  today  cannot 
be  recognized  as  such  without  a definite  terri- 
tory to  which  no  other  state  has  title. 
The  boundaries  of  this  territory  should  be 
definitely  marked,  not  a few  international 
collisions  having  resulted  from  certain  differ- 
ing boundary  claims.  Every  land  boundary 
of  the  United  States  for  instance  has  been  the 
subject  of  long  diplomatic  discussion  with 
abutting  states  and  finally  has  been  deter- 
mined by  a series  of  treaties.  Further,  the 
course  of  history  has  witnessed  repeated  evi- 
dences of  ambition  for  the  extension  of  the 
state  territory,  especially  on  the  part  of  na- 
tions with  crowded  populations. 

The  organization  of  the  state  for  public 
purposes  is  essential  for  the  enacting  and  for 
the  execution  of  law,  and  for  interna- 
tional interchange.  No  body  of  people 
can  be  recognized  as  having  international  stat- 
us without  a definite  political  organization. 
This  organization  must  be  adequate  to  ascer- 
tain and  express  the  public  will  and  must  have 


supreme  power  to  subordinate  all  other  wills 
to  that  which  is  taken  as  the  will  of  the  state. 
Supremacy  within  and  independence  without 
are  the  essential  marks  of  sovereignty. 

Analysis  of  the  State. — A given  state  may  be 
considered  from  two  points  of  view : either  as 
including  all  the  people  who  belong  within  the 
state  territory;  or  as  including  only  those 
whose  will  is  law  and  who  thus  have  the  right 
to  share  in  the  constitution  and  operation  of 
the  state  organization.  The  former  we  may 
call  the  social  state  and  the  latter  the  political 
state.  Those  who  compose  the  political  state 
are  usually  rather  a small  fraction  of  the 
social  state,  often  not  more  than  a fifth,  and 
include  only  those  with  full  political  rights 
— the  electorate.  The  political  organization 
of  the  state  includes  the  electorate,  or  politi- 
cal state,  which  is  the  basis  of  political  power, 
and  the  government,  which  is  the  agency  by 
which  the  political  state  performs  its  func- 
tions. The  government,  then,  is  by  no  means 
the  state  but  is  merely  the  servant  of  the 
state.  Law  is  the  formally  expressed  will  of 
the  political  state  as  a rule  of  action,  obedience 
to  which  is  incumbent  on  all  members  of  the 
social  state. 

Classification  of  States. — States  may  be 
classified  on  the  basis  of:  (a)  the  extent  of 
the  political  state;  (b)  the  structure  of  the 
political  state;  (c)  the  structure  of  the  gov- 
ernment. 

Democracy,  Oligarchy,  Autocracy.— A demo- 
cratic state  is  one  in  which  the  political  state 
is  relatively  a large  part  of  the  social  state. 
In  an  oligarchic  state  the  political  state  is 
relatively  a small  part  of  the  social  state.  An 
autocratic  state  is  one  in  which  the  political 
state  is  supposed  to  be  a single  person. 

It  will  be  observed  that  in  the  first  two 
classes  the  terminology  is  wholly  relative.  An 
oligarchy  tends  towards  democracy  as  the  num- 
ber of  those  sharing  in  political  power  increas- 
es; the  state  thus  becoming  less  oligarchic. 
One  state  may  be  more  or  less  democratic  than 
another,  as  the  ratio  of  the  electorate  to  the 
social  state  varies.  The  tendency  during  the 
last  century  in  most  states  has  been  to  lessen 
the  restrictions  on  suffrage,  thus  increasing 
the  relative  size  of  the  political  state.  This 
has  been  notably  true  in  Great  Britain  and 
in  the  United  States,  but  indeed  is  true  in  all 
states  with  constitutional  government.  In 
other  words,  the  century  has  been  marked  by 
the  advance  of  political  democracy;  states  have 
become  more  democratic. 

States  Centralized  or  Federal. — States  may 
also  be  classified  on  the  basis  of  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  political  state.  If  the  will  of  the 
political  state  is  determined  in  mass  the  state 
is  centralized.  If  the  will  of  the  state  is 
determined  by  weighing  the  separate  will  of  a 
series  of  fundamental  groups,  the  state  is  fed- 
eral. France  is  a centralized  state.  Its  de- 
partments are  mere  administrative  convenien- 


416 


STATES,  CLASSIFICATION  OF 


ces,  created  and  subject  to  change  at  the  option 
of  the  central  government.  Its  fundamental 
law  is  enacted  by  the  central  legislature,  the 
two  houses  uniting,  and  thus  merely  represent- 
ing the  electorate  en  masse.  The  United  States 
is  a federal  state.  The  federal  groups  (called 
states,  though  the  term  is  not  strictly  accu- 
rate) exist  by  virtue  of  fundamental  law,  be- 
yond the  control  of  the  federal  Congress.  In  a 
federation  the  federal  groups  might  better  be 
called  commonwealths.  The  final  will  of  the 
state  as  embodied  in  enactment  or  change  of 
the  fundamental  law  (the  Constitution)  is  as- 
certained by  determining  the  will  of  a specified 
majority  (three-fourths)  of  the  common- 
wealths (Art.  V). 

The  German  Empire  and  the  Swiss  Republic 
are  federal  states. 

Democracies,  Republics,  Monarchies. — On 

the  basis  of  government,  states  may  be 
classified  as  pure  democracies,  in  which  nearly 
all  functions  of  government,  and  especially  leg- 
islation, are  performed  directly  by  the  politi- 
cal state ; republics,  in  which  representatives 
chosen  directly  or  indirectly  by  the  political 
state  carry  on  nearly  all  the  functions  of  gov- 
ernment, including  legislation  and  adjudica- 
tion; monarchies,  in  which  the  head  of  the  ad- 
ministration owes  his  position  to  birth  rather 
than  to  personal  choice  by  the  political  state. 
A state  may  also  be  called  oligarchic  (or  aris- 
tocratic) if  the  members  of  a branch  of  the 
government  owe  their  position  to  birth  or  some 
other  accident  independent  of  the  will  of  the 
political  state.  For  instance,  many  members 
of  the  British  House  of  Lords,  the  upper 
branch  of  the  imperial  legislature,  hold  their 
position  by  hereditary  title,  and  some  few  mem- 
bers by  virtue  of  holding  some  other  office. 
Strictly  speaking,  these  are  all  states  with  a 
democratic,  republican,  or  monarchical  form  of 
government,  as  the  case  may  be. 

Obviously  a state  may  be  of  one  form  on  the 
basis  of  the  status  of  the  political  state,  and 
of  a similar  or  different  form  on  the  basis  of 
the  nature  of  the  government.  Thus  a demo- 
cratic republic  is  a democratic  state  with  a 
republican  form  of  government,  and  an  aristo- 
cratic (or  oligarchic  ) republic  is  an  oligarchic 
state  with  a republican  form  of  government. 
In  like  manner  a monarchy  may  be  democratic 
or  oligarchic,  as  well  as  autocratic. 

Comments. — Pure  democracies  are  practic- 
able only  in  small  communities,  and  such  states 
no  longer  exist.  Such  democracies  imply  a 
general  uniformity  of  condition  and  intelli- 
gence, and  as  increase  in  population  or  di- 
versity of  character  become  marked  the  de- 
mocracy inevitably  tends  to  pass  into  a demo- 
cratic republic. 

A republic  with  powers  delegated  to  the 
government  on  the  whole  has  seemed  the  most 
practicable  form.  The  entire  American  conti- 
nent has  adopted  this  form  ( Canada  being 
only  a nominal  exception),  and  France, 


Switzerland,  and  Portugal  are  included.  Many 
states  classed  as  monarchical  are  in  fact 
more  or  less  republican — notably  Great  Brit- 
tain and  those  states  on  the  Continent  which 
have  adopted  British  methods.  Such  a mon- 
archy has  at  times  been  an  autocracy,  but 
autocratic  monarchies  are  passing  away.  In 
most  modern  monarchical  states  the  monarch 
is  really  little  more  than  the  hereditary  pres- 
ident of  a more  or  less  democratic  republic. 
Great  Britain  is  a democratic  monarchy,  re- 
publican in  fact,  with  sundry  aristocratic  sur- 
vivals. 

Democracy  of  any  kind  is  the  best  form  of 
state  organization  for  a community  which  has 
intelligence  generally  diffused  among  a people 
self-reliant  and  mutually  tolerant.  In  a mon- 
archy like  Russia  or  a republic  like  Mexico, 
each  having  a large  illiterate  mass  in  the  pop- 
ulation, a real  political  democracy  is  by  no 
means  easy  to  maintain.  But  in  any  event 
a political  oligarchy  is  a mere  half-way  station 
between  autocracy  and  ultimate  democracy. 
Autocracy  may  be  highly  efficient,  but  tends 
to  become  a tyranny. 

The  purpose  of  all  political  organization  is 
the  well-being  of  the  social  state  as  a whole. 
No  one  has  a natural  right  to  membership  in 
the  political  state,  and  the  sole  test  which 
should  be  used  in  extending  the  suffrage  is 
the  effect  of  the  extension,  not  primarily  on 
those  enfranchised  only,  but  on  the  entire  com- 
munity. 

Government  is  centralized  or  federal  accord- 
ing to  the  nature  of  the  state.  A centralized 
government  may  be  more  efficient  than  a fed- 
eral government,  but  the  latter  is  more  re- 
sponsive to  the  variety  of  ideas  which  may 
characterize  a large  state,  and  also  on  the 
wdiole  is  more  likely  to  be  permanent.  The 
Supreme  Court  description  of  the  American 
federal  state  as  “an  indestructible  union  of 
indestructible  states”  very  happily  character- 
izes any  real  federal  union. 

See  Composite  State;  Confederation; 
Federal  State;  Germany,  Federal  Organi- 
zation of;  Nation;  Political  Theories;  Rep- 
resentative Government;  State,  Theory  of; 
Unitary  States;  Switzerland,  Federal  Gov- 
ernment in. 

References;  J.  K.  Bluntschli,  Theory  of  the 
State  (6th  ed.,  translated,  1885)  ; J.  W.  Bur- 
gess, Pol.  Sci.  and  Comparative  Constitutional 
Law  (1891),  I;  J.  Q.  Dealey,  Development  of 
the  State  (1909);  W.  A.  Dunning,  Hist,  of 
Pol.  Theory  (1902-5)  ; J.  W.  Garner,  Intro, 
to  Pol.  Sci.  (1910),  123-167;  R.  A.  Gettell, 
Intro,  to  Pol.  Sci.  (1910),  9-204;  T.  E.  Hol- 
land, Elements  of  Jurisprudence  (10th  ed., 
1906)  ; G.  Jellinek,  Das  Recht  des  modernen 
Staatcs  (1905);  J.  S.  Mill,  Representative 
Covernment  (1882)  ; W.  W.  Willoughby,  Na- 
ture of  the  State  (1896)  ; W.  Wilson,  The 
State  (rev.  ed.,  1909);  T.  D.  Woolsey,  Pol. 

Harry  Pratt  Judson. 


Sci.  (1889). 

417 


STATES,  COMPACTS  BETWEEN— STATES,  EQUALITY  OF 


STATES,  COMPACTS  BETWEEN.  After 
the  Declaration  of  Independence  the  several 
colonies  became  theoretically  sovereign  states 
and  capable  of  contracting  with  each  other 
in  that  capacity;  although  they  did  not  in 
fact  exercise  in  full  the  functions  of  sovereign- 
ty by  entering  into  separate  relations  with  for- 
eign governments.  By  agreeing  to  the  Articles 
of  Confederation  they  expressly  bound  them- 
selves not  to  enter  into  any  conference,  agree- 
ment, alliance  or  treaty  with  any  king,  prince, 
or  state,  and  they  further  agreed  that  they 
would  not  enter  into  any  treaty,  confederation 
or  alliance  between  themselves  without  the 
consent  of  the  United  States  in  Congress  as- 
sembled (Aet.  of  Confed.,  VI).  By  the  Con- 
stitution the  states  are  prohibited  from  enter- 
ing “into  any  treaty,  alliance  or  confederation’’ 
(Art.  I,  Sec.  x,  KTf  1,  3),  and  from  entering 
“into  any  agreement  or  compact  with  another 
state  or  with  a foreign  power”  without  the 
consent  of  Congress.  Judging  from  its  associ- 
ated provisions  the  first  of  these  prohibitions 
relates  to  the  exercise  by  the  states  of  func- 
tions intended  to  be  reserved  within  the  ex- 
clusive control  of  the  Federal  Government, 
while  the  latter  relates  to  matters  concerning 
the  states  but  to  some  extent  affecting  their 
relations  under  such  government.  No  very 
clear  distinction  between  the  subject  matter 
of  the  absolute  prohibition  and  that  of  the 
qualified  prohibition  has  been  discovered  but 
it  has  been  held  that  a compact  between  an 
existing  state  and  a new  state  formed  by 
consent  of  Congress  out  of  a portion  of  its 
territory  as  to  the  conditions  of  the  separation 
is  valid  under-  the  second  provision,  and  that 
an  adjustment  of  a boundary  line  made  be- 
tween two  adjacent  states  is  binding  upon 
them  although  no  express  consent  of  Congress 
has  ever  been  given  to  such  agreement. 

The  recognition  of  the  justiciable  character 
of  controversies  between  two  or  more  states 
(Art.  Ill,  Sec.  ii,  H 1)  would  seem  to  imply  a 
power  to  adjust  controversies  between  states 
by  their  mutual  action  to  such  extent  that 
they  would  be  bound  by  the  result;  for  it  is 
difficult  to  conceive  of  a power  to  litigate 
which  does  not  involve  a power  to  adjust  the 
subject  matter  of  litigation. 

References:  J.  Story,  Commentaries  on  the 
Constitution  (5th  ed.,  1891),  §§  1355,  1403; 
W.  W.  Willoughby,  Constitutional  Law  (1910), 
§ 112;  Virginia  vs.  West  Virginia  (1870),  11 
Wallace  39;  Virginia  vs.  Tennessee  (1893), 
148  V.  S.  503.  Emlin  McClain. 

STATES,  CREATION  OF.  See  Recogni- 
tion of  New  States. 

STATES,  EQUALITY  OF.  Sixteenth  Cen- 
tury.— During  the  sixteenth  century  new  con- 
ceptions of  the  nature  of  the  state  arose.  Bo- 
din’s  idea  of  sovereignty  as  absolute,  indi- 
visible, and  inalienable,  and  the  theories  of 


other  writers,  prepared  the  way  for  the  doc- 
trine of  the  equality  of  states.  The  political 
conditions  toward  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury suggested  the  possibility  of  the  family 
of  states  which  made  it  natural  for  such  the- 
orists as  Suarez  to  write  early  in  the  seven- 
teenth century: 

Every  state,  republic,  or  kingdom,  forms  a mem- 
ber of  this  general  body  which  is  the  human  race. 
None  of  these  states  is  sufficient  for  itself : all 
have  need  of  reciprocal  support,  association,  and 
mutual  relations  to  ameliorate  their  situation. 

Seventeenth  Century. — Grotius  in  1625  car- 
ried the  ideas  of  Suarez  to  a fuller  develop- 
ment and  added  the  force  of  his  great  ability 
and  wide  experience  in  his  De  Jure  Belli  ac 
Bads  which  marked  an  epoch  in  the  recogni- 
tion of  the  rights  of  states  as  such.  The  em- 
phasis by  Grotius  upon  the  rights  of  states  as 
political  entities  based  on  a natural  equality 
among  independent  states  had  much  inlluence 
during  the  second  quarter  of  the  seventeenth 
century  and  many  editions  of  his  great  work 
appeared.  The  law  of  nature  was  such  as 
would  furnish  a support  for  a universal  law 
to  which  all  should  be  subject  and  before 
which  all  would  be  equal. 

The  Treaty  of  Westphalia  in  1648,  made 
under  the  influence  of  the  theories  of  Grotius, 
became  the  fundamental  document  of  modern 
European  diplomacy  and  evidenced  the  growth 
of  the  idea  of  equality  as  a state  attribute. 
The  equality  recognized  was  not  of  area,  pop- 
ulation or  power,  but  of  international  status. 

Eighteenth  Century. — The  treaties  from  1713 
on  showed  a growing  tendency  towards  tacit 
admission  of  this  equality  among  states.  Chief- 
Justice  Marshall,  in  1825,  two  hundred  years 
after  Grotius,  was  able  to  say  in  an  opinion 
of  the  Supreme  Court: 

No  principle  of  general  law  is  more  universally 
acknowledged  than  the  perefct  equality  of  na- 
tions. Russia  and  Geneva  have  equal  rights.  It 
results  from  this  equality  that  no  one  can  right- 
fully impose  a rule  on  another.  Each  legislates 
for  itself,  but  its  legislation  can  operate  on 
itself  alone.  A right,  then,  which  is  vested  in 
all  by  the  consent  of  all,  can  be  devested  only 
by  consent.  . . . As  no  nation  can  prescribe 

a rule  for  others,  none  can  make  a law  of  nations 
(The  Antelope,  10  Wheaton  66). 

Congresses  of  Nineteenth  Century. — The  con- 
gresses and  conferences  (see)  of  the  nineteenth 
century  were  assembled  and  acted  on  the  basis 
of  a political  equality;  but  they  raised  new 
questions  as  to  the  continued  recognition  of 
the  equality  of  states,  because  of  manv  con- 
gresses in  which  small  states  in  decisive  votes 
claimed  the  same  weight  as  the  large  states. 
The  question  of  equality  of  influence  had  al- 
ready been  raised  in  regard  to  the  weight  of 
affairs  of  the  different  states,  and  a list  of 
“Great  Powers”  and  “Minor  Powers”  was  com- 
monly mentioned  during  the  latter  half  of  the 
nineteenth  century. 

The  differences  became  even  more  marked  as 
some  states  in  the  last  quarter  of  the  nine- 


STATE’S  EVIDENCE— STATES  IN  THE  UNION 


teentli  century  began  to  be  recognized  not  only 
as  “Great  Powers”  but  also  on  account  of  the 
extent  of  their  dominions  as  “World  Powers.” 
This  practical  recognition  of  the  differences 
among  states  was  accompanied  by  a change  in 
the  theories  in  regard  to  state  attributes,  the 
doctrine  of  equality  began  to  be  questioned 
seriously  and  the  propriety  of  following  it  as 
a working  rule  seemed  to  many  inconsistent. 

Hague  Conferences. — The  Second  Hague  Peace 
Conference  in  1907  put  a severe  test  upon  the 
application  of  the  principle  of  equality  of 
states.  Forty-four  of  the  states  of  the  world 
were  assembled,  each  possessing  one  vote. 
Montenegro  had  the  same  numerical  weight 
in  the  voting  as  Great  Britain;  Panama  the 
same  as  the  United  States.  At  this  conference 
the  question  was  definitely  raised  when  it  was 
proposed  that  an  attempt  should  be  made  to 
select  the  judges  of  the  international  prize 
court  of  arbitral  justice  according  to  a system 
which  should  give  to  the  different  states  a 
number  of  judges  corresponding  to  their  rela- 
tive rank.  The  representatives  from  the  South 
American  states  and  from  some  of  the  smaller 
states  protested  against  any  deviation  from 
the  principle  of  numerical  equality  in  repre- 
sentation. Speaking  of  the  basis  of  representa- 
tion in  the  international  prize  court  the  dele- 
gate from  Brazil  said,  “We  have  been  given 
instructions  of  the  most  formal  kind  to  oppose 
it  by  not  subscribing  to  any  combination 
which  has  not  for  its  basis  equality  of  na- 
tions.” The  question  of  equality  of  states  has 
since  received  more  attention  as  being  one 
which  must  be  considered  by  future  confer- 
ences. 

Tendencies.— In  some  international  organi- 
zations the  powers  are  classified.  The  Univer- 
sal Postal  Union  has  seven  classes,  the  large 
states  like  the  United  States  being  in  the  first 
class  and  bearing  twenty-five  times  as  much  of 
the  expense  as  Liberia  in  the  seventh  class.  The 
International  Radiotelegraphic  Convention  of 
1906  and  other  conventions  of  recent  years 
recognize  in  fact  the  inequality  of  states  by 
giving  to  the  divisions  of  the  larger  states 
the  right  to  vote  but  limiting  the  number  of 
votes  of  any  state  with  its  subordinate  divi- 
sions so  that  it  may  not  exceed  six.  There 
is  much  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  future 
of  the  recognition  of  the  equality  of  states. 
Some  writers  believe  in  the  system.  Others 
agree  with  Dr.  Lawrence,  who  says,  “It  is  im- 
possible to  hold  any  longer  the  old  doctrine 
of  the  absolute  equality  of  all  independent 
states  before  the  law.” 

See  Monroe  Doctrine  ; Recognition  of  New 
States;  Sovereignty,  Theory  of;  State  Sov- 
ereignty; State,  Theory  of. 

References:  T.  .T.  Lawrence,  Essays  on  Some 
Disputed  Questions ■ in  International  Law 
(1885),  230;  F.  C.  Hicks,  in  Am.  Journ.  of 
Tnt.  Lam  11907),  I,  530.  T.  J.  Lawrence,  Ini. 
Law  (1910),  268  et  seq.;  L.  Oppenheim,  Int. 


Law  (1912),  I,  168;  H.  Wheaton,  Hist,  of  the 
Law  of  Nations  (1904),  636. 

George  G.  Wilson, 

STATE’S  EVIDENCE.  The  testimony  by  a 
participant  in  the  commission  of  a crime,  tend- 
ing to  criminate  the  other  participants,  and 
given  under  the  express  or  implied  promise  of 
immunity  for  such  witness.  H.  M.  B. 

STATES  IN  THE  UNION.  The  United 

States  has  been  described  as  an  indestructible 
union  of  indestructible  states.  The  fundament- 
al principle  of  constitutional  construction  is 
that  the  United  States  government  is  one  of 
enumerated  powers  and  that  it  is  possessed  of 
only  the  powers  that  are  granted  expressly  or 
by  reasonable  implication.  All  other  powers 
are  reserved  to  the  states  or  to  the  people. 
The  Constitution  contains  a number  of  re- 
strictions. These  are  directed  to  the  action 
of  the  national  government  except  when  the 
states  are  expressly  mentioned.  There  are  a 
number  of  such  express  restrictions  upon  the 
states  (see  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  Prohibitions  in).  These  are:  (1) 
Those  that  are  intended  to  prevent  the  states 
from  doing  things  that  might  interfere  with 
the  activities  of  the  national  government.  For 
example,  no  state  shall  enter  into  any  treaty, 
alliance,  or  confederation,  or  grant  letters  of 
marque  and  reprisal  (see),  coin  money,  emit 
bills  of  credit  (see),  etc.;  no  state  shall  with- 
out the  consent  of  Congress  lay  any  imposts 
or  duties  on  imports  or  exports  except  what 
may  be  absolutely  necessary  for  executing  its 
inspection  laws.  No  state  shall  lay  any  duty 
on  tonnage  (see)  or  keep  troops  or  ships  of 
war  in  time  of  peace,  or  enter  into  any  agree- 
ment or  compact  with  another  state  or  with  a 
foreign  power,  or  engage  in  war  unless  actu- 
ally invaded  or  in  such  imminent  danger  as 
will  not  admit  of  delay  (Art.  I,  Sec.  x).  (2) 

Another  class  of  prohibitions  includes  those 
that  are  intended  to  prohibit  the  states  from 
interfering  with  certain  individual  rights  and 
liberties;  for  example,  no  state  shall  pass  a 
bill  of  attainder  (see),  ex  post  facto  law  (see), 
or  law  impairing  the  obligations  of  contract; 
no  state  shall  deprive  any  person  of  life,  lib- 
erty or  property  without  due  process  of  law 
nor  deny  to  any  person  within  its  jurisdiction 
equal  protection  of  the  law.  (3)  The  third 
class  includes  provisions  which  are  intended  to 
make  for  the  working  harmony  of  the  states; 
for  example,  the  citizens  of  each  state  are 
entitled  to  all  the  privileges  and  immunities 
of  citizens  in  the  several  states.  Provision  is 
made  for  the  extradition  of  fugitives  from  jus- 
tice, and  full  faith  and  credit  must  be  given 
in  each  state  to  the  public  acts,  records,  and 
judicial  proceedings  of  every  other  state. 

The  state  has  the  right  of  determining  the 
question  of  suffrage  except  as  it  is  limited  by 
the  Fourteenth  and  Fifteenth  Amendments 


419 


STATES,  UNITARY— STATISTICS 


and  in  this  way  determines  what  person  shall 
have  the  right  to  vote  for  Representatives  in 
Congress  and  also  for  presidential  electors. 
The  state  is  entitled  to  be  protected  by  the 
United  States  Government,  to  have  the  as- 
sistance of  the  Federal  Government  in  the  case 
of  insurrections  and  invasions,  and  to  be  as- 
sured a republican  form  of  government.  The 
outcome  of  the  Civil  War,  whatever  may  be 
said  of  conditions  before  that  time,  established 
as  a principle  that  states  cannot  secede  from 
the  Union  and  are  not  possessed  of  full  and 
unalloyed  sovereignty. 

As  explained  in  other  articles,  the  states 
have  the  right  to  pass  laws  on  which  the 
United  States  Government  may  also  legislate 
(see  Bankruptcy,  Constitutional  Pro- 
visions Affecting;  Concurrent  Powers). 
The  mere  granting  of  authority  by  the  Fed- 
eral Constitution  to  the  United  States  Gov- 
ernment to  legislate  is  not  conclusive  evidence 
that  the  state  cannot  also  legislate  on  the  same 
subject. 

Each  state  is  freely  allowed  to  legislate  on 
all  subjects  of  general  internal  concern  and 
on  the  relations  between  man  and  man  subject 
to  the  restrictions  suggested  above,  the  re- 
striction which  is  of  most  significance  being 
that  portion  of  the  Fourteenth  Amendment 
which  provides  that  no  state  shall  deprive  any 
person  of  life,  liberty  or  property  without  due 
process  of  law.  Each  state  has  its  own  con- 
stitution and  the  right  to  make  and  amend 
its  own  constitution.  The  constitution  or 
laws,  however,  must  not  violate  the  Constitu- 
tion or  laws  of  the  United  States  which  are 
the  supreme  law  of  the  land;  and  the  judges 
of  each  state  are  under  obligations  to  be 
bound  by  the  Constitution,  laws,  and  treaties, 
anything  in  the  constitution  or  laws  of  the 
state  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding  (Art. 
VI,  Tf  2).  Each  state  in  the  Union  has  the 
political  power  and  authority  of  every  other 
state,  a matter  which  was  not  until  recently 


established  absolutely  authoritatively  by  the 
courts.  The  possibility  of  establishing  a union 
of  unequal  states  had  arisen  through  the  pro- 
cess of  placing  conditions  on  admission  ( see 
Admission  of  States).  In  the  case,  however, 
of  Coyle  vs.  Oklahoma  (221  U.  »S'.  559),  de- 
cided in  1911,  the  Supreme  Court  decided  that, 
when  a new  state  is  admitted  into  the  Union, 
it  is  so  admitted  with  all  the  powers  of  sov- 
ereignty and  jurisdiction  which  pertain  to 
the  original  states. 

See  Concurrent  Powers;  Double  Citizen- 
ship; Extradition,  Interstate;  Interstate 
Law  and  Relations;  Privileges  and  Im- 
munities of  State  Citizenship;  Spheres  of 
Government;  State  Rights;  State  Sov- 
ereignty; United  States  as  a Federal 
State. 

Reference:  T.  M.  Cooley,  Constitutional 
Limitations  (6th  ed.,  1890),  chs.  ii,  iii. 

Andrew  C.  McLaughlin. 

STATES,  UNITARY.  See  Unitary  States. 

STATION  HOUSES.  For  the  efficient  per- 
formance of  police  functions  an  American  city 
is  divided  into  police  districts  or,  as  they 
are  sometimes  called,  police  precincts.  In 
each  precinct  there  is  a station  house  or  local 
police  headquarters.  This  building,  owned  by 
the  municipality,  is  in  charge  of  a police  cap- 
tain, police  lieutenant,  or  other  police  officer; 
it  is  the  place  where  local  police  records  are 
kept;  also  the  center  at  which  the  local  police 
reserves  are  kept,  from  which  patrolmen 
are  despatched  to  their  posts  of  duty.  As  a 
rule  the  station  house  is  a local  place  of  de- 
tention for  persons  under  arrest  and  contains 
a number  of  detentive  cells.  In  many  cities 
any  man,  not  suspected  of  crime,  may  on  ap- 
plication receive  a lodging  in  bunks  kept  up 
for  that  purpose  in  the  station  house.  See 
Police  in  American  Cities;  Precinct,  Mu- 
nicipal; Vagrancy.  W.  B.  M. 


STATISTICS 


Definition. — By  the  term  “statistics”  is 
meant  the  numerical  presentation  of  facts  re- 
lating to  aggregates  of  phenomena.  As  the 
term  is  now  generally  conceived  there  is  no 
independent  science  of  statistics.  The  statisti- 
cal method  may  be  applied  as  an  adjunct  to 
numerous  sciences,  to  any  in  which  there  are 
aggregates  of  phenomena  capable  of  numerical 
measurement,  but  in  no  science  is  it  the  ex- 
clusive method  of  ascertaining  or  presenting 
facts.  Formerly  the  term  “statistics”  was 
used  exclusively  in  connection  with  numerical 
presentations  of  social,  economic,  or  political 
phenomena.  In  fact,  the  word  is  derived  from 
the  Latin  “status”  with  the  mediaeval  meaning 
of  the  political  state.  In  its  original  use,  in- 


deed, the  term  “statistics”  was  not  confined 
to  numerical  presentations,  but  included  also 
other  descriptive  data.  By  a gradual  transi- 
tion, however,  it  came  to  be  restricted  to  num- 
erical data  and  afterwards  to  be  applied  to 
numerical  data  with  regard  to  other  than 
social,  economic,  and  political  subjects,  in- 
cluding data  as  to  various  so-called  natural 
sciences. 

The  statistical  method,  however,  has  still 
by  far  its  principal  use  in  connection  with 
facts  relating  to  human  societies,  and  is  the 
most  important  method  of  ascertaining  and 
presenting  data  regarding  social,  economic, 
and  political  phenomena.  In  this  field  the 
method  is  constantly  being  extended  in  scope 


420 


STATISTICS 


and  carried  to  a higher  degree  of  elaboration. 
This  is  a natural  result  of  the  increasing  mag- 
nitude and  complexity  of  human  societies.  In 
a society  consisting  of  a few  score  or  a few 
hundred  persons,  supplying  its  own  needs  and 
living  in  a simple  manner,  direct  observation, 
without  precise  numerical  determinations,  will 
permit  an  approximately  accurate  knowledge 
of  conditions  and  laws.  As  the  society  in- 
creases in  numbers  and  in  the  complexity  of 
its  external  and  internal  relations,  such  direct 
observation  becomes  less  and  less  practicable 
and  statistical  methods  become  more  and  more 
necessary.  Concerning  many  facts  of  funda- 
mental social  importance  it  is  impossible  in  a 
large  community  to  form  any  definite  idea  ex- 
cept by  a numerical  presentation.  For  example, 
take  the  death  rate.  Individuals  may  be  able 
to  form  some  general  impression,  from  in- 
stances coming  under  their  observation,  as  to 
whether  deaths  are  increasing  or  decreasing  in 
proportion  to  the  population,  but  to  generalize 
observations  and  obtain  conclusions  at  all  ac- 
curate requires  systematic  statistics.  Still 
more  impossible  would  it  be  to  arrive  at  any 
knowledge  as  to  the  causes  of  changes  in  death 
rates  without  the  statistical  method. 

Statistics  therefore  have  a profoundly  im- 
portant use  as  a basis  of  scientific  knowledge, 
particularly  in  the  group  of  sciences  having 
to  do  with  human  society.  They  are  also 
essential  as  a guide  to  action.  Very  few  im- 
portant subjects  of  legislation  can  be  properly 
considered  without  statistical  data.  Even  a 
private  business  concern  often  cannot  properly 
determine  the  policies  it  shall  pursue  without 
statistical  information  as  to  conditions  in  the 
industry  in  general  and  in  its  own  internal 
affairs. 

Governmental  Statistics. — Both  government- 
al and  private  agencies  collect  statistics.  The 
most  important  statistics  of  social,  economic, 
and  political  phenomena  are  those  collected 
by  governments.  This  is  naturally  the  case. 
The  government,  as  the  organized  representa- 
tive of  the  whole  people,  the  center  of  its  so- 
cial, economic,  and  political  life,  is  the  natural 
agency  for  collecting  statistical  data  regarding 
matters  which  affect  the  entire  community. 
Moreover,  the  sovereign  power  of  the  govern- 
ment enables  it  to  compel  its  citizens  to  fur- 
nish statistical  information  which,  in  many 
cases,  would  not  be  voluntarily  furnished  to  a 
private  agency. 

With  respect  to  purpose  and  method,  govern- 
mental statistics  fall  into  two  main  classes 
between  which,  however,  stands  an  intermedi- 
ate class.  One  class  of  government  statistics 
records  the  transactions  of  the  government  it- 
self; such  statistics  are,  in  a sense,  a by-pro- 
duct of  the  primary  administrative  functions 
of  the  state.  Such,  for  example,  are  statistics 
of  the  government’s  own  finances,  of  the  num- 
ber of  letters  and  mail  packages  it  carries, 
or  of  the  number  of  prisoners  or  insane 


in  its  institutions.  Over  against  these  statis- 
tics stand  those  which  are  not  associated  with 
any  administrative  functions,  but  are  collect- 
ed by  the  government  solely  for  its  own  in- 
formation and  the  information  of  its  citizens. 
The  most  conspicuous  example  is  the  census, 
none  of  the  features  of  which,  save  the  de- 
termination of  the  number  of  inhabitants  for 
the  purposes  of  representation,  is  incidental 
to  any  other  function  of  government.  Inter- 
mediate stand  those  statistics  which,  while 
collected  in  connection  with  the  administra- 
tion of  some  other  function  of  government, 
are  not  an  essential  part  of  that  function,  but 
have  a broader  purpose.  An  example  is  found 
in  the  statistics  of  exports  and  imports,  which 
are  collected  in  connection  with  the  adminis- 
tration of  customs  laws,  but  which,  particu- 
larly the  statistics  of  exports,  are  not  an  es- 
sential part  of  the  customs  administration. 

Statistics  Collected  by  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment.— In  the  United  States  the  statistics  col- 
lected and  published  by  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment cover  a much  wider  scope  than  those  col- 
lected by  state  or  local  governments.  This  is 
naturally  the  ease  because  the  most  important 
classes  of  social,  economic,  and  political  phe- 
nomena are  not  bounded  by  state  or  other  local 
lines.  There  is  probably  no  government  in 
the  world  which  collects  a greater  mass  of 
statistics  than  the  Federal  Government  of  the 
United  States.  Every  department  of  the  Fed- 
eral Government,  publishes  more  or  less  statis- 
tical information,  but  the  most  important  de- 
partments in  this  respect  are  those  of  the 
Treasury,  Agriculture,  Commerce,  Labor,  the 
Interior,  and  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  (see  Statistics,  Official  Col- 
lection of). 

Statistics  Collected  by  State  and  Local  Gov- 
ernments.— All  of  the  state  governments  in  the 
United  States  publish  more  or  less  statistical 
material.  In  some  states  this  is  practically 
confined  to  facts  relating  to  the  administration 
of  the  government  itself — finances,  inmates  of 
state  institutions,  and  the  like.  In  many 
states,  however,  officials  or  boards  exist  for 
the  regulation  of  railroads,  insurance  com- 
panies, and  other  quasi-public  enterprises,  and 
these  authorities  commonly  publish  statistical 
information.  In  a large  proportion  of  the 
states  there  are  also  bureaus  which  collect 
information  regarding  industries  and  regard- 
ing conditions  of  labor.  Over  one-fourth  of 
the  states  take  censuses  of  population,  usually 
in  the  fifth  year  after  the  decennial  census 
taken  by  the  Federal  Government.  Over  a third 
of  the  states  have  systems  covering  the  entire 
state  for  the  registration  of  death.  In  various 
other  states  registration  is  maintained  by  the 
larger  cities.  There  has  been  a gradual  ex- 
tension during  recent  years  of  the  area  for 
which  vital  statistics  are  available;  at  present 
that  area  includes  about  three-fifths  of  the 
population  of  the  country.  The  United  States 


421 


STATISTICS 


is,  however,  far  behind  in  respect  to  vital  sta- 
tistics ; most  foreign  countries  have  systems 
covering  their  entire  population. 

Very  few  cities  or  other  local  governments 
in  the  United  States  publish  satisfactory 
statistics  even  of  their  own  governmental  op- 
erations, and  still  fewer  publish  statistics  of 
any  other  character.  Statistics  of  public 
finances  are  very  generally  published,  but  sel- 
dom in  satisfactory  form.  Statistics  of  crime, 
of  persons  in  institutions,  and  of  the  extent  of 
certain  municipal  activities  are  published  by 
some  cities,  usually  in  a more  or  less  desultory 
manner.  There  has  been  of  recent  years,  how- 
evei,  a marked  increase  in  interest  on  the  part 
of  the  public  in  municipal  and  other  local 
statistics.  It  is  obviously  desirable,  as  a 
means  of  judging  the  efficiency  of  government 
and  of  remedying  abuses,  that  every  local  gov- 
ernment should  have  satisfactory  statistics 
showing,  not  only  the  amounts  of  money  ex- 
pended for  different  purposes,  but  the  results 
accomplished  and  the  cost  per  unit  of  service 
rendered.  Cities,  particularly  large  cities, 
might  also  advantageously  collect  statistics 
regarding  local  conditions  with  respect  to  sev- 
eral subjects  not  directly  pertaining  to  the 
administration  of  government;  e.  g.,  housing 
conditions,  other  sanitary  conditions,  street 
railways  and  other  transportation  to  and  from 
and  within  the  city,  mercantile  business,  etc. 

Statistics  Collected  by  Private  Agencies. — 
Of  the  statistics  collected  by  private  agencies 
much  the  most  important  are  those  relating 
to  commerce  and  industry.  Statistics  of  this 
character  may  cover  the  business  of  numerous 
individuals  or  concerns  or  may  relate  only  to 
the  internal  affairs  of  a single  concern.  Statis- 
tics of  the  first  class  mentioned  are  usually 
collected  either  by  associations  of  business 
men  or  by  trade  journals;  in  most  eases  such 
statistics  are  made  public,  but  in  some  in- 
stances their  circulation  is  confined  to  the 
members  of  the  associations  who  furnish  the 
information.  Almost  every  branch  of  com- 
merce and  industry  is  supplied  more  or  less 
extensively  with  statistical  information  col- 
lected by  private  enterprise.  In  the  aggregate 
private  agencies  probably  collect  a greater 
volume  of  statistics  regarding  business  condi- 
tions than  governmental  agencies. 

Of  rapidly  increasing  importance  are  the 
statistics  of  individual  business  concerns  re- 
garding their  own  internal  transactions.  No 
sharp  line  of  distinction  can  be  drawn  between 
ordinary  accounting  and  business  statistics, 
but  there  is  obviously  a wide  gap  between  a 
rudimentary  bookkeeping  system,  sufficient 
merely  to  enable  a firm  to  determine  the 
amount  of  its  profit  and  loss,  and  a thorough- 
going system  of  cost  accounting  and  statistics 
which  presents  the  condition  of  the  business 
in  its  every  detail,  affording  important  means 
of  securing  economy  and  of  wisely  directing 
business  policy.  Most  private  concerns  which 


prepare  statistics  regarding  their  business  do 
not  make  them  public,  but  some  of  the  large 
corporations  publish  them  at  least  in  part. 
A considerable  amount  of  statistical  informa- 
tion regarding  other  than  business  matters  is 
also  collected  by  private  agencies.  Individual 
students,  colleges,  associations  for  study  and 
betterment  of  social  and  economic  conditions, 
frequently  undertake  statistical  investigations, 
and  in  a few  cases  such  investigations  have 
been  of  a very  extensive  character.  Such  pri- 
vate investigations,  however,  are  apt  to  be  lim- 
ited in  scope  by  reason  of  inadequate  financial 
support,  and  also  are  likely  to  encounter  dif- 
ficulty through  the  absence  of  compulsory  pow- 
er. 

Requisites  of  Good  Statistics. — The  phenom- 
ena to  the  investigation  of  which  statistical 
methods  are  most  appropriate  are,  in  many 
cases,  so  complex  that  only  by  great  care  can 
erroneous  data  and  erroneous  conclusions  from 
data  be  avoided.  A particular  set  of  cautions 
needs  to  be  observed  in  handling  each  particu- 
lar class  of  statistics,  but  there  are  certain 
general  cautions  which  apply  universally,  or 
at  least  very  commonly,  with  respect  to  the 
use  of  the  statistical  method.  The  value  of 
statistical  presentations  is  often  seriously  im- 
paired by  positive  inaccuracy.  With  reason- 
able care  errors  in  the  summation  of  figures 
can  be  avoided,  and  serious  errors  of  this 
character  are,-  in  fact,  uncommon.  The  diffi- 
culty is  in  securing  correct  original  data. 
Error  in  the  original  returns  may  arise  from 
inefficiency  or  neglect  on  the  part  of  persons 
collecting  them  or  from  ignorance  or  indif- 
ference on  the  part  of  persons  who  furnish 
information.  Questions  are  sometimes  asked 
which  the  average  person  interrogated  simply 
cannot  answer  correctly.  For  example,  to 
ask  a farmer  the  value  of  the  products  of  his 
farm  which  his  own  family  and  stock  consume 
is,  in  the  present  condition  of  accounting 
methods  among  farmers,  practically  useless. 
Another  mistake  consists  in  asking  too  many 
questions,  with  the  result  that  the  attention 
of  the  interrogator  and  of  the  person  inter- 
rogated flags  or  even  that  resentment  is 
aroused.  The  fact  that  a government  may 
possess  compulsory  power  to  require  informa- 
tion and  to  punish  those  who  make  false  state- 
ments is  often  no  adequate  protection  against 
error.  The  statistician  should  test  by  every 
means  in  his  power  the  accuracy  of  his  origi- 
nal returns;  he  should  use  every  practicable 
measure  to  reduce  the  margin  of  error  to  a 
minimum;  and  he  should  frankly  make  known 
to  the  public  the  existence  and  probable  de- 
gree of  such  error  as  cannot  be  eliminated. 

In  many  cases  statistics  are  rendered  mis- 
leading, or  at  least  lose  much  of  their  signifi- 
cance, through  the  lack  of  adequate  analysis 
of  the  factors  entering  into  totals  and  aver- 
ages. Apparent  tendencies  or  causal  relation 
may  appear  in  aggregate  figures  which  cor- 


422 


STATISTICS,  OFFICIAL  COLLECTION  OF 


respond  to  no  tendency  or  causal  relations  ex- 
isting in  any  one  of  the  different  elements 
making  up  the  totals.  In  other  cases  such  ag- 
gregate figures  may  possess  some  significance, 
but  fail  to  disclose  important  facts  which 
would  appear  by  further  analysis.  The  phenom- 
ena which  are  subjected  to  the  statistical 
method  are  usually  far  from  simple,  and  it  is, 
therefore,  usually  impossible  to  make  correct 
generalizations  from  a few  totals  and  averages, 
attractive  as  they  may  appear  on  their  face. 
For  example,  a common  statistical  fallacy  re- 
sulting from  lack  of  adequate  analysis  is  in 
the  use  of  crude  death  rates,  that  is,  rates 
calculated  on  the  relation  between  the  total 
number  of  deaths  and  the  total  population. 
The  death  rate  differs  so  enormously  at  differ- 
ent ages  that  comparisons  between  places, 
periods  of  time,  or  classes  of  people  are  utter- 
ly misleading  unless  the  age  distribution  is 
taken  into  account.  Again,  statistics  of  the 
relation  of  the  number  of  crimes  to  the  popu- 
lation are  misleading  unless  the  age  distribu- 
tion is  considered. 

Serious  statistical  fallacies  often  arise  in 
the  use  of  averages.  These  fallacies  fall  logi- 
cally under  the  heading,  lack  of  analysis,  but 
they  are  so  common  and  important  as  to  de- 
serve separate  mention.  One  common  error  is 
the  use  of  unweighted  averages  in  cases  where 
the  different  factors  entering  into  the  averages 
are  widely  different  in  relative  importance.  An 
example  is  the  calculation  of  average  prices 
or  index  numbers  for  a combination  of  a num- 
ber of  distinct  articles,  without  allowing  for 
differences  in  their  relative  consumption  and 
utility. 

A second  common  fallacy  is  the  attempt  to 
make  an  average  of  items  which  differ  so 
widely  in  range  that  the  average  does  not 
correspond  at  all  closely  to  the  actual  figures 
for  any  considerable  portion  of  the  factors. 
For  example,  an  average  income  for  all  in- 
dividuals or  families  would  have  little  signifi- 
cance under  modern  conditions,  because  the 
enormous  incomes  of  a very  small  number  of 
persons  would  have  as  much  weight  in  the 
average  as  the  small  incomes  of  a very  large 
number.  Averages  should  be  used  only  where 
the  range  of  variation  among  the  phenomena 
is  comparatively  narrow  or  where  the  number 
of  extreme  cases  is  so  small  as  to  have  little 
effect.  In  the  absence  of  these  conditions  it  is 
essential  to  substitute  for  the  average,  as  a 
means  of  statistical  presentation,  a system  of 
classifying  the  phenomena  in  groups  in  the 
order  of  the  magnitude  of  the  factor  under 
consideration;  such  a system  results  in  what 
are  called  “frequency  tables.” 

Statistical  Associations. — In  the  United 
States  there  are  several  national  associations 
devoted  to  the  different  branches  of  political, 
economic,  and  social  science,  the  more  impor- 
tant being  the  American  Economic  Association, 
the  American  Sociological  Association,  the 


American  Society  for  Labor  Legislation,  the 
American  Political  Science  Association,  and 
one  section  of  the  American  Association  for 
the  Advancement  of  Science.  Papers  pre- 
sented at  the  meetings  or  in  the  publications 
of  all  of  these  associations  deal  often  more 
or  less  extensively  with  statistical  material 
and  methods.  Besides  these  there  is  a na- 
tional organization  peculiarly  devoted  to 
statistics,  namely,  the  American  Statistical 
Association.  This  association  is  older  than 
any  of  the  others  named;  it  was  organized  in 
Boston  in  1839  and  incorporated  under  the 
laws  of  Massachusetts  in  1841.  Its  formation 
followed  shortly  after  that  of  the  British 
Royal  Statistical  Society,  which  dates  from 
1834.  The  association  has  held  annual  meet- 
ings since  its  organization.  Since  1888  it  has 
published  a periodical  known  as  the  Quarterly 
Publications  of  the  American  Statistical  As- 
sociation-. The  articles  in  these  publications, 
together  with  the  discussions  at  the  annual 
meetings,  have  been  of  much  service  to  statis- 
tical science. 

International  meetings  of  leading  statisti- 
cians have  been  held  more  or  less  regularly 
for  over  half  a century.  International  Con- 
gresses of  Statistics  were  held  at  irregular 
intervals  from  1853  to  1876.  At  the  jubilee 
meeting  of  the  Royal  Statistical  Society  of 
London  in  1885,  however,  a permanent  Inter- 
national Statistical  Institute  was  organized 
and  is  still  in  active  existence.  The  member- 
ship of  the  International  Statistical  Institute 
is  limited  to  200  ordinary  members  and  one- 
tenth  of  that  number  of  honorary  members. 
The  Institute  elects  its  own  members,  and, 
while  a large  proportion  of  the  members  are 
engaged  in  governmental  statistical  work,  per- 
sons not  in  the  government  service  are  often 
elected.  Nevertheless,  the  Institute  has  a semi- 
official standing.  While  the  Institute  deter- 
mines the  places  of  its  meetings,  which  are 
held  every  two  years,  it  is  the  custom  of  the 
government  of  the  country  where  the  meeting 
is  to  be  held  to  issue  an  invitation  to  the  other 
governments  to  send  delegates.  Such  delegates 
may  or  may  not  be  members  of  the  Institute. 
The  only  meeting  of  the  Institute  which  has 
been  held  in  the  United  States  was  in  1893 
in  connection  with  the  World’s  Columbian  Ex- 
position. 

See  Census;  Foreign  Elements  in  United 
States;  Population  of  United  States; 
Statistics,  Official  Collection  of;  Vital 
Statistics. 

References:  R.  Mayes-Smith,  Science  of  Sta- 
tistics (1896);  Am.  Statistical  Assoc.,  Quar- 
terly Publications-,  W.  I.  King,  Elements  of 
Statistical  Method  (1912). 

E.  Dana  Durand. 

STATISTICS,  OFFICIAL  COLLECTION  OF. 
Federal  Statistics. — The  United  States  Govern- 
ment is  probably  the  largest  gatherer  and 


423 


STATISTICS,  OFFICIAL  COLLECTION  OF 


compiler  of  statistics  in  the  world.  The  first 
separate  organization  for  this  work  was  the 
Bureau  of  Statistics,  established  in  the  Trea- 
sury Department  in  1820,  and  dealing  mainly 
with  the  statistics  of  exports  and  imports.  In 
1877  this  Bureau  began  the  publication  of  the 
Statistical  Abstract  of  the  United  States, 
which  has  since  been  continued,  gradually  in- 
creasing in  bulk,  and  bringing  together  in  con- 
venient form  a body  of  national  and  inter- 
national statistics  condensed  from  the  reports 
of  other  bureaus  and  departments  and  from 
miscellaneous  private  sources.  A division  of 
statistics,  since  made  a bureau  (see),  was 
established  in  the  Department  of  Agriculture 
upon  its  organization,  which  has  developed  a 
unique  system  of  estimating  the  quantity  and 
value  of  all  crops,  and  of  forecasting  the  con- 
dition and  yield  of  crops  in  advance  of  their 
harvesting.  Annual  reports  on  the  production 
of  gold  and  silver  are  made  by  the  Mint,  and 
of  other  metals  by  the  Geological  Survey.  The 
State  Department  has  its  own  compilation  of 
international  trade  statistics,  based  upon  con- 
sular reports  (see).  Other  statistics  annual- 
ly compiled  are  those  of  banking  and  currency, 
published  by  the  Comptroller  of  the  Currency 
(see)  ; of  immigration,  emigration  and  natu- 
ralization, compiled  by  the  Bureau  of  Immi- 
gration; of  mercantile  shipping,  compiled  by 
the  Bureau  of  Navigation;  of  railroads  and 
railroad  transportation,  by  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  (see)  ; of  patents,  by 
the  Patent  Office;  of  pensions,  by  the  Pension 
Office;  of  fisheries,  by  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries; 
of  the  manufactures  of  tobacco,  and  malt  and 
spirituous  liquors,  by  the  Internal  Revenue 
Bureau;  and  of  education,  by  the  Bureau  of 
Education.  In  1884  the  national  Bureau  of 
Labor  was  established,  and  has  since  pub- 
lished voluminous  reports  relating  to  industri- 
al and  labor  conditions,  including  strikes  and 
lock-outs,  the  cost  of  living,  etc.  The  Census 
Office,  temporarily  reestablished  every  ten 
years  in  the  Department  of  the  Interior,  com- 
piles the  statistics  of  population,  agriculture, 
manufactures,  mines  and  mining,  wealth,  debt 
and  taxation,  and  many  other  subjects  (see 
Census  ) . The  permanent  Census  Office  was 
established  March  6,  1902,  and  has  been 

charged  with  numerous  additional  statistical 
investigations. 

Largely  with  a view  to  concentrating  and 
coordinating  the  statistical  work  of  the  Gov- 
ernment, the  Department  of  Commerce  and 
Labor  (made  two  separate  departments,  1913) 
was  established  February  14,  1903,  and 

the  Census  Office,  Bureau  of  Statistics,  Im- 
migration Bureau,  Bureau  of  Labor  (previous- 
ly an  independent  department),  Bureau  of 
Navigation,  Bureau  of  Fisheries  (previously 
the  Fish  Commission),  were  transferred  to  its 
jurisdiction.  In  1912  the  Bureau  of  Statistics 
and  the  Bureau  of  Manaufactures  were  com- 
bined under  the  name  of  the  Bureau  of  Foreign 


and  Domestic  Commerce.  The  official  statis- 
tics of  the  Government,  compiled  by  so  many 
different  bureaus,  each  operating  independent- 
ly of  the  others,  has  been  marked  by  great 
duplication  and  overlapping,  and  much  incon- 
sistency, involving  confusion  and  contradic- 
tion. Some  of  these  faults  have  been  corrected 
since  the  new  department  was  established,  and 
numerous  reports  have  been  transferred  from 
other  bureaus  to  the  Census  Office,  which  was 
intended,  as  both  the  organic  acts  indicate,  to 
become  the  general  statistical  clearing  house 
of  the  Government.  Various  departmental 
committees  have  been  appointed,  from  time  to 
time,  still  further  to  concentrate  and  coordi- 
nate statistical  work,  but  nothing  of  value  has 
come  from  them,  and  Congress  has  taken  no 
further  action. 

State  Statistical  Reports. — There  exist  in  all 
the  states  series  of  statistical  reports,  whose 
volume  and  variety  exceed  those  of  the  nation. 
In  1867,  Massachusetts  established  the  first 
bureau  of  labor  statistics,  and  forty-four  such 
state  bureaus  now  exist,  charged  with  statis- 
tical work  within  the  state  limits,  along  lines 
more  or  less  similar  to  those  of  the  Bureau 
of  Labor  and  the  Census  Office.  There  exist 
also  many  state  mining  bureaus,  or  boards 
of  mining  inspectors,  boards  of  agriculture, 
forestry  and  fisheries,  state  banking  and  in- 
surance departments,  state  geologists,  state 
boards  of  health  and  charities,  railway  and 
public  utilities  commissions,  state  superin- 
tendents of  education,  etc.,  all  of  them  com- 
piling statistical  data  required  by  law,  and 
together  producing  an  annual  output  of  ma- 
terial, often  highly  technical  in  character,  in 
which  the  general  student  of  statistics  is  over- 
whelmed when  he  seeks  to  digest  the  available 
data;  for  many  of  them  are  compiled  on  lines 
that  differ  in  important  respects  from  those 
adopted  in  other  states  and  in  federal  bureaus, 
so  that  one  of  the  chief  purposes  sought — 
comparison  between  conditions  in  the  several 
states — is  largely  lost. 

No  attempt  is  anywhere  made  to  combine, 
compare  and  correlate  this  vast  mass  of  statis- 
tical material.  Such  a function  could  be  as- 
signed by  law  to  the  permanent  Census  Office, 
which  has  demonstrated  the  advantages  to  ac- 
crue from  such  work  by  its  admirable  reports 
on  the  financial  and  other  statistics  of  mu- 
nicipalities. From  these  reports  it  is  now 
possible  to  learn  the  comparative  and  per  cap- 
ita expenditures  for  municipal  government, 
carefully  segregated,  for  all  American  cities 
of  30,000  population  and  over. 

European  Statistics. — The  defect  of  Ameri- 
can official  statistics,  both  national  and  state 
is  a lack  of  coodination  and  unification;  the 
cost  of  compilation  is  excessive,  while  their 
practical  value  is  greatly  decreased.  In  both 
respects,  the  United  States  is  behind  the  most 
advanced  European  nations,  primarily  because 
of  the  diversity  of  statutes  and  administra- 


424 


STATUS  QUO  ANTE  BELLUM— STATUTES,  STATE 


tion,  inherent  in  a federal  system.  In  Europe, 
there  has  been  a transfer  of  statistical  func- 
tions from  divergent  local  authorities  to  some 
central  authority,  as  for  example  in  the  Ger- 
man Empire,  which  in  1873  created  an  imperial 
statistical  office  in  which  has  gradually  been 
concentrated  most  of  the  statistical  work  for- 
merly conducted  by  the  several  kingdoms  and 
states,  such  as  the  statistics  of  population; 
of  foreign  and  internal  trade,  and  canal,  rail- 
road and  maritime  traffic;  marine  disasters; 
mines  and  mining;  agriculture  and  manufac- 
tures; wholesale  prices;  industrial  conditions; 
steam  boilers  and  engines;  crime  and  pauper- 
ism; insurance  against  sickness  and  old  age, 
and  relief  of  the  poor;  occupations  and  trades; 
the  issue  of  paper  money;  suicides;  the  condi- 
tions of  the  labor  market,  etc.  Many  subjects 
included  in  German  statistical  investigations 
are  not  covered  by  either  the  federal  or  state 
investigations  of  the  United  States.  In  many 
of  these  German  investigations  the  field  work, 
or  collection  of  the  data,  is  done  by  the  Central 
Office;  in  others,  the  field  work  is  done  by  the 
statistical  offices  of  the  several  states  and  for- 
warded to  the  Central  Office  for  tabulation, 
correction  and  publication. 

In  Great  Britain  official  statistics  are  in 
the  main  compiled  by  the  Board  of  Trade  and 
by  the  registrar-general’s  office,  each  divided 
into  many  branches,  together  making  all  the 
reports  required  for  governmental  or  general 
sociological  purposes,  including  the  census  and 
the  annual  vital  statistics.  In  Canada  the 
statistical  work  of  the  government  has  been 
largely  concentrated  in  the  census  and  sta- 
tistics bureau. 

Movement  for  Uniformity  in  the  United 
States. — What  these  countries  have  accom- 
plished by  statute  must  be  done  in  the  United 
States,  if  at  all,  as  the  result  of  conferences 
between  the  diverse  state  agencies  and  the  na- 
tional Government,  looking  to  a voluntary  un- 
iformity in  statistical  blanks  and  methods. 
The  most  striking  instance  of  success  in  this 
direction  is  that  initiated  by  the  Director  of 
the  Census  in  the  effort  to  build  up  a system 
of  uniform  vital  statistics  (see  Vital  Statis- 
tics in  the  United  States).  Gratifying  as 
has  been  the  progress  made  in  this  field, 
the  United  States  remains  far  behind  every 
other  great  civilized  nation  in  the  field  of 
vital  statistics — the  field  that  touches  the 
people  most  closely  by  reason  of  its  inti- 
mate relation  to  the  public  health.  Prog- 
ress has  been  made  toward  the  unifica- 
tion of  national  statistics  through  cooperation 
between  government  bureaus.  The  director  of 
the  permanent  Census  Office  effected  arrange- 
ments with  the  Mint,  the  Internal  Revenue, 
the  Marine  Hospital  Service,  the  Geological 
Survey,  the  Bureau  of  Education,  the  Bureau 
of  Statistics,  the  Forest  Service,  the  Civil  Serv- 
ice Commission,  and  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries, 
whereby  the  data  compiled  by  each  and  also 


by  the  Census  were  prepared  on  a cooperative 
basis,  and  many  of  the  previous  inconsistencies 
eliminated. 

In  international  statistics,  the  organization 
of  the  International  Institute  of  Agriculture, 
in  1907,  with  headquarters  at  Rome,  Italy, 
supported  by  thirty-three  contributing  na- 
tions, marks  the  first  attempt  to  bring  the 
agricultural  statistics  of  the  world  upon  a 
uniform  basis,  with  a view  to  measuring  the 
food  supplies  and  their  distribution.  It  has 
organized  its  work  very  largely  along  the 
methods  of  crop  reporting  devised  by  the  De- 
partment of  Agriculture  for  predicting  and 
measuring  the  crops  of  the  United  States. 

See  Banking,  Public  Regulation  of;  Cost 
of  Government  in  the  United  States;  Ex- 
penditures, Federal;  Expenditures,  State 
and  Local;  Statistics;  Vital  Statistics  in 
the  United  States;  Wealth,  National,  and 
bureaus  and  offices  by  name. 

References:  R.  Mayo-Smith,  The  Science  of 
Statistics  (1896-1899),  Pts.  I,  II;  R.  Giffin, 
Economic  Inquiries  and  Studies  (1904)  ; F.  A. 
Walker,  Discussions  in  Economics  and  Statis- 
tics (1899).  S.  N.  D.  North. 

STATUS  QUO  ANTE  BELLUM.  The  state 
of  things  before  the  war,  is  a term  sometimes 
used  in  treaties  of  peace  when  it  is  the  intent 
of  the  negotiators  to  indicate  that  all  rela- 
tions, and  particularly  the  possession  of  ter- 
ritory, shall  be  restored  to  the  conditions 
which  existed  prior  to  hostilities.  See  Con- 
quest, Right  of;  Peace,  Conclusions  of; 
War,  International  Relations  during. 

G.  G.  W. 

STATUTES,  STATE.  State  statutes  are 
the  legislative  will  of  the  state,  attested  by 
prescribed  forms  and  solemnities,  prescribing 
rules  of  action.  In  general,  their  source  is  the 
representative  law-making  body,  created  in 
accordance  with  the  state’s  constitution ; but 
a dozen  or  more  states,  by  constitutional 
amendment,  have  authorized  the  making  of 
laws  by  popular  vote  upon  initiative  and  refer- 
endum (see)  petitions. 

State  constitutions  usually  require  that  the 
title  of  each  act  shall  clearly  express  its  ob- 
ject; that  each  act  have  a formal  enacting 
clause ; that  it  be  attested  by  the  signature 
of  the  president  of  the  senate  and  of  the  speak- 
er of  the  house  to  the  statement  that  on  spe- 
cified dates  the  measure  passed  their  respec- 
tive branches.  The  “enrolled  bill,”  thus  at- 
tested, is  the  original  act,  to  which  reference 
is  made  in  testing  the  accuracy  of  any  subse- 
quent version.  If  the  governor  approves  the 
law,  he  gives  it  its  final  sanction  by  signing 
the  bill,  and  delivers  it  to  the  secretary  of 
state  for  filing  and  publication.  Unless  other- 
wise provided  by  the  constitution,  by  law,  or 
in  the  statute  itself,  it  takes  effect  from  the 
date  of  receiving  the  governor’s  approval.  As 


425 


STAY-AT-HOME  VOTER— STEAM  ROLLER 


all  the  courts  of  a state  take  judicial  notice 
of  the  public  statutes  enacted  by  that  state’s 
legislative  authority,  no  proof  is  required  of 
their  existence  or  provisions.  In  general,  how- 
ever, private  or  special  statutes  must  be  proved 
by  competent  evidence,  but  in  most  states  the 
production  of  copies  of  the  acts  in  question, 
printed  by  authority,  is  held  sufficient.  Sub- 
ject to  limitations  imposed  by  the  constitu- 
tion, the  legislature  has  plenary  power  to 
amend  or  repeal  any  statute.  Indefiniteness 
of  reference  to  the  act  modified  has  often  given 
rise  to  so  much  uncertainty  as  to  just  what 
provisions  of  the  former  law  remained  in  force 
that  in  twenty  or  more  states  it  is  now  re- 
quired by  the  constitution  that  no  act  may 
be  revised  or  amended  merely  by  reference 
to  its  title,  but  that  the  act  as  revised  or 
amended  must  be  set  forth  and  published  at 
length. 

The  appallingly  large  output  of  each  legis- 
lative session  comprises:  (1)  ordinary  pri- 
vate law;  (2)  administrative  law;  (3)  meas- 
ures of  a local  and  special  nature.  It  is  this 
third  group  which  is  still  by  far  the  most 
numerous,  and  which  in  the  past  has  covered 
such  a multitude  of  legislative  sins  that  con- 
stitutions are  placing  increasingly  rigid  re- 
strictions upon  the  passing  of  special  legis- 
lation. Thus  Mississippi  specifies  35  different 
topics  upon  which  the  legislature  is  forbidden 
to  make  any  law  of  a special  nature  or  purely 
local  application.  The  enormous  volume  of 
laws  is  due  to  defective  systems  of  representa- 
tion; to  carelessness  and  haste;  to  a lack  of 
responsibility  of  members  in  introducing  meas- 
sures;  and  to  a lack  of  expert  service  in  se- 
curing data,  in  determining  how  far  a new 
proposal  squares  with  existing  law,  and  in 
drafting  new  statutes.  Wisconsin  has  shown 
how  great  improvement  may  be  attained 
through  the  establishment  of  a library  of  leg- 
islative reference  (see),  with  its  staff  of  ex- 
perts. Improvement  has  also  come  from  ses- 
sions of  the  “House  of  Governors,”  and  from 
interstate  conferences  of  delegates  seeking  to 
promote  uniformity  in  state  legislation  (see) 
where  uniformity  is  most  needed.  More  than 
Half  the  states  have  adopted  the  negotiable 
instruments  act  drafted  under  such  supervision 
(see  Legislative  Output,  State  and  Na- 
tional) . 

The  secretary  of  state  is  usually  charged 
with  the  duty  of  publishing  or  promulgating 
the  statutes  as  required  by  law.  Each  legis- 
lative act  is  issued  by  itself,  and  later  the 
product  of  the  legislature’s  labors  is  compiled 
into  a volume  variously  called  “session  laws,” 
“acts  and  resolves,”  etc.  When  the  mass  of 
such  session  laws  has  accumulated  so  as  to 
be  almost  unusable — the  output  of  a single 
annual  session  in  Massachusetts  occupied  1046 
pages — a revision  is  undertaken  either  by  pri- 
vate parties  as  a business  venture,  or  by  com- 
missioners duly  authorized  by  the  legislature. 


It  is  customary  for  the  legislature  by  a single 
act  to  enact  the  product  of  such  a commis- 
sion’s labors  as  the  “Revised  Laws”  of  the 
state,  superseding  the  session  laws  up  to  the 
date  specified. 

See  Bills,  Course  of;  Committee  System 
in  United  States;  Drafting  of  Legislation; 
Legislature  and  Legislative  Reform;  Leg- 
islative Reference  Bureau;  Reports  of 
Committees;  Revised  Statutes. 

References:  J.  G.  Sutherland,  Statutory 
Construction  (1904);  A.  R.  Willard,  Legisla- 
tive Handbook  Relating  to  the  Preparation-  of 
Statutes  (1890);  James  Bryce,  Am.  Common- 
wealth (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  481-497;  “The 
Making  and  Revision  of  Law”  in  Am.  Pol. 
Sci.  Assoc.,  Proceedings,  IV  (1907),  69-141; 
P.  S.  Reinsch,  Am.  Legislatures  ( 1907 ) , 299- 
330,  Readings  in  Am.  State  Government 
(1911),  56-84;  F.  J.  Stimson,  Am.  Statute 
Law  (1892),  Popular  Law  Making  (1910);  T. 
Roosevelt,  Am.  Ideals  (1897),  63-101;  A.  B. 
Hart,  Actual  Government  (rev.  ed.,  1908),  vii. 

G.  H.  Haynes. 

STAY-AT-HOME  VOTEP,  See  Voting, 

Compulsory. 

STAY  LAWS.  Laws  enacted  by  the  legis- 
lature suspending  the  operation  of  remedies 
against  debtors,  such  as  executions  on  judg- 
ments, mortgage  foreclosures  and  the  like,  or 
providing  that  suits  shall  not  be  brought  un- 
til after  a specified  time  has  passed  after  the 
cause  of  action  arose.  H.  M.  B. 

STEAM  ENGINEERING,  BUREAU  OF.  The 

Bureau  of  Steam  Engineering  is  one  of  the 
bureaus  of  the  United  States  Navy  Depart- 
ment (see).  It  is  charged  with  the  prepara- 
tions of  plans  for  repairs  and  alterations  upon 
machinery  of  vessels  in  commission  or  fitting 
out  at  navy  yards,  and  for  the  construction 
of  new  machinery  at  navy  yards  and  by  con- 
tract. It  conducts  an  engineering  station  at 
Annapolis,  where  it  makes  experiments  to  de- 
termine the  relative  values  of  different  types 
of  engines,  boilers  and  fuels.  References:  Sec- 
retary of  the  Navy,  Annual  Reports ; J.  A. 
Fairlie,  National  Administration  of  U.  S. 
(1905),  160.  A.  N.  H. 

STEAM  ROLLER.  Name  applied  to  meth- 
ods for  putting  an  end  to  the  claims  of  con- 
testing delegations  and  minorities  in  repre- 
sentative bodies  or  public  meetings.  It  first 
became  a recognized  political  term  in  the  Re- 
publican National  Convention  at  Chicago, 
June,  1908,  when  the  regularity  and  thorough- 
ness with  which  opposition  to  the  seating  of 
contesting  delegations  in  favor  of  the  nomina- 
tion of  William  H.  Taft  was  suppressed,  was 
likened  to  the  action  of  a road  roller  which 
happened  to  be  in  operation  outside  the  con- 
vention hall.  See  Committee  on  Credentials  ; 


STEAMBOAT  INSPECTION— STILL-HUNT 


Convention,  Political;  Credentials  of  Del- 
egates. Reference:  Republican  National 
Convention  of  1908,  Official  Proceedings 
(1908).  A.  B.  H. 

STEAMBOAT  INSPECTION.  A Bureau  of 
Steamboat  Inspection  Service  was  created  in 
the  Treaty  Department  in  1838,  where  it  re- 
mained until  transferred  to  the  Department 
of  Commerce  and  Labor  in  1903.  When  that 
Department  was  divided  it  became  part  of  the 
Department  of  Commerce,  March  4,  1913.  The 
chief  officer  of  the  Bureau  is  the  inspector 
general,  under  whom  there  are  ten  supervising 
inspectors  and  numerous  local  inspectors.  The 
materials  used  in  constructing  marine  boilers 
must  be  inspected  by  the  Steamboat  Inspec- 
tion Service,  and  When  the  boilers  are  com- 
pleted they  must  be  inspected,  tested  and  ap- 
proved before  they  can  be  used.  It  is,  also, 
the  duty  of  the  service  to  inspect,  annually, 
the  hulls  of  all  steamers  and  of  sailing  vessels 
over  700  tons,  to  inspect  each  year  the  boil- 
ers, machinery  and  fire  apparatus  of  steamers, 
to  determine  how  many  passengers  a steamer 
may  lawfully  carry,  to  enforce  the  laws  con- 
cerning the  transportation  of  explosives,  and 
all  other  laws  intended  to  protect  the  lives  of 
passengers  and  crew.  It  also  has  authority 
to  prescribe  such  rules  and  regulations  con- 
cerning the  operation  of  ships  as  the  laws 
permit  and  the  safety  of  the  public  may  re- 
quire. No  vessel  can  secure  registry  or  en- 
rollment until  its  hull,  and,  if  a steamer,  its 
boilers,  have  been  inspected  and  approved  by 
the  Steamboat  Inspection  Service.  Another 
duty  of  the  Steamboat  Inspection  Service  is  to 
examine  and  license  the  officers  of  steamers. 
In  the  case  of  the  captain  and  mates  of  a 
coastwise  steamer  the  examination  must  in- 
clude pilotage — the  law  requiring  such  officers 
to  be  licensed  pilots.  See  Inspection  as  a 
Function  of  Government;  Navigation,  Reg- 
ulation of;  Pilotage;  Registry  of  Shipping. 
References:  E.  R.  Johnson,  Ocean  and  Inland 
Water  Transportation  (1906),  xv;  Am.  Tear 
Book,  1912,  56-57.  E.  R.  J. 

STEAMSHIP  ACCIDENTS.  See  Accidents, 
Railroad  and  Steamship. 

STEPHENS,  ALEXANDER  HAMILTON. 

Alexander  H.  Stephens  (1812-1883)  was  born 
near  Crawfordsville,  Ga.,  February  11,  1812. 
In  1834  he  was  admitted  to  the  bar,  and  in 
1836  entered  the  House  of  Representatives  as  a 
state  rights  Whig  and  an  opponent  of  nullifica- 
tion. He  served  in  the  house  until  1841,  when 
he  declined  reflection.  In  1843  he  was  elected 
to  Congress,  where  he  sat  until  1859.  Here 
he  opposed  the  Mexican  War,  though  welcom- 
ing its  results;  advocated  the  compromise  of 
1850;  and  assisted  to  carry  the  Kansas-Ne- 
braska  act.  In  1860  he  was  a presidential  elec- 
tor on  the  Douglas,  or  Union  Democratic,  tick- 
125 


et.  In  the  secession  convention  in  Georgia,  in 
1861,  he  labored  to  prevent  withdrawal,  but 
once  secession  had  been  voted,  he  “went  with 
his  state.”  He  was  a member  of  the  provision- 
al Confederate  congress  at  Montgomery,  and 
was  elected  Vice-President  of  the  Confederate 
States  of  America.  He  was  at  variance  with 
Jefferson  Davis,  however,  on  the  question  of 
state  rights,  and  was  one  of  the  leaders  of 
the  Georgia  peace  party  in  1864.  He  was  a 
member  of  the  peace  conference  at  Hampton 
Roads  in  February,  1865.  In  May  he  was  ar- 
rested, and  confined  until  October  at  Fort  War- 
ren, Boston.  In  1866  he  was  elected  United 
States  Senator,  but  was  refused  a seat.  In 
1873  he  was  elected  to  the  House,  serving  un- 
til 1882.  In  the  latter  year  he  was  elected 
governor  of  Georgia,  and  died  in  office,  March 
4,  1883,  at  Savannah.  He  wrote  A Constitu- 
tional View  of  the  War  between  the  States, 
2 vols.  (1868-72).  See  Confederate  States; 
Whig  Party.  References:  H.  Cleveland,  Alex- 
ander H.  Stephens  in  Public  and  Private 
(1866);  R.  M.  Johnston  and  W.  H.  Browne, 
Life  of  Alexander  H.  Stephens  (1878)  ; J.  F. 
Rhodes,  Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (1893-1905). 

W.  MacD. 

STEVENS,  THADDEUS.  Thaddeus  Ste- 
vens (1792-1868)  was  born  at  Danville,  Vt., 
April  4,  1792.  In  1816  he  was  admitted  to 
the  Maryland  bar,  and  began  practice  at 
Gettysburg,  Pa.  He  began  his  political  life  as 
a National  Republican,  becoming  thereafter  in 
turn  an  Anti-Mason,  a Whig,  and  a Republi- 
can. He  was  in  the  Pennsylvania  legislature 
most  of  the  time  from  1833  to  1842,  was  a 
member  of  the  state  constitutional  convention 
of  1836,  and  in  1838  canal  commissioner.  From 
1849  to  1853  he  was  a member  of  Congress, 
and  again  from  1858  until  his  death.  From 
the  first  he  was  a strong  partisan,  a bitter  op- 
ponent of  slavery  and  the  compromise  of  1850, 
and  the  leader  of  the  radical  Republicans  in 
the  earlier  years  of  reconstruction.  He  was 
chairman  of  a number  of  important  commit- 
tees, including  the  joint  committee  on  recon- 
struction. In  this  latter  capacity  he  waged 
bitter  and  relentless  war  against  President 
Johnson,  insisted  upon  a rigorous  treatment  of 
the  South,  and  was  the  principal  author  of 
the  reconstruction  acts  of  1867.  In  1868  he 
was  one  of  the  managers  of  the  Johnson  im- 
peachment. He  died  at  Washington,  August 
11,  1868.  See  Reconstruction;  Republican 
Party.  References:  E.  B.  Callender,  Thaddeus 
Stevens,  Commoner  (1882)  ; S.  W.  McCall, 
Thaddeus  Stevens  (1899)  ; W.  A.  Dunning,  Re- 
construction, Pol.  and  Economic  (1907). 

W.  MacD. 

STILL-HUNT.  A term  applied  to  an  elec- 
tion canvass  carried  on  with  little  ostensible 
activity,  but  accompanied  by  vigorous  secret 
or  underhand  work;  in  such  a sense  it  was 


427 


STOCK  ISSUES,  REGULATION  OF— STOCK  WATERING 


used  as  early  as  1876.  It  is  also  applied  to 
the  secret  wire-pulling  of  a would-be  candidate 
who  openly  avows  himself  not  a candidate. 

0.  C.  H. 

STOCK  ISSUES,  REGULATION  OF.  The 

issue  of  corporate  shares  in  the  United  States 
is  almost  universally  subject  to  the  statutory 
requirement  that  shares  shall  be  issued  only 
for  money  or  for  labor  or  property  fairly 
valued.  By  the  statutes  of  Kentucky,  North 
Dakota,  South  Carolina,  Tennessee,  Utah  and 
Florida,  only  money  and  property  rated  at  its 
“true  value”  are  valid  payment  for  stock,  and 
this  rule  is  applied  by  many  courts  in  other 
jurisdictions.  The  more  common  rule  is,  in 
the  absence  of  proof  of  fraud,  to  accept  as  final 
the  valuations  of  property  made  by  the  cor- 
poration’s directors.  By  the  Michigan  stat- 
utes, where  shares  are  paid  for  otherwise  than 
in  cash,  there  must  be  included  in  the  articles 
of  incorporation  an  itemized  description  of  the 
property  received  in  payment,  with  the  valua- 
tion placed  upon  it.  A similar  rule  is  in 
effect  in  England  under  the  Companies  Act. 

So  far  as  the  above  described  statutes  are 
designed  to  limit  the  volume  of  shares  in 
a corporation  to  the  actual  value  of  its  prop- 
erty, they  have  generally  proven  ineffectual. 
Property  and  service  paid  in  for  stock  have 
almost  universally  been  notoriously  overvalued. 
This  is  especially  true  of  the  valuation  placed 
upon  the  shares  and  bond  issues  of  existing  cor- 
porations absorbed  through  consolidation.  Only 
in  the  field  of  banking,  where  all  stock  must 
be  paid  in  cash,  and  in  the  public  service  cor- 
porations of  Massachusetts  and  New  York,  has 
an  effectual  check  been  placed  upon  the  tend- 
ency to  accept  property  at  an  excessive  valua- 
tion in  exchange  for  shares. 

In  early  American  corporation  history,  regu- 
lation of  stock  issues  was  undertaken  chiefly  in 
the  interest  of  the  creditors  of  the  corpora- 
tions. The  proposed  forms  of  regulation  under 
discussion  in  recent  years  have  for  their  ob- 
ject the  protection  of  the  investor  in  corporate 
shares  against  the  deception  resulting  from 
unregulated  issues,  and  the  protection  of  the 
public  against  the  excessive  prices  necessary 
to  pay  dividends  on  inflated  capital. 

See  Corporation  Charters  ; Corporation, 
Public;  Futures,  Dealing  in;  Publicity  of 
Corporate  Accounts;  Railroad  Capitaliza- 
tion; Stockholders,  Legal  Status  of. 

References:  F.  T.  Frost,  Incorporation  and 
Organization  of  Corporations  (1906),  eh.  iv; 
E.  S.  Meade,  Corporation  Finance  (1910),  ch. 
vi;  G.  E.  Horack,  Organization  and  Control  of 
Industrial  Corporations  (1903),  Pt.  II,  ch.  vii. 

Alvin  S.  Johnson. 

STOCK  TRANSFER  LAW.  In  1895  the  leg- 
islature of  New  York  imposed  a tax  on  sales 
and  transfers  of  stock.  The  tax  is  2 cents  on 
each  $100  of  face  value,  equivalent  to  $2  per 


100  shares.  It  is  a tax  on  transactions  and 
not  on  values,  and  may  be  classified  as  a busi- 
ness rather  than  a property  tax.  It  was  ad- 
vocated on  the  ground  that  the  general  prop- 
erty tax  of  the  state  of  New  York  was  a 
failure.  In  opposition  it  was  urged  that  the 
measure  was  inequitable  in  that  it  singled  out 
the  stock  exchange  alone  for  taxation;  no 
tax  was  imposed  upon  produce  and  cotton  ex- 
changes. Moreover,  the  law  imposed  as  heavy 
a tax  on  a share  which  had  a market  value  of 
$50  as  on  one  at  a premium  of  $150;  the 
result  would  be  to  check  dealings  in  low  priced 
shares.  Notwithstanding  fraudulent  practices 
discovered  in  the  first  few  years  of  administra- 
tion of  this  tax,  executed  by  washing  stamps, 
the  law  as  a revenue  measure  has  exceeded  ex- 
pectations. The  revenue  accrues  to  the  state 
treasury.  See  Exchanges,  Business;  Gam- 
bling. Reference:  Comptroller  of  New  York 
State,  Annual  Reports.  D.  R.  D. 

STOCK  WATERING.  As  commonly  defined 
stock  watering  consists  in  the  issue  of  corpora- 
tion securities  of  par  value  in  excess  of  actual 
and  necessary  cash  investment.  Stock  water- 
ing may  take  place  at  the  time  of  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  company : ( 1 ) through  the  issue 

of  stock  at  less  than  par;  (2)  through  the 
issue  of  common  stock  as  a bonus  to  subscribers 
for  bonds  or  preferred  stock,  or  as  a reward 
for  promotion  and  financing  services;  (3) 
through  the  issue  of  stock  in  exchange  for 
property  taken  at  an  inflated  valuation.  The 
first  form  is  characteristic  of  the  promotion  of 
mining  stocks,  the  second  is  familiar  in  the 
history  of  railway  finance;  the  third  has  ac- 
companied the  formation  of  most  of  the  great 
American  industrial  corporations.  For  con- 
spicuous instances  of  this  form  of  stock  water- 
ing, see  the  Report  of  the  Commissioner  of 
Corporations  on  the  Tobacco  Industry,  Part  II 
(1911). 

An  established  corporation  may  water  its 
stock;  (1)  through  the  issue  of  a stock  divi- 
dend to  its  shareholders;  (2)  through  the  is- 
sue of  stock  below  market  value,  with  the 
preferential  right  of  its  shareholders  to  pro 
rata  shares  in  the  new  issues.  When  the  shares 
of  a company  are  selling  in  the  open  market 
much  above  par,  the  issue  of  shares  at  par  may 
be  regarded  as  a disguised  form  of  stock  water- 
ing. 

In  the  financial  world  the  stock  of  a company 
is  said  to  be  watered  only  when  its  volume  is 
so  great  that  the  earnings  of  the  company 
are  inadequate  to  pay  normal  returns  on  its 
securities.  This  definition  is  based  upon  the 
principle  that  not  original  investment,  but 
actual  earning  power,  is  the  proper  basis  of 
capitalization.  From  this  point  of  view  pay- 
ment of  dividends  on  watered  stock,  so  fre- 
quently enumerated  among  the  abuses  of  cor- 
porate business,  becomes  a contradiction  in 
terms. 


428 


STOCKHOLDERS,  LEGAL  STATUS  OF 


See  Capital  and  Capitalization;  Corpora- 
tion Charters;  Corporation,  Public;  Stock 
Issues,  Regulation  of. 

References:  J.  Jenks,  Trust  Problem  (1909), 
ch.  vi;  W.  Z.  Ripley,  Trusts,  Pools  and  Corpo- 
rations (1905),  ch.  vi,  “Stock  Watering”  in 
Pol.  Sci.  Quart.,  XXVI  (1911),  98-121;  A.  W. 
Spencer,  “Prevention  of  Stock  Watering”  in 
Jour,  of  Pol.  Economy,  XIV  (1906),  542-552. 

Alvin  S.  Johnson. 

STOCKHOLDERS,  LEGAL  STATUS  OF. 
Definition. — A stockholder  is  one  who  holds  a 
membership  in  a corporation  through  the  own- 
ership of  one  or  more  shares  of  stock.  This 
ownership,  and  membership  in  the  association, 
therefore,  is  called  the  “stock”  and  this  stock 
is  divided  into  shares.  It  is  the  custom  to 
represent  this  stock  ownership  by  a certain 
arbitrarily  assumed  sum,  such  as  $500,000  or 
$1,000,000,  or,  as  in  the  original  capitalization 
of  the  United  States  Steel  Corporation,  $1,100,- 
000,000.  This  capitalization,  as  the  expression 
of  ownership  in  the  company,  is  divided  into 
shares,  each  of  which,  being  a proportionate 
part  of  the  total  capitalization,  represents  an 
assumed  sum  of  money.  This  assumed  sum  is 
known  as  the  par  value  of  the  stock.  If  the 
capital  of  the  company  is  $100,000,  and  is  di- 
vided into  100  shares,  the  par  value  of  each 
share  is  $100.  Other  pars  are  $50,  $10  and  $1. 
In  some  cases,  shares  are  issued  without  par 
value,  but  this  is  unusual.  The  evidence  of 
ownership  is  an  entry  on  the  books  of  the 
corporation  attesting  that  John  Jones  is  the 
owner  of  100  shares  of  its  stock.  A negotiable 
certificate  of  ownership  is  also  issued  to  the 
stockholder.  The  membership  entitles  him  to 
certain  rights,  and  imposes  upon  him  certain 
liabilities.  His  rights  are,  briefly  stated,  to 
participate  in  the  management  of  the  corpora- 
tion by  the  election  of  directors  and  the  de- 
cision of  certain  matters  which  the  constitu- 
tion or  charter  of  the  corporation  provide 
shall  be  submitted  directly  to  the  stockhold- 
ers, to  be  faithfully  represented  by  the  direct- 
ors, and  to  share  in  those  assets  of  the  com- 
pany, in  case  it  is  dissolved,  which  remain 
after  the  debts  have  been  paid.  The  stock- 
holder, by  virtue  of  his  ownership,  has  the 
liability  to  pay  for  this  stock,  to  the  company 
or  to  the  creditors  of  the  company,  and  in 
some  cases,  the  law  may  make  him  responsible 
to  the  creditors  of  the  company  to  an  amount 
greater  than  his  stock  interests.  The  rights 
to  participate  in  profits  and  assets  and  the 
liabilities  to  stockholders  and  creditors  are 
based  upon  the  number  of  shares  which  each 
stockholder  owns  compared  with  the  total 
outstanding. 

Theory  of  Membership. — Membership  in  a 
corporation  is  acquired  by  the  purchase  of  its 
stock,  either  at  the  time  the  corporation  is 
organized  or  at  a later  time.  Tbe  original 
purchaser  is  known  as  a subscriber.  Unless 


released  by  the  consent  of  the  other  stockhold- 
ers, or  unless  his  subscription  has  been  im- 
properly obtained,  he  is  liable  to  the  corpora- 
tion the  day  he  signs  the  subscription  agree- 
ment, to  pay  in  cash  the  amount  for  which  he 
subscribed  on  such  installments,  and  on  such 
terms  as  may  have  been  agreed  upon'. 

The  stockholders  of  a corporation  are  not 
partners.  They  owe  no  duty  to  one  another. 
They  have  no  mutual  obligations.  The  cor- 
poration, moreover,  is  a legal  entity,  distinct 
from  the  stockholders  who  comprise  it,  and  a 
stockholder  may  enter  into  contracts  with  the 
corporation  of  which  he  is  a member,  and  may 
enforce  those  contracts  by  legal  process.  Stock- 
holders as  such  are  not  the  agents  of  the  cor- 
poration. They  have  no  power  to  bind  the 
corporation.  Legal  notice  to  one  or  all  of 
the  stockholders  of  a corporation,  for  example, 
notice  of  protest  of  a note,  is  not  notice  to  the 
corporation. 

Rights. — Taking  up  the  rights  of  the  stock- 
holder in  detail,  we  find  first  the  right  to 
inspect  the  corporate  books.  In  most  of  the 
states,  this  right  is  secured  to  the  stockholder 
by  statute.  The  inspection  must  be  for  a 
proper  purpose,  and  must  be  made  at  such  time 
and  in  such  manner  as  may  be  convenient  to 
the  officials  of  the  company. 

The  stockholder  has  the  right  in  preference 
to  strangers  to  subscribe  for  his  proportionate 
part  of  any  new  stock  which  may  be  issued, 
and  he  can  sell  or  otherwise  assign  this  right. 
When  new  stock  is  issued  for  property,  how- 
ever, this  right  of  the  stockholder  does  not 
exist. 

Participation. — The  stockholder  has  the 
right  to  share  in  the  management  of  his  com- 
pany by  casting  a number  of  votes  equal  to 
the  number  of  shares  which  he  holds,  at  regu- 
lar or  special  meetings  of  the  stockholders. 
At  such  meetings  he  may  vote  for  directors, 
for  the  increase  of  the  capital  stock  of  the 
company,  and  on  any  other  matter  which  the 
corporation  law  of  the  state  or  the  charter  of 
the  company  requires  to  be  submitted  to  them. 

At  these  meetings,  in  the  absence  of  some 
requirement  for  a larger  proportion,  a majori- 
ty of  the  votes  cast  is  decisive,  and  in  the 
absence  of  some  different  provision  in  the  char- 
ter or  by-laws,  a majority  of  the  shares  out- 
standing is  a quorum.  When  the  stockholder 
enters  the  corporation,  he,  by  that  act,  agrees 
to  be  bound  by  the  will  of  the  majority  so 
long  as  they  act  in  good  faith  and  according 
to  law. 

Aside  from  casting  his  vote,  the  stockholder 
has  no  right  to  interfere  in  the  management 
of  his  corporation.  There  are,  however,  certain 
limitations  to  the  control  which  the  majority 
of  the  stockholders  may  exercise  over  the  af- 
fairs of  a corporation.  The  corporate  powers 
can  be  exercised  by  the  majority  only  to  ac- 
complish the  objects  to  obtain  which  the  cor- 
poration was  originally  called  into  existence, 


429 


STOCK- JOBBING 


and  the  majority  must  act  in  good  faith.  They 
cannot  manage  the  company  for  their  own 
profit  and  against  the  interests  of  the  minority. 
For  example,  one  corporation  cannot  purchase 
a majority  of  the  stock  of  a competitor,  and 
then  close  the  competitor’s  plant. 

Remedies. — The  remedy  of  a minority  stock- 
holder to  prevent  injury  to  his  rights  by  the 
majority  is  an  appeal  to  a court  of*  equity, 
which  will,  on  cause  being  shown,  enjoin  the 
corporation  controlled  by  a majority  of  its 
stock  from  doing  the  unlawful  acts  complained 
of.  A single  stockholder  may,  in  this  way,  re- 
strain the  corporation  from  the  doing  of  acts 
which  lie  outside  the  powers  of  the  corporation. 
Minority  stockholders  may  also  claim  the  pro- 
tection of  the  courts  against  any  unlawful  act 
which  tends  to  impair  the  value  of  their  stock. 

The  stockholder  may  enter  a court  of  equity 
to  protect  his  own  rights.  He  has,  however,  as 
a rule,  no  standing  in  a court  of  law  where 
he  may  seek  to  protect  the  rights  of  the  cor- 
poration. Even  though  the  stockholder  may 
own  all  the  stock  of  a company  he  cannot  bring 
a suit  to  recover  for  the  corporation  unless 
he  has  first  called  upon  the  directors  to  bring 
the  suit,  and  they  have  refused,  or  unless  they 
can  show  that  the  personal  interest  of  the 
directors  is  involved  on  the  other  side.  In 
such  a case,  a stockholder  may  attain  a stand- 
ing in  a court  of  law,  where,  however,  he  must 
sue  on  behalf  of  all  his  fellow  stockholders. 

The  stockholder  can  share  in  profits  only 
after  the  directors  have  declared  a dividend 
out  of  these  profits.  No  matter  how  large  the 
accumulated  profits  of  the  company  may  be, 
minority  stockholders  cannot  compel  the  di- 
rectors to  declare  a dividend,  so  long  as  they 
are  acting  honestly  and  within  the  limits  of 
the  trust  reposed  in  them.  If,  however,  fraud 
or  bad  faith,  for  example,  in  withholding  divi- 
dends where  profits  are  used  to  pay  excessive 
salaries,  be  established,  the  stockholder  can  ob- 
tain relief  from  a court  of  equity. 

In  all  such  cases  where  a stockholder  desires 
the  court  to  inquire  into  the  management  of  a 
company,  it  is  important  that  he  act  promptly, 
lie  cannot  “sleep  upon  his  rights.”  Especially 
will  the  court  refuse  him  relief  if  it  appears 
that  he  has  delayed  his  action  in  the  hope 
that  the  act  complained  of  might  work  to  his 
own  advantage. 

Liabilities. — Over  against  the  rights  of  the 
stockholder  stand  his  liabilities.  The  stock- 
holder is  liable  to  the  corporation  and  indirect- 
ly to  creditors,  when  his  stock  is  not  fully  paid, 
up  to  the  amount  remaining  unpaid  upon  his 
stock.  When  he  has  paid  the  face  or  par 
value  of  his  shares  his  liability  to  the  company 
ceases.  Any  balance,  however,  which  may  be 
due  upon  his  stock  represents  a part  of  the 
assets  of  the  corporation  which  passes  to  the 
creditors,  with  a right  of  action  against  the 
stockholders,  in  the  event  of  bankruptcy.  In 
case  it  can  be  shown  that  the  stock  of  a com- 


pany has  been  issued  for  property  or  services 
at  excessive  valuations,  and  if  the  stock  is 
found  in  the  possession  of  the  beneficiaries  of 
this  fraud  upon  the  creditors,  who  have  a 
right  in  dealing  with  the  company  to  assume 
that  its  stock  has  been  paid  in  full,  the  stock- 
holder is  liable  to  the  creditors  for  his  propor- 
tionate part  of  the  difference  between  the  par 
value  of  the  stock  and  the  fair  value  of  the 
property  or  services  given  for  it. 

This  is  the  common  law  liability  of  stock- 
holders. By  statute  law  it  may  be  increased 
and  special  liabilities  can  be  added.  Stock- 
holders in  national  banks,  for  example,  are 
liable  to  creditors  in  an  additional  sum  equal 
to  the  par  value  of  the  stock.  In  many  states, 
stockholders  are  liable  for  wages  due  and  ma- 
terials furnished  to  the  corporation.  Before 
enforcing  this  liability  of  the  stockholder,  the 
creditor  must  first  have  exhausted  all  his  rem- 
edies against  the  corporation.  The  liability 
of  the  stockholder  as  long  as  the  corporation 
remains  in  existence,  is  secondary  to  the  lia- 
bility of  the  corporation. 

See  Corporation  Charters;  Corporation, 
Public;  Holding  Companies;  Publicity  of 
Corporate  Accounts  ; Reasonableness  in 
Restraint  of  Trade;  Stocks  and  Bonds. 

References:  Am.  and  English  Encyclopedia 
of  Law  (1903),  ch.  xxiii,  582-698,  748-775; 
W.  W.  Cook,  Treatise  on  Stock  and  Stockhold- 
ers, Bonds,  Mortgages  and  General  Corpora- 
tion Law  (3d  ed.,  1894),  199-243,  561-641, 
673-701;  J.  J.  Sullivan,  American  Corporations 
(1910)  ; R.  S.  Harvey,  Rights  of  the  Minority 
Stockholder  (1909);  D.  MacG.  Means,  “Pro- 
tection of  Minority  Stockholders”  in  Nation, 
XXIV  (1902),  24;  A.  W.  Machen,  Jr.,  Treatise 
on  the  Modern  Law  of  Corporation  (1908), 
926-1086.  E.  S.  Mead. 

STOCK-JOBBING.  Stock-jobbing  is  a term 
applied  to  gambling  contracts  carried  on 
under  the  guise  of  legitimate  business,  in 
which  the  real  intent  of  both  parties  is 
merely  to  speculate  in  the  rise  and 
fall  of  prices,  and  the  property  is  not  to  be 
delivered,  but  one  party  is  to  pay  to  the  other 
the  difference  between  the  contract  price  and 
the  market  price.  In  American  legislation 
stock-jobbing  is  better  known  as  “dealing  in 
futures,”  “bucket-shopping,”  “speculating  in 
stocks,”  “buying  and  selling  on  margin,”  “buy- 
ing at  option,”  etc.,  and  the  places  in  which 
transactions  of  this  sort  are  regularly  carried 
on  as  a business  are  usually  called  “bucket- 
shops”  (see). 

Thirty-one  states  have  passed  legislation  pro- 
hibiting stock- jobbing;  Louisiana,  in  its  con- 
stitution, declares  it  to  be  against  public  policy 
and  directs  the  legislature  to  pass  prohibitory 
legislation;  and  West  Virginia  permits  it  only 
by  licensed  corporations.  New  York  and  Penn- 
sylvania have  repealed  and  reenacted  statutes 
prohibiting  stock -jobbing. 


430 


STOCKS  AND  BONDS— STRAIGHT  DEMOCRATS 


The  statutes  are  substantially  all  alike. 
They  usually  include  under  the  provisions  of 
the  law  the  mere  attempt  to  make  such  con- 
tracts. The  persons  who  are  held  liable  include 
individuals,  corporations,  associations,  etc., 
whether  acting  in  their  own  rights  or  as  of- 
ficers, agents,  servants,  correspondents  or  rep- 
resentatives of  another.  The  laws  also  apply 
to  those  who  conduct  bucket-shops,  and,  in 
many  instances,  to  those  who  rent  premises 
for  such  purposes  or  who  intentionally  furnish 
information  for  such  purposes  by  mail,  tele- 
phone, telegraph  or  advertising.  In  Illinois 
those  who  forestall  the  market  by  spreading 
false  rumors  to  influence  the  price  of  commod- 
ities, or  corner  or  attempt  to  corner  the  market 
are  also  held  liable. 

To  protect  legitimate  business  involving  fu- 
ture delivery,  most  states  require  a record  to 
be  kept  of  the  parties  to  the  contract  and  such 
other  proofs  of  sale  as  will  insure  future  de- 
livery. 

With  the  exception  of  New  York,  where  it  is 
considered  a felony,  the  offence  is  regarded  as 
a misdemeanor,  and  the  punishment  is  a fine, 
imprisonment,  or  both  at  the  discretion  of  the 
court.  Several  states  also  provide  that  when 
a corporation  is  convicted  a second  time  of 
such  an  offense  it  shall  forfeit  its  charter.  In 
general  these  laws  are  poorly  executed.  “Open 
brokers’  offices”  are  carried  on  in  many  cities 
which  are  practically  open  houses  for  gambling 
in  the  rise  and  fall  of  securities.  Without  re- 
course to  such  places  anyone  who  has  money 
or  credit  at  a bank  may  open  a speculative  ac- 
count with  a broker,  which  is  very  hard  to 
separate  from  legitimate  business. 

See  Exchanges,  Business;  Futures,  Deal- 
ing in;  Gambling;  Public  Morals,  Care  for; 
Securities,  Federal  Commission  on. 

References:  J.  R.  Dos  Passos,  Treatise  on 
the  Law  of  Stock  Brokers  and  Stock  Exchanges 
(1882),  ch.  viii;  S.  S.  Pratt,  The  Work  of 
Wall  Street  (1910)  ; Horace  White  et  al,  Rep. 
of  Committee  on  Speculation  in  Securities  and 
Commodities  (1909)  ; H.  C.  Emery,  Speculation 
on  the  Stock  and  Produce  Exchanges  of  the 
U.  S.  (1896),  ch.  vi.  H.  W.  Nudd. 

STOCKS  AND  BONDS.  A bond  is  a note 
made  by  a company,  corporation  or  govern- 
ment, promising  to  pay  a certain  amount  of 
money  on  a specified  date,  at  a designated  rate 
of  interest.  A share  of  stock  is  the  certificate 
that  a certain  sum  has  been  paid  into  the 
fund  from  which  the  business  of  a company  or 
corporation  is  to  be  transacted  and  that  the 
holder  of  the  stock  has  a certain  part  in 
the  ownership  of  the  property. 

The  primary  reasons  for  governmental  regu- 
lation of  stocks  and  bonds  are  as  follows: 

( 1 ) a close  relation  exists  between  the  amount 
of  stocks  and  bonds  issued  by  quasi-public  cor- 
porations and  the  rates  charged  and  standards 
of  service  given — the  amount  of  securities  is- 


sued has  often  been  a factor  in  determining 
the  fair  valuation  upon  which  reasonable  rates 
must  be  allowed;  (2)  regulation  is  necessary 
to  give  protection  to  investors. 

See  Corporation  Charters;  Corporation, 
Pi'blic;  Exchanges,  Business;  Publicity  of 
Corporate  Accounts;  Securities,  Federal 
Commission  on. 

References:  E.  S.  Mead,  Corporation  Fi- 
nance (1910),  Trust  Finance  (1903)  ; Lawrence 
Chamberlain,  Principles  of  Bond  Investment 
(1911);  S.  S.  Pratt,  Work  of  Wall  Street 
(1903)  ; W.  Z.  Ripley,  “Later  History  of  the 
Bond  Conversion”  in  his  Trusts,  Pools  and 
Corporations  (1905).  Clyde  L.  King. 

STORE  PAY.  This  is  a method  of  wage 
payment  in  which  wages,  in  whole  or  in  part, 
are  paid  in  merchandise  obtainable  at  stores 
in  which  the  employers  are  financially  inter- 
ested ; often  employees  who  do  not  trade  at 
the  employer’s  store  will  be  discharged.  See 
Labor  Laws,  Contracting  out  of;  Mine 
Legislation  for  Laborers;  Wages,  Regula- 
tion of.  J.  R.  C. 

STORY,  JOSEPH.  Joseph  Story  (1779- 
1845),  associate  justice  of  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States,  was  bo.rn  at  Marblehead, 
Mass.,  September  18,  1779.  In  1801  he  was 
admitted  to  the  bar,  and  began  practice  at 
Salem.  In  1805  he  was  elected  to  the  general 
court  as  a Republican,  and  was  made  speaker. 
In  1808-09  he  was  a member  of  Congress,  hav- 
ing been  elected  to  fill  a vacancy.  In  1811  he 
was  appointed  by  Madison  an  associate  jus- 
tice of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  held  the  office 
until  his  death.  Next  to  Marshall,  he  had  the 
largest  influence  in  shaping  the  remarkable 
series  of  decisions  which,  particularly  after 
1812,  laid  the  foundations  of  American  con- 
stitutional law;  and  he  was  mainly  responsible 
for  the  development  of  admiralty  law  as  a 
branch  of  federal  jurisprudence.  From  1829 
onward  he  was  also  professor  of  law  at  Har- 
vard. He  died  at  Cambridge,  Mass.,  September 
10,  1845.  Of  his  numerous  law  books,  many 
of  them  still  regarded  as  standard  treatises,  the 
best  known  is  his  Commentaries  on  the  Con- 
stitution (3  vols.,  1833,  5th  ed.,  M.  M.  Bigelow, 
Ed.,  2 vols.,  1891).  See  Law,  Constitu- 
tional, American;  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States.  References:  W.  W.  Story, 
Life  and  Letters  of  Joseph  Story  (1851)  ; H. 
L.  Carson,  Supreme  Court  of  the  U.  S.  (2 
vols.,  1892).  W.  MacD. 

STRAIGHT  DEMOCRATS.  The  nomination 
by  the  Democratic  national  convention  at  Bal- 
timore, July  9,  1872,  as  candidates  for  Presi- 
dent and  Vice-President,  of  Horace  Greeley 
of  New  York  and  B.  Gratz  Brown  of  Missouri, 
both  of  whom  had  already  been  nominated 
by  the  Liberal  Republicans  (see),  caused  great 
dissatisfaction  within  the  Democratic  party, 


431 


STRAIGHT  TICKET— STREET  COMMISSIONS  AND  COMMISSIONERS 


and  was  widely  denounced  as  “a  cowardly  sur- 
render of  principle  for  the  sake  of  a possible 
victory.”  In  response  to  a.  call  for  a “straight” 
or  “straight-out”  Democratic  ticket,  a conven- 
tion met  at  Louisville,  Kentucky,  September  3. 
The  brief  platform,  after  declaring  that  “hav- 
ing been  betrayed  at  Baltimore  into  a false 
creed  and  a false  leadership  by  the  convention, 
we  repudiate  both,”  asserted  the  “time-honored 
principles”  of  state  rights  and  strict  construc- 
tion, and  added  resolutions  opposing  class 
legislation  and  the  gift  of  public  lands  to  cor- 
porations, and  in  favor  of  “a  judicious  tariff 
for  revenues  purposes  only.”  Charles  O’Conor 
of  New  York  and  John  Quincy  Adams  of  Mass- 
achusetts were  nominated  for  President  and 
Vice-President  respectively.  O’Conor  declined, 
and  Adams  refused  to  stand  without  him. 
The  ticket  polled  29,489  votes,  the  larger  num- 
ber coming  from  New  York,  Georgia,  Texas, 
and  the  states  of  the  central  west.  See  Demo- 
cratic Party.  Reference:  E.  Stanwood,  Hist, 
of  the  Presidency  (1898),  348.  W.  MacD. 

STRAIGHT  TICKET.  A term  applied  to 
the  regular  party  ticket,  containing  all  the 
party  candidates,  voted  en  bloc — without 
“scratching” — by  the  elector.  See  Scratch- 
ing. 0.  C.  H. 

STRAUS,  OSCAR  SOLOMON.  Oscar  S. 
Straus  (1850 — ) was  born  at  Otterberg, 
Rhenish  Bavaria,  December  23,  1850.  He  came 
to  the  United  States  in  1854,  and  lived  in 
Georgia  until  1865,  when  he  removed  to  New 
York  City.  He  practiced  law  from  1873  to 
1881,  and  then  engaged  in  business.  From 
1887  to  1889  he  was  minister  to  Turkey,  and 
in  1898  was  a second  time  appointed  to  the 
post,  holding  the  office  until  1901.  In  1902 
he  was  appointed  a member  of  the  permanent 
court  of  arbitration  at  The  Hague.  From  1907 
to  1909  he  was  Secretary  of  Commerce  and 
Labor.  He  was  for  some  time  president  of 
the  New  York  board  of  trade  and  transporta- 
tion, and  is  a vice-president  of  the  National 
Civic  Federation.  In  1912  he  was  the  Pro- 
gressive candidate  for  governor  in  New  York 
State.  He  is  the  author  of  Origin  of  the 
Republican  Form,  of  Government  in  the  TJ.  S. 
(1886),  Roger  Williams,  the  Pioneer  of  Re- 
ligious Liberty  (1894),  Development  of  Re- 
ligious Liberty  in  the  United  States  (1896), 
and  other  works.  See  Near  East,  Diplomatic 
Relations  with.  References:  J.  W.  Foster, 
Arbitration  and  the  Hague  Court  (1904)  ; Sec- 
retary of  Commerce  and  Labor,  Annual  Re- 
ports, 1907-1909.  W.  MacD. 

STRAW  (BAIL.  Worthless  bail  given  by  fi- 
nancially irresponsible  sureties.  The  name  is 
said  to  have  been  derived  from  the  old  prac- 
tice of  professional  sureties  wearing  straw 
about  their  clothes,  to  attract  the  attention 
of  those  seeking  bail.  H.  M.  B. 


STRAW  VOTE.  Straw  votes  as  a means  of 
learning  public  opinion  are  particularly  com- 
mon in  exciting  presidential  campaigns.  The 
straw  vote  is  employed  also  by  enterprising 
newspapers  to  determine  the  trend  of  public 
opinion,  e.  g.,  the  Chicago  Tribune’s  poll  on 
the  Payne-Aldrich  Tariff  bill  and  on  the  leader- 
ship of  Speaker  Cannon.  Wherever  men  as- 
semble— at  industrial  gatherings,  county  fairs, 
church  bazaars  and  on  railroad  trains — informal 
votes  are  sometimes  taken  by  enthusiasts  who, 
from  a large  number  of  such  polls,  get  a fair 
idea  of  the  prospects  for  the  coming  election. 
See  Polls;  Preliminary  Canvass.  Reference: 
M.  Ostrogorski,  Democracy  and  Parti/  System 
(1910),  203.  J.  M. 

STREET  CLEANING.  See  Streets. 

STREET  COMMISSIONS  AND  COMMIS- 
SIONERS. In  many  cities  the  supervision  of 
streets  is  vested  in  an  officer  having  the  title 
of  commissioner  of  streets,  or  some  title  equiv- 
alent thereto,  but  the  jurisdiction  and  duties 
attached  to  the  position  vary  widely  in  differ- 
ent cities.  In  Boston  the  “Superintendent  of 
Streets”  has  jurisdiction  over  the  construction 
and  maintenance  of  pavements,  the  cleaning 
and  sprinkling  of  the  streets,  the  disposal  of 
refuse,  the  city  sewerage,  the  public  lighting, 
and  the  municipal  ferries.  He  is  thus  one  of 
the  most  important  executive  officers  of  the 
city. 

In  New  York  and  Philadelphia  and  many 
other  cities  no  such  distinct  office  exists,  the 
duties  appropriate  to  the  position  being  per- 
formed by  bureau  heads  of  the  department  of 
public  works,  or  some  equivalent  body.  New 
York,  however,  has  a “Commissioner  of  Street 
Cleaning”  who  has  control  of  cleaning  the 
streets  and  disposing  of  the  city  wastes  other 
than  sewage.  In  other  cities  the  duties  of  the 
commissioner  or  superintendent  of  streets  does 
not  extend  beyond  the  keeping  of  the  streets 
in  repair. 

It  can  hardly  be  said,  therefore,  that  such 
an  office  is  an  established  accompaniment  of 
municipal  government  in  this  country,  or  that 
where  it  exists  there  is  any  uniformity  in  the 
powers  and  duties  of  its  occupant. 

This  is  rather  surprising  since  the  depart- 
ment of  street  and  pavement  construction  and 
maintenance,  the  general  care  of  the  streets, 
and  matters  connected  directly  therewith,  is 
not  only  one  of  the  most  important  but  one  of 
the  most  clearly  defined  and  readily  differ- 
entiated functions  of  municipal  government. 

A department  of  streets,  under  the  control 
of  a competent  commissioner  or  superintendent 
would  appropriately  have  jurisdiction  over  all 
the  established  streets  and  alleys  of  the  city, 
embracing  construction  and  maintenance, 
street  cleaning,  street  obstructions,  and  the  oc- 
cupation of  highways  by  quasi-public  corpora- 
tions, including  operations  for  the  construe- 


STREET  PAVEMENTS 


tion  and  repair  of  underground  street  struc- 
tures. 

The  concentration  of  the  control  and  man- 
agement of  the  streets  into  a separate  depart- 
ment under  a single  competent  official  would 
be  likely  greatly  to  simplify  and  improve 
street  conditions  irt  most  American  cities. 

See  Bbidges,  Public;  City  Planning; 
Roads;  Streets.  Samuel  Whinery. 

STREET  PAVEMENTS.  Materials. — In  Eu- 
ropean cities  the  kind  and  qualities  of 
street  pavement  adopted  for  use  are  the  result 
of  long  experience,  modified  by  local  conditions 
and  the  availability  of  materials.  At  the  pres- 
ent time  some  form  of  stone-block  paving  seems 
to  be  most  in  favor,  though  asphalt  and  wood- 
block are  very  popular  and  extensively  used. 

In  American  cities  street  paving  has  hardly 
yet  passed  the  experimental  stage,  and  many 
new  kinds  of  pavement  are  being  proposed  and 
tried.  Some  form  of  stone-block  pavement  is 
most  largely  used,  but  with  much  lack  of 
uniformity  in  the  quality  of  the  pavements. 
Sheet  asphalt  pavements  are  extensively  used 
in  most  cities;  and  quite  recently,  creosoted 
wood-block  pavement  has  been  laid  in  a number 
of  cities.  Brick  pavement  is  used  very  largely 
in  the  interior  cities;  and  some  form  of  bit- 
uminous concrete  has  also  been  used  on  quite 
a large  scale.  Many  other  kinds  and  qualities 
of  pavement  have  been  tried  in  comparatively 
small  areas.  Broken  stone  road  surfaces  ( mac- 
adam ) are  extensively  used  on  city  and  town 
streets  of  moderate  travel,  though  not  usually 
classed  as  pavement. 

In  attempting  to  compare  the  merits  of  the 
principal  pavements  in  use  they  may  be  ranked, 
with  reference  to  certain  desirable  qualities  as 
follows:  in  low  first  cost,  macadam,  asphalt, 
wood-block,  granite-block;  in  durability,  gran- 
ite-block, asphalt,  wood-block,  brick,  macadam; 
in  resistance  to  hauling  loads  over  them,  as- 
phalt, wood-block,  brick,  granite-block,  ma- 
cadam; in  secure  foothold  for  horses,  macadam, 
granite-block,  brick,  asphalt,  wood-block;  in 
noiselessness  under  travel,  wood-block,  mac- 
adam, asphalt,  brick,  granite-block. 

Attempts  to  assign  a general  weight-rating 
to  these  and  several  other  properties  of  the 
different  pavements  and  thus  to  deduce  their 
comparative  merits  are  interesting  and  use- 
ful, but  not  always  applicable  to  individual 
streets. 

Conditions  of  the  Problem. — The  question,  of 
the  best  pavement  for  any  given  street  de- 
pends so  largely  upon  the  conditions  existing 
on  that  street  that  a separate  study  in  each 
case  is  necessary.  If  we  disregard  certain 
qualities,  such  as  comfort  and  convenience  in 
use,  and  aesthetic  considerations,  the  question 
may  be  treated  as  a purely  economic  one,  and 
becomes,  what  kind  of  pavement  under  given 
conditions  will  yield  the  largest  returns  for 
the  money  invested  in  it?  Because  of  the  many 


varying  conditions  involved,  this  is  a compli- 
cated problem  which  can  only  be  solved  prop- 
erly by  the  expert  engineer. 

In  most  of  our  cities  more  money  is  expended 
for  and  invested  in  street  pavements  than  in 
any  other  public  utility ; and  because  of  unwise 
selection  of  the  kinds  of  pavement  to  be  used 
and  lax  methods  of  construction  and  main- 
tenance, it  may  confidently  be  stated  that  a 
large  percentage  of  this  money  is  wasted.  This 
waste  may  be  expected  to  continue  until  street 
paving  shall  be  dealt  with  as  a purely  en- 
gineering and  economic  problem,  the  same  as 
municipal  water  supply,  sewerage  and  other 
municipal  work. 

Distribution  of  Cost. — In  the  great  majority 
of  American  cities  the  cost  of  the  first  pave- 
ment laid  on  a street  is  specially  assessed 
against  the  property  benefitted,  but  when  re- 
pavement is  necessary  the  whole  cost  is  paid 
by  the  corporation.  This  practice  may  and 
usually  does  work  to  the  disadvantage  of  the 
municipality  where  the  property  owners  are 
allowed  to  designate  the  kind  of  pavement  to 
be  used.  The  cheapest  possible  construction 
will  be  chosen  for  the  first  pavement,  without 
regard  to  its  service  or  durability,  and,  when 
repaving  becomes  necessary  in  a very  few  years, 
the  cost  of  a permanent  pavement  is  saddled 
upon  the  corporation  at  large.  The  wisdom 
and  justice  of  paying  for  repaving  wholly  out 
of  the  general  funds  is  questionable.  If  it  is 
right  to  assess  the  cost  of  any  pavement 
against  benefited  property  owners,  it  would 
seem  to  be  equally  right  to  assess  at  least  a 
part  of  the  cost  of  maintaining  the  street  in 
well  paved  condition.  The  cost  of  paving  and 
repaving  a street  subjected  almost  wholly  to 
local  travel  and  for  the  benefit  of  local  prop- 
erty owners  may  very  properly  be  wholly  as- 
sessed against  these  property  owners,  while  in 
the  case  of  main  thoroughfares  and  purely 
business  streets,  used  largely  by  the  public  at 
large,  the  cost  of  paving  may  be  mainly  met 
from  the  public  funds. 

The  object  in  the  case  of  any  street  should 
be  a fair  division  of  the  cost  between  the  per- 
sons specially  benefited  and  the  general  public. 
To  accomplish  this  presupposes  some  competent 
authority  to  make  the  proper  distribution  of 
cost,  and  this  authority  might  be  delegated,  as 
it  is  now  to  a limited  extent  in  some  cities,  to 
a board  of  assessment,  appointed  by  the  courts 
or  in  some  other  manner  that  would  insure  the 
selection  of  high-class,  disinterested  men  who 
would  not  be  subject  to  improper  personal  or 
political  influences. 

Taxation  for  Pavements. — The  municipal 
funds  required  to  pay  for  street  paving  are 
provided  either  by  taxation  in  the  usual  man- 
ner or  by  the  sale  of  bonds.  The  first  named 
method  is  preferable  in  most  cases.  Pavements 
are  usually  not  long  lived,  and  the  time  when 
they  will  require  renewal  cannot  definitely  be 
predicted.  Where  bonds  are  issued  for  any 


STREET  RAILROADS— STREETS 


municipal  improvement  they  should  obviously 
mature  and  be  paid  coincident  with,  or  not 
later  than  the  end  of  the  useful  life  of  the 
improvement.  If  bonds  running  for  thirty 
years  are  issued  to  pay  for  a pavement  that 
will  require  renewal  in  fifteen  years,  and  ad- 
ditional bonds  are  issued  for  such  renewal, 
whenever  required,  the  indebtedness  of  the 
municipality  will  in  time,  greatly  exceed  the 
existing  value  of  the  pavements,  taxation 
for  interest  may  become  excessive  and  unjust, 
and  the  municipal  debt  be  unduly  inflated. 

The  cost  of  maintaining  pavements  during 
their  useful  life  is  usually  met  from  the  gen- 
eral funds  of  the  corporation.  The  useful  life 
of  any  pavement  is  affected  materially  by  the 
degree  in  which  it  is  kept  in  proper  repair,  and 
it  is  important  for  this  reason  as  well  as  to 
supply  satisfactory  service  to  the  public,  that 
all  repairs  shall  be  promptly  made  when  neces- 
sary. 

Street  paving  has  not  received  the  attention 
it  merits  in  American  cities.  Although  other 
departments  of  municipal  work  such  as  water 
supply  and  sewerage  have  been  developed  care- 
fully by  study  and  experimental  research  along 
scientific  lines,  street  paving  seems  to  be  re- 
garded as  unworthy  of  or  unamenable  to  like 
systematic  and  thorough  investigation  and 
treatment.  There  is  here  a wide  and  promis- 
ing field  for  the  municipal  engineer  and  econo- 
mist. 

See  Pavements;  Roads;  Street  Com- 
missions and  Commissioners;  Streets. 

References:  G.  W.  Tillson,  Street  Paving  and 
Paving  Materials  (1900)  ; I.  O.  Baker,  Treatise 
on  Roads  and  Pavements  (1903);  C.  Rich- 
ardson, Modern  Asphalt  Pavement  (2d  ed., 
1908)  ; F.  P.  Spalding,  Text  Book  in  Roads 
and  Pavements  (3d  ed.,  1908)  ; S.  Whinery, 
Boston  Finance  Commission  Report,  IV 
(1909),  194.  Samuel  Whinnery. 

STREET  RAILROADS.  See  Railroads, 
Street. 

STREETS.,  In  the  opinion  of  a growing 
number  of  municipal  experts,  the  problems  of 
the  streets  are  the  greatest  material  problems 
of  the  city.  Here,  by  the  cooperation  of  the 
whole  community,  an  open  road,  a free  way,  a 
channel  for  traffic  and  transportation  is  main- 
tained for  the  use  of  all  upon  equal  terms. 
Besides  the  work  of  making  and  improving  the 
street  itself,  and  the  work  attendant  upon  the 
service  of  public  utilities  upon,  over  and  under 
the  street,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the 
police  department  is  mainly  a street  depart- 
ment, and  that  the  fire  department  is  depend- 
ent upon  the  street  for  its  efficiency. 

Functions  of  the  Street. — It  is  the  function 
of  a city  to  protect  a citizen  in  the  street: 
to  provide  for  physical  safety;  to  provide  for 
the  safety  of  property,  and  to  provide  for 
moral  safety.  The  most  important  public  agen- 


cies for  the  accomplishing  of  these  functions 
are  bureaus  of  police,  fire,  building  inspection, 
electricity,  surveys,  highways,  street  cleaning, 
lighting,  health  and  charities.  Among  the 
private  agencies  are  hospitals,  dispensaries 
and  citizen  associations  and  public  spirited 
individuals.  In  addition,  many  public  service 
corporations  discharge  important  functions  in 
relation  to  the  streets. 

Public  Rights. — Public  rights  in  streets  were 
defined  in  a recent  decision  of  the  justices  of 
the  Massachusetts  supreme  judicial  court. 
They  held  that  the  public  acquires  an  easement 
in  the  land  of  a highway,  including  a right  to 
occupy  the  same  for  travel  and  communication 
of  persons  and  the  reasonable  movement  of 
property.  Subject  to  this  right,  the  owner 
of  the  fee  retains  his  ownership  of  every  valu- 
able interest,  and  he  may  use  it  in  any  way 
not  interfering  with  the  rights  of  the  public. 
The  legislature  may  enlarge  or  limit  public 
rights  acquired  in  highways,  having  due  regard 
to  private  rights,  and  may  confer  on  munici- 
palities the  power  to  erect  structures  across 
public  streets,  or  permit  individuals  to  erect 
structures  bridging  public  streets;  but  may  not, 
without  the  consent  of  the  abutting  owners, 
take  away  any  right,  except  for  a public  use 
and  on  compensation  made.  The  legislature 
may  confer  on  a municipality  the  power  to 
grant  permits  to  individuals  to  erect  structures 
which  will  bridge  a public  street  connecting 
premises  owned  by  the  individual  on  both  sides 
of  the  street,  subject  to  the  payment  of  rent  to 
the  municipality  if  so  stipulated  in  the  per- 
mit. 

As  against  the  easement  acquired  by  the  pub- 
lic for  travel  and  communication  an  abutting 
owner  has  the  right  to  have  the  street  open  for 
light  and  air,  so  long  as  there  are  no  uses 
affecting  his  enjoyment  to  which  the  public 
desires  to  put  the  street.  Where  the  legisla- 
ture authorizes  the  imposition  of  an  additional 
burden  on  property  abutting  on  a street  for  a 
different  use,  which  will  interfere  with  the 
abutting  owners’  enjoyment  of  light  and  air, 
he  is  entitled  to  compensation.  One  has  no 
right  to  have  adjacent  premises  remain  open 
for  admission  of  light  and  air  (see  in  re 
Opinion  of  the  Justices,  94  N.  E.  R.  849  (. 
While  this  decision  is  based  on  the  laws  and 
constitution  of  a single  state,  Massachusetts,  it 
may  be  regarded  as  a fair  statement  of  the  law 
as  it  holds  generally  throughout  all  the  coun- 
try. 

Organization  of  Street  Bureaus. — There  is  no 
uniformity  of  organization  of  the  bureaus  deal- 
ing with  the  street.  Except  in  commission 
governed  cities,  where  most  of  the  duties  per- 
taining to  the  streets  are  assigned  to  one  com- 
missioner, there  is  little  recognition  of  their 
unity  and  importance.  As  a rule  the  functions 
are  widely  scattered  although  in  some  cities, 
like  Philadelphia  and  Chicago,  there  is  a ten- 
dency to  recognize  the  need  for  coordination. 


434 


STREETS 


JNor  is  there  any  uniform  practice  in  American 
cities  in  the  manner  of  selecting  the  heads  of 
the  street  bureaus. 

Street  Planning  and  Sidewalks. — The  impor- 
tance of  streets  and  the  necessity  of  properly 
laying  them  out  may  be  gathered  from  the  fact 
that  from  a fifth  to  two-fifths  of  the  total 
area  of  cities  is  devoted  to  streets,  rising  to 
more  than  half  in  the  city  of  Washington.  The 
considerations  entering  into  the  determination 
of  street  width  include:  (1)  fixing  roadway 
units  for  vehicles;  (2)  adjoining  sidewalk  un- 
its required  for  pedestrians;  (3)  classification 
of  the  streets  according  to  traffic  requirements, 
or  other  functions  they  are  to  serve;  (4)  an 
estimate  of  the  present  and  future  traffic  of 
the  streets,  the  width  required  to  meet  that 
traffic,  and  then  the  standardization  of  that 
width.  The  width  of  vehicles  and  the  load  are 
likely  to  be  standardized  by  law  so  that  de- 
finite figures  will  be  available.  Various  meth- 
ods have  been  devised  and  followed  for  de- 
termining the  width  of  sidewalks.  The  most 
customary  is  to  make  the  sidewalks  some  fixed 
proportion  of  the  roadway,  in  some  cases  one- 
half,  in  others  one-third,  the  latter  representing 
the  most  frequent  practice. 

Classification. — Classifying  the  streets  of  a 
city  according  to  the  traffic  requirements  or 
the  other  functions  that  they  are  to  serve  is  a 
fundamental  requirement  of  any  attempt  to 
standardize  street  widths  and  is  so  recognized 
in  European  countries.  The  London  Traffic 
Commission  has  made  five  divisions,  as  fol- 
lows : 


Main  avenues  140  feet 

First  class  arterial  streets  100  feet 

Second  class  streets  80  feet 

Third  class  streets  60  feet 

Fourth  class  streets 40  feet 


The  standard  classification  for  German  cities 
of  the  second  size,  cities  like  Leipzig  and 
Frankfort,  is  as  follows: 


Main  thoroughfares  — 85  to  118  feet 

Secondary  thoroughfares  50  to  SO  feet 

Local  streets  35  to  47  feet 


In  different  American  cities  the  width  of 
streets  varies  greatly.  There  are  very  few  that 
have  adopted  standards.  Probably  the  best 
classification  is  that  of  Washington,  D.  C., 
which  is  as  follows: 


Main  thoroughfares  — . 160  feet 

Secondary  thoroughfares  120  feet 

Local  streets  60  to  90  feet 


To  determine  such  classification,  however,  re- 
quires an  estimate  of  the  recent  and  future 
traffic  requirements  of  the  streets  of  any  given 
class.  The  better  practice  is  to  decide  what 
traffic  capacity  in  roadway  and  sidewalk  the 
street  should  provide  for,  thus  determining 
which  class  it  falls  in;  and  then,  apply  the 
unit  of  measurement  adopted  for  car  lines, 
for  vehicles,  for  pedestrians,  for  trees,  etc. 
Here  are  three  illustrations  of  this  method: 


I.  An  average  main  thoroughfare  is  to 
have  : 

A double-track  car  line  20  feet 

6 lines  of  vehicles,  3 on  each  side  of 

tracks,  8 feet  each  48  feet 

20  lines  of  pedestrians,  10  lines  on  each 

of  the  two  sidewalks,  2 feet  each  40  feet 


Total  108  feet 

tn  average  secondary  thoroughfare  is 
to  have : 

A double-track  car  line  20  feet 

4 lines  of  vehicles,  2 on  each  side  of 

tracks,  8 feet  each  32  feet 

16  lines  of  pedestrians,  8 lines  on  each 

of  the  two  sidewalks,  2 feet  each  32  feet 


Total  84  feet 

III.  An  average  local  street  is  to  have: 

Roadway  for  3 lines  of  vehicles,  8 

feet  each 24  feet 

12  lines  of  pedestrians,  6 lines  on  each 


Total  for  an  average  local  street  — 48  feet 


House  Numbering. — The  numbering  of  hous- 
es along  the  street  is  a municipal  function 
which  would  not  occur  to  the  average  cit- 
izen as  being  such.  It  cannot  be  left  to  the 
owners,  however,  but  must  be  attended  to  by 
some  one  authorized  by  the  municipality. 

Street  Signs. — Street  signs  designating  the 
names  of  streets  are  also  an  important  item 
of  the  street  furnishings,  much  neglected  in 
many  cities.  In  the  large  cities  even  the  resi- 
dents are  only  generally  familiar  with  those 
streets  which  they  frequent  daily;  in  the 
small  cities  signs  are  desirable  for  the  direction 
of  vistors  and  new  comers. 

Beautifying  the  Streets. — Usefulness  must  be 
the  first  test  of  street  furniture  and  fixtures, 
but  it  should  not  be  the  only  one.  There  is 
no  reason  why  all  the  various  structures  which 
are  demanded  on  modern  streets  by  the  neces- 
sities of  the  case  should  not  be  so  constructed 
as  to  appeal  to  the  eye  and  develop  the  love 
for  the  beautiful,  as  well  as  serve  the  im- 
mediate end  for  which  they  are  designed. 

Street  Cleaning. — The  condition  of  the  sur- 
face of  streets  not  only  greatly  interests  all 
those  who  live  in  cities,  but  frequently  invites 
attacks  upon  city  officers  for  alleged  inefficiency 
and  incompetency  in  keeping  them  cleaned.  It 
is  the  opinion  of  experts,  on  close  investiga- 
tion, that  the  true  cause  of  the  difficulty  must 
be  sought  elsewhere. 

Physical  Conditions. — To  have  a clean  street 
surface  the  pavement  must  be  of  a kind  and 
must  have  a sufficiently  smooth  surface  to  al- 
low of  effective  and  easy  cleaning.  Smooth 
pavements  (sheet  or  block  asphalt)  of  ac- 
curately cut  blocks  of  granite  or  other  stone, 
of  hard  and  tough  brick,  of  wood,  all  set  on  a 
firm  foundation,  are  much  easier  and  cheaper 
to  clean  effectively  than  the  ordinary  rough- 
dressed  stone  blocks,  cobble  or  rubble  pave- 
ments, or  almost  any  pavement  placed  on  an 
infirm  foundation,  such  as  is  still  to  be  found 
in  many  American  cities. 

Political  Conditions. — The  care  of  pavements, 
as  regards  repairs  and  cleansing,  should  be 


435 


STRICT  CONSTRUCTION— STRIKES 


entirely  in  the  hands  of  a permanent  organiza- 
tion of  well  trained  and  experienced  men,  espe- 
cially educated  in  the  specific  duties  involved, 
continuously  encouraged  by  rewards  for  good 
and  better  work;  rather  than  discouraged  by 
unwarranted  criticism,  or  discharged  without 
good  cause. 

Financial  Conditions. — To  maintain  clean 
streets  requires  sufficient  funds  to  enable  the 
work  to  be  done  thoroughly.  Necessary  ap- 
propriations to  do  thorough  work  are  probably 
never  refused  by  taxpayers,  if  the  public  feels 
that  clean  streets  can  and  will  be  secured. 

Cleaning  city  streets  is  at  once  the  oldest  and 
least  developed  branch  of  public  health  work. 
There  is  no  undertaking  concerning  whose  re- 
sults there  is  such  universal  dissatisfaction, 
or  concerning  whose  correct  principles  so  little 
is  generally  known.  Many  persons  consider 
scavenging  to  be  a disreputable  kind  of  under- 
taking, and  instinctively  shrink  from  even  dis- 
cussing it.  Under  these  circumstances  pro- 
gress is  slow.  The  New  England  Conference 
on  Street  Cleaning,  by  placing  the  subject  on 
the  plane  of  dignified  debate,  promises  to  do 
much  to  remove  these  prejudices,  and  to  facili- 
tate a better  understanding  of  how  cities  can 
be  kept  clean. 


See  Betterments,  Assessments  for;  City 
Planning;  Eminent  Domain;  Health,  Pub- 
lic Regulation  of;  Pavements;  Railroads, 
Street;  Rapid  Transit  in  Cities. 

References:  C.  B.  Crane,  Clean  Streets  for 
Chicago  (1907);  R.  T.  Fox,  Report  on  Street 
Cleaning,  Street  Watering  and  Sanitary  De- 
partments of  Boston  (1907);  “The  Street 
Cleaning  Problem  in  San  Francisco”  in  Report 
to  the  Merchants’  Assoc.  (1909);  T.  H.  Boor- 
man, Asphalts,  Their  Sources  and  Utilizations 
(1908)  ; A.  T.  Byrne  and  A.  E.  Phillips,  High- 
way Construction  (1908)  ; F.  P.  Spalding,  Text 
Book  on  Roads  and  Pavement  (1908)  ; H.  P. 
Boulnois,  Dirty  Dustbins  and  Sloppy  Streets 
(1881).  Clinton  Rogers  Woodruff. 

STRICT  CONSTRUCTION.  See  Construc- 
tion and  Interpretation. 

STRIKE,  LEGISLATIVE.  A phrase  applied 
to  the  introduction  into  a legislature  of  a bill 
hostile  to  some  financial  interest,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  extorting  money  or  personal  advantage 
from  the  interest  whose  welfare  demands  that 
the  matter  be  dropped.  See  Black  Horse 
Cavalry;  Corruption,  Legislative. 

O.  C.  H. 


STRIKES 


Definition. — Strikes  are  concerted  cessations 
of  work  by  wage-earners,  designed  to  coerce 
their  employers  into  compliance  with  their  de- 
mands, during  which  efforts  are  made  to  keep 
other  workmen  from  filling  the  places  tem- 
porarily vacated.  The  improvement  or  the 
maintenance  of  the  existing  conditions  of  em- 
ployment is  the  usual  question  at  issue  in 
strikes,  though  many  are  called  to  secure 
recognition  of  the  unions,  and  many  are  sym- 
pathetic strikes.  The  public  always  associates 
strikes  with  trade  unions,  but  about  a third 
of  the  strikes  of  the  last  thirty  years  were 
started  by  men  belonging  to  no  labor  organiza- 
tion. Generally  labor  unions  later  have  en- 
tered the  field  to  direct  and  support  these 
strikes  of  the  unorganized. 

The  strikes  begun  by  labor  organizations 
generally  find  their  iniatiative  in  the  local 
unions  directly  involved.  In  many  unions  the 
vote  of  more  than  a majority  of  the  members 
of  the  locals  particularly  affected  is  required 
to  authorize  any  strike  even  if  not  local.  To 
secure  financial  support  from  the  general  union 
treasury,  strikes  must  have  the  sanction,  also, 
of  the  officers  of  the  national  organization. 
Only  in  the  building  trades  do  the  local  union 
officials  have  the  power  to  call  strikes  on  their 
own  initiative. 

Strikes  duly  authorized  are  generally  con- 
ducted under  the  direction  of  a representa- 
tive of  the  national  union,  Cooperating  with 


committees  of  the  local  directly  involved. 

Strike  Benefits. — To  the  men  on  strike, 
weekly  payments  of  a certain  amount  are  made, 
and  sometimes  milk,  clothing  and  groceries  are 
furnished  directly.  Workmen  not  belonging  to 
the  union,  if  they  join  in  the  strike,  receive  the 
same  benefits  as  do  the  union  members. 

Unions  are  able  to  pay  these  strike  benefits 
because  they  collect  funds  for  these  emergencies 
in  times  of  peace,  and  during  strikes,  unions 
frequently  levy  special  assessments  for  their 
support  upon  the  members  who  are  employed. 
Contributions  are  also  solicited  from  other 
unions  and  from  the  general  public.  When 
unions  can  no  longer  financially  support  a 
strike,  it  is  almost  sure  to  collapse. 

Strike-Breakers. — In  most  strikes  employers 
are  not  content  simply  to  close  their  factories. 
To  defeat  the  striking  workmen  in  their  de- 
mands, it  is  necessary  to  show  that  the  factory 
can  be  operated  without  them.  This  necessi- 
tates getting  new  workmen,  either  from  among 
the  unemployed,  or  from  professional  strike 
breakers.  In  large  cities,  agencies  exist  which 
stand  ready  to  supply  strike-breakers,  and  the 
armed  guards  necessary  for  their  protection 
(see  Pinkerton  Men;  Scab). 

To  the  strikers  it  is  all  important  that  their 
places  shall  not  be  filled  by  other  workmen.  To 
turn  back  those  whom  the  employer  has  se- 
cured. the  strikers  institute  picketing  (see). 
Peaceful  picketing  is  frequently  effective  in  in- 


STRIKES 


ducing  workmen  who  have  been  secured  by  the 
employer  through  ignorance  of  the  existence  of 
a strike  to  turn  back,  sometimes  by  paying 
their  transportation  expenses. 

Violence  in  Strikes. — When  peaceful  meth- 
ods fail  to  prevent  the  employer’s  filling  their 
places,  strikers  resort  at  time  to  acts  of  viol- 
ence. Non-union  workmen  are  threatened  and 
even  assaulted,  and  efforts  are  made  to  destroy 
the  employer’s  property.  In  the  United  States 
protection  to  employers  against  acts  of  violence 
has  been  far  less  efficient  than  in  Europe.  Be- 
cause of  the  political  power  of  the  wage-earn- 
ers, local  officials  have  sometimes  been  unwill- 
ing to  prosecute  strikers  who  violate  the  law. 
Even  where  the  state  militia  has  been  called 
in,  violence  has  not  always  been  checked.  Upon 
only  a few  occasions  have  federal  troops  figured 
in  strikes  ( see  Order,  Maintenance  of; 
Riots,  Suppression  of). 

Because  of  the  inadequacy  of  police  protec- 
tion, employers  frequently  hire  armed  guards 
to  conduct  workmen  to  and  from  the  factory 
to  their  lodging-houses,  and  to  protect  them 
while  at  work.  Sometimes  these  squads  have 
been  given  commissions  as  deputy  sheriffs,  with 
power  to  make  arrests. 

Sypathetic  Strikes  and  Boycotts. — Workmen 
in  the  same  industry  by  continuing  to  work 
help  to  defeat  the  men  who  are  out  on  strike. 
Not  infrequently  the  employer  transfers  a part 
of  his  orders  to  other  factories.  Sympathetic 
strikes  in  these  factories  are  then  called  by  the 
union.  In  a sympathetic  strike,  strictly  speak- 
ing, the  sympathising  union  strikes  to  help 
another  union,  but  without  a direct  grievance 
or  demand  of  its  own.  The  sympathetic  strikes 
of  most  common  occurrence  take  place 
in  the  building  trades.  The  members  of  as 
many  as  twenty  unions  are  frequently  em- 
ployed upon  the  same  building;  only  through 
sympathetic  strikes  can  these  act  together  to 
bring  work  to  a standstill.  All  told,  less  than 
five  per  cent  of  all  strikes  are  sympathetic. 

Labor  union  men  in  other  industries  seldom 
give  aid  to  strikers  through  sympathetic 
strikes.  The  chief  manner  in  which  they  aid 
strikes  is  through  their  refusal  to  purchase 
from  dealers  the  products  manufactured  by  the 
employers  involved  in  the  strike  and  by  their 
contributions  through  their  unions.  Almost 
all  trade  union  boycotts  have  been  inaugurated 
to  assist  strikes,  but  they  are  of  real  assis- 
tance only  in  those  industries  where  a con- 
siderable portion  of  the  product  is  consumed 
by  union  men  ( see  Boycotts  ; Unfair  List  ) . 

How  Strikes  Are  Ended. — Most  strikes  end 
within  a comparatively  short  time,  many  last- 
ing but  a single  day.  Usually  some  sort  of 
an  adjustment  is  reached  between  the  strikers 
and  the  employer,  sometimes  through  reference 
of  the  disputed  questions  to  a neutral  board 
of  arbitration.  More  frequently  tbe  adjust- 
ment is  secured  through  direct  negotiations  be- 
tween tbe  union  and  the  employer.  Quite  often 


the  employer  refuses  to  recognize  any  one  in 
the  negotiations  other  than  his  own  employees. 
If  the  union,  however,  is  sufficiently  strong,  it 
insists  that  the  employer  shall  make  a trade 
agreement  with  it,  to  govern  the  conditions  of 
employment  which  are  to  prevail  in  the  future. 
Observance  of  such  trade  agreements,  since 
they  are  unenforceable  at  law,  depends  upon 
the  strength  of  the  organization  on  both  sides 
(see  Labor  Contracts). 

If  the  employer  wins  a complete  victory,  he 
refuses  to  recognize  the  strikers  as  a body,  but 
usually  reemploys  most  of  them.  The  union 
leaders  are  likely  not  to  get  back  their  old  posi- 
tions, and  may  be  prevented  from  getting  work 
elsewhere  (see  Blacklisting) . 

Effect  of  Strikes. — Of  the  strikes  under- 
taken in  the  last  thirty  years,  by  trade  unions, 
one-half  have  been  won  by  laborers,  and  one- 
third  by  employers,  the  rest  were  compromised. 
A majority  of  the  strikes  not  called  by  labor 
organizations,  on  the  other  hand,  have  been 
won  by  the  employers. 

Strikers  have  always  been  more  successful  in 
times  of  prosperity  than  in  those  of  depression. 
While  demand  is  keen,  employers  can  ill  afford 
to  have  their  factories  closed,  and  at  such 
times  there  are  few  unemployed  to  take  the 
places  of  strikers.  Slack  times,  on  the  other 
hand,  make  it  difficult  for  strikers  to  win,  for 
factories  may  be  closed  without  much  injury 
to  the  employers,  and  other  workmen  maj 
easily  be  had. 

A satisfactory  net  balance  of  gains  and  losses 
sustained  through  strikes  has  never  been 
struck.  John  Mitchell  has  computed  that  the 
average  time  lost  through  strikes  does  not 
amount  to  one  day  per  year  for  all  workmen. 
The  net  losses  directly  traceable  to  strikes  are 
equal  to  three  cents  per  year  for  each  in- 
habitant of  the  county.  That  strikes  make  em- 
ployers more  ready  to  grant  the  demands  of 
the  laboring  men  seems  certain.  For  every  ad- 
vance in  wages  secured  through  strikes  more 
than  a dozen  are  won  without  them,  in  many 
cases  out  of  fear  of  strikes. 

History  of  Strikes. — Not  until  the  interests 
of  the  masters  had  become  distinctly  different 
from  those  of  their  workmen,  could  strikes 
play  any  real  role  in  industry.  In  most  in- 
dustries this  stage  was  not  reached  until  the 
nineteenth  century  was  well  advanced.  The 
first  epidemic  of  strikes  throughout  the  coun- 
try occurred  in  1827-29.  Prior  to  1881  about 
1500  strikes  are  known  to  have  taken  place. 
Official  annual  statistics  since  1881  show  that 
the  number  of  strikes  has  been  increasing, 
but  at  a less  rapid  rate  than  has  the  popula- 
tion. 

Statistics  show,  also,  that  the  importance  of 
wage  demands  as  a cause  of  strikes  has  been 
slowly  declining.  Within  the  last  decade  the 
question  of  the  recognition  of  the  union  and  of 
union  rules  has  been  responsible  for  as  many 
strikes  as  have  disputes  over  wages. 


437 


STRIKES 


Strike  Legislation. — During  the  first  decades 
of  the  nineteenth  century  workmen  who  went 
out  upon  strikes  were  in  some  cases  convicted 
of  conspiracy  to  raise  their  wages,  which  was 
an  offense  in  common  law.  When  juries  in  the 
thirties  refused  to  convict,  this  form  of  prose- 
cution for  striking  ceased.  Not  until  after 
the  Civil  War,  however,  were  statutes  enacted 
expressly  legalizing  strikes.  Only  a few  states 
ever  adopted  such  laws;  and  most  of  them 
applied  only  to  strikes  directly  involving  ques- 
tions of  wages  or  hours  of  labor. 

During  the  sixties  most  industrial  states  en- 
acted laws  prohibiting  intimidation  in  labor 
controversies.  In  the  eighties  some  of  them 
made  it  criminal  for  men  to  participate  in  com- 
binations with  the  purpose  primarily  to  in- 
jure employers  or  non-union  workmen.  At  the 
same  time  a few  states  declared  boycotting  to 
be  a criminal  offense.  More  recently  Alabama 
and  Colorada  enacted  laws  making  picketing 
illegal. 

On  the  other  hand  a number  of  states  have 
enacted  laws  declaring  peaceful  picketing  to  be 
lawful.  Maryland,  California,  and  Oklahoma 
have  even  gone  so  far  as  to  provide  that  acts 
done  by  labor  combinations  shall  not  be  deemed 
criminal  unless  they  are  unlawful  when  under- 
taken by  individuals. 

Statute  law  has  had,  however,  but  a slight 
importance  in  determining  the  legality  of  the 
activities  of  strikers.  Such  restrictions  as  it 
has  placed  upon  their  conduct  have  usually 
been  nothing  more  than  restatements  of  the 
common  law.  The  few  laws  enacted  to  remove 
common  law  restrictions  have  been  so  con- 
strued by  the  courts  as  to  render  them  almost 
meaningless. 

Court  Decisions. — Court  decisions  upon  the 
legality  of  the  activities  of  strikers  have  often 
been  contradictory.  As  to  combinations  to 
strike,  the  view  now  accepted  in  perhaps  the 
majority  of  jurisdictions  is  that  their  legality 
depends  upon  the  objects  they  aim  to  accomp- 
lish, and  upon  the  means  they  employ  to  gain 
these  objects.  It  is  an  illegal  object  primarily 
to  conduct  strikes  to  injure  employers  or  non- 
union workmen.  Illegal  means  are  employed 
in  furthering  a strike  when  resort  is  had  to 
“intimidation”  or  “coercion.” 

On  passing  upon  the  issue  of  fact,  whether 
the  aim  of  strikers  has  been  primarily  to  ad- 
vance their  own  interests,  or  to  do  injury  to 
others,  many  courts  have  failed  to  discover  the 
former  when  questions  of  wages  or  hours  of 
labor  were  not  directly  involved.  The  bulk 
of  authority  is  in  favor  of  the  view  that  strikes 
to  gain  a closed  shop  are  unlawful.  Similarly 
all  forms  of  sympathetic  strikes  have  been  held 
illegal  in  most  of  the  cases  which  have  come 
up.  Some  decisions,  on  the  other  hand,  hold 
that  strikes  are  never  illegal. 

As  to  what  constitutes  “intimidation”  and 
“coercion,”  also,  much  uncertainty  exists.  All 
cases  agree  that  these  terms  cover  all  actions 


which  place  the  average  person  in  fear  of  physi- 
cal violence.  Other  decisions  go  much  beyond 
this,  and  assert  that  employers  or  non-union 
workmen  are  “intimidated”  whenever  they  are 
compelled  to  do  something  they  do  not  intend 
to  do.  The  courts  defining  “intimidation”  in 
this  manner  usually  hold  that  no  picketing 
during  strikes  is  ever  “peaceful.”  The  more 
generally  accepted  view  is  that  picketing  is 
lawful  if  not  conducted  in  an  unreasonable 
manner,  or  by  an  unnecessarily  large  number  of 
men. 

The  courts  cannot  directly  prevent  strikes 
for  illegal  purposes  from  being  carried  on. 
Under  common  law  principles,  and  by  the 
Thirteenth  Amendment  of  the  Constitution, 
persons  may  not  be  compelled  to  labor  against 
their  will,  except  in  punishment  for  crime  ( see 
Peonage).  They  may  leave  work  for  any  rea- 
son they  see  fit,  even  in  violation  of  their 
contracts  of  employment,  unless  they  are  in 
military  or  sea  service  (see  Labor  Contracts). 
In  some  cases  courts  have  prohibited  officers  of 
labor  unions  from  advising  or  calling  illegal 
strikes,  and  from  making  benefit  payments  in 
aid  of  them.  The  more  progressive  view  is 
that  such  prohibitions  amount  to  an  indirect 
method  of  compelling  workingmen  to  labor 
against  their  will. 

The  most  effective  manner  in  which  the 
courts  interfere  in  strikes  is  through  the  al- 
lowance of  injunctions  enjoining  the  strikers 
from  committing  acts  of  violence  or  intimida- 
tion (see  Injunctions  in  Labor  Disputes). 
Often  these  prohibitions  are  phrased  very 
broadly,  such  as  “coercing  the  said  complain- 
ants to  do  any  act  they  have  a legal  right  to 
do  or  not  to  do,”  and  “from  in  any  manner 
interfering  with  the  business  of  said  complain- 
ants.” Persons  knowing  of  the  issuance  of 
such  injunctions  are  bound  to  respect  them, 
although  they  are  not  specifically  named  in 
them,  or  personally  served  with  them.  Vio- 
lators of  injunctions  are  subject  to  punishment 
for  contempt  of  court  without  the  jury  trial. 

The  practical  effect  of  the  allowance  of  in- 
junctions in  strikes  is  often  to  discourage  the 
rank  and  file  of  the  striking  workmen.  The 
average  wage-earner  does  not  understand  how 
he  may  conduct  himself  during  a strike  with- 
out violating  the  injunction  which  has  been 
issued.  The  allowance  of  injunctions  against 
strikers,  again,  usually  loses  them  the  support 
of  public  opinion  since  it  seems  to  brand  them 
as  law-breakers.  The  legality  of  boycotts  is 
treated  elsewhere  (see  Boycotts). 

See  Arbitration  of  Labor  Disputes;  Boy- 
cotts ; Contract,  Freedom  of  ; Labor,  Hours 
of;  Lockouts;  Mine  Legislation  for  Labor- 
ers; Order.  Maintenance  of;  Picketing; 
Right  to  Labor;  Riots,  Suppression  of; 
Scab;  Unemployment;  Wages,  Regulation 
of;  and  under  Labor. 

References:  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Labor, 
Annual  Report  (1906)  ; J.  Mitchell,  Organized 


438 


STUMP,  GOING  ON  THE— SUBSIDIES  TO  PRIVATE  INSTITUTIONS 


Labor  (1903)  ; C.  D.  Wright,  Battles  of  Labor 
(1906);  T.  S.  Adams  and  H.  Sumner,  Labor 
Problems  (1905),  Bk.  II,  ch.  vi;  F.  T.  Carlton, 
Hist,  and  Problems  of  Organized  Labor  (1911), 
ch.  vii;  F.  S.  Hall,  Sympathetic  Strikes  and 
Sympathetic  Lockouts  (1898);  F.  H.  Cooke, 
Law  of  Combinations,  Monopolies  and  Labor 
Unions  (1909);  Symposium,  “Use  of  Injunc- 
tions in  Labor  Disputes”  in  Amer.  Acad,  of 
Pol.  and  Soc.  Sci.,  Annals  (1910),  89-141;  Am. 
Year  Book,  1910,  425,  530,  ibid,  1911,  354,  ibid, 
1912,  403-05.  J.  R.  Commons. 

STUMP,  GOING  ON  THE.  A political  cam- 
paign phrase  referring  to  the  delivery  of 
speeches  in  various  places  during  a political 
canvass  in  support  of  a party  ticket  and  plat- 
form. The  phrase  was  evidently  derived  from 
the  use  of  stumps  as  platforms  in  newly 
cleared  districts.  O.  C.  H. 

SUBMARINE  CABLES,  REGULATION  OF. 

Navigable  waters  or  streams  of  the  United 
States  are  post  roads.  Submarine  cables  with- 
in the  boundaries  of  the  United  States  have  a 
right  of  way  under  all  navigable  waters,  pro- 
vided they  do  not  interfere  with  navigation. 
Their  rates,  routes  and  service  are  regulable 
by  the  government  in  the  same  way  as  tele- 
graphs, provided  they  are  a part  of  an  inter- 
state system. 

From  1869  to  August  1893,  in  the  absence 
of  congressional  legislation  on  the  subject, 
various  Presidents  and  Secretaries  of  State 
held  that  the  executive  had  the  power  to  con- 
trol the  landing,  and,  incidentally  to  regulate 
the  operation  of  foreign  submarine  cables  in 
the  protection  of  the  interests  of  the  govern- 
ment and  its  citizens.  This  power  of  the  Presi- 
dent to  permit  the  landing  of  cables  was  called 
into  question  by  Secretaries  Gresham  and 
Olney. 

The  matter  has  been  adjudicated  by  Judge 
Lacombe  (77  Fed.  Rep.  496)  as  follows: 

Without  consent  of  the  General  Government  no 
one,  alien  or  native,  has  any  right  to  establish  a 
physical  connection  between  the  shores  of  this 
country  and  that  of  any  foreign  nation.  Such  con- 
sent may  be  implied  as  well  as  expressed,  and 
whether  it  shall  be  granted  or  refused  is  a polit- 
ical question,  and  in  the  absence  of  Congressional 
action,  would  seem  to  fall  within  the  province  of 
the  Executive  to  decide.  As  was  intimated  in  the 
argument,  it  is  further  thought  that  the  Executive 
may  effectually  enforce  its  decision  without  the 
aid  of  the  courts. 

Acting  Attorney  General  Richards  has  held 
that  the  President  “may  either  prevent  the 
landing  of  a cable,  if  the  rights  entrusted  to 
his  care  so  demand,  or  permit  it  on  conditions 
which  will  protect  the  interests  of  this  Govern- 
ment and  its  citizens.”  These  rulings  are  ap- 
parently on  the  theory  that  the  preservation  of 
our  territorial  integrity  and  the  power  to  make 
treaties  (subject  to  ratification  by  the  Senate) 
are  vested  in  the  President. 

See  Commerce,  International;  Postal  Sys- 
tem of  the  United  States;  Telegraph  Regu- 


lation; Water  Boundaries;  Wireless  Teleg- 
raphy. 

Reference:  Opinions  of  the  Attorneys  Gen- 
eral, XXII,  25.  G.  W.  Pierce. 

SUBPOENA.  A writ  or  order  directed  to  a 
person,  commanding  him  to  be  present  and 
testify  in  a specified  case  pending  in  court. 
This  is  the  subpoena  ad  testificandum.  A sub- 
poena duces  tecum,  commands  the  witness  to 
bring  certain  books,  records,  or  other  docu- 
ments with  him.  H.  M.  B. 

SUBSIDIES  TO  PRIVATE  INSTITUTIONS. 

The  system  of  grants  from  the  public  treasury 
to  private  institutions  prevails  in  different 
forms  in  a considerable  number  of  the  states 
of  the  Union.  In  some  states,  for  instance 
Pennsylvania  and  Maryland,  these  subsides 
take  the  place  of  the  lump  sum  appropriated 
to  such  institutions.  In  other  states,  such  as 
California  and  New  York,  appropriations  are 
based  upon  the  average  number  of  inmates 
cared  for.  In  some  cases  the  allowance  is 
based  only  upon  those  inmates  who  might 
properly  become  public  wards. 

Appropriations  for  private  institutions  reach 
large  proportions  in  some  states.  New  York 
appropriates  about  $5,000,000  annually  to  in- 
stitutions controlled  by  private  boards.  In 
California  about  $450,000  per  year  of  public 
money  is  appropriated  for  the  support  of 
children’s  institutions  alone.  In  a number  of 
states  there  is  a constitutional  provision  for- 
bidding appropriation  of  public  funds  for  the 
support  of  any  sectarian  institution. 

There  is  a wide  difference  of  opinion  among 
experts  as  to  these  grants.  They  are  defended 
on  the  ground  that  public  institutions  are  lia- 
ble to  be  controlled  by  political  influences,  and 
to  become  the  subjects  of  extravagance  and 
graft  on  the  one  hand  and  of  cheese-paring 
economy  on  the  other  hand;  and  the  argument 
is  sustained  by  many  examples.  The  opponents 
of  this  system  urge  that  it  is  in  many  cases 
a violation  of  the  American  principle  of  sepa- 
ration between  church  and  state,  that  it  tends 
to  the  multiplication  of  unnecessary  institu- 
tions, and  to  the  accumulation  of  many  in- 
mates, especially  children,  who  would  otherwise 
be  properly  provided  for  if  the  institution  did 
not  exist.  They  point  to  the  disproportionate 
number  of  children  found  in  the  institutions 
in  California,  New  York  and  the  District  of 
Columbia  where  public  grants  are  liberal. 

The  special  census  report  of  1904  on  benevo- 
lent institutions  shows  that  out  of  every  hun- 
dred thousand  people  in  the  United  States, 
there  are  112  children  in  orphan  asylums  or 
children’s  homes.  In  the  District  of  Columbia 
the  number  is  321  out  of  every  hundred  thou- 
sand population;  in  the  state  of  New  York 
317;  in  the  state  of  California  297.  As  a rule 
the  highest  ratios  of  children  in  orphanages  are 
found  where  the  subsidy  system  prevails. 


439 


SUBSIDIES  TO  SHIPPING 


See  Charities,  Public  Agencies  for;  Child- 
ren, Dependent,  Public  Care  for;  Church 
and  State  in  the  United  States;  Defective 
Classes,  Public  Care  for;  Poverty  and  Poor 
Relief;  Religious  Liberty. 


References:  Homer  Folks,  Care  of  Desti- 
tute, Neglected,  and  Delinquent  Children 
(1902)  ; H.  H.  Hart,  Ed.,  Preventive  Treatment 
of  Neglected  Children  (1910);  A.  G.  Warner, 
Am.  Charities  (1908).  Hastings  H.  Hart. 


SUBSIDIES  TO  SHIPPING 


Nature. — A ship  subsidy  is  a direct  grant 
from  the  national  treasury,  in  the  form  of  a 
gift  or  bounty,  for  the  purpose  of  building  up 
the  shipping  industry.  It  must  be  carefully 
distinguished  from  payments  made  for  services 
rendered,  such  as  carrying  the  mails;  or  for 
building  a vessel  in  such  a way  as  to  be  in 
readiness  for  use  in  time  of  war.  The  United 
States  has  nominally  never  granted  subsidies, 
though  it  has  granted  certain  subventions  to 
mail  carriers  so  far  above  the  cost  of  that 
service  as  to  be  virtually  subsidies. 

Recent  Proposals. — Many  subsidy  measures 
have  been  suggested,  however.  The  first  of 
these,  known  as  the  Hanna-Payne  Bill,  was 
introduced  by  Senator  Hanna,  December  19, 
1898.  This  bill  aimed  to  subsidize  shipping 
generally,  according  to  tonnage,  speed  and  dis- 
tance covered.  It  was  soon  evident  that  it  could 
not  pass  and  its  authors  did  not  even  push  it 
to  a vote.  A similar  bill  met  a like  fate  in  the 
succeeding  Congress.  Senator  Frye  introduced 
another  subsidy  bill  in  the  57th  Congress 
(1901-03).  This  bill  passed  the  Senate  but 
was  defeated  in  the  House.  At  the  suggestion 
of  President  Roosevelt,  Congress,  on  April  28, 
1904,  passed  an  act  authorizing  the  President 
to  appoint  a Merchant  Marine  Commission  of 
five  Senators  and  five  Representatives  to  in- 
vestigate the  shipping  question.  The  findings 
and  testimony  of  this  commission  were  later 
printed  in  three  volumes.  The  majority  of 
the  commission  advocated  naval  subventions  to 
mail  vessels,  subsidies,  and  tonnage  duties. 
The  minority  favored  discriminating  duties. 
All  agreed  that  some  active  measures  should  be 
taken  to  build  up  the  American  merchant  ma- 
rine. The  bill  proposed  by  the  majority  of  this 
commission  passed  the  Senate  February  14, 
1906,  but  was  defeated  in  the  House.  Two 
bills  were  introduced  on  February  13,  1907, 
the  Gallinger  Ship  Subsidy  Bill,  and  the 
Grosvenor  Ship  Subsidy  Bill. 

Advantages. — The  leading  argument  ad- 
vanced in  favor  of  subsidies  has  been  that  they 
would  rehabilitate  our  shipping  ( see  Ship 
Building).  To  this  it  has  been  answered,  that 
the  decline  has  been  due  to  economic  factors 
which  subsidies  would  do  but  little  to  remedy. 
A second  argument  has  been  that  it  would  save 
the  $2,000,000  that  is  now  annually  paid  to  for- 
eign carriers  for  transporting  our  freight.  This 
argument  assumes  that  capital  invested  in 
shipping  would  produce  as  much  there  as  it 


does  in  the  industries  in  which  it  is  at  present 
employed.  Moreover,  foreign  commerce  is 
bilateral  and  the  carriage  bill  is  paid  by  those 
dealing  with  us  as  well  as  by  the  Americans 
themselves.  Another  argument  advanced  is 
that  subsidies  have  been  successful  in  building 
up  the  merchant  marine  of  other  countries  and 
that  they  would  have  the  same  effect  here. 

Other  countries  have  adopted  numerous 
forms  of  subsidizing  their  shipping,  chief  of 
which  are  naval  subventions  and  reserves; 
navigation,  fishing  and  construction  bounties; 
mailing  and  trade  subsidies;  pilotage  and  tariff 
refunds,  and  exemption  from  harbor  duties. 

British  Experience. — Great  Britain  began  her 
subsidizing  policy  in  1840,  in  order  to  have 
mails  carried  regularly  to  her  colonies  and  in 
order  to  secure  steamers  of  great  power  and 
speed,  which  could  be  transferred  to  use  in 
time  of  war.  In  60  years  she  paid  out  a total 
of  $283,906,000  in  these  so-called  subsidies  to 
certain  ships  complying  with  both  these  re- 
quirements. It  cannot  be  shown,  however,  that 
Great  Britain’s  registered  tonnage  of  19,418,824 
tons  has  been  entirely  due  to  subsidies,  for 
95  per  cent  of  her  merchant  marine  has  never 
received  any  subvention.  It  appears,  therefore, 
that  the  principal  return  to  Great  Britain  for 
subventions  to  5 per  cent  of  her  merchant 
marine  has  been  the  carriage  of  mails  more 
rapidly  and  more  frequently  than  business 
profit  would  warrant,  and  the  possible  use  of 
certain  vessels  in  time  of  war. 

German  Experience. — Germany  has  never  had 
a general  subsidy  pure  and  simple,  but  in  1885 
a mail  subvention  of  $1,047,000  a year  was 
granted  for  fifteen  years  to  the  North  German 
Lloyd  for  a mail  service  to  Australia,  China 
and  Japan.  In  1890  another  subvention  of 
$214,000  a year  was  granted  a German  line  to 
German  East  Africa.  In  1898  and  1899  both 
subventions  were  renewed,  the  Asiatic  subven- 
tion being  increased  to  $1,330,000  and  the  East 
African  to  $390,000.  Germany  has  secured  the 
political  advantages  accuring  from  better  mail 
service,  but  little,  if  any,  increase  in  shipping 
can  be  traced  to  her  subvention  policy. 

French  Experience. — France  has  adopted  a 
policy  of  granting  real  subsidies  to  all  cargo 
carriers  with  a view  to  building  up  a big  for- 
eign trade  marine.  The  law  was  passed  in  1881 
when  her  tonnage  was  913,000.  In  1890  her 
tonnage  was  1,104,000.  During  these  twelve 
years  she  had  paid  out  in  subsidies,  $19,503,- 


440 


SUBSTITUTE,  MILITARY— SUBTREASURY  SYSTEM 


701.  Her  subsidies  were  increased  in  1893, 
with  further  amendments  in  1902.  Despite  her 
subsidies,  however,  her  tonnage  did  not  in- 
crease in  proportion  to  the  tonnage  of  other 
nations  which  had  no  subsidies. 

Comparative. — The  subsidies  granted  by  cer- 
tain other  nations  are  indicated  in  the  table 
below : 


Country 

Date 

Amount 

Great  Britain  and  Colonies 

1909 

$ 9,689,384 

France  

1908 

13,423,737 

Japan  --  -- 

1910 

5,413,700 

Italy  - - - 

1909 

3,8,2,917 

Spain  

1910 

3,150,012 

Austria-Hungary  

1908 

2,984,530 

Germany  --  - --  — 

1908 

2,301,029 

Trade  and  the  Flag. — Another  argument  ad- 
vanced in  favor  of  subsidies  is  that  they  would 
increase  commerce  because  “trade  would  fol- 
low the  flag.”  This  ignores  the  fact,  however, 
that  the  bulk  of  the  world’s  tonnage  will  prob- 
ably always  go  to  the  vessels  that  carry  it 
cheapest.  The  increase  in  commerce  due  to 
national  ownership  cannot  be  used  as  a token 
of  what  increase  would  follow  from  the  mere 
flying  of  American  colors. 

War  Argument. — Another  and  more  pointed 
argument  is  that  subsidies  would  build  up  a 
marine  which  could  carry  our  shipping  in  times 
of  war  abroad.  It  is  usually  frankly  admitted 
that,  were  America  a belligerent,  a big  mer- 
chant marine'  would  only  necessitate  a larger 
navy.  But  where  America  is  a neutral  and  a 
nation  with  which  we  have  large  commerce  is 
engaged  in  war,  there  is  a definite  need  for  a 
limited  independence  in  carriage.  The  question 
is  as  to  whether  this  independent  carriage  can- 
not be  secured  most  economically  in  other  ways. 
The  advocates  of  subsidies  further  urge  that 
they  will  give  us  sailors  and  auxiliary  cruis- 
ers in  time  of  war.  It  is  answered  that  vessels 
built  so  as  to  be  convertible  into  cruisers  prove 
to  be  neither  the  best  merchant  vessels  in  time 
of  peace  nor  good  ships  in  time  of  war.  The 
opponents  to  subsidies  urge  that  it  would  be 
far  more  economical  to  devote  the  money  di- 
rectly to  the  navy  in  the  first  place,  and  that, 
so  far  as  service  in  the  navy  is  concerned,  a 
canal  boatman  can  adapt  himself  to  naval  serv- 
ice about  as  readily  as  can  the  regular  seaman. 

Commercial  Argument. — A final  argument  is 
that  subsidies  are  a political  necessity  in  order 
to  have  thoroughgoing  mail  steamship  lines 
with  our  outlying  possessions,  especially 
Hawaii,  Guam,  the  Philippines,  Porto  Rico  and 
the  Canal  Zone,  and  with  certain  foreign  coun- 
tries with  which  we  are  especially  desirous  of 
building  up  cordial  commercial  relations.  To 
this  the  opponents  of  subsidies  answer  that  the 
payment  for  such  service  should  be  based  de- 
finitely upon  the  cost  of  the  service  and  should 
not  be  in  the  form  of  gratuities.  Mail  sub- 
ventions would,  moreover,  be  unavailing  be- 
cause not  permanent;  they  would  not  remove 


the  causes  for  differences  in  the  cost  of  ship 
operation  and  they  would  not  be  of  assistance 
to  shipping  generally. 

It  seems  that  the  future  policy  of  the  United 
States  will  be  that  of  paying  directly  for  serv- 
ices to  given  lines  needed  for  political  reasons 
and  not  that  of  subsidizing  shipping  generally. 
Subsidies  cannot  be  justified  on  economic 
grounds.  Their  best  justification  is  in  politi- 
cal necessity. 

See  Bounties  ; Mail  Subsidies  ; Ship  Build- 
ing, Regulation  and  Public  Aid  to;  Ship- 
ping, Regulation  of;  Trade  Follows  the 
Flag. 

References: W.  T.  Dunmore,  Ship  Subsidies 
(1907)  ; Antoine  Riquoir,  L’’ encouragement  des 
marines  marchandes,  Legislation  compare 
(1906)  ; Merchant  Marine  Commission,  Report 
(1905)  ; Senate  Reports,  58  Cong.,  3,  Sess.,  No. 
2700  (1905);  E.  M.  Bacon,  Ship  Subsidies 
(1911)  ; R.  Meeker,  Hist,  of  Shipping  Subsidies 
( 1905 ) ; C.  Day,  History  of  Commerce  ( 1907 ) , 
527-31.  Clyde  L.  King. 

SUBSTITUTE,  MILITARY.  In  countries 
where  the  obligation  to  serve  for  the  national 
defense  is  merely  nominal  the  acceptance  of 
substitutes  follows  a levy  by  conscription.  Uni- 
versal military  service  allows  no  substitutes. 
Men  drafted  from  the  militia  for  the  army  of 
the  American  Revolution  might  furnish  sub- 
stitutes; and  the  conscriptions  which  began  in 
1862  drew  many  into  the  volunteer  regiments, 
hired  either  to  fill  local  quotas  or  to  take  the 
place  of  men  whose  names  had  been  drawn. 
Premiums  were  paid  for  aliens  and  for  robust 
boys  under  eighteen  who  were  not  subject  to 
draft.  Negroes  were  not  accepted  as  substi- 
tutes for  white  men,  as  they  had  to  be  as- 
signed to  special  regiments.  The  responsibil- 
ity of  a principal  ceased  as  soon  as  his  sub- 
stitute was  mustered  in,  unless  fraud  were 
d tected;  but  substitute  brokers  notoriously 
promoted  desertion.  Drafted  men  could  com- 
mute their  service  for  $300,  and  84,966  paid 
commutation  in  1863  and  1864;  34,913  hired 
substitutes,  and  13,297  entered  the  ranks.  The 
drafts  of  July  and  December,  1864,  yielded 
33,050  conscripts  and  81,275  substitutes.  Patri- 
ots not  liable  to  the  draft  who  furnished  “rep- 
resentative recruits”  numbered  only  1292.  See 
Bounties  to  Soldiers  and  Sailors;  Bounty- 
Jumping;  Conscription  and  Draft;  Enlist- 
ment, Naval  and  Military;  Militia;  Vol- 
unteer. References:  Massachusetts  Soldiers 
and  Sailors  in  the  Revolutionary  War  ( 1896 ) , 
I,  xxii,  xxvi;  U.  S.  War  Department,  Offi- 
cial Records  (1880-1901),  Series  III,  IV,  473- 
475,  664,  993,  1235,  V,  628-635,  649-652,  722, 
932.  C.  G.  Calkins. 

SUBTREASURY  SYSTEM.  Until  1840  the 
funds  of  the  Federal  Government  were  kept  on 
deposit  in  banks.  Prompted,  however,  by  the 
embarrassments  of  the  treasury  after  the  panic 


441 


SUBWAYS  AND  TUNNELS  FOR  CITY  TRANSIT 


of  18.37,  in  which  many  banks  suspended  specie 
payments,  Congress  in  1840  decided  to  change 
radically  the  system  of  keeping  public  funds. 
An  independent  or  subtreasury  system  was 
established  by  an  act  in  1840.  Provision  was 
made  for  the  construction  of  a treasury  build- 
ing in  Washington,  and  for  facilities  in  certain 
government  offices  in  different  parts  of  the 
country  for  the  safe  keeping  of  public  moneys. 

Owing  to  a change  in  parties  the  act  was 
repealed  in  1841,  but  in  1846  the  principle 
was  readopted  and  has  continued  in  operation 
since  that  time.  By  statute  of  June  3,  1864, 
the  original  plan  was  modified  so  as  to  permit 
the  treasury  to  deposit  funds,  other  than  re- 
ceipts from  customs,  in  national  banks  ( see 
Deposit  of  Public  Funds).  In  1866,  disburs- 
ing officers  were  permitted  to  deposit  in  banks, 
in  places  where  there  was  no  subtreasury;  and 
in  1907  authority  was  also  given  for  the  de- 
posit of  customs  receipts  in  national  banks. 
Subtreasuries  are  established  at  Baltimore, 
Boston,  Chicago,  Cincinnati,  New  Orleans,  New 
York,  Philadelphia,  St.  Louis,  and  San  Fran- 
cisco. 

The  subtreasury  system  is  a survival  of 
mediaeval  finance;  in  England  all  public  funds, 
and  in  France  and  Germany  the  greater  part, 
are  deposited  in  banks.  Although  government 
funds  are  secure  under  the  American  system, 
it  has  disadvantages,  as  large  amounts  of 
money  are  withdrawn  from  commercial  use, 
causing  at  times  a stringency  in  the  money 
market.  In  so  far  as  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  has  power  to  make  deposits  in  banks, 
this  evil  is  lessened,  but  as  the  power  is  dis- 
cretionary, it  gives  the  Secretary  an  unfortu- 
nate influence  upon  the  money  market. 

See  Bank,  Central;  Deposit  of  Public 
Funds;  Revenue,  Surplus. 

References:  A.  P.  Andrew,  “The  Treasury 
and  the  Banks  under  Secretary  Shaw”  in 
Quart.  Journ.  Econ.,  XXII  (1907),  519-568; 
D.  Kinley,  Independent  Treasury  of  the  U.  Is. 
(1893),  historical  and  discussion;  M.  S.  Wild- 
man,  “Independent  Treasury  and  the  Banks” 
in  Am.  Acad,  of  Pol.  and  Soc.  Sci.,  Annals, 
Nov.,  1910.  Davis  R.  Dewey. 

SUBWAYS  AND  TUNNELS  FOR  CITY 
TRANSIT.  The  most  efficient  and  popular 
form  of  rapid  transit  is  the  subway  line. 
In  1912  subways  were  in  operation  in  Boston, 
New  York,  Philadelphia,  Berlin,  Paris,  London 
and  Budapest. 

The  enormous  cost  of  the  modern  subway 
line,  ranging  from  a cost  per  mile  of  road, 
double  track,  of  two  million  dollars  to  four  mil- 
lion dollars,  makes  it  impossible  profitably  to 
install  this  method  of  rapid  transit  except 
where  extremely  heavy  traffic  prevails.  Hence 
private  capital  has  generally  been  reluctant 
to  embark  upon  this  sort  of  enterprise. 

In  the  United  States  only  two  subway  lines 
— that  in  Philadelphia  and  the  so-called  Me-  I 


Adoo  system  under  the  Hudson — have  been 
constructed  by  private  capital,  the  other  roads 
having  been  built  by  the  respective  cities  upon 
their  corporate  credit.  Generally  speaking, 
it  seems  probable  that  subways  in  the  future 
will  be  constructed  by  the  city  and  leased  to 
the  street  railway  company  operating  also  the 
surface  and  elevated  lines  (if  any)  already 
existing.  This  arrangement  enables  the  exist- 
ing transportation  system  to  use  a subway  in 
tbe  most  effective  manner  by  diverting  to  it 
traffic  from  the  overcrowded  or  indirect  sur- 
face lines. 

New  York  City,  has  the  largest  subway  mil- 
eage in  this  country,  and  in  1912  embarked  up- 
on the  construction  of  an  ambitious  scheme  of 
additional  subways  to  be  built  from  the  pro- 
ceeds secured  from  the  sale  of  city  bonds,  and 
to  be  leased  for  a term  of  fifty  years  to  two 
corporations.  The  previous  city  subway, 
operated  by  the  Interborough  Transit  Com- 
pany, was  leased  by  the  city  to  this  corporation 
for  a period  of  fifty  years  from  completion, 
with  an  option  of  renewal  for  another  twenty- 
five  years,  the  company  agreeing  to  pay  to  the 
city' an  annual  rental  equal  to  the  interest  on 
the  city’s  bonds  issued  for  construction  (but 
not  for  easements,  etc.),  and  a sinking  fund 
of  1 per  cent  yearly  to  retire  the  bonds.  The 
Interborough  Company  was  required  by  the 
lease  to  provide,  at  its  own  expense,  the  elec- 
trical equipment  and  rolling  stock,  for  which  up 
to  1912  over  $26,000,000  had  been  expended. 

This  lease  was  abrogated  in  part  by  the 
“Dual  System  Contracts”  referred  to  above,  en- 
tered into  for  the  construction  of  the  new  sub- 
way lines,  with  the  Interborough  Rapid  Tran- 
sit Company  and  the  New  York  Municipal 
Railroad  Corporation,  a company  formed  in 
the  interest  of  the  Brooklyn  Rapid  Transit 
Company.  The  operating  contracts  made  witli 
each  company  will  run  for  a period  of  forty- 
nine  years  from  January  1,  1917,  and  apply 
to  all  subways  or  extensions,  whether  con- 
structed by  the  city  or  by  the  operating  com- 
pany, or  by  both  jointly,  including  the  exist- 
ing subway.  The  leases  for  the  extensions  of 
the  elevated  lines  run  for  eighty-five  years 
from  the  time  that  the  various  extensions  are 
put  into  operation.  In  the  operating  contracts, 
provisions  have  been  made  for  the  sharing  of 
profits  with  the  city  after  the  operating  com- 
panies have  paid  all  necessary  expenses  and 
taken  out  the  equivalent  of  their  existing  earn- 
ings on  the  old  lines.  This  is  to  be  accom- 
plished by  pooling  the  revenues  derived  from 
the  operation  of  all  the  lines  (not  including 
the  Interborough  elevated  railroads  and  their 
extensions)  and  deducting  therefrom  each 
quarter  year  payments  to  be  made  on  account 
of  the  operator  and  the  city  on  a predetermined 
basis,  set  forth  in  detail  in  the  contracts. 

The  subway  lines  in  Boston  are  constructed 
by  the  city  and  leased  to  a private  company 
upon  terms  generally  similar  to  those  existing 


442 


SUCCESSION  DUTIES— SUFFRAGE 


in  New  York.  The  Philadelphia  Rapid  Transit 
Company,  through  a subsidiary  corporation, 
constructed  a subway  line  in  that  city  under 
a perpetual  franchise.  It  seems  likely  that 
the  next  to  construct  a subway  will  be  Chicago. 

See  Municipal  Ownership;  Public  Serv- 
ice Corporations;  Street  Railroads;  Sub- 
ways and  Tunnels;  and  under  Railroads. 

References:  A.  E.  Pinanski,  Street  Railway 
Problems  of  Metropolitan  Boston  (1908)  ; B.  J. 
Arnold,  Report  on  the  Subway  Problem  of  Chi- 
cago (1911);  Report  on  the  Pittsburg  Trans- 
portation Problem  (1910)  ; Ford,  Bacon,  and 
Davis,  Report  on  the  Philadelphia  Rapid  Tran- 
sit Company  (1911)  ; New  York  Public  Service 
Commission,  New  Subways  for  New  York — the 
Dual  System  of  Rapid  Transit  (1913);  Tran- 
sit Commissioner,  City  of  Philadelphia,  Report 
(1913).  Thomas  Conway,  Jr. 

SUCCESSION  DUTIES.  These  duties  are 
practically  synonymous  with  inheritance  taxes. 
In  English  finance  this  duty  refers  specifically 
to  the  extension  of  the  legacy  duty  in  1853  to 
all  forms  of  realty  and  settled  personalty.  See 
Tax,  Inheritance.  D.  R.  D. 

SUEZ  CANAL.  The  Suez  Canal  was  begun 
in  1859  by  a corporation  chartered  by  France 
and  was  opened  for  traffic  at  the  close  of 
1869.  The  waterway,  which  extends  from 
Port  Said  on  the  Mediterranean  to  Suez  at  the 


head  of  the  Red  Sea,  is  88  nautical  or  100 
statute  miles  in  length.  The  canal  is  at  sea 
level,  and  its  depth  is  at  present  34.4  feet. 
The  cost  of  the  canal  up  to  the  time  of  its 
completion  was  about  $80,000,000. 

The  British  Government  owns  176,602  shares 
of  the  400,000  shares  of  capital  stock,  which 
were  purchased  in  1875  by  the  Beaconsfield  min- 
istry of  Khedive  Ismail  for  $3,976,582,  and 
practically  controls  and  manages  the  canal. 
The  share  holders  have  latterly  received  over 
30  per  cent  per  annum  on  par  value. 

The  traffic  of  the  canal  has  risen  steadily 
from  the  beginning  and  continues  to  increase 
rapidly.  In  1880,  the  canal  was  used  by  2,026 
vessels  having  a net  tonnage  of  3,057,421  tons; 
in  1910  by  4,533  vessels  whose  net  tonnage  was 
16,581,898  tons,  and  in  1912  by  5,373  vessels 
with  an  aggregate  net  tonnage  of  20,275,120. 
The  tolls  at  present  are  6.25  francs  per  net 
vessel  ton.  The  passenger  tolls  are  10  francs 
for  each  person  above  12  years  and  5 francs 
for  those  3 to  12  years  old.  The  receipts  in 
1912  were  135,720,000  francs. 

See  Canal  Diplomacy;  French  Panama 
Canal;  Hay-Pauncefote  Treaties;  Nica- 
raucua  “Canal  Policy  ; Panama  Canal. 

References:  E.  R.  Johnson  in  Report  of  the 
Isthmian  Canal  Commission  (1899-1901),  Ap- 
pendix, Industrial  and  Commercial  Val- 
ue of  an  Isthmian  Canal,  chaps,  xxi,  xxii. 

E.  R.  Johnson. 


SUFFRAGE 


In  the  English  Colonies  in  America. — The 

suffrage  was  granted  on  very  different  terms 
in  the  several  colonies;  and,  despite  the  play 
of  nationalizing  influences  for  four  genera- 
tions, substantial  differences  still  persist.  In 
the  early  days  of  the  colonies  there  was  uni- 
formity in  confining  the  suffrage  to  males 
of  at  least  twenty-one  years  of  age.  In  the 
northern  colonies  there  were  no  discrimina- 
tions as  to  race;  but  at  least  four  of  the 
southern  colonies  in  the  seventeenth  century 
explicitly  confined  the  suffrage  to  whites.  Brit- 
ish citizenship  was  taken  for  granted  by  the 
law  of  most  of  the  colonies,  but  four  specifical- 
ly prescribed  it.  In  New  England  religious 
tests  were  insisted  upon  as  a basis  for  a per- 
son’s being  “admitted  to  the  freedom  of  the 
colony,”  and  immoral  behaviour  might  lead 
to  suspension  of  his  voting  privileges,  or  even 
to  his  permanent  disfranchisement.  Religious 
tests  of  one  form  or  another  were  applied  in 
several  of  the  colonies.  Thus,  the  Massa- 
chusetts Bay  Colony,  by  a law  of  1631,  “to 
the  end  that  the  body  of  the  freemen  may  be 
preserved  of  honest  and  good  men,”  prescribed 
that  “henceforth  no  man  shall  be  admitted  to 
the  freedom  of  the  Commonwealth  but  such  as 
are  members  of  some  of  the  churches  within 
126 


the  limits  of  this  jurisdiction,”  and  despite 
the  protests  of  dissenters,  this  test  was  strict- 
ly exacted  for  more  than  thirty  years;  and 
when  pressure  from  the  Crown  necessitated  re- 
laxation, the  alternative  of  a property  quali- 
fication was  placed  so  high  as  to  apply  to 
but  few.  New  Haven  also  required  that  voters 
be  members  of  the  orthodox  church.  South 
Carolina  voters  were  required  to  profess  the 
Christian  religion.  Quakers  were  specifically 
excluded  from  the  franchise  in  Massachusetts 
and  Plymouth,  while  in  other  colonies  they 
were  usually  debarred  by  their  unwillingness 
to  take  oaths,  and  Roman  Catholics  were  usual- 
ly not  allowed  to  vote. 

The  terms  “freeholder,”  “inhabitants,”  etc., 
in  early  suffrage  laws  implied  a certain  per- 
manence of  residence;  in  some  colonial  laws 
this  was  plainly  insisted  upon,  the  term  vary- 
ing from  six  months  to  two  years.  In  the 
latter  part  of  the  seventeenth  century  a prop- 
erty qualification  came  to  be  introduced  in 
every  one  of  the  colonies.  Its  form  and  amount 
varied:  thus,  in  New  York  voters  for  mem- 
bers of  the  lower  branch  of  the  legislature 
were  required  to  be  freeholders  of  an  estate 
to  the  value  of  £40,  but  in  New  York  City 
and  Albany  the  suffrage  was  open  to  all  free- 


443 


SUFFRAGE 


men;  in  Virginia  the  voter  had  to  be  a free- 
holder of  an  estate  of  at  least  fifty  acres  if 
there  were  no  house  upon  it,  or  twenty-five 
acres  with  a house  of  at  least  twelve  feet 
square  upon  it,  and  there  were  different  qual- 
fications  for  town-dwellers;  in  Massachusetts, 
under  the  charter  of  1691  the  voter  had  to 
be  a freeholder  of  an  estate  worth  at  least 
forty  shillings  a year,  or  the  owner  of  other 
property  to  the  value  of  £40  sterling.  A.  E. 
McKinley  says: 

[In  colonial  days,]  the  potential  voters  seem  to 
vary  from  one-sixth  to  one-fiftieth  of  the  popula- 
tion, and  the  actual  number  of  voters  shows  almost 
an  equal  variation  ; Massachusetts  and  Connecticut 
showing  at  times  only  two  per  cent  of  actual 
voters  among  the  population,  where  perhaps  six- 
teen per  cent  were  qualified  electors ; and  New 
York  City  and  Virginia  showing  the  far  larger  pro- 
portion of  eight  per  cent  of  the  population  as  ac- 
tual voters.  . . . Property  qualifications,  poor 

means  of  communication,  large  election  districts, 
and  the  absence  of  party  organization  combined  to 
make  the  most  sharply  contested  elections  feeble  in 
their  effects  upon  the  community  as  compared  with 
the  widespread  suffrage  of  the  twentieth  century. 

The  Federal  Constitution. — In  the  Federal 
Convention,  in  1787,  it  was  soon  recognized 
that  the  attempt  to  impose  uniform  suffrage 
qualifications  for  the  electors  of  federal  of- 
ficers would  be  resented  as  a needless  restric- 
tion upon  the  states,  which  might  imperil  the 
ratification  of  the  Constitution.  Accordingly 
there  was  adopted  a provision  which  accepted, 
as  a basis  for  federal  election,  all  the  existing 
variety  of  suffrage  qualifications,  and  which 
left  their  future  modification  to  the  discretion 
of  the  individual  states.  It  was  prescribed 
that  the  electors  of  representatives  in  Congress 
should  have  “the  qualifications  requisite  for 
electors  of  the  most  numerous  branch  of  the 
state  legislature”  (Art.  I,  Sec.  ii,  If  1).  In 
some  of  the  states  this  distinction  was  of 
significance.  Four  allowed  all  resident  free- 
men to  vote  provided  they  paid  taxes.  Such 
was  the  law  in  North  Carolina  for  electors 
of  members  of  the  lower  houses,  but  one  who 
would  vote  for  state  senator  must  own  a 
freehold  of  fifty  acres;  in  New  York  the  voter 
for  assemblyman  must  own  a freehold  worth 
£20,  or  pay  rent  of  40  shillings,  and  have  paid 
taxes  to  the  state  during  the  previous  year; 
but  to  vote  for  senator  he  must  have  an  un- 
encumbered freehold  of  the  value  of  £100. 
In  every  one  of  the  original  states,  the  pay- 
ment of  taxes  or  the  ownership  of  real  or 
personal  property  varying  in  amount  from 
$33  to  $200  was  required. 

Extension  of  the  Suffrage:  Democratic  Move- 
ment.— The  first  movement  toward  broadening 
the  suffrage  came  from  the  democratizing  in- 
fluences which  were  signalized  by  Jefferson’s 
election  in  1801.  In  compliance  with  the  new 
spirit,  the  states  gradually  shortened  the  terms 
of  preliminary  residence  and  abolished  proper- 
ty qualifications  for  voting;  the  last  disap- 
peared in  Louisiana  in  1845,  though  the  pay- 
ment of  a poll  tax  continued  to  be  insisted 
upon  in  some  states.  In  the  middle  of  the 


century  the  stress  which  the  abolitionists  laid 
upon  the  “rights  of  man”  led  in  the  northern 
states  to  the  sweeping  away  of  barriers  to  the 
suffrage. 

Negro  Suffrage. — The  second  great  extension 
came  in  the  grant  of  the  ballot  to  the  negro 
as  a result  of  the  civil  war  ( see  Fifteenth 
Amendment).  Partly  on  the  plea  that  the 
ballot  was  needed  by  the  negro  to  protect  his 
own  rights,  and  partly  to  secure  to  the  Re- 
publican party  control  in  the  South,  by  a 
strange  alliance  of  humanitarians  like  Sumner 
and  politicians  of  the  type  of  Thaddeus  Ste- 
vens, there  was  forced  into  the  Reconstruc- 
tion Act,  passed  over  the  President’s  veto, 
March  2,  1867,  a requirement  that  each  of  the 
states  which  had  been  in  revolt  must  remain 
under  military  rule  until  a state  convention, 
chosen  by  loyal  electors  without  regard  to 
race  or  color,  should  frame  a state  constitu- 
tion and  ratify  the  Fourteenth  Amendment 
(see  Fourteenth  Amendment;  Recon- 
struction ) . Upon  the  states  which  did  not 
promptly  comply  with  this  requirement  there 
was  imposed  the  further  condition  for  read- 
mission that  they  ratify  also  the  Fifteenth 
Amendment,  which  forbade  the  denying  of 
suffrage  rights  to  citizens  of  the  United  States 
“on  account  of  race,  color,  or  previous  consid- 
tion  of  servitude.”  Inasmuch  as  until  their 
disabilities  should  be  removed  by  Congress,  the 
leading  white  citizens  at  the  South  were 
disfranchised  by  the  Fourteenth  Amendment, 
control  was  thus  brought  into  the  hands  of 
ignorant  freedmen,  largely  under  the  guidance 
of  self-seeking  whites  from  the  north.  An 
orgy  of  misgovernment  and  reckless  finance 
followed.  Gradually,  largely  by  intimidation 
if  not  by  force  or  fraud,  the  negro’s  influence 
was  cut  down,  and  in  less  than  a dozen  years 
from  Lee’s  surrender  the  former  leaders  re- 
gained dominance  in  all  the  states  which  had 
been  in  revolt,  the  President  being  no  longer 
willing  to  bolster  up  “carpet-bagger”  (see) 
governments  by  federal  troops  (see  Negro 
Suffrage) . 

Woman  Suffrage. — The  extension  of  the  suf- 
frage to  women  early  found  advocates  in  vari- 
ous parts  of  the  Union  but  it  was  first  given 
full  effect  in  western  frontier  states,  in  most  of 
which  the  great  majority  of  the  population 
consisted  of  males.  The  first  states  to  intro- 
duce “equal  suffrage”  were  Wyoming  (I860), 
Colorado  (1893),  Utah  (1896),  and  Idaho 
(1896).  For  several  years  women  voted  in 
the  territory  of  Washington,  under  a law 
which  was  later  (1887)  declared  unconstitu- 
tional because  of  a technical  defect  in  its 
title.  In  1910  a constitutional  amendment  was 
ratified  which  gave  the  suffrage  to  women  on 
the  same  terms  as  to  men.  In  1911  the  voters 
of  California  by  a small  majority  ratified  an 
amendment  establishing  equal  suffrage  for 
men  and  women.  In  Kansas  where  women  have 
had  for  some  years  the  vote  in  local  elections 


SUFFRAGE 


and  have  been  eligible  for  municipal  offices, 
a constitutional  amendment  ratified  in  1912 
extended  the  suffrage  to  women  on  the  same 
terms  as  men.  In  1312  Arizona  and  Oregon 
also  were  added  to  the  list  of  equal-suffrage 
states,  and  in  1913  the  legislature  of  Illinois 
granted  the  suffrage  to  women  for  statutory 
offices.  In  about  half  the  states  of  the  Union 
women  may  vote  in  the  election  of  school  of- 
ficers; in  a few,  women  who  are  taxpayers 
are  allowed  to  vote  upon  financial  measures 
( see  Woman  Suffrage). 

Restriction  of  the  Suffrage:  Citizenship  Re- 
quired.— But  the  evolution  of  the  suffrage  in 
America  lias  been  in  the  way  of  restriction  as 
well  as  of  extension.  Gradually  about  three- 
quarters  of  the  states  have  come  to  require 
that  their  voters  shall  be  full-fledged  citizens 
of  the  United  States.  Yet  in  about  ten  states, 
including  those  which  are  most  eager  to  at- 
tract immigrants  as  agricultural  laborers,  the 
suffrage  is  granted  to  the  newcomer  after  a 
residence  within  the  state  of  from  six  months 
to  a year,  and  a declaration  of  his  intention 
to  become  a citizen.  But  such  a voter  has  not 
renounced  his  allegiance  to  his  native  land,  nor 
sworn  allegiance  to  the  United  States;  thus 
the  strange  anomaly  is  presented  that  lie  might 
today  be  taking  part  in  the  election  of  officers 
of  the  national  Government,  and  tomorrow  the 
United  States  might  be  brought  into  strained 
diplomatic  relations  with  his  native  country 
over  some  question  relating  to  his  citizenship. 
In  1859  a constitutional  amendment  was  rati- 
fied by  Massachusetts  which  required  that  no 
foreign-born  citizen  should  be  entitled  to  vote 
in  that  commonwealth  until  the  end  of  two 
years  after  he  had  completed  his  naturaliza- 
tion. This  caused  grave  apprehension  and  re- 
sentment, particularly  among  the  German- 
Americans;  their  influence  in  the  Chicago  con- 
vention of  1860  succeeded  in  forcing  into  the 
Republican  platform  a condemnation  of  such 
restrictions,  and  is  alleged  to  have  turned  the 
scale  in  favor  of  the  nomination  of  Lincoln 
rather  than  Seward  or  Banks,  who  were  be- 
lieved to  be  sympathetic  toward  such  nativist 
legislation. 

Educational  Tests. — In  requiring  educational 
qualifications,  the  desire  to  raise  the  voter’s 
plane  of  intelligence  has  sometimes  been 
associated  with  motives  which  were  less  noble. 
Thus,  when  Connecticut  (1854)  and  Massa- 
chusetts (1856)  took  the  lead  in  requiring  that 
a voter  be  able  to  read  the  Constitution  and 
(in  Massachusetts)  write  his  own  name,  the 
action  was  taken  in  the  heat  of  the  Know- 
Nothing  excitement  (see  American  Party), 
and  its  prime  object  was  to  delay  and  diminish 
the  influence  of  the  foreign-born  in  state  and 
national  politics.  After  the  nativist  move- 
ment subsided,  educational  qualifications  for 
the  suffrage  continued  to  win  their  way  on 
their  own  merits,  until  reading  and  writing 
tests  have  come  to  be  applied,  in  one  form  or 


another,  in  a dozen  states.  Federal  law  has 
helped  indirectly  toward  decreasing  the  num- 
ber of  illiterate  voters,  since  the  naturalization 
act  of  1906  requires  that  the  applicant’s  peti- 
tion shall  be  signed  by  him  in  his  own  hand- 
writing, and  that  at  the  time  of  taking  out 
his  final  papers  he  shall  be  able  to  speak  the 
English  language  (see  Citizenship;  Naturali- 
zation ) . 

Tests  in  the  South. — Soon  after  the  domi- 
nance of  the  whites  in  the  government  of  the 
southern  states  was  reestablished,  a movement 
arose  to  assure  the  permanence  of  white  rule 
by  law  instead  of  by  force,  intimidation  or 
fraud.  In  states  like  Mississippi  and  South 
Carolina,  where  the  whites  and  negroes  were 
in  the  ratio  of  two  to  three,  this  meant  the 
elimination  of  the  greater  part  of  the  negro 
vote.  This  has  been  accomplished  by  constitu- 
tional amendments  which  combine  various 
optional  qualifications.  Thus  a convention 
in  Mississippi,  1890,  drafted  a new  constitution, 
and — in  spite  of  the  existing  constitution’s 
prohibition  of  such  action — proceeded  to  or- 
dain and  establish  it,  without  referring  it  to 
the  people  for  ratification.  Thousands  of  negro 
voters  had  already  been  kept  from  the  polls 
by  the  working  of  a new  registration  law. 
But  the  new  constitution  introduced  two 
novelties.  Besides  requiring  that  the  would-be 
voter  be  registered  and  payer  of  a poll  tax, 
it  was  stipulated  that  after  January  1,  1892, 
he  must  be  able  either  to  read  any  portion 
of  the  Constitution,  or  to  understand  it  when 
read  to  him,  or  give  a reasonable  interpreta- 
tion thereof.  Registration  officers  throughout 
the  state  were  whites,  and  the  exclusion  of 
the  great  mass  of  negro  voters  from  any  con- 
siderable share  in  politics  was  a foregone  con- 
clusion. 

In  succession,  other  southern  states  have 
approached  the  problem  of  eliminating  the 
negro  vote,  each  profiting  by  the  experience 
of  its  predecessors.  Thus,  in  1895  the  South 
Carolina  convention  provided  that  the  voter 
must  be  able  to  read  and  write  any  section  of 
the  Constitution,  or  prove  that  he  owns  and  has 
during  the  previous  year  paid  taxes  on  proper- 
ty assessed  at  $300  or  more.  The  Louisiana  con- 
stitution of  1898  incorporated  a taxpaying 
qualification  like  that  of  South  Carolina;  a 
second  option  was  an  educational  test,  the 
would-be  voter  being  required  to  write  out 
a specified  form  of  application,  about  75  words 
in  length;  for  applicants  kept  from  the  polls 
by  these  tests  Louisiana  presented  her  own 
discriminating  test — that  during  the  next 
three  and  a half  months  after  the  ratification 
of  this  amendment,  any  man  might  get  his 
name  permanently  upon  the  voter’s  list  who 
could  prove  that  he  had  been  a legal  voter  in 
any  state  of  the  Union  on  January  1,  1867, 
“or  that  he  is  the  son  or  grandson  of  some 
such  person”;  29,198  men  became  permanent 
voters  of  Louisiana  by  taking  advantage  of 


445 


SUFFRAGE 


this  “son-or-grandson”  clause — -a  peculiarly 
American  form  of  hereditary  aristocracy.  In 
1901  Alabama  contributed  her  novel  invention 
in  a “good  character”  qualification  which  has 
been  imitated  by  Virginia.  The  result  of  these 
various  restrictions  has  been  to  disfranchise 
practically  all  the  blacks  and  from  30,000  to 
60,000  whites  in  each  of  the  states  where  such 
tests  have  been  applied.  The  total  vote  cast 
in  the  three  states,  Louisiana,  Mississippi  and 
South  Carolina,  fell  from  492,357  in  1876  to 
177,822  in  1900,  despite  the  fact  that  the  ag- 
gregate population  of  the  three  states  between 
the  years  1880  and  1900  increased  forty  per 
cent.  In  1876  the  Republicans  polled  91,780 
votes  in  South  Carolina;  in  1908  they  polled 
3,963. 

It  is  sufficiently  obvious  that  these  disfran- 
chising devices  are  contrary  to  the  spirit  of 
the  Fourteenth  and  Fifteenth  Amendments 
(see),  yet  no  attempt  has  succeeded  in  getting 
from  the  Supreme  Court  a decision  upon  the 
direct  issue  of  their  constitutionality.  In 
Williams  vs.  Mississippi  (170  U.  8.  213)  it 
was  declared  that  the  suffrage  qualifications  in 
the  Mississippi  constitution  “do  not  on  their 
face  discriminate  between  the  white  and  negro 
races,  and  do  not  amount  to  a denial  of  the 
equal  protection  of  the  law  secured  by  the 
Fourteenth  Amendment  to  the  Constitution; 
and  it  has  not  been  shown  that  their  actual 
administration  was  evil,  but  only  that  evil  was 
possible  under  them.”  In  Giles  vs.  Harris 
(189  U.  8.  474)  the  court  declared:  “Relief 
from  a great  political  wrong,  if  done  as  al- 
leged, by  the  people  of  a state  or  by  the  state 
itself,  must  be  given  by  them,  or  by  the  legis- 
lative and  political  departments  of  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  LTnited  States.”  If  the  penalties 
for  disfranchisement  decreed  by  the  Fourteenth 
Amendment  were  enforced,  it  would  mean  the 
loss  of  at  least  three  representatives  in  Con- 
gress to  such  a state  as  Louisiana  or  Mississip- 
pi. But  Congress  is  not  likely  to  take  upon 
itself  the  enforcement  of  the  penalty,  for  the 
ratification  of  those  amendments  was  procured 
only  by  counting  the  vote  of  states  which  acted 
under  duress,  and  the  requirement  of  such  rati- 
fication as  a prerequisite  to  readmission  is 
considered  to  have  been  of  doubtful  constitu- 
tionality. Moreover,  serious  doubt  has  been 
growing  as  to  both  the  justice  and  the  ex- 
pediency of  the  suffrage  conditions  which  were 
forced  upon  the  southern  states.  The  fore- 
most leaders  among  the  negroes  themselves 
have  avowed  their  approval  of  both  property 
and  educational  tests,  if  fairly  administered, 
since  each  of  them  would  serve  as  a spur 
to  greater  efforts  on  the  part  of  the  negroes  in 
thrift  and  in  education  ( see  Negro  Suffrage). 

Proportion  of  Voters  to  Population.— As  a 
result  of  the  varying  suffrage  tests,  the  pro- 
portion of  the  population  who  are  entitled  to 
vote  differs  very  widely  in  the  several  states. 
Striking  evidence  of  this  may  be  seen  in  the 


statistics  of  the  congressional  election  of  No- 
vember 8,  1910,  the  year  of  a federal  census. 
On  that  date  the  number  of  votes  actually  cast 
for  Congressmen  bore  the  following  ratios  to 
the  population  of  these  representative  states: 
Utah,  1 to  4;  Oregon,  1 to  6;  Massachusetts, 
1 to  8;  South  Carolina,  1 to  50;  Mississippi, 
1 to  75.  Woman  suffrage  accounts  for  the 
large  proportion  of  voters  in  Utah;  in  Oregon 
intense  interest  in  local  issues  called  out  a 
heavy  vote.  In  South  Carolina  and  Mississippi 
the  very  small  vote  is  to  be  accounted  for  not 
only  by  the  restrictive  qualifications,  but  by  the 
fact  that  these  states  were  so  under  the  domi- 
nance of  one  political  party  as  to  make  voting 
by  its  opponents  hopeless  and  by  its  adherents 
of  little  interest,  especially  as  the  issue,  as 
between  candidates  for  the  several  offices,  had 
already  been  settled  at  the  primaries.  The  in- 
difference to  political  interests  and  responsibil- 
ities which  such  conditions  produce  is  a seri- 
ous menace  to  the  progress  of  the  South,  and 
to  that  of  the  country  as  well,  for  in  Congress 
there  remains  uncurtailed  the  representation 
of  states  where  one  party  has  been  virtually 
shut  out  of  all  influence,  and  where  the  other 
party  fails  to  call  forth  in  the  rank  and 
file  of  its  adherents  an  alert  or  intelligent  in- 
terest in  national  or  even  state  politics  ( see 
Voting,  Compulsory). 

Suffrage  in  the  Territories  and  Dependencies. 
— In  the  organized  territories  (see)  of  the 
United  States,  the  suffrage  has  been  regulated 
by  the  people  of  the  several  territories,  subject 
to  such  restrictions  as  Congress  chose  to  pre- 
scribe. Thus,  before  their  admission  as  states, 
Wyoming,  Utah,  and  Washington  all  gave 
themselves  woman  suffrage.  In  the  District  of 
Columbia  (see)  white  tax-payers  were  allowed 
to  vote  for  the  local  officers  from  1802  to  1855 ; 
the  tax-paying  qualification  was  then  removed; 
in  1867  the  suffrage  was  extended  to  adult 
male  citizens,  whether  white  or  black,  not  dis- 
qualified by  the  Fourteenth  Amendment.  But 
government  of  the  nation’s  capital  by  an  elec- 
torate largely  made  up  of  illiterate  negroes 
proved  so  fruitful  of  extravagance,  inefficiency 
and  dishonesty  that  by  the  act  of  1874  all 
rights  of  suffrage  were  taken  away  from  the 
residents  of  the  District,  the  executive  power 
in  its  government  being  then  placed  in  the 
hands  of  a board  of  commissioners  appointed 
by  the  President. 

The  war  with  Spain  forced  upon  the  United 
States  complicated  suffrage  problems  in  or- 
ganizing government  in  its  new  dependencies. 
Although  the  Republic  of  Hawaii  had  pre- 
scribed a substantial  property  qualification  for 
electors  of  members  of  the  senate  the  organic 
act  (1900)  swept  that  conservative  restriction 
aside,  and  gave  the  ballot  to  all  duly  registered 
citizens  of  the  United  States,  who  have  been 
resident  in  the  islands  not  less  than  one  year, 
who  have  attained  the  age  of  twenty-one  years, 
and  are  able  to  speak,  read  and  write  either  the 


446 


SUFFRAGE 


English  or  Hawaiian  language.  The  Japanese 
and  Chinese,  who  constitute  a large  majority 
of  the  population,  are  thus  excluded,  and  as 
the  Hawaiians  show  a tendency  to  decrease, 
political  control  is  becoming  more  centralized 
in  the  hands  of  persons  of  American  descent 
( see  Citizenship  in  United  States). 

In  Porto  Rico  (see)  at  first  the  electoral 
franchise  was  conferred  upon  male  citizens  of 
Porto  Rico,  of  the  age  of  twenty-one  years 
and  upwards,  who  should  have  been  resident  in 
the  island  for  one  year,  subject,  as  in  South 
Carolina,  to  an  option  between  an  educational 
and  a property  test.  But  the  law  of  1904 
swept  aside  the  property  qualification  and  pro- 
vided that  after  1906  no  person  should  be  al- 
lowed to  register  unless  he  could  read  and 
write,  although  those  who  should  be  voters  at 
that  date  were  to  continue  to  enjoy  that  priv- 
ilege. The  entire  control  of  elections  was 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  executive  council, 
appointed  by  the  President. 

In  the  Philippine  Islands  (see)  the  elective 
principle  was  first  introduced  in  municipal 
government.  In  1907  President  Roosevelt,  in 
accordance  with  the  act  of  1902,  directed  that 
a call  be  issued  for  a general  election  of  dele- 
gates to  a Philippine  assembly,  to  constitute 
the  lower  house  of  the  territorial  legislature, 
the  upper  house  being  the  appointive  Philip- 
pine commission.  The  right  of  representation 
was  not  accorded  to  the  Moros  or  other  non- 
Christian  tribes;  and  each  voter  was  required 
to  take  an  oath  of  allegiance,  be  the  owner  of 
property  or  a taxpayer,  or  be  able  to  read, 
write  and  speak  English  or  Spanish. 

The  enactment  of  these  laws  for  the  new 
dependencies  called  forth  a storm  of  protest 
from  theorists  and  from  partisan  politicians. 
Democrats  and  doctrinaires  united  in  denounc- 
ing the  Republican  administration  for  forcing 
upon  the  insular  possessions  a rule  which  vio- 
lated the  principle  of  government  by  consent 
of  the  governed  ( see  Imperialism).  The  Re- 
publicans who  were  responsible  for  these  mea- 
sures insisted  that  they  had  been  framed  with 
benevolent  consideration  for  the  best  interests 
of  the  backward  peoples  of  the  islands,  and 
that  criticism  of  such  restrictive  suffrage  quali- 
fications came  with  peculiarly  ill  grace  from 
Democrats  who  in  the  southern  states  had  in 
these  very  years  sanctioned  practices  and  con- 
stitutional devices  which  had  deprived  of  the 
ballot  hundreds  of  thousands  of  United  States 
citizens  ( see  Dependencies  of  the  United 
States)  . 

Basis  of  Suffrage. — Such  mutual  charges  of 
inconsistency  force  the  facing  of  the  question, 
what  is  the  basis  of  the  suffrage.  In  the  pro- 
gress of  civilization,  the  counting  of  heads  has 
displaced  the  breaking  of  heads  as  a mode  of 
determining  in  whose  control  government  shall 
be  placed,  and  at  a given  time,  each  commun- 
ity’s answer  to  the  question  whose  heads  shall 
be  counted  is  its  determination  as  to  the  basis 


of  the  suffrage.  That  the  suffrage  cannot  he 
a natural  right  (see)  is  obvious  from  the  fact 
that  no  community  can  ever  enfranchise  all  its 
citizens.  There  is  no  political  unit  in  which 
at  least  two-fifths  of  its  citizens  are  not  de- 
nied a right  to  a voice  in  determining  matters 
of  its  government  for  the  reason  that  in  the 
eye  of  the  law  they  are  infants.  Their  ex- 
clusion is  on  the  ground  that  their  participa- 
tion in  government  would  be  for  the  disad- 
vantage of  the  state.  And  precisely  that  test 
is  to  be  applied  in  the  case  of  other  excluded 
classes.  The  pauper,  as  a dependent,  is  not 
allowed  a vote  in  determining  the  government 
upon  which  he  is  a burden,  and  to  which  he 
can  contribute  nothing;  the  criminal,  by  his 
own  anti-social  acts,  has  given  proof  of  his 
unfitness  for  the  exercise  of  voting  privileges. 
These  plainly  recognized  facts  make  it  evident 
that  the  suffrage  is  a privilege,  the  extension 
of  which  to  any  excluded  class  is  a question 
of  political  expediency, — a question  of  the  pro- 
bable effects  of  the  proposed  change  for  the 
good  or  ill  of  the  state,  under  given  condi- 
tions. The  norms  which  may  properly  be 
applied  in  one  community  or  generation  may 
be  utterly  inappropriate  under  changed  condi- 
tions. In  the  twentieth  century  a church-mem- 
bership test  as  a qualification  for  the  suffrage 
would  be  preposterous;  yet,  if  the  early  history 
of  colonial  development  in  Massachusetts  Bay 
(see)  and  in  the  more  liberal-minded  Rhode 
Island  (see)  be  compared,  basis  may  be 
found  for  the  belief  that  the  Puritans  of  the 
former  colony  showed  quite  as  much  political 
sagacity  as  religious  bigotry  in  their  derided 
law  of  1631. 

There  is,  of  course,  the  ever-present  danger 
that  the  group  of  persons  in  any  community  to 
which  for  the  time  being  the  suffrage  is  con- 
fined will  look  upon  their  own  interests  as 
coincident  with  those  of  the  state,  and  will 
exercies  the  suffrage  in  a selfish  class  spirit. 
History  affords  abundant  illustrations  of  oli- 
garchies, which  came  to  disaster  for  this  very 
reason.  As  intelligence  becomes  more  widely 
diffused,  the  presumption  is  in  favor  of  a 
broadening  suffrage.  Stability  is  given  to  the 
political  structure  by  extending  its  base;  the 
narrowness  of  class  rule  is  prevented;  the 
needs  and  aspirations  of  the  many  secure  great- 
er recognition;  and  men  and  measures  are 
given  the  more  loyal  obedience,  where  it  is  felt 
that  their  authority  rests  upon  the  vote  of 
the  majority.  Nevertheless,  to  any  excluded 
group’s  demand  for  the  ballot,  sound  logic 
must  ever  propound  two  questions — in  what 
ways  and  to  what  extent  does  the  present  ex- 
clusion injure  this  group  of  citizens;  and  in 
what  ways  and  to  what  extent  would  their 
enfranchisement  inure  to  the  advantage  of  the 
state.  In  the  opinion  of  most  careful  stud- 
ents of  existing  conditions,  the  restrictions 
upon  the  suffrage  in  the  insular  dependencies 
of  the  United  States  are  no  more  severe  than 


447 


SUFFRAGE 


is  necessitated  by  the  illiteracy  and  utter  in- 
experience in  self-government  of  the  great 
mass  of  the  people.  The  tolerance  which  has 
been  shown  for  the  limitations  imposed  upon 
the  suffrage  by  recent  constitutional  amend- 
ments in  the  southern  states  is  due  in  con- 
siderable measure  to  a growing  doubt  in  the 
minds  of  thoughtful  men,  whether  the  thrust- 
ing of  the  ballot  into  the  hands  of  ignorant 
negroes  at  the  end  of  the  war  was  not  a wrong 
to  the  freedmen  themselves,  and  an  unjustified 
cause  of  dissension  to  the  states  upon  which  it 
was  imposed.  The  tendency  in  the  country  at 
large  seems  now  to  be  to  recognize  that  the 
public  interest  requires  the  drawing  more 
closely  the  restrictions  upon  the  suffrage  by 
giving  the  ballot  only  to  those  who  are  citizens 
of  the  United  States,  and  who  have  enough 
of  the  rudiments  of  education  to  enable  them 
to  look  out  for  their  own  interests.  Yet  there 
is  a prospect  that  the  effect  of  such  restric- 
tions in  the  future  will  be  more  than  offset  by 
a widening  of  the  electorate.  The  “new  wo- 
man,” who  has  established  her  place  in  educa- 
tion, in  industry  and  in  the  professions,  is 
making  progress  in  convincing  the  present 
holders  of  the  ballot  that  her  admission  to  the 
suffrage  will  work  for  the  advantage  of  the 
state. 

Differing  Electorate. — In  nearly  all  of  the 
states  the  suffrage  requirements  are  uniform 
for  electors  of  every  officer  to  be  voted  for  in 
that  state.  The  one  great  exception  is  allowing 
women  to  vote  in  the  election  of  the  boards  or 
committees  which  control  the  schools.  In 
Rhode  Island  there  still  survives  a law  that  no 
person  may  vote  for  the  election  of  any  mem- 
ber of  a city  council,  or  upon  any  measure 
of  municipal  finance,  unless  he  shall  have  paid, 
the  previous  year,  a tax  upon  his  property 
therein  valued  at  least  at  $134.  A tax  on  so 
trifling  a valuation  affords  no  guarantee  of  the 
financial  responsibility  of  the  voters,  for — like 
the  poll  tax  (see)  in  states  where  its  payment 
is  required  as  a qualification  for  the  suffrage — 
the  law  is  easily  evaded,  or  the  payment  of  the 
tax  is  taken  care  of  by  political  friends  of  the 
indigent  voter.  In  England,  and  to  a still 
greater  extent  in  Germany,  the  municipal  as 
contrasted  with  the  parliamentary  suffrage  is 
so  restricted  as  to  exclude  entirely  or  render 
negligible  in  effect  the  vote  of  great  classes  in 
the  city’s  population.  In  the  United  States, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  vote  of  the  slum-dweller, 
the  corner  loafer,  the  household  servant  weighs 
as  much  as  that  of  the  city’s  heaviest  tax-payer 
or  most  distinguished  citizen.  American  de- 
mocracy is  not  disposed  to  tolerate  the  rein- 
troduction of  property  qualifications.  This 
contrast  in  the  political  influence,  through  the 
ballot,  of  the  propertied  class  in  England  and 
Germany  as  compared  with  America  must  con- 
stantly be  borne  in  mind  in  any  critical  study 
of  the  problem  of  municipal  government  in  the 
several  countries. 


Scope  of  the  Suffrage. — Aside  from  the  ques- 
tion, who  may  vote  in  a given  community, 
there  remains  the  inquiry,  what  is  the  scope  of 
power,  the  range  of  decision  controlled  by  the 
voter.  Some  of  the  earliest  American  state 
constitutions  gave  the  election  of.  most  im- 
portant officers,  such  as  governors  and  judges, 
not  to  the  voters  but  to  the  representative 
legislature,  just  as  the  Federal  Constitution 
made  that  disposition  of  the  election  of  Sen- 
ators (Art.  I,  Sec.  iii,  U 1).  The  democratiz- 
ing movement,  which  came  at  the  end  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  soon  transferred  most  of 
these  elections  to  the  direct  vote  of  the  people; 
the  legislature’s  election  of  judges  in  Rhode 
Island  is  a discredited  survival  of  the  older 
system.  In  later  years  distrust  of  legislatures 
became  widespread,  and  the  idea  became  pre- 
valent that  safe  and  responsible  government 
was  best  to  be  secured  by  making  as  large  a 
proportion  as  possible  of  the  public’s  servants 
elective,  for  short  terms  of  office.  In  the  last 
decade  of  the  nineteenth  century  growing  leg- 
islative abuses  led  to  a vigorous  agitation  for 
direct  legislation,  and  to  the  gradual  adoption 
of  the  initiative  and  referendum.  As  a result 
the  task  devolved  upon  the  voter  has  been 
greatly  extended  and  complicated.  On  the 
ballot,  November  5,  1912,  the  Oregon  voter  was 
expected  to  express  his  choice  between  177 
candidates  for  the  filling  of  44  offices,  and  then 
to  vote  yes  or  no  upon  37  projects  of  direct 
legislation,  including  14  constitutional  amend- 
ments. Against  such  a strain  upon  the  suf- 
frage the  reaction  is  already  making  itself 
felt.  The  multiplication  of  elective  offices  with 
the  purpose  of  securing  responsible  government 
has  defeated  its  own  object;  for  the  voter,  un- 
able to  discriminate  among  so  many  men  whom 
he  does  not  know,  has  been  forced  to  vote 
blindly  by  party  label.  In  city  government  it 
first  came  to  be  appreciated  that  better  results 
might  be  secured  by  focussing  the  voters’s 
attention  upon  fewer  men,  and  making  those 
few  responsible  for  minor  officials  to  be  ap- 
pointed by  them.  The  same  logic  holds  as  to 
the  initiative  (see)  and  referendum  (see)  : 
the  best  results  are  not  to  be  expected  if  the 
voter’s  attention  is  distracted  by  too  many 
diverse  projects.  Simplification  of  the  voter’s 
task  has  been  accomplished  in  some  degree  by 
lengthening  the  terms  of  elective  office,  and  by 
assigning  state  and  local  elections  to  different 
days.  The  present  tendency  is  toward  more 
drastic  remedies.  Thus,  in  Oregon  in  1910 
strong  support  was  given  a proposal  to  reduce 
the  number  of  offices  on  which  the  elector  would 
vote  in  a state  general  election  from  the  pres- 
ent number  (22  to  39)  to  from  five  to  eight, 
and  to  set  a low  maximum  to  the  number  of 
direct  legislation  projects  which  may  appear 
upon  the  same  ballot.  For  experience  is  mak- 
ing it  increasingly  clear  that  the  “people’s 
rule”  movement  and  the  “short  ballot”  move- 
ment must  be  united. 


448 


SUFFRAGE  CONDITIONS  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 


SUFFRAGE 


> w 

a 

? Qj 


ag 

<V  Qj 

o o> 
E=  § 


3 r~l  f->  : 
a 2«j,i 
“ &o  < 
o > 

^ O 0) 

E §« 

£■§  g 

_!§■ 
S-e  g 
s go 

a £ „ 

^ <v  c3 ; 
^ be  o ; 
c3<a  s 


^0^-0 
r-o  beo> 
a afl  cq 
3 IS  ^ 


P .. 

O°~0 

o . o a 
> fcT-r,  o 


§=e 

cc  O 

a _< 
0>  o 

d a g 

wo-? 

B*  r/) 


g«o- 

O Cvj 
"■*-*  (-4 

g°d 

£ o 


-o 

a a-*-*  ° 1 
•3  3.  ! 

_ g 0)  < 
o.S-2.2, 

«W  rq  — >>  < 

•^'T  >>0,^ 


73  o 
0^3 
O > 
hn  ^ 


'3  Z*  S2( 


? 73  , c 

9 "<*>  ^ 

H 0»<M  .. 

C3^  ", 

J-  73  W, 


^ & 


$a2“ 
o 2 2 ■ a 

► a§t=" 

J^o 


1/2  73 


. £ 
o 


2 « 
S 73  f" 

O a : 

> 9^ 
73 

^ a>„ 

r-HH  ' 

75  . : 

^CO  ; 

o - 


a ^ 

^<4-^  rq 

o a o 

Sg£! 

"a-? 

'Ocj^o 
a be£  be 

cj^'O 

o 


0' 

£ O a 

* 73  3 

73  'O  £ 
0 a o o 


aa 


frto  a)  • -•> 

a^§2 
rta^.  ° 
o 

W33 

£ £ ao 
o „ 


a ** 

Q ^ . 

a a^n 

a t-jo 
►»  2, 
a ^ 

P 73  05 
O o 

i-i  Jj  a 


•aa>cl£_ 

, ao 


CO 


2 o 

. 

°*s'£* 
'O  ^ 

^ 75 

P . WCQ 

a , a>  o> 

^ 7i 


S S4”  8 

a a a) 

■*■*  73  7J 

o 73 
*§a 
£o-° 

'-'  b*  q-J  ”2 

o>  o.a 
a . o 
o ^ w a> 

2 a o a 
ago  73 

>?£g°M 

a 9 c to  a 

o *■*»  1-7, 

Sfl3a 

ao  aa  d 


P x 


rQ'-W  ;73 

a ° be  o 
cs  a w>, 

o a 
Sr:  a ^ 
u x 


, >>,3 


>i  o 
o ^ 

1°* 

u 

— • 0) 


73 


m ^ a._ 

O O '-i ' 

aj  c 3 0 be 


’*m  ca  os 
o <v 

bo^ 
. be 
n a 


* £02 
<i-g  .■§ 

c3 


^ fl^rQ 


M D 

rt  Sg 

.2  a a 


a " 


p.. 

_.a3 

'O  7J  . 
C3-JT  O 

SJ9 

H a 


be  o 
a^q 
W 


u-g 

•o* 

c3  c 

H tfi  c 


o be  o 


.W  a 


o o 

-O 


be  a 
o 


C3  73  72  O' 
. 0>  C3  -«-> 

>>  “ b 3 “ a 
a a a 4->  o ^ 

a O a o3  73  c3 
€ 

T3  . O .P_ 

2 a . a S a 

(S-g-gggs 

uso  S 


si 


§l| 


'tj  73  o 

a as 

O ^ 
^ p7 

^j^ra 


o o <o 
be  ° 73 


j -5g 


>»  o a 

*+-*  J0  0 

r-l  ott; 

(M  > 0 

o a 

a O 72  73 
c3  N a o 

^5  3 3 

O 03^0 


o a ( 
bo.a  ■ 


<D  • - 

^P  : 


iigJ 

C3  N , 


! O 'C  c 

be  o c 

, ^•S'c 


o be 


O a 
w 01 
>> 


sw 

2 ^5 


aJ  a 

QJ 
03  N 

as 


b'.P 


o a 


^5.P 

u 


o a 

•— « o- 

03  N 


<1 

449 


Sections  preceded  by  asterisks  present  tests  which  are  options  one  for  another.  The  would-be  voter  is  required  to  qualify  under  only  one  of  them. 


SUFFRAGE  CONDITIONS  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES — Continued 


SUFFRAGE 


a 

c fl 

°a 


o © 


e 

o 


5 fl  Ca 


O Bj-W  _ 

c "5  = 
t-  a 

„ a .-.2 

© > © £ A 

a = » 

M=s 


a 

o — 

C=  S 


£ V.  <r.  - 
o“£c 
> o 

«W  — ■ rj 
Cl  „ 5 

2 S G 
fl  £ c 

© fl«w 
gc-K 

& >.a 
^ a o 

flfl> 


7"  --  _, 

^ fl 
a fl  ^ K- 
— '1  o'! 


w 

&g 

2 a 


© ^ a a 

£ fl-~-£ 

p:  fl  £ 

’h  ai 

.2  O rQ 

03  ^ 

fl  'O 

K >co 


be  s 

*t— i 


' © 


i§< 

u„ 


o © 


© © 

o 

H-I'M 

_ >»  O h 


rj  S3  £ l 

U © 2 a;  — 


73 

2 ^ 

o a,  .*_> 

S'Ow  © ’ 
53  S3  fl  2 fl 

a O f3  O fl  , 
W 03  W 2 ' 

rH  'I'p  rt  ^ 

•3  a)  o 
,<J  P-CL|  _ 

I*.  Kd*.  g 

IA2  O M O r 

;M  a am  g 


.©  S3 
S3 

fl.  © 
3<w  ti  O 
© be 
u rr)  A 

3 “ «M 

3 A ^ © 

© © 

3 c3  2 ^ 

3 be  © ^ 

3 *u  © 

■*  A ci  . ; 

«sSg 

3 fl  5 © A 

3 fl  fl 


H 


03  • © J 13  ' M 

© © ti  <q  ,3  a o 


M 


.2  o 


A.fl  g 

V,  2 
© © 
b* 

■+->  a 

a & o 

13 


0^3 

a&r 


•-■ 

fHa-gPffl 

^,00 


Qj'O  « 
fl  fl ; 
££ 
O .1 


:0« 


> fl,°o  ^ © ^ fl 

O^r— I O C-.  © fl 


S 'fl  4 


rfl  © 

o 

u 

a : + 
>.  -*-*  : 
+?4i”i 

f-i  S-4  § e 
© (fl  © 

a o- 


fl  S? 

fl  .2 


’ 03 


© f 


■Sflos 
" © 2 


o ' © 


H 


SaS 

fl 

* i «m  ; 


© 


'S  be  fl  S 

fl  a _ 

© ^ flrrt 

« g.2fl 

. 

J 5>,-m  r 
^ fl-r;  fl 
citcO 


flp 

© 

>» 


iJ  fl 
*fl  © 
fl  N 


O A 


©3  © 
©fl 

rfl  © 
fl  CSJ 

SS 

a 


S!=^§ 

► 4 5 

•tM  ■© 

, ©— < © . 
Tfi  rp  « 

^ a'k!  2 
' a ^ ^ .2 
fl.  © ► 
a 2 fl  b 2 

S3S&5 

OflrH.2 


©'2 
r— ' © 

fl  N 


► fl 


m 


02©  2 
© fl 
.'O  fl 


«M^3©Q 

© 

B2g 

|g|«S 

— g ^ 


450 


* Sections  preceded  by  asterisks  present  tests  which  are  options  one  for  another.  The  would-be  voter  is  required  to  qualify  under  only  one  of  them. 


SUFFRAGE  CONDITIONS  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES — Continued 


SUFFRAGE 


451 


* Sections  preceded  by  asterisks  present  tests  which  are  options  one  for  another.  The  would-be  voter  is  required  to  qualify  under  only  one  of  them. 


SUFFRAGE  CONDITIONS  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES — Continued 


SUFFRAGE 


> a 
a >> 

ce- 

o 

S-  o 
° o a 

^■S| 

m a 


j oj  q^Tj 
' « CTo  . 

Sg's+'g 

! C3  C3_,  05 

S-5  'o  >» 

5 3 2 a 

3 o>  C.*£  M 
- S 5 C « 

l O 0-2 

PI“o 

.a  >-<  a 
i'okc^ 


o o 03 

•r 

+2  a+- 

£ a a 
pt~ 
°’e 

d-C  05 

O k O' 
05  ^ 05 
05 

a a 

05 

>-1  o-£ 
p:  o 


2c~° 

T C ci 
£.C 

O bfl 

^ » o.s 
3*  *3 

°£a 
. fl  o f 
05  o > r* 
o ;-  2 

|2 &a 

■3  73 

_,  05  £ 2 

2 > ot;  2 

C3  a C eo 


SB 

© 

> 

+-> 

►*3 

C 5- 

£g 

a'0 

05 

It 

£.a  5 


H 

>> 


a 

o 

£ 


°33  rt 

,0.2  o 
©aa 

P ^ <15 
3fl  t> 

a v.  o 
2 a +J 

B 2 

^s'"1  03 


_-,o 

'U  o> 
© o 


C ^ 

a;  5 

a 05  .5 

33  > 

05  k -- 

© a o 

M v. 
a o 2 


>a  05 

a a 
a.  o 


fH  05 


°o“o° 


a £ cv~  5 

05  a 

-m  > as 

> 2 ° o 
.2  'O 
1-,+j-^  q»  a; 

£ 0 2 [5  > a; 
£ £ a fcc 
05  a 05  »a  a 


a p ~ 

«m  a u 
o b£  a 
a © 

-M  (>-. 

a 

S’O  a.  c 

2fe£c 

t 

CU  S t-  c 


-4_j<W  0-03  eV 
a h ® o a o 

32  a 7:  a-*-» 

HS  c a 

rBfl< 


2 05^"^ 
•2-=-~  <b„ 


a£1 

a 03 
^‘fcJD 
beg 
a ^ 

St 

5>& 


) a 


O’ca?' 

. a a Z 

•soS 

,|»s5 

oS?;g 

'CJ'Q  .2 

a a+- 
^ * 


05  ' 


« 05 


J o -: 


w _ 

> g 

bJD  Ci 


O :- 


*G  05 

a 2 


a 

| 

&2 

1 

S-I 

Oi 

60  d. 

1 

10  d. 

J 

6 1110s. 

i 

0 

to> 

! 

60  d. 

30  d. 

40  d. 

30  d. 

1 be**-*  a 

a ° i- 

3 S 2 n 
— * 05  a j 
o o J 

. 05  05  P 


2 05 

. o 05  a 

u a o 
«0,g 

ro^° 

“ . 05 

SPg-2  £ 

&'  2 sg 


bfl . 


'o  • - a 
o a a 


05Ct!  J 


'C  bJDfl 

05  a 
o — 

a >>Oi 

I'll 

9 o a 


a o +;  fe 

-,'3  S 

■•  ^ 9-oc3=  ® 

a . , , a ^ .Pi  .5  c^'w  .2 
O'^’n*'  a o 4— » 

3 05  05  t>  O'-  05 

J'S'Or,  ^2.2  2 03  i5  2 

^•nOa'p^a^  ej 
OSsa^fl^a^trq 


o a 


^72 

a 

05 

>»P 


o a 

-— ■ 05 

a n 


b£  c 
a 

O^’c 


<M 

05  a ’ 


-05 

= .S?g  O 

3 .2  JL«M 


gw 

^ . 

05  O 

o a 

— o 
a n 

a 


bi°”£;.s 

«i_i  ■ zi  'o 

g c 

05 

aPt5 


a 

co 


(M 


o 2 

H O - n 


05 


ei  *-  ’h. 

a a 

05  05  . O 

a n c w _ 7! 
wh •*-;  o hat 


£x 
a . 

C/K 


2 S 

cs  s 


2« 
a . 

&p 


o a 

5?K 


452 


SUFFRAGE  CONDITIONS  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES — Continued 


SUFFRAGE 


CC  73 

£3  g g 

o U 0,0 


G 0 .3 

P.  O - 


c3  5 O 

M-gS's 

•SaS| 

O «M  ^ 

o o 


ga^ 

G O G _ 

o+j  fl  ® 
cc  o 

^ G Or* 

- rl 


ha 

G G 
'HuSfl 
O 3 V.  - 
O X Ga 
2o« 
o— • o P 
■/.  o o1 

o o H II 

P4  o — 

5z^ 


i Ga  cc  .2  G 


G 


£?W02-»- 

^ ^ G p i 

w •*|h  " B < 

g 3 o -3  r 

o.S 

>>3  O) 

G.2”G  _ 

swaU 

G o 3 P a 

g^ 


*>.22.2 

G 'O 

g cc^? 

3=  53  9 


Ogt 


cr».£ 

© G P T3 


71  33  2a  O £ Gw 


§ 2 


a 

a> 

1 S3 

K >sO  C 

£ a S .< 

a-s£s 


:«aa 

3 o ° a 

8 “ m 9 

2 G CO 

3 >>  O 3 
G TU  ro 

} n o 3 
. . 0 o 


O G 


ot:  g 
CO  P G 
.S  Mt-s 
U JO 

3 

.a  g w 
gSh 
“§§=- 
|Mo'o[ 
I’S  ^ S f 

© G 


P G 

i— 1 1 Cj  O 

C/2  • •J-> 


fcflg  0 U O 02^ 
P°  *>***>  * 

^ O S C 

+->  G O 


Or:  rr>  © -P 

So  .^G-^ 
o > P 73 

Cl.  G G _ © 

ah  p g’3 
■SffoT53^ 
aGSS«J 

_ «Q 

03  T3  -mJZI 

g >,2  p G 

£ g Ga 

* G 'P  M 
• O oT  p _ 
ChG3  cd  G G 
"T  Goo  o O 

5 .m  H K 


O © © >. 

,2  P'S  0 

; ?C  “g 

■ p 

O © G 
G G3 


Sg|o 

fc£  © ^ G 


: © 2. 

1 G.P1 

G 

.£  o 

G ’-M 

rp  g 

G g 

|<WG  2 

.22  ^ g 


-M  cOjdt4 
G ^ o G G 

G © J u 

P G O P 
g ^-2,2.22 
PjD'G 
G 


>>  .„§ 


Og'S^g 

2^  °5  x 

»P  ■*_‘  ,F^  G >2 

o 0 ;>4-<  r; 

w «}  g ^ 

t»Js2  a &.S 
S 22>  = 
S«sp; 

^ vf  W <D  2 
•hG  G - 


O *,  P G 

2 og:  x 

Ga  > ^ ^ 


G Gcc  to  D 

4->  to  3 ^ 

oj  f-<  G 

G O W O O 


X O 


_ m 
— G 

O o 
Ga'G 


G G • 


ri  • ° 


j3^rO'T3 
fcf)  O G G 
•3r  > +-’  J-1 


G 3-^S  G3G 
O®  P G G 


a"“S; 


IS  °-a 

|&aw 
z c=r 

O to  G 


°5.5a 

o 2— - 
G^  G P O Ui 
G G ° G 

§2o2=m 


fl 
73  O 
flU 


®S| 

+-*  t/3 
q Gfl 

W _ P 

•-H  o o 

tu-^-P 

G -*-* 


g 

o 

e-h 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

l 

l 

1 

©2 

90  d. 

02 

cc 

W 

6> 

§ 

a 

I 

a 

3 

<5 

ID 

T* 

CD 

* 

CD 

’Pm 
p . 

°r-i 


cJP 
— o 

G CS3 


P . 

G *— j 

oj  O 
^ G 

G5  G 
G N 

£5 

a 


w . >s 

p G T3  G 

^g'-g 

.73  G 
G P O 
G N^p 

32  g« 

UsS 


p . 

cq  O 

G 

«—  G 
G N 
t-H  "3 


G >■  P G ? G 
bfi-r'.P  G ^ O 
cj 

,.  . ri  to  o 

oT»9^g« 

° 

2 .m<9 
gp  rn  oT.2 
>>  9^3  '-v 


s w | 


o ! 

g .-p  *; 

9ncE°- 


G — G 
G N?  ^ 


OGrQ^i 

N “ O G 
"~'  G ^ q; 
— "O  G 


P 

P 

PS. 

o ° 

O G 


453 


* Sections  preceded  by  asterisks  present  tests  which  are  options  one  for  another.  The  would-be  voter  is  required  to  qualify  under  only  one  of  them. 


SUFFRAGE  CONDITIONS  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES — Continued 


SUFFRAGE 


O 

0°fl 

ri 

Oj  P 

-m  c3  O 

oca 

P 


<d  „ 


C«M 


a ‘4 


Sg|| 

>a§'' 

poo 


w ct-‘  w +-> 
P O oE 


«S-3"S 
a"  c SB 

S6IW«« 
'“.S  O oA 

S 


as  hr -2 


a 
a a 
o a 


t*  m 

a 

a ** 


o o 


!,  zo  © ^ © *■ 

-<©,a  g p 1 

£3*2 


o 


cc  73 


a . o p 

o p ,rH  . 
g * -r  P 
o^-p'o  o 
a p o P 

o O cc  P 

^ >i-<  cl 

° J5  tao 
• ^ fl'3 

P3T3  ^ 

1.2  £.2 


•r  t;  w j_j  ^ 

- >Jo.L 

S t?S“§ 

s§*~*8 

a.*1  5 

33  M „ 
a!  3 2 

PpO'o 
2 O P O C«HM 
p o o c>E 
E x 'O  jO  ^ w 


■•=>  P m2 

oSo"0 

aj 


. ,,  TO 

■J  W M c 

to  .9  =3  t 


M 

r— H O 

o p 

:«2.Sa« 

't5*S° 

M P C3  _ _ 
o p p^r 

53  Oj  g M P 

>>p  Ut  o o 
•£>  .Hpaco 


o+j  3.S  cx) 

JO  K >.  P 

f«iSod„ 

d >.2 

agoP-g 
djq  a .3  “ 

^ 4^  P f | i 

a gg:* 

°g’a|'SS 

h^SeSS 

OC-mJq 


£C 

n3«M 
P o 
p 

pd  p p 
«-2.2 

O-^  4J 

K 9 3 


<j  >>9 

^ P O 


73  p c3 
P ^ 

(S  ^ M 


«w 

O P^1 

M S ri 


2 w o 

*1S, 
— —J  p 

o 


5 J-6  'Z'BIV* 

«o.2eoa* 
a,  "2  £V=o~ 


- £S 

’’ad. 
p a 


■*-*C3  4__ 

' co’-p 

^4-J  £rt  O 

P P~~ 
P o ^ 

S'"  d o> 
^d-oS 
o s 

*'8ftg 

JSoo 

C Q TO  P .Q 


O p-.v: 


a-M  a. 
?e§2c 

p a^ 


i«  K ; 

O IC  0) 
E!U> 


ig£«* 

3 t;  a ^ m 
)S  c3K 

j Vj  d c 


55  S— ~ 


sri 

+->  p S3 

*?jfl 

W 4_T 

S“  --a 

. • d 2 


>>pg 


t °,2 

133’° 

=5  m 


iiSSg 


S; 


i fli  *3  . 

I NO.St3 

I Tl  'Ti  y 


U O 


<W  P«M 


Sriog 

,_!  «W 

(N  O (D  ^ p 


c«  N 5 
y_H  O o O 
«rP  O+j 
5J  & a;5 


dpi 


aTO  ‘ 
•P  cu 

Ci  N4 


o 

454 


* Sections  preceded  by  asterisks  present  tests  which  are  options  one  for  another.  The  would-be  voter  is  required  to  qualify  under  only  one  of  them. 


SUFFRAGE  CONDITIONS  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES — Continued 


SUFFRAGE 


. 2 c. 

2 3 

ago, 


t? 

cd  «m 


oS 
P*  o 


° cd 
bc-ft 

O.S  ° 

>-.  =5  ® 


3 

© co  „ 
«S§f 

C3  rS 

d © w 
d a. 


kl  O . 


oft  a 


!S3 

CSrQ 


: a fl 

: O S 


o 


3 a d 

, -'o  r 


co  k • 

© r^Ul  © 

* o 

C3-r  do 
— <0 


SB'' 


■ .©  CO 

^»rt  cd  d 
■J  oj  © 

- 7i  as  -ft  o 
sSP,  °-£o 


^ O A 
, CO  rrt  CJ-H 

i cs  5 
3 3 O 

^ *.a 


„ 0)  c 


d o co  -*-*  *3  ®*-ft 

© cd 

co  © S' 

m aft  5 2-d  S'® 

ai  © . /-;  ft  gj 

' O-  co 

rO  CO 

3 3 % 

dMog 
- d ~* 


cJa 

a co  'V  a 
© cd^ 
go  co  © 

Cd  CO  — CO  <M 
^3^4,0 

m _ ^ s-* 
cd 


*P  © . 

+j  x d % d 
cd  .£  ® © 


w.; 


; ><  2 mk  2 3 jj  - o 
— — — ” © • ~ 
O'Q  d 


^ ^ n 2 

0S5? 2 . 

O'*"1  d »CQ 

M 
O cd 


: bX)2 
* cd  g 


•S  &%§■§£ 

^§^g«2 

41  c u 2 
^ .©  d ^ 

” «4— ( .”  >> 

"So  cd 

c-  'SgB 


ft  ° d 
£ © 

© © n,  o. 

'O  Sa°  O ^ 
33gnS 

os  g § 

'd  C0  CO 

_gt- 

J££mki.u„ 

-*-*OOOQO 


c,  ^ V 

2 © 

>5  2 

cd  o 
P-i*M  © 


kd 

s £ 


M 

cd  u 
+*  o 

,£?  >> 
d.1' 


£.2ia 

c &,rH 

SI«1 

/.SS 

cd  o ko 
-ft  P ft 


o'gdMS 
C-o  O^'O 
O ^ a* 

£||d| 

hCO’Q 


jcJS; 

iw[ 


, C0'U'M  -‘  ^ 

1 r-  3 O ^ 


^ rf  ^ P 


S 2 


MgR  a 


; >.  d 
• c O 
cdCJ 


bfi-d  >»+; 
1 g £fl  co 
-3«g 

s“g  . 

a>  o *-*0 

« ??Pr/ 


•d'O 
d cd 
cd  a> 

'S  fl 

d o 
cd  .d 

CO  ^ 


fl 

1 

£ 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

! 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

| 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

l 

| 

j 

W 

GO 

GO 

; 

fl 

>i 

O 

1 

a 

2 

1-1 

CD 

CD 

| 

/dd'O 

hr.O)  Cd  <U 

3 

cd 

1-J  "f-t  o 

o • »•  o a> 

. «+-(  rrt 

co  02  a*  w 
f-  O 
cd  • in  • 

SP«| 

SoS  ^ 

^d50  5 +*> 

£ S .2  a 

cd  N '--*-> 

H,h  o fj 

a;#w 
CJ  ^'o!d 


O W 


r-J  d 

JO  ^ OJ 

cd  co 
Vi  -* 

1-i  o o « 

<x  dd  • 

a:ss-2M 
d.  0)  • 

Cd  n d 

Gd.2.B 


aJ  d 
-d  a> 
cd  csj 


r«o 

aiS^ 

■£v  s 

KH  d*  O 

hJ  -ft-” 
a*  -m 
. — ■ o 

«m  a*  & <x> 
O Mg  — 

«g® 

dcM  o o 
00  -*— * 

.2  d 
42  w © ^ 

S 3 *-m  .2 

o cd  J-* 
>>  k Cu 


cd  . 

iH  '4~‘ 
CO  O 

aT  d 
*cd  #n 
^.-ft 


p ft 

O cd 
OiU 


455 


Sections  preceded  by  asterisks  present  tests  which  are  options  one  for  another.  The  would-be  voter  is  required  to  qualify  under  only  one  of  them. 


SUFFRAGE  CONDITIONS  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES — Continued 


SUFFRAGE 


<V 

X 

S3  ^ 
°8 
_P  CO 

o 

^ CO 


•£  a 

OiM 


g'gtfgi 

o ° 
w r c3  P th 
^r/2  -M'w 

c- 

a'™ 

* « 01 


a 


H OJ  0> 

-<  "G 


r-%-  0 

o =2i 

G<  *w 

-£  t S - 

m 2.-3 

«M  P 

o - a 
o, 


+J  G 
, Z W O ££ 
1*0  on  “ 
^ bo 

§3 

oc  „ ■ 

S ajar's0 

£ at!  o 


_<«  a a ° <n  0 
;.gogca  -Sr1 
v r a 

a* 

D if 

3 u * 

■>  Qh^=M  CO 


"co  a 


r co 
£ O' 


0 c 

<k  2 

C G 


CO  Q; 


(2  «-2 


a +J 

li-p  cj 

-CQ^J 

H _ . tC0 

■a 

. o 

PS 

•J* 

o *. 

>CQ 


f a 


£.2  a^- 

P 03 
G*  <3 

O’®  CO-P 
ph  i Qj  CO 

a rj  m a 
°c“+jS 

c.  c C3  OJ 
a> 

.a  i >>  vr  a 

v:  a be  a> 
k a ai 
a-  ^ a-r^ 
g a»2  a 
£•2  t>  bo P 

. p,  U U rt 

fc.be,  ' 


-•  o 


0 cr.  M 

r#\  <1  1*0 


; o'3 

§ 9 


i >> 

■2  f 

“ro  a 
« c£ 

OJ^ 

*.« 

**S  C3 


- G 9 


iS’S 

w O'  OJ 


•?  c G 
bo+->  oj 

a .a 

'O"  £ 
□ 


3 H M* 
^ O 0) 
S "Mi 
cr  m 
rH  § S 3 

•IS  £ to 

c'ti'o 

= S g s 


O-M  O ^ ? 
crs  a co  a Cu 
iH  4-J  CO  fl 
viv  G 
_4  co  be  co 

•S  03  03 

G c3  <U 
TO  CO  Q_)  r*j 
•T  c.  _ 
o xaj  ® 

.5  a tirti 

w 25“  K.S 

* IS.SB-2 

a _,  _ o 

C5fe  £ ^ S ?; 

C3  O -C3  C- 


cagng 


p to  ° 3^ 
5 ai;  cr 

cS'o^ 

.a  -m^co 

a o o'o'o 
o o ° a 

~ o c o 


&P 
cj.^  a 


^'O  >> 


^*2  P 
§dcS 


03  ° 

.9eflc 

m ^4-> 
"5  o 

•h  03  r~ 

<i  S w ii 


a g 

° a .a 
M«  S+- 
G Q<  qj 

rQ  OJ 

2a8 

“■■sSa 

a'^!2  a 
o a g .2 


3 S O 

').a  s-« 
-o  a 

CJ 

o CO 

qj  a 

o> 

.J3 


.i? 


a Jf 

CO  2 

a 

_,  bo 
*2  fl 

■Om 


oj  •— , 

,_i«w 
CM  O 

oj  a 
— > o 
a tN 

as 

o 


cj  a 


HtW 
(M  q 

oJ  a 
»->.  0) 
a n 


2 < 

CjH  ^ 


op 


q a 

3-2o6 

^4-00 

: GE-a: 


0 a 
X oj 
a n . 

^SS ; 

o— i 


•o  o c 
£G.S 


O 0; 

a 

■2  w 

O G 

^ CO 

a I 

o o 

O OJ 


a o 

C .pH 

K-E 


TO  , CO 

7-  oj  a G P to 


CO  * CO  bp 

a o a a 
tj  'O 

ZoS'S 

13  Jo  w 

*v  S*  in 

a ^ 

> S 

<=J  . o O 

M..a 

» C 


OC3 


oj  a 
a co 


. 0) 
6 ^ 
0 to 


CO 


CO 


ti  be 

<b 

G*fl 

<P 

§a 

|i 

*^*a 
'c  a 


oj  c- 


OJ 

frt 


•c  o 


a:  o 

^a: 


a 
a c 


g if 


a P 


►» 

*g  a a 
'C  co  7^ 
oj  z 
0 a 

<u  • 

O 

P s-4  a 

a o =-g 

a?  "k  u>  0 
a O OJ  r; 

o 

0 I a a 

^ lie 

a c 


456 


SUFFRAGE  IN  EUROPEAN  COUNTRIES 


See  Ballot;  Ballot,  Short;  Election  Sys- 
tem in  the  United  States;  Polls;  Voters, 
Registration  of;  Woman  Suffrage. 

References:  F.  R.  Meehem,  Law  of  Public 
Offices  and  Officers  (1890),  ch.  v;  M.  H. 
Throop,  Law  Relating  to  Public  Officers 
(1892),  ch.  ix;  G.  W.  McCrary,  Am.  Law  of 
Elections  (4th  ed.,  1897);  D.  C.  MacMillan, 
Elective  Franchise  in  the  V.  S.  (rev.  ed., 
1898)  ; D.  S.  Remsen,  Suffrage  and  the  Ballot 
(1892);  A.  E.  McKinley,  Suffrage  Franchise 
in  the  Thirteen  English  Colonies  (1905);- 
A.  B.  Hart,  “Realities  of  Negro  Suffrage”  in 
Am.  Pol.  Sci.  Assoc.,  Proceedings , II  (1905), 
149-166,  “The  Exercise  of  the  Suffrage”  in 
Pol.  Sci.  Quart.,  VII  (1892),  307-329,  same 
article  in  Practical  Essays  on  Am.  Government 
(1893),  20-57,  Actual  Government  (1903),  65- 
85;  J.  C.  Rose,  “Negro  Suffrage”  in  Am.  Pol. 
Sci.  Review,  I ( 1906 ) , 17-43 ; K.  Schirmacher, 
Modern  Woman’s  Rights  Movement  (Eck- 
hardt,  tr.,  1912),  2-23;  J.  W.  Garner,  Intro,  to 
Pol.  Sci.  (1910),  500-516;  C.  A.  Beard,  Read- 
ings in  Am.  Gov.  and  Politics  (1911),  index, 
“Suffrage”;  T.  M.  Cooley,  Constitutional  Limi- 
tations (7th  ed.,  1903). 

George  H.  Haynes 

SUFFRAGE  IN  EUROPEAN  COUNTRIES. 
Tendency. — The  article  confines  itself  primarily 
to  the  suffrage  qualifications  now  in  force  for 
the  election  of  members  of  the  more  popular 
branch  of  the  national  legislatures  of  the 
several  European  countries.  Throughout  all 
of  the  European  countries  there  has  been  a 
steady  movement  toward  a liberalizing  of  the 
suffrage,  and  for  many  of  the  countries  this 
movement  may  be  said  to  have  proceeded  ( 1 ) 
from  qualifications  which  confined  the  control 
of  elections  to  the  upper  classes,  (2)  to  a re- 
duction of  qualifications  which  should  permit 
the  middle  classes  to  exercise  a share  of  power, 
and  (3)  finally,  a system  of  universal  male 
suffrage,  which  would  permit  the  lower  classes 
of  the  population  to  exercise  an  influence  pro- 
portionate to  their  numbers.  This  movement 
for  the  extension  of  the  suffrage  has  been  par- 
ticularly active  during  the  past  decade,  and 
has  brought  about  important  results  in  Aus- 
tria, Sweden,  Norway,  Denmark,  Italy,  and  a 
number  of  German  States.  Struggles  for  suf- 
frage extension  in  Hungary,  Prussia,  and  the 
Netherlands,  have  not  yet  v1912)  been  success- 
ful. 

In  a discussion  of  the  general  features  of 
present  suffrage  qualifications  in  the  European 
countries,  it  will  be  necessary  to  group  to- 
gether roughly  those  countries  whose  systems 
have  similar  features,  and  in  this  way  it  is 
possible  to  distinguish  six  classes  of  suffrage 
qualifications: 

Curial  System. — The  so-called  curial  system, 
the  most  important  illustration  of  which  is 
the  electoral  scheme  which  existed  in  Austria 
before  1907.  There  were  five  classes  of  elec- 


tors: (1)  the  great  land  owners,  comprising 

those  who  paid  a certain  land  tax,  varying  in 
the  several  provinces  from  50  to  250  florins — 
this  class  elected  85  representatives;  (2)  the 
cities,  where  the  electoral  franchise  was  ex- 
tended to  all  males  of  twenty-four  who  paid 
a tax  of  five  florins — this  class  elected  99  rep- 
resentatives; (3)  chambers  of  commerce  and 
of  industry — this  class  alone  elected  21  repre- 
sentatives and  together  with  the  second  class 
chose  19  others;  (4)  rural  communes,  in  which 
the  qualifications  for  voting  were  the  same  as 
in  the  cities — this  class  elected  129  representa- 
tives; (5)  a fifth  class  created  by  law  of  June 
14,  1896,  included  all  males  who  had  attained 
the  age  of  twenty-four  years,  and  chose  seventy- 
two  representatives.  This  system  was  replaced 
in  1907  by  universal  male  suffrage  for  Austrian 
imperial  elections,  but  a curial  system  is  still 
employed  in  the  Austrian  provinces  and  in 
Uosnia-Herzegovina.  By  the  Russian  elec- 
toral law  of  June  16,  1907,  a curial  system  is 
established,  by  means  of  which  a Duma  of  pop- 
ular character  has  been  largely  avoided. 

Three  Class  System. — The  Prussian  three- 
class  system  of  voting  is  one  not  dissimilar  in 
principle  from  the  curial  system,  except  that 
it  is  based  entirely  upon  a tax  qualification. 
The  highest  tax-payers  paying  one-third  of  the 
taxes  form  the  first  class;  those  paying  the 
second  third  of  the  taxes  form  the  second  class; 
and  the  third  class  is  composed  of  all  those 
smaller  tax-payers  paying  the  other  third  of 
the  taxes.  The  representation  is  primarily 
one  of  large  tax  payers.  An  unsuccessful  ef- 
fort was  made  in  1910  to  liberalize  the  suffrage 
in  Prussia.  From  1896  to  1909  Saxony  had  a 
three-class  system  of  voting  somewhat  similar 
to  but  more  liberal  than  that  of  Prussia.  [For 
fuller  description  of  Prussian  system,  see  Leg- 
islative System  in  Europe.] 

Plural  Voting. — Systems  of  plural  voting 
aim  to  accomplish  the  same  purpose  as  the 
curial  and  class  systems — to  give  a predomi- 
nant political  power  to  certain  elements  in  the 
community.  The  plan  introduced  in  Belgium 
in  1893  gives  the  suffrage  to  all  male  citizens 
of  twenty-five,  but  gives  one  or  two  additional 
votes  on  account  of  certain  tax-paying,  educa- 
tional, or  professional  qualifications.  The  Sax- 
on electoral  law  of  1909  introduced  the  system 
of  plural  voting — males  twenty-five  years  of 
age  paying  direct  taxes  have  one  vote,  and  one 
or  two  additional  votes  are  given  on  account  of 
property,  tax-paving,  educational  or  profes- 
sional qualifications ; each  voter  receives  an 
additional  vote  upon  reaching  the  age  of  fifty, 
and  no  person  has  more  than  four  votes.  The 
plan  of  electoral  reform  which  was  under 
consideration  in  Hungary  in  1908-10  provided 
also  for  a system  of  plural  voting.  Magyars 
were  to  have  one,  two,  or  three  votes,  non- 
Magyars  to  have  one-tenth  of  a vote  each — this 
system  was  of  course  devised  to  maintain  the 
political  supremacy  of  the  Magyars. 


SUFFRAGE,  MANHOOD— SUGAR  FRAUDS 


Qualifications. — Property,  tax-paying,  or  ed- 
ucational qualifications  for  voting  confine  po- 
litical control  in  the  hands  of  the  upper  classes 
in  proportion  to  the  stringency  of  the  qualifica- 
tions imposed.  Since  the  reform  act  of  1884 
limitations  upon  the  suffrage  in  England  are 
slight,  and  the  system  approaches  one  of  uni- 
versal male  suffrage.  In  the  Netherlands  the 
qualifications  are  somewhat  more  stringent;  in 
Portugal  tax  qualifications  limiting  the  suf- 
frage very  materially  were  somewhat  liberalized 
by  a decree  of  April  5,  1911;  the  present  Hun- 
garian suffrage  qualifications  are  such  as  to 
maintain  political  control  in  the  hands  of  the 
Magyars ; in  Italy  the  property  and  educa- 
tional qualifications  before  1912  were  such  as 
materially  to  limit  the  suffrage. 

Universal  Male  Suffrage. — The  tendency  has 
steadily  been  toward  a wider  basis  of  suffrage 
in  the  European  countries  and  universal  male 
suffrage  now  exists  in  the  German  Empire, 
France,  Austria  ( since  1907 ) , Spain,  Switzer- 
land, Greece,  Denmark,  Norway  (since  1898), 
and  Sweden  (since  1909).  In  Italy  substanti- 
ally universal  male  suffrage  was  introduced  in 
1912.  But  the  qualifications  of  age  vary  ma- 
terially in  the  several  countries — twenty  in 
Switzerland,  twenty-five  in  Germany,  and  thirty 
in  Denmark.  In  this  latter  country  a meas- 
ure now  ( 1912 ) under  consideration  proposes 
the  reduction  of  the  age  qualification  to  twenty- 
five — a reduction  already  made  in  1908  for  lo- 
cal elections. 

Universal  Suffrage. — The  final  step  in  suf- 
frage extension  is  that  to  universal  suffrage 
for  both  males  and  females,  and  this  step  was 
taken  by  the  election  law  of  Finland  in  1906. 
In  1907  Norway  admitted  women  to  vote  in 
national  elections,  on  the  basis  of  a tax  quali- 
fication, and  the  same  country  in  1910  intro- 
duced universal  woman’s  suffrage  for  local  elec- 
tions. A proposed  suffrage  law  now  under  con- 
sideration in  Denmark  contemplates  the  ex- 
tension of  suffrage  to  women  in  national  elec- 
tions, tax-paying  women  having  enjoyed  this 
privilege  since  1908  in  local  elections. 

See  House  of  Commons;  Legislative  Sys- 
tem in  Europe. 

References;  F.  Schneider  in  Archiv  fiir  oef- 
fentliches  Reclit,  XXVI  (1910),  193-289;  YV. 
F.  Dodd,  “Constitutional  Developments  in  For- 
eign Countries  during  1908  and  1909”  in  Am. 
Pol.  Sci.  Review,  IV  (1910),  325-349;  G.  Meyer, 
Das  parlamentarische  Wahlrecht  (1901)  ; 
Lofevre-Pointalis,  Les  Elections  en  Europe 
(1902).  W.  F.  Dodd. 

SUFFRAGE,  MANHOOD.  In  the  eighteenth 
century  it  was  generally  accepted  doctrine  that 
the  suffrage  should  be  confined  to  men  of  posi- 
tion, with  some  property  interest  in  the  com- 
munity. The  democratic  ferment,  which  gave 
rise  to  the  revolution  in  America  and  in 
France,  set  up  a new  goal  in  “manhood  suf- 
frage” or  “universal  suffrage”  (see  Suffrage), 


and  the  nineteenth  century  saw  long  strides 
taken  toward  its  attainment.  The  American 
states  soon  abolished  their  property  qualifica- 
tions. As  the  phrase  is  used  today,  “manhood 
suffrage”  means  the  giving  of  the  ballot  (see) 
to  all  adult  (male)  citizens  of  mental  and 
moral  capacity,  irrespective  of  their  possession 
of  property.  Strong  arguments  have  been  ad- 
duced in  its  favor,  both  as  dignifying  the  in- 
dividual and  affording  a means  for  the  politi- 
cal education  of  the  masses,  and  also  as  making 
government  more  representative  and  stable. 
Critics  of  democracy  fear  a government  “by  the 
most  ignorant  and  the  most  incapable.”  J.  S. 
Mill  was  justified  in  insisting  that  universal 
teaching  must  precede  universal  enfranchise- 
ment. The  reassuring  fact  is,  that  the  countries 
of  the  broadest  franchise  are  the  foremost  in 
multiplying  the  facilities  for  public  education. 
References:  S.  Leacock,  Elements  of  Pol.  Sci. 
(1906),  218-228;  J.  W.  Garner,  Intro,  to  Pol. 
Sci.  (1910),  502-516.  G.  H.  H. 

SUFFRAGE,  NEGRO.  See  Negro  Suf- 

frage. 

SUFFRAGE  PARTY.  Prior  to  the  Rhode 
Island  constitution  of  1842,  suffrage  in  that 
state  was  restricted  to  owners  of  land,  or  the 
eldest  sons  of  such  owners,  of  a minimum  value 
of  $134.00.  In  March,  1840,  the  Rhode  Island 
Suffrage  Association  was  formed,  and  under  its 
direction  mass  meetings  were  later  held  at 
Providence  and  Newport.  A suffrage,  or  peo- 
ple’s, convention,  the  delegates  to  which  were 
chosen  by  votes  of  male  citizens  of  at  least 
one  year’s  residence,  met  at  Providence,  Octo- 
ber 4,  and  November  18  completed  a constitu- 
tion under  which  the  suffrage  was  given  to 
white  male  citizens  who  had  resided  one  year 
in  the  state  and  six  months  in  the  town  or 
city  in  which  the  vote  was  tendered.  The  con- 
stitution was  adopted,  December  27-29,  by 
the  votes  of  4960  freemen  and  8984  non-free- 
men. Tlie  general  assembly  refused  to  recog- 
nize it,  but  instead  submitted,  February  19, 
1841,  a constitution  framed  by  a convention 
legally  called,  under  which  the  freehold  quali- 
fication was  abolished  for  native-born  citizens. 
March  21-23  this  constitution  was  rejected,  the 
suffragists  voting  against  it.  The  attempt  of 
the  suffrage  party  to  put  their  constitution 
into  effect  resulted  in  the  Dorr  Rebellion.  See 
Dorr  Rebellion;  Rhode  Island  and  Provi 
dence  Plantation.  References:  I.  B.  Richman, 
Rhode  Island:  a Study  in  Separatism  (1905), 
290-299;  A.  M.  Money,  The  Dorr  War  (1900). 

W.  MacD. 

SUGAR  FRAUDS.  Frauds  connected  with 
the  importation  of  sugar  have  been  prevalent 
for  many  years.  Formerly  fraudulent  entry 
was  accomplished  by  artificial  coloring  of  sugar 
in  order  to  lower  its  standard  and  thus  secure 
a lower  rate  of  duty.  By  the  tariff  of  1883 


458 


SULU  ARCHIPELAGO— SUNDAY  LEGISLATION 


this  was  made  ineffective  by  the  requirement 
that  sugar  be  classified  by  the  polariscope  test, 
a scientific  method  of  measuring  the  saccharin 
strength  of  the  sugar.  In  1909,  under  the 
energetic  administration  of  William  Loeb,  Jr., 
as  collector  of  the  New  York  port,  it  was  dis- 
covered that  extensive  frauds  had  been  per- 
petrated over  a series  of  years  by  several  of 
the  largest  sugar  refining  companies,  notably 
the  American  Sugar  Company.  Weights  were 
falsified,  scales  were  tampered  with,  and  em- 
ployees bribed.  By  these  means  it  was  esti- 
mated that  the  government  had  been  defrauded 
of  $6,000,000.  The  cases  against  the  companies 
were  settled  out  of  court.  More  than  $4,000,- 
000  in  penalties  was  paid,  Criminal  suits  also 
were  brought  leading  to  the  conviction  of  sev- 
eral employees  of  the  American  Sugar  Com- 
pany, including  two  of  the  higher  officials.  See 
Smuggling;  Tariff  Administration. 

D.  R.  D. 

SULU  ARCHIPELAGO.  This  consists  of 
188  islands,  with  an  area  of  1,029  square  miles, 
lying  between  Mindano  and  Borneo.  The  in- 
habitants are  Moros  and  the  population  in 
1903  (census)  was  117,777.  Sulu,  the  capital, 
was  occupied  by  the  American  forces  on  May 
19,  1899,  and  during  the  next  four  years  the 
islands  were  administered  in  accordance  with 
the  terms  of  the  treaty  negotiated  by  General 
Bates  with  the  Sultan  and  certain  Datos  on 
August  20.  In  1903  the  treaty  was  set  aside 
because  of  non-fulfillment  by  the  Sultan  and 
the  islands  were  organized  as  Sulu  District  of 
Moro  Province.  See  Dependencies  of  the 
United  States  ; Philippine  Annexation, 
Reference:  Philippine  Commission,  Report, 
1903.  P.  J.  T. 

SUMNER,  CHARLES.  Charles  Sumner 
(1811-1874)  was  born  at  Boston,  January  6, 
1811.  In  1834  he  was  admitted  to  the  bar, 
and  in  connection  with  his  practice  edited  for 
three  years,  jointly  with  George  S.  Hillard, 
the  American  Jurist.  He  was  already  an  ard- 
ent anti-slavery  man.  From  1837  to  1840  he 
travelled  in  Europe,  where  he  made  a wide 
acquaintance.  He  first  became  prominent  in 
politics  in  1845,  by  eloquent  denunciation  of 
the  annexation  of  Texas  and  the  Mexican  War. 
Though  strongly  opposed  to  slavery,  he  was 
not  a Garrisonian  Abolitionist,  but  in  1848 
joined  the  Free  Soil  party.  In  1851  he  was 
elected  United  States  Senator  from  Massa- 
chusetts by  a coalition  of  Whigs  and  Free- 
Soilers,  retaining  his  seat  until  his  death.  In 
the  Senate  he  became  a leader  of  the  anti- 
slavery opposition,  and  denounced,  with  great 
oratorical  power  but  at  times  with  extremely 
bitter  and  vituperative  language,  the  slavery 
advocates  and  their  measures.  Because  of 
personal  remarks  in  a speech  entitled  “The 
Crime  against  Kansas,”  May  20,  1856,  he  was 
assaulted  by  Representative  Brooks  of  South 
127 


Carolina,  receiving  injuries  which  necessitated 
his  absence  from  his  seat  until  1859.  In  1861 
he  became  chairman  of  the  committee  on  for- 
eign affairs,  and  gave  his  support  to  Lincoln; 
but  he  joined  the  radical  Republicans  in  op- 
posing Johnson,  and  defended  the  reconstruc- 
tion program.  The  Civil  Rights  Act  of  1866 
was  mainly  his  work,  and  is  almost  his  only 
constructive  act.  In  March,  1871,  he  was 
forced  from  his  chairmanship  in  consequence 
of  differences  with  Grant  over  San  Domingo, 
and  became  in  consequence  a bitter  opponent 
of  the  President.  .He  died  at  Washington, 
March  11,  1874.  See.  Reconstruction;  Slav- 
ery Controversy.  References:  Charles  Sum- 
ner, Works  (1870-83)  ; E.  L.  Pierce,  Memoir 
and  Letters  of  Charles  Sumner  ( 1877-93 ) ; 
M.  Storey,  Charles  Sumner  (1900);  A.  H. 
Grimke,  Life  of  Charles  Sumner  (1892)  ; G.  H. 
Haynes,  Charles  Sumner  (1909). 

W.  MacD. 

SUNDAY  LEGISLATION.  At  common  law, 
judicial  proceedings  only  were  prohibited  on 
Sunday,  and  ordinary  labor  and  the  making 
of  contracts  were  lawful.  An  English  act 
in  the  time  of  Charles  II  .(29  Car.  II  c.  7), 
still  in  force,  laid  the  basis  for  the  English 
and  American  legislation  as  it  exists  to  this 
day,  by  a general  prohibition  of  labor  and 
business  except  work  of  necessity  or  charity  on 
the  first  day  of  the  week  (which  unless  other- 
wise defined  in  particular  statutes  means  from 
midnight  Saturday  to  midnight  Sunday) 
whether  referred  to  as  Sunday,  Sabbath  or  the 
Lord’s  Day.  The  courts  in  the  United  States 
have  sustained  the  most  sweeping  state  stat- 
utes from  the  so-called  blue  laws  of  early  colon- 
ial days  to  the  prohibition  of  public  games  of 
baseball  (New  York  and  Indiana,  if  an  ad- 
mission is  charged).  Even  the  running  of  in- 
terestate trains,  notwithstanding  the  general 
power  of  Congress  over  interstate  commerce, 
has  been  prohibited  as  the  valid  exercise  of 
the  police  power  of  the  states.  Persons  observ- 
ing the  seventh  day  as  the  Sabbath  are  exempt- 
ed in  some  states  from  observance  of  Sunday. 
The  general  tendency  in  legislation  is  toward 
greater  liberality  in  the  matter  of  prohibited 
acts  on  Sunday.  On  the  other  hand  the  “one 
day  rest  in  seven”  movement  is  gaining 
strength  especially  in  the  ranks  of  organized 
labor,  with  the  cooperation  of  the  churches,  in 
proportion  to  the  increase  in  number  and  im- 
portance of  continuous  industries  where  labor 
is  required  twenty-four  hours  a day  seven  days 
a week;  and  legislation  will  soon  be  enacted  in 
many  states  which  will  forbid  the  employment 
of  anyone  for  more  than  six  days  without  an 
intervening  period  of  24  hours  for  rest.  See 
Holidays,  Legal;  Labor,  Protection  to;  Pub- 
lic Morals,  Care  for.  References:  J.  A. 
Fitch,  “Sunday  and  Rest-day  Labor  Laws  in 
U.  S.”  in  N.  Y.  Dept.  Labor,  Bulletin , Sept., 
1910,  “Rest-day  Legislation  in  Foreign  Coun- 


459 


SUNDRY  CIVIL  BILL— SUPERVISORS 


tries”  in  ibid,  Dec.,  1911;  Survey,  XXVII,  17 
(1898),  XXVIII  (1899),  548.  S.  McL. 

SUNDRY  CIVIL  BILL.  A law  which  in- 
cludes a part  of  the  regular  appropriations 
for  federal  expenditures.  Originally  designed 
to  provide  for  miscellaneous  items  not  falling 
conveniently  under  general  heads  of  appropria- 
tion, it  has  grown  by  the  addition  of  new 
items  which  in  a systematized  budget  would 
be  classified  under  the  several  main  services. 
This  bill  now  carries  one-fifth  to  one-sixth  of 
the  aggregate  appropriations.  Its  totals  for 
fiscal  years  at  ten-year  intervals  are  (thousand 
dollars):  1890-91,  $29,738.2;  1900-01,  $65,- 
319.9;  1910-11,  $114,066.6.  The  last  sum  in- 
cludes $37,855,000  for  Panama  Canal  expendi- 
ture. Items  are  grouped  under  government 
departments — State,  Treasury  and  War  now 
having  the  largest  totals.  See  Appropriation's, 
American  System  of;  Committee  System  in 
the  United  States;  Expenditures,  Federal; 
House  of  Representatives;  Senate  of  the 
United  States;  Treasury  Department. 
Reference:  “Sundry  Civil  Appropriation  Act” 
in  Sen.  Doc.,  61  Cong.,  2 Sess.,  No.  655  (1910), 
320-392.  E.  H.  V. 

SUPERIOR  COURT.  See  Court,  Superior. 

SUPERVISING  ARCHITECT,  OFFICE  OF. 

The  Supervising  Architect’s  Office  prepares 
plans  for  and  supervises  the  construction  and 
repair  of  public  buildings  throughout  the  Unit- 
ed States.  The  work  of  the  office  is  subject  to 
the  general  supervision  of  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  (see  Treasury  Department).  Ref- 
erences: Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  Annual 
Reports;  J.  A.  Fairlie,  National  Administra- 
tion of  the  U.  S.  (1905),  130-131.  A.  N.  H. 

SUPERVISORS.  Certain  county,  and  in 
some  cases  also  certain  town,  officers  are  called 
supervisors  in  a number  of  American  states. 
The  general  administrative  authority  for 
county  affairs  in  these  states  is  a board  of 
supervisors,  elected  by  towns  or  other  sub- 
divisions of  the  county,  these  boards  exercising 
the  powers  and  functions  of  county  commis- 
sioners and  the  administrative  functions  of 
county  courts  in  other  states. 

A county  authority  composed  of  town  repre- 
sentatives was  provided  in  Massachusetts  be- 
fore 1650,  to  equalize  the  apportionment  of 
taxes  between  the  various  towns.  But  the  more 
definite  establishment  of  the  supervisor  sys- 
tem began  in  New  York  in  1691,  when  county 
boards  of  town  supervisors  were  established  to 
supervise,  levy  and  assess  county  taxes,  which 
had  previously  been  done  by  the  county  courts 
of  the  justices  of  the  peace.  During  the  next 
half  century  other  administrative  powers  of 
the  justices  of  the  peace  in  New  York  were 
transferred  to  the  supervisors.  A similar  sys- 
tem was  developed  during  the  colonial  period 


in  New  Jersey,  where  the  county  board  is 
called  the  board  of  chosen  freeholders  (see)  ; 
and  with  the  growth  of  new  states  this  system 
has  also  been  established  in  Michigan,  Wis- 
consin, and  in  most  counties  in  Illinois.  In 
these  states,  the  supervisors  are  elected  by 
towns  and  cities;  and  in  addition  to  their 
duties  as  members  of  the  county  boards  the 
town  supervisors  are  also  the  most  important 
town  officials,  and  the  city  supervisors  also 
have  some  special  functions. 

Boards  of  supervisors  in  these  states  usually 
have,  in  distinctly  rural  counties,  from  fifteen 
to  twenty-five  members.  But  cities  generally 
have  several  members  and  in  counties  contain- 
ing a large  city  the  total  number  of  members 
is  sometimes  as  high  as  fifty;  while  in  a few 
sparsely  settled  counties  there  are  only  four  or 
five  organized  townships  and  the  same  number 
of  members.  The  city  representation,  however, 
is  not  in  proportion  to  pojmlation ; and  the 
rural  sections  of  a county  nearly  always  con- 
trol the  boards  of  supervisors. 

These  large  boards  of  supervisors,  are  ap- 
parently organized  as  a local  legislative  body; 
but  their  functions  are  for  the  most  part  ad- 
ministrative, and  in  this  respect  they  appear 
to  be  less  effective  bodies  than  the  small  boards 
of  county  commissioners.  In  several  Michigan 
counties  a good  deal  of  administrative  work 
has  been  transferred  to  small  boards  of  county 
auditors  (see)  ; and  in  Cook  county,  Illinois, 
the  president  of  the  board  of  fifteen  county 
commissioners  has  a veto  power  and  the  power 
to  appoint  most  of  the  appointive  county  of- 
ficers. 

In  several  other  states  there  are  county 
boards  of  supervisors  composed  of  a smaller 
number  of  members  elected  by  districts.  In 
Iowa  and  Nebraska  the  county  boards  of  super- 
visors have  from  three  to  seven  members; 
and  in  these  states  the  supervisors  are  not 
town  officers.  In  Virginia  each  county  has  a 
board  of  supervisors,  elected  by  magisterial 
districts,  of  which  there  are  from  three  to 
eight  in  each  county;  and  in  Mississippi  each 
county  has  a board  of  five  supervisors  elected 
by  districts.  In  California,  each  county  has  a 
board  of  supervisors  of  three  to  seven  members, 
except  in  San  Francisco  where  there  is  a 
board  of  twelve  supervisors  elected  at  large, 
which  acts  both  as  county  board  and  as  city 
council. 

Boards  of  supervisors  have  similar  powers 
to  county  commissioners  (see).  They  levy 
county  taxes  and  supervise  county  finances; 
they  have  charge  of  county  buildings,  county 
roads,  and  poor  relief.  Their  ordinance  and 
legislative  powers  are  as  limited  as  the  boards 
of  county  commissioners,  except  in  Michigan, 
where,  by  an  Act  of  1909,  the  county  boards  of 
supervisors  have  been  granted  a broad  and 
general  power  of  local  legislation,  subject  to 
the  general  laws  of  the  state,  and  also  to  the 
right  of  a local  referendum. 


460 


SUPPLIES  AND  ACCOUNTS,  BUREAU  OF— SUPREME  COURT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


See  County  Commissioners;  County  Gov- 
ernment; Court,  County. 

References:  J.  Fiske,  Civil  Government 
(1890),  79,  92;  G.  E.  Howard,  Local  Constitu- 
tional Government  (1889),  I,  169  et  seq;  J.  A. 
Fairlie,  Local  Government  (1906),  175;  E.  W. 
Bemis,  “Local  Government  in  Michigan  and 
the  Northwest”  in  Johns  Hopkins  University, 
Studies,  I (1883),  ch.  v,  15,  17,  18;  Statute 
laws  of  the  central  and  western  states. 

J.  A.  Fairlie. 

SUPPLIES  AND  ACCOUNTS,  BUREAU  OF. 

The  Bureau  of  Supply  and  Accounts  is  one  of 
the  bureaus  of  the  United  States  Navy  De- 
partment (see).  It  is  under  the  management 
of  the  Paymaster  General  of  the  Navy,  and 
handles  the  moneys  appropriated  for  the  con- 
struction of  vessels,  the  purchase  of  equipment 
and  supplies,  and  the  payment  of  officers  and 
men.  References:  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  Annu- 
al Reports ; J.  A.  Fairlie,  Rational  Adminis- 
tration of  the  U.  S.  (1905),  160.  A.  N.  H. 

SUPPLY  AND  DEMAND.  In  a given  mark- 
et, the  supply  of  a commodity  is  the  quantity 
(number  of  units)  of  that  commodity  which 
sellers  might  be  induced  to  part  with.  The 
demand  'for  a commodity  is  the  quantity  which 
buyers  might  be  willing  to  take.  In  both  cases, 
the  quantity  depends  upon  value,  as  denoted  by 
price.  By  lowering  price,  sellers  may  increase 
demand.  By  raising  their  offers,  buyers  stim- 
ulate an  increase  in  supply.  The  price  at 
which  demand  and  supply  become  equal  is  the 
market  (“equilibrium”)  price.  If  this  price 
be  much  above  the  cost  of  producing  the  com- 
modity, excepting  monopolies  (see),  the  equi- 
librium is  only  temporary;  because  sellers, 
perhaps  also  producers,  find  profit  in  increas- 
ing the  supply.  Similarly,  a price  much  be- 
low the  cost  of  producing  the  commodity  is 
temporary,  because  the  resulting  loss  ultimate- 
ly causes  a shrinkage  of  supply.  Hence  rela- 
tively stable  equilibrium  between  supply  and 
demand  is  attained  only  at  a price  which  is 
determined  by  the  cost  of  producing  the  com- 
modity. The  foregoing  principles  are  modi- 
fied and  complicated  by  many  considerations; 
such  as  time,  distance,  new  inventions,  change 
of  process,  exhaustion  of  materials,  nature  of 
the  industry  as  primarily  affecting  supply; 
and  change  of  population,  taste,  fashions,  use 
of  substitutes  as  affecting  demand.  See  Ex- 
change, Principles  of.  References:  A.  Mar- 
shall, Principles  of  Economics  (6th  ed.,  1910), 
Bk.  V;  J.  S.  Nicholson,  Principles  of  Pol. 
Economy  (1897),  II,  Bk.  III.,  chs.  iv-vi. 

E.  H.  V. 

SUPREME  COURT  OF  THE  UNITED 
STATES.  At  the  head  of  the  federal  judiciary, 
and  through  its  appeal  jurisdiction  at  the 
head  of  the  whole  judicial  system  of  the  Unit- 
ed States,  is  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 


States.  The  idea  of  a supreme  central  ju- 
diciary was  familiar  to  the  colonies  through 
the  possibility  of  taking  appeals  from  the 
highest  colonial  courts  to  the  privy  council  in 
England.  The  practice  was  infrequent;  but 
during  the  Revolution  inconveniences  arose 
through  conflicts  of  state  jurisdiction  in  such 
questions  as  boundaries,  and  prize  law;  and 
there  was  little  difficulty  in  securing  in  the 
Federal  Convention  (see)  a federal  Supreme 
Court,  with  final  jurisdiction,  partly  original, 
and  partly  appeal,  in  cases  where  states  were 
parties,  and  in  cases  involving  the  construction 
of  the  Federal  Constitution. 

Under  the  Constitution  there  must  be  a Su- 
preme Court  (Art.  Ill,  Sec.  i),  but  the  details 
of  its  organization  are  left  to  statutes.  Ac- 
cordingly the  number  of  judges  has  varied  at 
different  times  from  6 to  10  and  is  now  9 
(1913).  After  the  Civil  War,  Congress  voted 
to  reduce  the  number  of  the  judges  so  as  to 
prevent  Andrew  Johnson  from  making  ap- 
pointments. In  two  instances  also  Congress 
has  with  set  purpose  interfered  with  the 
operation  of  the  Court:  (1)  by  postponing 
the  term  of  court  which  would  normally  have 
come  from  December,  1801,  to  December,  1802, 
so  as  to  prevent  any  interference  with  Jeffer- 
son’s organization  of  administration  (see  Mar- 
bury  vs.  Madison);  (2)  in  Johnson’s  admin- 
istration a class  of  cases  was  removed  from 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Supreme  Court  to  pre- 
vent ruling  upon  the  President’s  orders. 

By  statute  one  of  the  judges  is  Chief  Jus- 
tice (see).  Salaries  of  the  judges  have  al- 
ways been  low  for  men  in  that  kind  of  pro- 
fession, and  are  now  $12,500.  Besides  the 
Chief  Justices  the  court  has  included  some  of 
the  great  jurists  in  the  country,  such  as  James 
Wilson,  Joseph  Story,  B.  R.  Curtis,  Samuel 
F.  Miller,  David  J.  Brewer. 

The  Supreme  Court  always  sits  in  Washing- 
ton. Nominally  each  justice  is  also  a justice 
of  one  of  the  circuit  courts,  but  they  have  long 
since  ceased  to  sit  on  any  except  Supreme 
Court  Cases.  The  Supreme  Court  never  hears 
jury  trials,  but  hears  oral  argument  of  counsel 
and  takes  printed  briefs.  After  argument  the 
Chief  Justice  subdivides  the  cases,  and  the 
opinions  written  by  individual  judges  are  then 
brought  in  for  private  discussion  by  the  whole 
body.  An  opinion  concurred  in  by  a majority 
of  the  judges  is  the  opinion  of  the  court;  but 
justices  frequently  file  dissenting  opinions; 
and  on  some  important  suits  like  the  income 
tax  cases  of  1894,  and  the  Insular  Cases  of 
1900,  it  is  difficult  to  find  any  opinion  in 
which  a majority  of  the  judges  completely  con- 
curs. The  decisions  of  the  Court  are  taken 
down  by  an  official  court  reporter,  and  are 
also  printed  as  fast  as  they  come  out  by  a 
private  firm  which  makes  a business  of  issuing 
court  decisions. 

The  Supreme  Court  is  much  behind  its  dock- 
et. In  1910,  1,182  cases  were  filed  for  adjudi- 


SUPREME  COURT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  JUSTICES  OF— SURVEYOR  OF  CUSTOMS 


cation.  During  tlie  term  the  court  was  able 
to  dispose  of  only  502  cases,  so  that  when  it 
adjourned  in  the  summer  of  1912  there  re- 
mained 680  cases  on  file  The  number  of  cases 
on  file  June,  1913,  awaiting  decision,  was  604. 
The  Supreme  Court,  like  every  other  body  of 
public  men,  is  much  influenced  by  public  opin- 
ion, and  notwithstanding  the  principle  of  using 
its  former  opinions  as  precedents  it  has  several 
times  reversed  itself,  as  in  the  Insular  Cases 
(sec),  and  in  the  decisions  on  the  Sherman 
Anti-Trust  Act  (see). 

See  Cases,  Significance  of  in  Constitu- 
tional Law;  Construction  and  Interpreta- 
tion; Courts,  Federal;  Courts  and  Uncon- 
stitutional Legislation;  Judges,  Federal; 
Judiciary  and  Congress;  Judiciary  and  Ju- 
dicial Reform. 

References:  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Supreme 
Court  of  tlie  U.  S.  (1890)  ; H.  L.  Carson,  Hist, 
of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  U.  S.  (1892); 
A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government  ( rev.  ed.,  1908 ) , 
§§  136-138,  Salmon  P.  Chase  (1899),  xiv,  xv. ; 
S.  E.  Baldwin,  Am.  Judiciary  (1908)  ; 
bibliography  in  A.  B.  Hart,  Manual  (1908), 
§ 114.  Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

SUPREME  COURT  OF  THE  UNITED 
STATES,  JUSTICES  OF.  Following  is  a list 
of  justices  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States,  since  the  establishment  of  the  federal 
judiciary  in  1789: 

1789  (Sept.  26) -1795,  John  Jay  (Chief  Justice;  re- 
signed ) . 

1789  (Sept.  26)-1791,  John  Rutledge  (resigned). 

17S9  (Sept.  27) -1810,  Wm.  Cushing  (died  in  office). 

1789  (Sept.  29)-1798,  James  Wilson  (died  in  of- 
fice ) . 

1789  (Sept.  30) -1796,  John  Blair  (resigned). 

1790  (Feb.  10)-1799,  James  Iredell  (died  in  office). 

1791  (Aug.  5J-1793  Thomas  Johnson  (resigned). 

1793  (Mar.  4)-1806,  Wm.  Paterson  (died  in  office). 

1796  (Jan.  27 ) —1811,  Samuel  Chase  (died  in  office). 

1796  (Mar.  41-1800,  Oliver  Ellsworth  (Chief  Jus- 
tice; resigned). 

1798  (Dee.  20)-1829,  Bushrod  Washington  (died  in 
office) . 

1799  (Dec.  10 ) —1804,  Alfred  Moore  (resigned). 

1801  (.Jan.  3D-1S35,  John  Marshall  (Chief  Justice; 

died  in  office). 

1804  (Mar.  26)-1834,  Wm.  Johnson  (died  in  office). 

1506  (Nov.  10)-1823,  Brockholst  Livingston  (died 
in  office). 

1507  (Mar.  3) -1826,  Thomas  Todd  (died  in  office). 

1811  (Nov.  18 ) —1845,  Joseph  Story  (died  in  office). 

1811  (Nov.  181-1835,  Gabriel  Duvall  (resigned). 

1S23  (Dec.  9 ) — 1S43,  Smith  Thompson  (died  in  of- 
fice). 

1826  (May  91  —1828,  Robert  Trimble  (died  in  office). 

1829  (Mar.  71-1S61,  John  McLean  (died  in  office). 

1830  (.Tan.  61-1844,  Henry  Baldwin  (died  in  office). 

1835  (Jan.  9)-1864,  .Tames  M.  Wayne  (died  in  of- 
fice) . 

1836  (Mar.  151-1864,  Roger  B.  Taney  (Chief  Jus- 
tice ; died  in  office). 

1836  (Mar.  15 ) —1841,  Philip  P.  Barbour  (died  in 
office). 

1837  (Mar.  41-1865,  John  Catron  (died  in  office). 

1837  (Sept.  251-1852,  John  McKinley  (died  in  of- 
fice). 

1841  (Mar.  31-1860.  Peter  V.  Daniel  (died  in  office). 

1845  (Feb.  141-1872,  Samuel  Nelson  (retired). 

1845  (Sept.  20 )— 1851,  Levi  Woodbury  (died  in  of- 
fice). 

1846  (Aug.  41-1870.  Robert  Grier  (retired). 

1851  (Sept.  22) -1857,  Benjamin  R.  Curtis  (re- 
signed). 

1853  (Mar.  221-1861,  John  A.  Campbell  (resigned). 

1858  (Jan.  12 ) — 18S1,  Nathan  Clifford  (died  in  of- 
fice). 


1862  (.Tan.  24 ) —1881,  Noah  II.  Swayne  (retired). 

1862  (July  16) -1890,  Samuel  F.  Miller  (died  in  of- 
fice). 

1862  (Dec.  8 ) —1877,  David  Davis  (resigned). 

1863  (Mar.  101-1897,  Stephen  J.  Field  (retired). 

1864  (Dec.  6 ) —1873,  Salmon  P.  Chase  (Chief  Jus- 
tice; died  in  office). 

1869  (Dec.  20)-1869,  Edwin  M.  Stanton  (died  1869  ; 
never  served). 

1870  (Feb.  18) -1880,  William  Strong  (retired). 

1870  (Mar.  2D-1892,  Jos.  1’.  Bradley  (died  in  office). 

1872  (Dec.  11 ) —1882,  Ward  Hunt  (retired  by  spe- 
cial act  of  Congress). 

1874  (Jan.  21 ) —1888,  Morrison  R.  Waite  (died  in 
office). 

1877  (Nov.  29)-1911,  John  M.  Harlan  (died  in  of- 
fice). 

1880  (Dec.  21)-1887,  William  B.  Woods  (died  in 
office). 

1881  (May  12) -1889,  Stanley  Matthews  (died  in  of- 
fice I . 

1S81  (Dec.  20 ) —1902,  Horace  Gray  (died  in  office). 

1882  (Mar.  27 ) —1893,  Samuel  Blatehford  (died  in 
office). 

1888  (Jan.  16) -1893,  Lucius  Q.  C.  Lamar  (died  in 
office) . 

1888  (July  20) -1910,  Melville  W.  Fuller  (Chief  Jus- 
tice ; died  in  office). 

1889  (Dec.  18)-1910,  David  J.  Brewer  (died  in  of- 
fice). 

1890  (Dee.  29)-1906,  Henry  B.  Brown  (retired). 

1892  (July  26)-1903,  George  Shiras,  Jr.  (retired). 

1893  (Feb.  18)-1S95,  Howell  E.  Jackson  (died  in 
office) . 

1894  (Feb.  19),  Edward  D.  White  (Chief  Justice; 
Dec.  12,  1910). 

1S95  (Dec.  9) -1909,  Rufus  W.  Peckham  (died  in 
office). 

1898  (Jan.  21),  Joseph  W.  McKenna. 

1902  (Dec.  4).  Oliver  W.  Holmes. 

1903  (Feb.  25),  William  R.  Day. 

1906  (Dec.  17)-1910,  William  II.  Moody  (retired  by 
special  act  of  Congress). 

1909  (Dee.  20)-1914,  Horace  H.  Lurton  (died  in  of- 
fice). 

1910  (May  2),  Charles  E.  Hughes. 

1910  (Dec.  16),  Willis  Van  Devanter. 

1910  (Dee.  17),  Joseph  R.  Lamar. 

1912  (Mar.  13),  Mahlon  Pitney. 


Reference:  List  of  judges  at  front  of  U.  S. 
Supreme  Court,  Reports , year  by  year. 

Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 


SURGEON  GENERAL.  The  Surgeon  Gen- 
eral is  the  head  of  the  medical  department  of 
the  United  States  Army.  This  department  is 
charged  with  the  protection  of  the  health  of 
officers  and  enlisted  men,  with  the  main- 
tenance of  sanitary  conditions  in  barracks, 
posts  and  fortified  places,  with  the  care  of  the 
sick  and  the  maintenance  of  hospitals  and 
with  the  supervision  of  tests  for  physical 
disability  of  commissioned  officers  and  enlist- 
ed men.  See  Army,  Standing;  Hospitals, 
Public.  References:  Secretary  of  War,  Annual 
Report-,  J.  A.  Fairlie,  Rational  Administration 
of  the  U.  S.  (1905)  143;  C.  H.  Van  Tyne  and 
W.  G.  Leland,  Guide  to  the  Archives  (2d  ed., 
1907),  124.  A.  N.  H. 

SURROGATE’S  COURT.  See  Court,  Sur- 
rogate’s. 


SURVEYOR  OF  CUSTOMS.  The  surveyor 
is  an  outdoor  officer  of  a customs  port 
of  entry,  who  has  charge  of  the  force  of 
inspectors,  weighers,  measurers,  and  gaugers. 
He  supervises  the  discharge  of  the  cargoes  and 
the  admeasurement  of  vessels  for  registry  and 
determination  of  the  tonnage  tax.  See  Col- 


462 


SURVEYORS,  OFFICIAL — SUZERAINTY 


i.ectoe  of  Customs;  Tariff  Administration. 
Reference:  J.  D.  Goss,  Tariff  Administration 
of  the  U.  S.  (1891).  D.  R.  D. 

SURVEYORS,  OFFICIAL.  The  title  applied 
to  the  following  classes  of  officials:  (1)  sur- 
veyors of  customs,  officers  at  ports  of  entry 
superintending  the  inspectors,  weighers,  meas- 
urers and  guagers;  (2)  surveyors  general,  of- 
ficers who  under  the  direction  of  the  commis- 
sioner of  the  General  Land  Office  of  the  De- 
partment of  Interior  supervise  the  surveys  of 
public  land;  (3)  county  surveyors,  county 
officials  (usually  elected)  found  in  nearly  all 
the  states  outside  of  New  Engand.  The  title  is 
not  officially  applied  to  the  officials  of  the  chief 
surveying  bureaus  of  the  government,  i.  e., 
Coast  and  Geodetic  Survey,  Engineer  Corps 
of  the  Army,  and  Geological  Survey.  See  Pure 
Food;  Tariff  Administration;  Weights  and 
Measures,  Standards  of.  Reference:  J.  A. 
Fairlie,  Local  Government  (1906),  135. 

0.  C.  H. 

SURVEYS  OF  LAND.  Most  important  of 
all  the  provisions  of  the  National  Land  Ordi- 
nance of  1785  was  that  which  required  rec- 
tangular surveys  before  any  land  could  be 
offered  for  sale,  and  this  condition  was  in- 
sisted upon  even  at  the  cost  of  delayed  sales 
and  increased  expense.  This  system  of  surveys 
has  been  of  inestimable  value  in  the  orderly 
settlement  of  the  great  west.  It  provided 
definite  bounds,  free  from  overlapping  claims, 
to  every  land  holder ; it  gave  a security  against 
lost  or  forgotten  bounds;  it  rendered  possible 
the  simplest  kind  of  a deed.  The  surveyors 
were  required  to  report  on  the  quality  of  the 
lands  and  the  natural  phenomena  coming  un- 
der their  observation,  and  thus  a great  amount 
of  reliable  information  was  obtained  during 
the  extension  of  the  surveys. 

Prior  to  the  Revolution  each  colony  disposed 
of  its  land  in  its  own  way.  In  general,  the 
southern  colonies  made  use  of  land  warrants 
which  might  be  located  on  any  unappropriated 
land.  This  frequently  resulted  in  overlapping 
surveys  and  litigation.  In  New  England  the 
system  of  surveying  townships,  sometimes  six 
miles  square,  with  the  minor  divisions  set  off 
by  the  local  government,  was  worked  out.  The 
six  mile  township  was  incorporated  in  the 
national  system,  but  the  subdivision  into  lots 
(later  “sections”),  one  mile  square,  was  new. 
The  first  surveys  were  of  the  “Seven  Ranges” 
in  Ohio,  1785-89.  The  surveys  were  criticized 
as  being  costly  and  slow,  and  efforts  were  made 
until  1796  to  substitute  the  southern  system  of 
“indiscriminate  location”  by  means  of  land 
warrants,  the  evils  of  which  were  later  evident 
in  Kentucky  and  Tennessee.  The  presence  of 
private  and  Indian  lands  prevented  the  regular 
extension  of  the  surveys,  so  that  in  Ohio  six 
distinct  surveying  areas  are  found,  as  well  as 
four  privately  surveyed  tracts. 


To  meet  this  problem  the  system  of  prin- 
cipal meridians  and  base  lines,  on  which  to 
base  the  surveys,  was  evolved.  The  first  prin- 
cipal meridian  was  the  boundary  between  Ohio 
and  Indiana,  and  from  time  to  time  others 
were  determined  as  the  surveys  were  extended. 
The  base  lines  run  at  right  angles  to  the  merid- 
ians, on  a true  parallel  of  latitude,  and  cor- 
rection lines  are  run  every  twenty-four  miles 
north  and  south.  Guide  meridians  extend 
north  from  the  base  or  correction  lines  at  inter- 
vals of  twenty-four  miles  east  and  west  of 
the  principal  meridian.  Public  lands  are 
surveyed  into  townships,  six  miles  square,  con- 
taining approximately  23,040  acres.  Town- 
ships lying  in  order  north  and  south  consti- 
tute a “range.”  Townships  are  surveyed  in 
sections  of  640  acres,  and  may  be  subdivided 
into  quarter-quarter-sections  (forty  acres), 
and  in  certain  cases  into  ten  acre  tracts.  Min- 
eral surveys  are  not  bound  by  the  regular  sys- 
tem ( see  Mineral  Land).  The  surveys  have 
generally  been  executed  under  contract,  the 
cost  varying  from  $3.00  to  $25.00  a mile.  In 
1910  the  contract  method,  which  had  occasioned 
great  frauds,  was  abandoned,  and  surveys  are 
now  made  exclusively  by  government  em- 
ployees. The  following  is  the  official  descrip- 
tion of  a forty-acre  lot:  “SE  \ of  the  SW  \ of 
Sec.  36,  T.  6 N.,  R.  34  E.  of  the  principal  meri- 
dian in  Montana.”  Area  surveyed  to  June  30, 
1912,  1,193,320,614  acres. 

See  Boundaries  of  tiie  United  States,  In- 
terior; Geological  Survey;  Land  Office  of 
the  United  States;  Public  Lands,  Reserva- 
tion of. 

References:  Thos.  Donaldson,  Public  Domain 
(1884);  P.  J.  Treat,  National  Land  System, 
1785-1820  (1910),  179-197;  A.  C.  Ford,  “Col- 
onial Precedents  of  Our  National  Land  System 
as  it  existed  in  1800”  in  University  of  Wis- 
consin, Bulletin  (1910);  Public  Lands  Com- 
mission, Report  (1905),  127-130. 

P.  J.  Treat. 

SUSPENSION  OF  SENTENCES.  See  Pris- 
oners, Probation  of. 

SUZERAINTY.  The  source  of  power  as  re- 
gards international  status  in  a state  under 
suzerainty  is  derived  from  the  suzerain,  or  the 
state  or  monarch  upon  which  the  political  un- 
ity is  dependent.  The  states  of  India  are  “un- 
der the  suzerainty”  of  the  British  Crown,  and 
have  no  right  to  enter  upon  independent  for- 
eign relations.  Bulgaria  by  the  Treaty  of 
Berlin  and  till  1908  was  “an  autonomous  trib- 
utary principality,  under  the  suzerainty  of 
the  Porte.”  Egypt,  while  technically  under  the 
suzerainty  of  the  Porte,  is  largely  influenced 
in  her  international  affairs  by  British  advisers 
and  is  received  in  some  international  confer- 
ences as  a state.  While  in  a theoretical  sense 
the  power  of  a state  under  a suzerainty  is  de- 
rived from  a suzerain,  in  fact  the  amount  of 


463 


SWALLOW  TAILS— SWITZERLAND,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS  WITH 


power  and  the  method  of  its  exercise  differ 
greatly  in  the  different  instances.  See  Depend- 
ent States;  Protectorates;  States,  Equali- 
ty of;  Sovereignty,  Theory  of.  References: 
J.  Westlake,  Int.  Law  (1904),  I,  23  et  seq.\  L. 
Oppenheim,  Int.  Law  (1912),  I,  140  et  scq. 

G.  G.  W. 

SWALLOW  TAILS.  A derisive  term  applied 
to  men  prominent  in  fashionable  circles  who 
have  gained  some  influence  in  politics,  said 
to  have  been  thus  used  first  by  John  Morrissey 
in  New  York  in  1876.  See  Silk  Stockings. 

0.  C.  H. 

SWAMP  LANDS.  Believing  that  the  states 
could  reclaim  the  overflowed  lands  within  their 
limits  more  effectively  than  the  national  Gov- 
ernment, Congress  by  the  act  of  Mar.  2,  1849, 
granted  to  Louisiana,  and  by  the  act  of  Sept. 
28,  1850,  to  all  the  states,  such  lands  to  aid 
in  the  construction  of  levees  and  drains.  The 
grant  was  extended  to  Minnesota  and  Oregon 
in  I860.  An  indemnity  was  made  in  the  case 
of  lands  disposed  of  by  the  Federal  Government 
prior  to  Mar.  3,  1857,  a cash  payment  being 
made  for  land  sold,  and  scrip  being  issued 
where  the  land  was  located  by  scrip  or  war- 
rant. By  1912,  64,700,000  acres  had  been  pat- 
ented to  15  states.  See  Conservation;  Pub- 
lic Lands  and  Public  Land  Policy;  Public 
Lands,  State.  Reference:  T.  Donaldson,  Pub- 
lic Domain  (1884).  P.  J.  T. 

SWEATSHOPS.  Definition. — Industries  are 
“sweated”  which  do  not  pay  their  workmen  a 
living  wage,  although  very  long  hours  of  work 
prevail  under  sanitary  conditions  injurious  to 
the  persons  employed  and  dangerous  to  the 
public.  Sweating  in  the  United  States  occurs 
mainly  in  the  garment-making,  cigar-making, 
and  bakery  industries.  Typically  it  is  carried 
on  through  subcontractors  who  secure  the 
work  from  manufacturers  and  sublet  it  to  the 
sweated  workmen,  to  be  finished  in  their  homes 
or  in  small  workshops  in  the  back  rooms  of 
tenement  houses.  In  recent  years  the  subcon- 
tractor has  often  been  eliminated  without  any 
real  improvement  in  conditions.  The  funda- 
mental cause  for  the  existence  of  the  sweat- 
shop is  the  presence  of  an  oversupply  of  un- 
skilled labor  in  the  large  cities,  created  mainly 
by  the  heavy  immigration  in  the  last  decades 
from  southern  and  eastern  Europe. 

Legislation  Upon  Sweating. — Governmental 
efforts  to  deal  with  the  sweating  problem  have 
in  this  country  proceeded  from  the  necessity 
of  safeguarding  the  public  health.  Laws  have 
prescribed  where  workshops  may  he  located, 
how  many  persons  may  work  in  them,  how  they 
shall  be  ventilated,  and  in  general,  how  they 
may  not  he  conducted.  A number  of  states 
require  that  all  sweatshops  be  licensed.  Un- 
fortunately legislation  of  this  character  does 
little  to  raise  the  standard  of  living  of  the 


workers  in  the  sweated  industries,  and  the  en- 
forcement of  these  laws  has  been  found  ex- 
tremely difficult. 

In  Victoria,  New  South  Wales,  and  in  Eng- 
land, direct  efforts  are  made  to  guarantee  a 
living  wage  to  the  sweatshop  workers.  Boards 
have  been  established  in  these  countries  for 
some  of  the  sweated  industries — especially 
chain  making — to  prescribe  the  minimum 
wages  which  may  be  paid  in  them.  During  the 
year  1911  bills  containing  similar  provisions 
were  introduced  in  several  American  state  leg- 
islatures. In  Australia  the  minimum  wage 
laws  have  resulted  in  almost  wholly  wiping 
out  the  sweatshop  evil.  In  the  United  States 
such  legislation  would  probably  need  to  be 
supplemented  by  laws  materially  cutting  down 
the  number  of  unskilled  immigrants. 

See  Arbitration  of  Labor  Disputes;  Fac- 
tory Legislation;  Health,  Public  Regula- 
tion of;  Labor,  Protection  to;  Labor, 
Women’s,  Legislative  Control  of;  Manufac- 
turing, Relation  of  Government  to  ; Strikes  ; 
Tenement  House  Regulation. 

References:  U.  S.  Industrial  Commission, 
Report,  XV  (1901),  316-84;  N.  Y.  Bureau  of 
Labor  Statistics,  Report  (1902),  1-28,  37-281; 
F.  Kelley,  Rome  Ethical  Gains  Through  Legis- 
lation ( 1905 ) , 209-255.  J.  R.  Commons. 

SWINGING  ROUND  THE  CIRCLE.  A 

phrase  applied  by  the  press  to  President 
Andrew  Johnson’s  (see)  tour  through  the  chief 
cities  of  the  North,  in  the  autumn  of  1866. 

O.  C.  H. 

SWITZERLAND,  DIPLOMATIC  RELA- 
TIONS WITH.  Although  in  May,  1847,  a con- 
vention concerning  property  rights  was  negoti- 
ated between  Secretary  Buchanan  and  the 
Swiss  consul  at  Alexandria,  regular  diplomatic 
relations  began  in  1850  with  the  appointment 
of  A.  Dudley  Mann  as  special  agent  to  negoti- 
ate a convention  of  friendship,  commerce  and 
extradition,  which  was  ratified  in  amended 
form  in  1853.  Theodore  S.  Fay,  first  American 
minister  resident,  was  commissioned  March 
16,  1853.  The  Swiss  constitution  of  1848, 
following  a war  of  secession,  was  much  in- 
fluenced by  the  American  federal  system. 

Throughout  the  American  Civil  War  Switzer- 
land sympathized  with  the  American  Federal 
Government.  The  only  source  of  complaint 
was  the  Swiss  passport  requirement.  A 
revision  of  the  Swiss  constitution  in  1874 
made  it  still  more  like  that  of  the  United 
States. 

In  the  quarter  century  which  followed,  the 
principal  subjects  of  diplomatic  discussion  re- 
lated to  increased  Swiss  emigration  to  the 
United  States,  including  questions  of  expatria- 
tion and  repatriation,  naturalization  and  cit- 
izenship, military  service  and  taxes.  In  1879- 
82  the  United  States  protested  against  viola- 
tions of  the  emigration  laws  by  Swiss  local 


464 


SWITZERLAND,  FEDERAL  GOVERNMENT  IN 


officials  who  seemed  disposed  to  utilize  the 
United  States  as  an  outlet  for  paupers  and 
other  undesirable  persons — including  Mormons. 
Complaint  was  also  made  in  regard  to  the  re- 
fusal of  the  communal  authorities  to  recognize 
American  naturalization. 

From  1884  on  the  United  States  made  re- 
peated but  ineffectual  efforts  to  secure  a nat- 
uralization treaty  for  the  better  security  of  the 
rights  of  its  citizens  of  Swiss  origin ; but  the 
Government  of  Switzerland  declined  (1885  and 
1896)  to  consider  a convention  which  it  re- 
garded beyond  the  power  of  the  federal  council 
to  negotiate  under  the  Swiss  constitution.  In 
this  connection  the  question  of  the  military 
tax,  required  of  American  citizens  of  Swiss 
origin  who  had  returned  to  visit  or  reside  in 
Switzerland,  became  prominent.  The  United 
States  maintained  the  right  of  expatriation 
and  denied  the  doctrine  of  perpetual  alle- 
giance; but  was  not  disposed  to  insist  on  the 
application  of  her  principle  in  unworthy  cases. 

Near  the  close  of  the  century,  the  question 
of  trade  reciprocity  became  prominent.  In 
1898,  basing  her  action  on  the  “most  favored 
nation”  clause  of  the  treaty  of  1850,  Switzer- 
land demanded  reciprocity  concessions  which 
had  been  granted  France;  but  the  American 
Government,  referring  to  an  unbroken  line  of 
precedents,  replied  that  American  policy  had 
regarded  a reciprocity  treaty  as  a bargain  and 
not  as  a favor.  The  controversy  closed  by  the 
required  year’s  notice  which  (in  March,  1900) 
terminated  the  operation  of  clauses  which  un- 
der the  interpretation  of  Switzerland  would 
have  been  an  exception  to  the  otherwise  uni- 
form American  policy.  On  January  1,  19,06, 
President  Roosevelt  proclaimed  a reciprocity 
agreement  which  terminated  October  31,  1909. 

An  extradition  treaty,  terminating  articles 
of  the  amended  convention  of  1850-55,  was 
signed  May  14,  1900,  and  an  arbitration  con- 
vention on  February  29,  1908. 

See  Citizenship  in  the  United  States; 
Commercial  Policy  and  Relations  of  the 
United  States. 

References:  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  Int.  Law 
(1906),  III,  658-678,  V,  865;  Foreign  Rela- 
tions, 1861— 1912 ; W.  M.  Malloy,  Treaties  and 
Conventions  (1910),  1762-1777. 

J.  M.  Callahan. 

SWITZERLAND,  FEDERAL  GOVERN- 
MENT IN.  Comparison  with  United  States. 
— Federal  government  in  Switzerland  is  based 
upon  the  constitution  of  1848  and  amendments 
which  have  been  made  from  time  to  time.  The 
framers  of  the  constitution  had  the  example 
of  the  United  States  consciously  in  view  and 
imitated  in  some  respects  the  organization  of 
that  union.  This  was  particularly  true  in  re- 
spect to  the  outward  form  of  the  national  leg- 
islature, which  consists  of  a lower  house,  Na- 
tionalrat, representing  population  by  districts, 
and  a senate,  Stfinderat,  chosen  by  the  govern- 


ments of  the  cantons,  or  states.  Like  the 
United  States  the  nation  was  built  of  states, 
but  in  Switzerland  the  previous  history  of  the 
states  extended  over  a period  of  nearly  five 
centuries,  during  which  time  united  action  had 
been  spasmodic  only,  and  the  sense  of  state 
sovereignty  had  become  exceedingly  strong. 
This  condition  must  be  kept  in  mind  while 
considering,  not  only  the  task  of  forming  the 
constitution  of  1848,  but  also  the  problems  of 
the  political  life  which  have  since  followed. 

Legislature. — The  Nationalrat  is  elected  by 
universal  manhood  suffrage,  at  the  rate  of 
one  member  to  20,000  population  and  any  voter 
not  in  clerical  orders  can  be  chosen.  Voting 
citizenship  is  governed  by  cantonal  law  and 
differs  in  the  various  states,  but  in  general  the 
regulations  produce  a decidedly  democratic 
basis  for  the  national  legislature.  The  Stdn- 
derat  consists  of  44  members  representing  the 
22  cantons,  which  elect  their  members  in  any 
manner  they  may  prefer,  varying  from  pure 
democracy  in  the  Landesgemeinde  to  choice  by 
representative  legislatures.  The  difference  be- 
tween the  chambers  is  further  emphasized  by 
the  provision  that  members  of  this  senate  are 
paid  by  their  states,  while  representatives  draw 
upon  the  national  treasury.  As  a matter  of 
fact  the  Nationalrat  is  the  more  important  of 
the  two  bodies,  for  the  Standerat  is  not  only 
mentioned  second  in  order  in  the  constitution, 
but  has  never  been  endowed  with  the  high 
functions  nor  taken  the  important  position  of 
the  American  Senate. 

Executive. — The  federal  executive  authority 
is  vested  in  the  Bundesrat,  a Cabinet  of  seven 
members  among  whom  the  duties  of  the  various 
departments  are  distributed.  This  body  is 
elected  every  three  years  by  the  united  houses 
of  the  legislature,  who  also  designate  each  year 
one  member  of  the  Cabinet  to  act  as  Bundes- 
president.  The  president  of  the  Swiss  Republic, 
therefore,  is  merely  the  annual  chairman  of  the 
Cabinet.  For  that  year  he  is  the  medium  of 
communication  with  foreign  diplomats  and 
the  nominal  chief  of  the  state,  but  acts  under 
no  special  political  mandate  like  that  of  an 
American  Pr^  ident  or  an  English  prime  min- 
ister. His  election  attracts  no  attention,  for 
the  administrative  responsibility  rests  upon 
the  Cabinet  as  a whole,  and  each  member  in 
rotation  acts  as  president. 

Judiciary. — The  highest  judicial  authority  is 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  Bundesgericht,  a 
supreme  court  whose  members  are  elected  by 
the  national  legislature.  Its  functions  include 
contentions  between  cantons  and  between  fed- 
eration and  cantons,  as  well  as  private  litiga- 
tion of  sufficient  importance.  The  Bundes- 
gericht, on  the  other  hand,  is  not  competent 
to  consider  the  constitutionality  of  federal 
law.  The  constitution  expressly  declares  that 
the  acts  of  the  legislature  shall  be  conclusive 
for  the  decisions  of  the  federal  court.  Many 
difficulties,  however,  are  prevented  in  advance 


465 


SYMMES  PURCHASE— SYSTEM,  THE 


by  the  rule  that  all  revisions  of  cantonal  con- 
stitutions must  be  submitted  to  the  Bundesrat 
for  ratification  and,  if  matters  incompatible 
with  the  federal  constitution  are  found,  the 
points  are  referred  back  to  the  canton  until 
properly  adjusted. 

Powers  of  Government. — The  powers  of  the 
federal  government  have  been  from  time  to  time 
increased  by  amendments  to  the  original  con- 
stitution. Any  assumption  of  new  powers  by 
interpretation  or  by  construction  is  prevented 
by  the  declaration  of  Article  III,  that  the 
cantons  are  sovereign,  in  so  far  as  their  sover- 
eignty is  not  restricted  by  the  federal  consti- 
tution, and  exercise  all  rights  which  have  not 
been  assigned  to  the  federal  government.  At 
present  the  confederation  is  endowed  with  the 
authority  usually  found  in  a republic,  in  some 
cases  possessing  powers  which  are  not  found 
in  the  United  States  Government.  With  for- 
eign nations  it  has  exclusive  treaty  making 
power.  The  national  defense  through  military 
organization  rests  upon  the  central  government 
which  uses  the  cantonal  officials  in  its  admin- 
istration. No  standing  army  is  permitted  but 
an  elaborate  militia  system  under  federal  di- 
rection is  capable  of  putting  an  effective  force 
of  200,000  men  at  once  into  the  field.  The 
federal  government  has  power  to  maintain  a 
university  and  a technical  institute  but  has, 
to  the  present  time  (1914),  confined  its  ac- 
tivity to  the  latter. 

The  supervision  of  streams  and  forests  ac- 
companies the  power  to  carry  on  public  works 
of  correction  and  preservation.  Regulation  of 
fisheries  and  the  hunting  of  higher  game  are 
also  within  the  competence  of  the  confedera- 
tion. At  first  given  control  of  the  post  office, 
it  has  proceeded  by  degrees  to  the  monopoly 
of  the  telegraph  and  telephone.  Still  later  it 
was  authorized  to  purchase  the  railways  of 
the  country  and  now  with  the  exception  of  a 
few  short  lines  the  federal  government  is  in 
full  control  of  that  form  of  transportation. 
Since  1887  the  control  of  the  manufacture  of 
alcohol  has  been  a federal  monopoly.  The 
net  income  is  divided  pro  rata  among  the  can- 
tons. A recent  constitutional  amendment  gave 
the  government  power  to  prohibit  the  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  absinthe,  and  a federal  law 
on  this  subject  went  into  effect  in  1910.  A 
national  bankruptcy  act  regulates  the  law  of 
contracts  throughout  the  confederation.  In 
1910  there  also  went  into  effect  a federal  sys- 
tem of  invalid  and  accident  insurance. 

The  foregoing  examples  show  that  although 
the  administrative  officials  lack  certain  inde- 
pendent powers  found  in  the  United  States, 
the  Swiss  federal  government  has  in  numerous 
directions  proceeded  much  further  in  the  cen- 
tralization of  important  activities.  The  de- 
velopments since  1848  have  been  brought  about 


through  amendments  to  the  constitution,  which 
can  be  revised  at  any  time.  These  amendments 
can  be  effected  at  the  suggestion  of  the  legis- 
lature or  through  popular  initiative  and  refer- 
endum. Since  1891  the  legislative  initiative 
lias  also  been  possible  and  all  of  the  important 
changes  have  in  one  form  or  another  been  in- 
dorsed by  the  people. 

See  Federal  State;  States,  Classification 
of;  Unites  States  as  a Federal  State. 

References:  J.  S.hollenberger,  Die  Schweizer- 
ische  Eidgenossenschaft  von  1874  bis  auf  die 
Gegenwart  (1910)  ; C.  Ililty,  Politisches  Jahr- 
buch  der  Belt toe ize r is chen  Eidgenossenschaft, 
1886-1912  (annual)  ; J.  M.  Vincent,  Govern- 
ment in  Switzerland  (1900). 

J.  M.  Vincent. 

SYMMES  PURCHASE.  John  Cleve  Symmes, 
of  New  Jersey,  contracted  with  Congress,  on 
Oct.  15,  1788,  for  the  purchase  of  1,000,000 
acres  of  land  on  the  Ohio.  The  city  of  Cin- 
cinnati was  founded  on  this  tract.  Eventual- 
ly title  passed  for  248,540  acres,  for  which 
Symmes  paid  $70,455  in  securities,  and  bounty 
warrants  equivalent  to  95,250  acres.  See  Ohio 
Company;  Public  Lands  and  Public  Land 
Policy.  P.  J.  T. 

SYNDICALISM.  Syndicalism  is  a principle 
of  industrial  organization  which  aims  at  end- 
ing present  capitalism  by  combining  the  in- 
dustrial workers  of  the  world  into  an  immense 
industrial  union.  Its  exponent  in  France  is 
the  famous  Confederation  Generate  du  Travail, 
and  it  is  represented  in  America  by  the  In- 
dustrial Workers  of  the  World  (I.  W.  W.). 
It  bolds  that  “the  working  class  and  the  em- 
ploying class  have  nothing  in  common.”  The 
platform  of  the  Industrial  Workers  of  the 
World  states  that  “between  these  two  classes 
a struggle  must  go  on  until  the  workers  of  the 
world  organize  as  a class,  take  possession  of 
the  earth  and  the  machinery  of  production, 
and  abolish  the  wage  system.”  It  would  ac- 
complish its  ends  by  direct  action,  its  chief 
instrument  being  the  general  strike.  Revolt- 
ing against  socialism,  it  repudiates  state  ac- 
tion and  would  depend  upon  force,  active  or 
passive,  to  effect  change  with  revolutionary 
suddenness.  See  Labor  Organizations.  Ref- 
erences: J.  G.  Brooks,  American  Syndicalism 
(1913)  ; J.  R.  Macdonald,  Syndicalism  (1913). 

K.  F.  G. 

SYSTEM,  THE.  A term  coined  by  anti-trust 
propagandists  about  1900  to  denote  the  money 
power  of  the  great  corporations  taken  in  a 
collective  sense;  used  especially  to  denote  the 
financial  interests  of  the  country  organized  for 
the  purpose  of  influencing  government  and  leg- 
islation. See  Interests.  O.  C.  H. 


465 


TAFT,  WILLIAM  HOWARD— TAMMANY 


T 


TAFT,  WILLIAM  HOWARD.  William  H. 

Taft  (1857 — ),  twenty-seventh  President  of 
the  United  States,  was  born  at  Cincinnati, 
Ohio,  September  15,  1857.  In  1880  he  was 
admitted  to  the  bar.  In  1887  he  was  appointed 
judge  of  the  superior  court  of  Cincinnati,  and 
the  next  year  was  elected  for  a five  year  period, 
but  resigned  in  1890  to  become  solicitor  gen- 
eral of  the  United  States.  In  1892  he  was  ap- 
pointed United  States  circuit  judge  for  the 
sixth  circuit,  resigning  in  1900  to  become  presi- 
dent of  the  Philippine  Commission. 

In  July,  1901,  he  was  appointed  first  civil 
governor  of  the  Philippine  Islands,  but  gave  up 
the  duties  of  the  office  in  November  on  account 
of  illness.  In  1902  he  negotiated  with  Pope 
Leo  XIII  a settlement  of  the  “friars’  lands” 
question,  and  in  August  returned  to  the  Phil- 
ippines and  resumed  his  duties  as  governor. 
In  February,  1904,  he  was  appointed  Secretary 


of  War.  In  1906  he  was  for  a short  time,  pro- 
visional governor  of  Cuba,  and  in  1907  opened 
the  first  Philippine  assembly  at  Manila. 

In  1908  he  was  nominated  by  the  Republican 
national  convention  at  Chicago  for  President, 
and  was  elected,  receiving  321  electoral  votes 
against  162  for  William  J.  Bryan. 

In  June,  1912,  after  a heated  preconvention 
campaign  in  the  Republican  party,  he  was  re- 
nominated, but  was  defeated  in  the  November 
election  by  Woodrow  Wilson,  the  Democratic 
candidate.  Upon  the  expiration  of  his  term 
of  office  he  assumed  the  duties  of  the  Kent 
professorship  of  law  at  Yale  University. 

See  Philippine  Islands;  Reciprocity  Pol- 
icy; Republican  Party. 

References:  Philippine  Commission,  Annual 
Reports  (1900-1904);  Secretary  of  War,  An- 
nual Reports  (1904-1908);  Am.  Year  Book, 
1910,  and  year  by  year.  W.  MacD. 


TAMMANY 


Basis  of  Power. — Tammany  Hall,  or  the 
“Democratic-Republican  Organization  of  the 
County  of  New  York”  is  the  most  notorious 
political  organization  in  the  United  States. 
Located  in  New  York  City,  it  forms  a unit 
of  the  national  Democratic  party  with  which 
it  has  been  affiliated  from  the  beginning.  This 
connection,  which  gives  to  Tammany  the  stand- 
ing of  the  regular  Democratic  organization  in 
New  York  county,  is  one  of  its  great  sources 
of  strength.  Tammany  enjoys  the  reputation 
of  a thoroughly  corrupt  political  organization 
and  the  uncovering  of  a number  of  scandals  of 
great  magnitude,  notably  the  stealings  of  the 
Tweed  Ring,  has  at  times  led  to  its  defeat  and 
temporary  effacement;  but  the  fact  that  it  has 
been  able  to  maintain  recognition  as  the  regu- 
lar unit  of  the  national  party  has  been  the 
cause  of  its  invariable  restoration  to  power 
and  its  return  to  local  control.  The  Tammany 
organization  is  confined  to  New  York  county, 
comprising  the  boroughs  of  Manhattan  and  the 
Bronx,  but  it  is  very  closely  affiliated  with  the 
local  Democratic  organizations  in  the  counties 
of  Kings,  Queens  and  Richmond,  which,  to- 
gether with  New  York  county,  make  up  the 
greater  city  (see  New  York  City). 

History. — The  name  of  the  organization  is 
derived  from  an  Indian  chief,  Tamanend,  or 
Tammany.  Before  the  Revolution  there  exist- 
ed patriotic  societies  known  as  the  Sons  of 


Saint  Tammany,  which  disappeared,  however, 
after  the  close  of  the  war.  The  present  organi- 
zation dates  from  May  12,  1789,  when  the 
“Society  of  Saint  Tammany,  or  Columbian 
Order,”  was  founded  in  New  York  by  William 
Mooney,  an  ex-soldier  and  an  upholsterer  by 
trade.  In  1805  the  society  obtained  a charter 
of  incorporation  as  a benevolent  and  charitable 
body.  Previously,  however,  it  had  become  a 
political  factor,  strongly  partisan  and  Anti- 
Federalist.  As  a political  factor  Tammany  has 
been  known  as  Tammany  Hall  from  the  fact 
that  its  meetings  have  been  held  in  the  hall 
belonging  to  the  Tammany  Society,  but  no  clear 
distinction  between  the  two  organizations  can 
be  maintained.  The  leaders,  or  “sachems”  of 
the  society  have  held  control  of  the  political 
organization  and  have  been  and  are  today 
chosen  from  the  prominent  members  of  the 
Hall. 

Aaron  Burr  was  the  first  real  leader  of  Tam- 
many. His  influence,  in  the  main,  transformed 
it  into  an  active  party  agency  and  secured  the 
introduction  of  the  methods  of  party  control 
and  party  machinery  for  which-  Tammany  has 
stood  ever  since  as  the  chief  exponent. 
Throughout  the  long  period  of  Democratic  su- 
premacy in  the  national  Government,  Tammany 
fattened  on  the  federal  patronage  and  con- 
tinued its  active  warfare  for  local  control  in 
state  and  city.  It  applauded  the  War  of  1812, 


467 


TAMMANY 


strongly  supported  Jackson  in  his  banking  and 
spoils  policies,  and,  with  the  influx  of  foreign 
population  abandoning  its  policy  of  standing 
as  a native  American  organization,  admitted 
foreigners  to  its  ranks  and  provided  for  their 
rapid  naturalization.  It  supported  such  popu- 
lar issues  as  the  broadening  of  the  franchise 
and  abolition  of  imprisonment  for  debt.  Its 
history  down  to  the  middle  of  the  century  was 
replete  with  scandals  and  peculations  by  its 
leaders  which  from  time  to  time  proved  so 
nauseous  as  to  lead  to  its  defeat  at  the  polls, 
but  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  this  was 
not  a period  of  high  political  morality. 

Politics,  in  the  city,  had  reached  a very  low 
ebb  by  1850.  Turbulence  was  the  rule,  repeat- 
ing was  a common  practice,  and  dishonesty  was 
rife  among  the  city  officials.  The  Common 
Council  of  1852,  controlled  by  Tammany,  be- 
came so  notorious  for  its  corruption  and  ex- 
travagance that  it  earned  for  itself  the  title 
of  the  “Forty  Thieves  Council.”  In  1855  Fer- 
nando Wood  began  his  career  as  mayor  of  the 
city.  He  was  an  expert  organizer  and  political 
manipulator  and  under  him  the  saloon  ele- 
ment came  into  control.  He  served  as  mayor 
from  1855  to  1858,  but  in  December,  1857,  he 
was  defeated  through  the  opposition  of  the 
Tammany  organization,  with  which  he  had 
broken.  Undismayed,  he  formed  a competing 
Democratic  organization  known  as  Mozart  Hall 
and  secured  reelection  in  1859. 

The  next  great  figure  in  Tammany  Hall  was 
William  M.  Tweed  (see),  the  first  real  “boss.” 
Wood’s  career  had  shown  the  possibilities  for 
personal  enrichment,  and  Tweed  followed  in 
his  footsteps.  Born  in  the  city  in  1823,  Tweed 
first  became  prominent  as  a volunteer  fireman 
and  was  elected  foreman  of  his  company.  His 
great  popularity  led  to  his  becoming  a politi- 
cal ward  leader.  His  rise  to  political  control 
was  rapid.  He  became  sachem  and  later  grand 
sachem  of  the  Tammany  Society  and  secured 
absolute  control  of  Tammany  Hall.  He  was  in 
turn  elected  assistant  alderman,  member  of 
Congress  and  member  of  the  board  of  supervis- 
ors, and  later  became  deputy  street  commis- 
sioner, commissioner  of  public  works  and  state 
senator,  in  which  position  he  controlled  legis- 
lation affecting  the  city  and  dominated  the 
legislature.  Associated  with  him  in  the  no- 
torious Tweed  Ring  were  Peter  B.  Sweeny, 
city  chamberlain,  Richard  Connolly,  comptrol- 
ler, A.  Oakey  Hall,  mayor  of  the  city  from 
1869  to  1872,  and  others  of  lesser  importance. 
Obtaining  control  of  all  branches  of  the  city 
government  by  1868,  the  Ring  instituted  a 
reign  of  loot  such  as  had  never  before  been 
witnessed  and  has  not  since  been  equalled. 
Profits  were  taken  from  the  sale  and  barter  of 
offices,  including  judicial  offices;  from  the  let- 
ting of  contracts  on  all  kinds  of  public  works; 
from  the  granting  of  franchises:  from  the  pur- 
chase of  supplies;  from  “strike”  legislation  for 
securing  the  passage  or  defeat  of  bills.  These 


were  divided  on  a percentage  scale  among  the 
members  of  the  Ring,  the  lion’s  share  going 
to  Tweed  himself.  The  judiciary  was  corrupted 
and  became  a valuable  adjunct  of  the  Ring. 
To  make  his  control  more  secure,  Tweed  by  the 
liberal  use  of  money,  secured  the  passage  of 
a new  charter  for  the  city,  in  1870.  Un- 
bridled greed  eventually  led  to  the  downfall 
of  the  Ring  in  1871.  It  was  stated  that  over 
$10,000,000  had  been  squandered  in  the  erec- 
tion and  repair  of  the  county  court  house  alone. 
As  first  the  Ring  professed  no  concern  over 
the  disclosures.  When  questioned  in  regard 
to  the  charge,  Tweed  made  his  famous  reply, 
“What  are  you  going  to  do  about  it?”  But 
the  people  were  thoroughly  aroused.  Between 
sixty  and  seventy  millions  had  been  added  to 
the  permanent  debt  of  the  city  during  the  four 
years  of  Ring  control.  A Committee  of  Seventy 
was  formed  in  September,  1871,  which  brought 
about  the  destruction  of  the  Ring.  Tweed  was 
tried  and  convicted.  Released  after  one  year 
on  a decision  by  the  court  of  appeals,  he  was 
immediately  rearrested  in  a civil  suit,  escaped 
to  Cuba,  was  recaptured  and  died  in  prison 
in  1878.  The  total  stealings  of  the  Ring  have 
been  variously  estimated  from  $45,000,000  to 
$200,000,000,  of  which  the  city  succeeded  in 
recovering  only  $876,000. 

Following  the  fall  of  Tweed,  Tammany  was 
in  such  bad  odor  that  it  seemed  to  many  it 
could  never  recover.  There  was,  however,  no 
other  organization  in  the  field  strong  enough 
to  take  its  place  as  the  regular  Democratic  or- 
ganization of  the  city,  and  quickly,  by  adroit 
management  and  with  a certain  purging  of  its 
leadership,  it  arose  again  to  a position  of 
commanding  strength.  John  Kelly  was  its 
next  leader,  or  boss.  In  1874,  only  three  years 
after  the  downfall  of  the  Tweed  Ring,  it  suc- 
ceeded in  electing  its  candidate  for  mayor. 
Kelly  remained  in  absolute  control  of  the  or- 
ganization until  his  death  in  1886.  He  was 
succeeded  by  Richard  Croker,  who  retired  in 
1902  with  a large  fortune  to  take  up  residence 
in  Ireland  and  is  still  alive  (1914).  After  his 
retirement  the  organization  was  ruled  for  a 
short  time  by  a committee,  but  it  was  inevit- 
able that  the  boss  should  emerge  and  he  came 
forth  in  the  person  of  Charles  F.  Murphy,  an 
ex-saloon-keeper  and  former  dock  commissioner, 
who  held  a position  in  absolute  control  of  the 
organization  down  to  1914,  and  greatly  extend- 
ed its  power  in  the  state.  In  1909,  however, 
partial  control  of  the  city  of  New  York  was 
lost,  Tammany  electing  only  the  mayor;  and 
in  1913  an  overwhelming  defeat  was  incurred 
at  the  hands  of  a fusion  ticket  in  the  city, 
while  the  elections  throughout  the  state  were 
also  disastrous  to  the  organization. 

Organization. — The  paper  organization  of 
Tammany  as  a political  body  is  laid  down  in 
the  rules  and  regulations  of  the  Democratic- 
Republican  Organization  of  the  County  of  New 
York.  In  each  assembly  district  there  is  an 


TANEY,  ROGER  BROOKE 


association  composed  of  all  the  voters  enrolled 
as  members  of  the  Democratic  party.  They 
elect  the  general  or  county  committee,  which 
now  numbers  over  5,000.  This  is  in  name,  the 
governing  body;  it  is  called  upon  to  meet 
monthly,  except  in  June,  July  and  August  and 
has  its  full  quota  of  officers  and  committees. 
The  most  important  of  these  is  the  executive 
committee,  composed  of  a member  from  each 
assembly  district,  elected  annually  by  the  dele- 
gation from  that  district  to  the  general  com- 
mittee. He  is  the  executive  member  for  that 
district  and  is  usually  though  not  necessarily 
the  district  leader.  The  “boss”  has  no  recog- 
nition in  the  paper  organization. 

But  in  reality,  the  power  centers  in  the 
boss  and  he  carries  out  his  control  through  the 
district  leaders,  under  whom  are  the  district 
captains  for  each  election  district  and  numer- 
ous lieutenants  and  party  workers.  The  boss 
always  occupies  the  position  of  chairman  of 
the  finance  committee  and  it  is  understood 
that  he  shall  keep  no  books  and  shall  not  be 
accountable  to  anybody  for  sums  received  or 
expended. 

Methods. — Tammany  is  not  bound  to  any 
fixed  procedure,  and  its  methods  for  winning 
elections  and  enriching  its  following  vary  to 
such  an  extent  in  different  times  and  under 
different  leaders  that  it  is  only  possible  to 
describe  them  in  general  terms.  The  organiza- 
tion as  at  present  constituted  depends  for  its 
existence  and  success  upon  control  of  the  spoils 
of  office.  Officeholders  are  regularly  assessed 
for  campaign  funds.  Formerly  this  was  done 
openly,  but  since  the  civil  service  law  came  into 
force  the  levy  has  been  made  through  the  medi- 
um of  club  dues  and  like  expedients.  Offices 
are  used  for  the  support  and  pay  of  its  large 
working  force  of  leaders,  captains  and  lieu- 
tenants, who  are  to  a large  extent  maintained 
at  the  expense  of  the  city,  the  county  and  the 
state.  Although  the  civil  service  law  covers 
the  vast  majority  of  the  city  offices,  the  higher 
administrative  positions,  commanding  the  larg- 
est salaries,  are  almost  all  outside  the  scope 
of  the  rules  and  it  is  on  the  patronage  of  these, 
and  the  control  that  goes  with  them,  that 
Tammany  largely  relies  to  secure  contributions 
from  corporations  and  individuals.  In  addi- 
tion, Tammany  has  sold  the  offices,  both  elec- 
tive and  appointive,  and  has  always  exercised 
a very  considerable  control  over  the  police 
force,  and  evidence  has  frequently  pointed 
towards  its  receiving  revenue  from  the  protec- 
tion of  vice  and  crime. 

Tammany’s  strongest  hold  is  in  the  poorest 
and  most  congested  districts  of  the  city,  largely 
peopled  by  foreigners.  It  maintains  this  hold 
through  the  fact  that  its  leaders  have  risen 
from  the  people  and  never  allow  themselves  to 
lose  touch  with  them.  These  leaders  live  in 
their  districts,  care  for  their  constituents  when 
in  trouble,  obtain  jobs  and  favors  for  them  and 
provide  for  their  entertainment,  spending  large 


sums  in  this  work.  At  district  headquarters, 
expensive  clubs  are  maintained  which  all  the 
Democratic  voters  of  the  district,  including  the 
officeholders,  are  urged  to  join.  The  poor  of 
the  district  are  accustomed  to  go  to  the  dis- 
trict leader  in  their  distress  and  it  is  in 
this  paternal  relation  between  the  leaders  of 
the  organization  and  the  vast  numbers  of  the 
miserably  poor,  dependent  and  ignorant  classes 
of  the  population  of  the  city  that  there  lies 
the  main  secret  of  Tammany’s  success. 

See  Machine,  Political;  Organization; 
New  York  City;  Tweed  Ring. 

References:  E.  D.  Durand,  Finances  of  Flew 
York  City  (1898)  ; D.  B.  Eaton,  The  Govern- 
ment of  Municipalities  (1899)  ; G.  Myers,  His- 
tory of  Tammany  Hall  (1901)  ; J.  Macy,  Party 
Organisation  and  Machinery  (1904),  285-293; 
C.  F.  Murphy,  “Tammany  Society”  in  Encyclo- 
pedia Americana  (1904);  T.  Roosevelt,  “Ma- 
chine Politics  in  N.  Y.  City”  in  Am.  Ideals 
(1897),  98-128;  C.  A.  Beard,  Readings  in  Am. 
Government  and  Politics  (1911),  581-4. 

Elliot  H.  Goodwin. 

TANEY,  ROGER  BROOKE.  Roger  B.  Taney 
(1777-1864),  Chief  Justice  of  the  United 
States,  was  born  in  Calvert  County,  Md., 
March  17,  1777.  He  was  admitted  to  the  bar 
in  1799,  and  the  same  year  was  elected  to  the 
legislature  as  a Federalist.  He  retired  in  1800, 
and  did  not  enter  politics  again  until  1816, 
when  he  became  a member  of  the  state  senate, 
retaining  his  seat  until  1821.  From  1827  to 
1831  he  was  attorney  general  of  Maryland.  By 
this  time  he  had  became  a Jacksonian  Demo- 
crat, and  in  1831  was  appointed  Attorney  Gen- 
eral of  the  United  States.  In  1833,  on  the  re- 
fusal of  Duane,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
to  remove  the  deposits  from  the  Bank  of  the 
United  States,  he  was  transferred  to  the  Treas- 
ury Department,  and  gave  the  necessary  orders 
for  removal.  The  Senate,  however,  declared  his 
statement  of  reasons  unsatisfactory,  and  re- 
fused to  confirm  the  appointment;  and  he  ac- 
cordingly resigned.  In  1835  he  was  nominated 
for  associate  justice  of  the  Supreme  Court,  but 
confirmation  was  refused.  In  1836  he  became 
Chief  Justice.  Of  his  many  important  de- 
cisions, the  most  notable  were:  Charles  River 
Bridge  Co.  vs.  Warren  Bridge  (see)  ; Prigg  vs. 
Pa.,  in  1844  (16  Peters,  621);  the  .License 
Cases,  in  1846  (5  Howard  504)  ; Luther  vs. 
Borden  (see),  and  Scott  vs.  Sanford,  in  1857 
(19  Howard  393),  commonly  called  the  Dred 
Scott  Case  (see).  Taney  died  at  Washington, 
Oct.  12,  1864.  See  Deed  Scott  Case;  Fugi- 
tive Slaves  ; Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States.  References:  S.  Tyler,  Memoir  of 
Roger  B.  Taney  (1872);  H.  L.  Carson,  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  U.  S.  (1892)  ; H.  von 
Holst,  Const,  and  Pol.  Hist,  of  the  V.  8.  (1877- 
92),  III-VII ; T.  C.  Smith,  Parties  and  Slavery 
(1906)  ; J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  the  U.  8. 

W.  MacD. 


(1893-1905),  II,  III. 
469 


TARIFF  ACTS— TARIFF  ADMINISTRATION 


TARIFF  ACTS.  General  tariffs  were  passed 
in  1789,  1816,  1824,  1828,  1832,  1833,  1842, 
1846,  1857,  1861,  1883,  1890,  1894,  1897,  1909, 
1913.  See  following  acts  by  name:  Dingley 
Tariff  Act;  McKinley  Tariff  Act;  Morrill 
Tariff;  Payne- Aldrich  Tariff;  Underwood 
Tariff  Act;  Wilson-Gorman  Tariff. 

TARIFF  ADMINISTRATION.  Elaborate 

System. — The  administration  of  the  tariff  laws 
devolves  upon  the  Treasury  Department.  Al- 
though import  duties  are  the  most  important 
source  of  revenue,  there  is  no  separate  bureau 
for  customs,  as  in  the  case  of  the  internal 
revenue.  The  administration  is  directly  under 
the  care  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and 
one  of  the  assistant  secretaries  (see  Treasury 
Department).  At  every  step  of  importation 
the  supervision  of  the  Government  is  far-reach- 
ing. It  begins  when  foreign  merchandise  de- 
signed for  import  into  this  country  is  prepared 
for  shipment,  by  requiring  a certification  of 
value  before  consular  officers  of  the  United 
States  abroad.  It  prescribes  methods  of  entry 
of  goods,  of  valuation  and  of  classification  at 
the  port  of  entry  in  order  that  the  proper  rates 
of  duties  may  be  applied.  It  includes  an  elabo- 
rate system  whereby  appeals  may  be  made 
either  by  importers  or  the  Government;  it 
takes  charge  of  the  collection  of  the  duties  and 
provides  for  the  storage  and  warehousing  of 
goods  which  the  importer  does  not  immediately 
wish  to  use,  and  on  which  the  payment  of 
duties  may  be  deferred.  For  collection  of  cus- 
toms the  country  is  divided  into  districts 
in  each  of  which  there  is  a port  of  entry.  In 
several  of  these  ports  there  is  a staff  of  of- 
ficials, a collector,  appraiser,  naval  officer,  sur- 
veyor, inspectors,  and  gaugers,  the  number  of 
the  latter  depending  upon  the  commercial  im- 
portance of  the  port.  At  some  of  the  smaller 
ports  one  person  may  combine  two  or  more 
offices. 

Handling  of  Imports. — Dutiable  merchandise 
must  be  discharged  at  one  of  the  designated 
ports  of  entry  and  no  merchandise  can  be 
brought  by  sea  in  vessels  of  less  than  thirty 
tons.  Every  arriving  vessel  must  carry  a full 
manifest,  or  description  of  the  cargo,  specify- 
ing the  ports  where  the  cargo  was  taken  and 
also  the  names  of  the  consignees,  and  must 
submit  this  manifest  for  inspection  to  revenue 
officers  who  may  board  the  vessel  before  dock- 
ing. Upon  docking,  the  manifest  must  be  de- 
livered to  the  collector,  who  may  then  issue 
a permit  for  the  transfer  of  the  cargo. 

The  unloading  is  under  the  supervision  of  of- 
ficials (see  Collector  of  Customs),  and  must 
be  accomplished  within  a certain  limited  time. 

The  consignees,  or  persons  to  whom  the  mer- 
chandise is  sent,  must  then,  in  order  to  obtain 
the  merchandise,  present  a complete  and  de- 
tailed invoice  stating  the  value  of  the  goods. 
From  this  entry  or  statement  the  gross  amount 
of  duty  is  computed;  and  upon  payment  the 


importer  is  permitted  to  remove  his  merchan- 
dise except  a certain  number  of  packages  re- 
tained for  examination. 

The  valuation  is  then  made  by  officials  known 
as  appraisers  (see).  When  the  dutiable  value 
has  been  ascertained  the  rate  of  duty  to  which 
the  merchandise  is  subject  is  determined  by 
the  collector  of  the  port.  If  it  then  appears 
that  an  importer  has  paid  too  little  or  too 
much  an  adjustment  is  made  by  an  additional 
payment  or  by  a refund  of  the  difference. 
Should  there  be  dissatisfaction  with  the  ap- 
praisal, a reappraisement  may  be  ordered; 
and  appeals  may  be  taken  (as  to  valuation) 
to  the  board  of  general  appraisers,  and  (as  to 
classification  or  other  questions  of  dispute)  to 
the  United  States  Court  of  Customs  Appeals 
(see  Appraisers,  Board  of;  Court  of  Cus- 
toms Appeals). 

At  every  step  of  import,  regulations  are  most 
minute.  A complete  account  would  include 
rules  in  regard  to  packing,  stamping,  and 
marking  of  goods;  the  transportation  of  goods 
in  bond,  that  is,  the  shipment  to  the  interior 
under  custody  of  the  Government  to  be  cared 
for  at  interior  custom  houses,  or  in  transit 
to  foreign  countries;  the  management  of  bond- 
ed warehouses ; the  supervision  of  cartage  and 
lighterage;  and  the  imposition  of  fines,  penal- 
ties, and  forfeits. 

In  the  administration  of  the  customs  laws, 
little  discretionary  power  is  entrusted  to  of- 
ficers. For  this  reason  the  customs  system 
is  often  severely  criticised  when  compared  with 
foreign  practice.  On  the  other  hand  there  is 
greater  opportunity  in  the  United  States  for 
remedy  of  errors  or  unjust  exactions.  In  many 
of  the  European  countries  decisions  of  customs 
officers  are  final  not  only  as  to  valuation  but 
also  as  to  classification. 

Difficulties  of  Appraisement. — The  most  dif- 
ficult duty  involved  in  tariff  administration 
is  to  secure  a correct  appraisement.  For  near- 
ly thirty  years  the  invoice  certified  by  the  oath 
of  the  importer  was  accepted  without  further 
question,  unless  there  was  obvious  intent  to 
defraud  the  revenue.  The  increased  duties  laid 
under  the  tariff  of  1816  led  to  undervaluation, 
and  in  1818  there  was  given  to  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  power  to  order  an  appraise- 
ment for  the  port  of  New  York.  New  rules 
were  also  put  in  force  in  regard  to  the  declara- 
tion of  value  and  the  collector  was  required  to 
examine  a certain  number  of  packages  in  every 
invoice.  Serious  abuses  crept  in  through  the 
practice  of  consigning  goods  from  abroad  to 
American  agents.  In  such  cases  there  was  no 
foreign  bill  of  sale  to  determine  the  value  of 
the  goods  imported.  Oaths  were  consequently 
required  that  the  invoice  represented  the  mark- 
et value  of  the  goods  in  the  place  where  pro- 
cured (Act  of  March  1,  1823). 

In  1830  appraisement  was  extended  to  Boston 
and  Philadelphia  and  a new  rule  of  classifica- 
tion was  adopted  whereby,  for  goods  in  which 


470 


TARIFF  ADMINISTRATION 


either  cotton  or  wool  was  a component  part, 
the  value  of  the  most  expensive  article  in  a 
given  package  should  be  taken  as  the  average 
value  of  the  whole.  In  1842  this  principle  was 
still  further  extended  under  what  is  known  as 
the  similitude  section  of  the  tariff  act  of  that 
year.  This  was  to  the  effect  that  on  a known 
enumerated  article  (that  is,  an  article  for 
which  a duty  was  not  specifically  levied)  which 
bears  a similitude  either  in  material,  quality, 
texture,  or  use  to  any  enumerated  article,  the 
duty  of  the  latter  shall  apply;  if  it  resembles 
two  or  more  materials,  the  highest  rate  at 
which  any  of  the  component  parts  pays  may 
be  chargeable.  This  opened  the  way  to  un- 
certainty in  entries,  disputes,  and  innumerable 
decisions,  many  of  which  are  contradictory, 
and  has  prolonged  litigation. 

Payment  of  Duties. — Duties  are  paid  to  the 
collector  and  by  him  transferred  to  the  Treas- 
ury Department.  When  imported  goods  on 
which  duties  have  been  paid  are  exported  a 
refund  of  duties  termed  a drawback  (see)  may 
in  certain  cases  be  allowed. 

Thus  step  by  step  legislation  was  made  more 
stringent  in  order  to  make  operative  the  in- 
creasing rates  of  successive  tariffs.  In  1842 
credit  in  payments  of  duties  was  abolished, 
cash  payments  being  demanded.  In  1846  great- 
er liberality  was  shown  in  providing  for  the 
establishment  of  a warehouse  system  whereby 
the  payment  of  duties  should  be  deferred  while 
the  merchandise  was  in  bond. 

Administrative  Difficulties. — The  higher  tar- 
iff duties  of  the  Civil  War  led  to  still  more 
stringent  regulations  to  prevent  undervalua- 
tion. New  checks  were  introduced.  The  con- 
sular verification  originally  adopted  in  1818 
was  now  extended  to  invoices  made  in  tripli- 
cate. One  of  the  invoices  was  to  be  retained 
in  the  consular  office,  one  transmitted  to  the 
collector  of  the  port  where  the  entry  was  to 
be  made,  and  the  third  given  to  the  person 
making  the  entry.  It  was  also  provided  that 
commission  charges  of  the  agents  in  the  United 
States  should  be  taken  into  account  in  calcu- 
lating the  values  of  goods.  In  1870  authority 
was  given  for  the  appointment  of  special  agents 
whose  function  is  to  ferret  out,  either  in  this 
country  or  abroad,  intended  frauds  upon  the 
revenue. 

Notwithstanding  these  repeated  efforts  to 
prevent  fraud  and  undervaluation,  the  evil 
continued.  In  1885  Secretary  Manning  under- 
took an  exhaustive  investigation  of  the  meth- 
ods of  appraisement,  drawbacks,  and  under- 
valuation, the  results  of  which  were  published 
by  the  Treasury  Department  in  the  Finance 
Report  of  1885.  Attention  in  particular  was 
called  to  frauds  in  the  agency  system  or  prac- 
tice of  consignment,  an  abuse  which  the  law 
had  endeavored  to  check  in  the  earlier  part  of 
the  century.  More  serious  even  than  fraud 
was  the  confusion  caused  by  intricate  rules  in 
regard  to  classification  of  goods. 


Recent  System. — No  action,  however,  was 
taken  until  1890  when  the  so-called  McKinley 
Customs  Administrative  Act  was  passed  includ- 
ing most  of  Manning’s  suggestions.  Additional 
penalties  were  provided  for  undervaluation, 
and  in  order  to  secure  uniformity  of  appraisal 
at  different  ports  the  number  of  general  ap- 
praisers was  increased,  and  these  officers  were 
organized  into  courts  to  settle  questions  of  ap- 
peal. Since  1890  there  have  been  few  addi- 
tional changes.  The  most  significant,  before 
the  Underwood  Tariff  Act  of  1913,  was  the 
act  of  July  24,  1897,  which  modified  the  prin- 
ciple of  penalty  for  undervaluation;  and  in 
1909  the  establishment  of  the  Court  of  Customs 
Appeals  (see  Customs  Appeals,  Court  of). 
In  order  to  protect  the  Treasury  still  further 
the  act  of  1909  provided  for  an  additional  as- 
sistant attorney  general  with  deputies  who 
should  have  charge  before  the  courts  of  the 
interests  of  the  Government  in  all  matters  of 
reappraisement  and  classification,  thus  creating 
a special  division  in  the  Department  of  Justice 
for  the  effective  settlement  of  tariff  litigation. 

In  1913  an  unsuccessful  effort  was  made  to 
incorporate  in  the  Underwood  Tariff  Act  (see) 
a provision  intended  to  facilitate  the  detection 
of  undervaluation  and  fraud  by  empowering 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  exclude  from 
entry  the  merchandise  of  foreign  exporters  or 
manufacturers  refusing  to  submit  their  books 
to  the  examination  of  duly  accredited  investi- 
gating officers  of  the  United  States.  The  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasury  was  empowered,  how- 
ever, to  assess  an  additional  duty  of  15  per 
cent  ad  valorem  on  such  merchandise  when 
the  laws  of  the  country  of  exportation  do  not 
provide  for  the  administration  of  oaths  to 
invoices  and  for  punishment  for  false  swearing; 
he  was  empowered  further  to  assess  similar  ad- 
ditional duty  on  the  imports  of  importers  re- 
fusing to  submit  their  books  to  the  examina- 
tion of  customs  officials.  The  Underwood  Act 
retained  in  general  the  administrative  features 
of  its  immediate  predecessors  but  made  the 
penalties  for  attempted  evasion  more  severe. 

See  Appraisal  of  Imported  Goods  for  Dut- 
ies; Appraisers,  Boards  of  General;  Ap- 
praisers of  Duties;  Collector  of  Customs; 
Duties,  Ad  Valorem;  Duties,  Drawbacks 
on;  Duties,  Foreign  Valuation  for;  Duties, 
Specific;  Duty  on  Imports,  Average  Rates 
of;  Forfeitures  as  a Source  of  Revenue;  In- 
fant Industry;  Naval  Officer  in  Customs 
Service;  Reciprocity;  Revenue  Cutter  Serv- 
ice; Smuggling;  Sugar  Frauds;  Survfyor  of 
Customs;  Tariff  Board  of  1910;  Tariff  for 
Revenue  Only;  Tariff  Legislation,  Fram- 
ing of;  Tariff,  Maximum  and  Minimum; 
Tariff  Policy  of  the  United  States  ; Tariff 
Rates;  Tariff  Reform;  Tariff  Statistics; 
Taxation  of  Raw  Materials;  Underwood 
Tariff  Act;  Undervaluations. 

References:  J.  D.  Goss,  Hist,  of  Tariff  Ad- 
ministration in  the  U.  S.  (1891) ; D.  R.  Dewey, 


471 


TARIFF  AS  A LOCAL  ISSUE— TARIFF  COMMISSIONS 


Financial  Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  ( 1903 ) , 489-492, 
189-191,  references,  477;  A.  S.  Bolles,  Fi- 
nancial Hist,  of  the  U.  8.  (1886),  III,  489- 
522;  U.  S.  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  para- 
graphs on  “Customs  Service”  in  Annual  Re- 
ports. Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TARIFF  AS  A LOCAL  ISSUE.  In  1880, 
General  Hancock,  Democratic  candidate  for 
President,  in  a published  interview  remarked 
that  “the  tariff  is  a local  affair.”  This  state- 
ment was  received  with  derision  by  the  Re- 
publicans, who  upheld  protection  as  a national 
system;  and  it  proved  a heavy  handicap  to  the 
Democrats  in  the  subsequent  campaign.  So 
vulnerable  was  this  characterization  that  Re- 
publican orators  kept  it  alive  for  many  years 
as  evidence  of  the  unpatriotic  conviction  of 
their  opponents.  The  word  “affair”  in  popu- 
lar use  was  changed  to  “issue.”  See  Tariff 
Policy  of  the  United  States.  Reference: 
E.  Stanwood,  Am.  Tariff  Controversies  (1903), 
II,  200.  D.  R.  D. 

TARIFF  BOARD  OF  1910.  By  the  tariff  act 
of  August  5,  1909,  authority  was  given  to  the 
President  to  employ  persons  to  assist  him  in 
securing  information  in  order  to  carry  out  the 
provisions  of  the  maximum  and  minimum 
clause  of  the  tariff.  Primarily  for  this  pur- 
pose a board  of  three  persons  (later  increased 
to  five)  was  appointed;  but  under  instructions 
from  the  President  the  board  undertook  a 
broader  investigation,  and  in  1910  a more  gen- 
erous appropriation  was  granted,  whereby  the 
board  could  investigate  the  cost  of  manu- 
factures and  rates  of  wages  in  foreign  coun- 
tries. 

There  was  much  opposition  to  the  establish- 
ment of  the  board  on  the  ground  that  the 
framing  of  tariff  measures  belonged  exclusive- 
ly to  the  legislative  branch  of  government; 
and  that,  if  established,  it  should  report  di- 
rectly to  Congress  instead  of  to  the  executive. 
President  Taft,  however,  insisted  upon  the 
experiment,  and  was  supported  by  public  senti- 
ment which  had  been  exasperated  by  the  out- 
come of  the  Payne-Aldrich  tariff  (see)  legisla- 
tion. Congress  consequently  gave  a grudging 
assent. 

In  1911  the  board  made  exhaustive  reports 
on  the  pulp  and  news  print  paper  and  the  wool 
and  woolen  industries,  and  in  1912  on  the 
cotton  industry.  Pending  the  submission 
of  reports,  President  Taft  refused  to  sign  any 
tariff  measures  passed  by  Congress.  As  the 
preparation  of  reports  requires  careful  inves- 
tigation carried  on  by  many  experts  in  differ- 
ent parts  of  the  world,  and  as  in  the  reports 
submitted  the  board  declined  to  frame  recom- 
mendations in  regard  to  future  legislation, 
there  was  much  impatience  with  its  service, 
and  it  was  abolished  on  June  30,  1912,  by  the 
refusal  of  Congress  to  appropriate  funds  for 
its  maintenance. 


See  Commissions  in  American  Govern- 
ment; Lahor,  Protection  to;  Pauper  Labor; 
Payne-Aldrich  Tariff;  Tariff  Commissions; 
Tariff  Legislation,  Framing  of. 

References:  H.  C,  Emery,  “Tariff  Board  and 
its  Work”  in  Sen.  Does.,  61  Cong.,  3 Sess.,  No. 
700;  F.  W.  Taussig,  “Tariff  and  the  Tariff 
Commission”  in  Atlantic  Monthly,  CVT,  Dec. 
1910;  Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  1911,  1912. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TARIFF  COMMISSIONS.  Commission  of 
1865. — In  1865,  Congress  authorized  the  ap- 
pointment of  a revenue  commission  to  seek  out 
new  methods  of  obtaining  revenue.  As  the 
emergency  of  war  soon  terminated,  the  com- 
mission, composed  of  David  A.  Wells,  Stephen 
Colwell,  and  S.  S.  Hayes,  applied  itself  to  ad- 
vising in  regard  to  changes  in  the  tariff  and 
internal  revenue  laws  already  in  operation. 
In  1866,  Mr.  Wells,  under  authority  of  an- 
other act,  was  made  Special  Commissioner  of 
the  Revenue,  with  power  “to  inquire  into  all 
the  sources  of  national  revenue,”  and  to  report 
bills  to  Congress,  the  office  expiring  in  1870. 
The  special  problem  before  him  was  the  ad- 
justment of  tariff  and  internal  revenue  duties 
so  that  the  domestic  producer  should  be  put 
on  a parity  with  the  importer.  Wells  executed 
his  commission  with  conscientious  faithfulness 
and  industry,  and  collected  a large  amount  of 
valuable  data  which  were  presented  in  succes- 
sive annual  reports.  Beginning  as  a protec- 
tionist, he  became  convinced  of  the  need  of 
radical  tariff  reform  in  the  direction  of  free 
trade.  Meanwhile  the  protectionists  were  or- 
ganizing for  permanent  high  tariffs;  the  Re- 
publican party  committed  itself  to  this  move- 
ment, and  Mr.  Wells  was  soon  out  of  sympathy 
with  controlling  opinion.  His  constructive  in- 
fluence upon  legislation  was  therefore  nuga- 
tory. Undoubtedly  this  ineffective  ending 
brought  commission  expert  service  into  dis- 
repute. 

Commission  of  1883. — By  1880  the  need  of  a 
further  reduction  of  revenue  became  apparent. 
Successive  surpluses  enriched  the  Treasury, 
which  could  not  advantageously  be  applied  to 
the  redemption  of  the  debt.  In  1881,  Secretary 
Folger,  endorsed  by  President  Arthur,  sug- 
gested the  appointment  of  a commission  made 
up  of  expert  representatives  of  manufactures, 
agriculture,  and  commerce,  which  could  sit  as 
a board  “without  hampering  formalities,”  to 
frame  a tariff  law.  A commission  was  au- 
thorized, composed  of  nine  persons,  with  in- 
structions to  revise  the  tariff  “upon  a scale 
of  justice  to  all  interests.”  Among  the  mem- 
bership was  a representative  of  the  wool 
manufacturers,  an  iron  manufacturer,  a wool 
grower,  a sugar  grower,  a census  office  statis- 
tician, and  an  officer  of  the  customs  service. 

Six  months  were  given  for  the  preparation 
of  the  report.  The  commission  prosecuted  its 
work  energetically;  hearings  were  held  in 


472 


TARIFF  FOR  REVENUE  ONLY— TARIFF  LEGISLATION,  FRAMING  OF 


twenty-nine  different  places.  An  opportunity 
was  freely  given  to  anyone  who  wished  to  ap- 
pear as  witness.  The  commission  recommend- 
ed a reduction  of  duties  amounting  on  an 
average  to  over  20  per  cent,  but  did  not  at- 
tempt to  frame  a bill  with  precise  details  as 
to  rates,  leaving  this  to  Congress.  That  body 
paid  little  heed  to  its  recommendations.  The 
Senate  and  the  House  each  proceeded  to  pre- 
pare a bill,  and  soon  Congress  plunged  in*o  a 
controversy  in  which  each  industry  and  sec- 
tion endeavored  to  secure  the  maximum 
amount  of  benefit,  irrespective  of  the  merits 
of  a well-considered  general  policy. 

General  Principles. — This  failure  was  con- 
clusive for  many  years  in  defeating  any  pro- 
posal to  delegate  to  any  board  or  commission 
outside  of  congressional  representation  the 
duty  of  framing  a tariff  measure.  Such  sug- 
gestions have  also  been  opposed  on  the  ground 
that  a permanent  body  would  perpetually  keep 
tariff  questions  stirred  up ; that  a non-partisan 
board  would  be  ineffective,  as  protectionists 
and  free-traders  are  too  far  apart  on  funda- 
mental principles  to  agree  even  on  facts;  and 
that  Congress  already  has  sufficient  power  to 
secure  necessary  expert  assistance  for  purposes 
of  investigation  and  collection  of  data.  On 
the  other  hand  it  is  urged  that  international 
trade  relationships  have  become  complicated; 
that  manufacturing  processes  are  rapidly 
changing;  and  that  consumers  have  little  op- 
portunity in  the  stress  of  the  preparation  of 
a tariff  bill  by  Congress  of  presenting  their 
claims.  Hence  equitable  and  intelligent  action 
can  be  obtained  only  through  a commission 
which  is  in  continuous  session.  By  such  a 


policy  it  would  be  possible  to  change  the  tariff 
piecemeal,  thus  affecting  a few  interests  at  a 
time,  instead  of  subjecting  all  industry  to  the 
turmoil  of  general  tariff  revision  every  few 
years  when  there  was  a change  in  party 
control. 

See  Tariff  Board  of  1910;  Tariff  Legisla- 
tion, Framing  of;  Tariff  Policy  of  the 
United  States. 

References:  E.  Stan  wood,  Am.  Tariff  Contro- 
versies (1903),  II,  158-166,  202-207;  Tariff 
Commission,  Report  (1882);  W.  McKinley, 
Speeches  and  Addresses  (1893),  70-123;  J. 
Sherman,  Recollections  (1895),  II,  841-855. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TARIFF  FOR  REVENUE  ONLY.  By  this 
phrase  is  meant  the  imposition  of  duties  which 
have  for  their  primary  aim  the  raising  of 
revenue.  As  popularly  used,  however,  the  adop- 
tion of  such  a principle  does  not  necessarily 
condemn  protection,  for  in  laying  revenue  dut- 
ies, discrimination,  it  is  asserted,  may  be  made 
whereby  certain  industries  will  receive  protec- 
tive aid.  President  Polk  and  Secretary  Walk- 
er, in  1846,  gave  the  term  prominence;  and  of 
all  the  tariffs,  that  of  1846  comes  the  nearest 
to  being  one  for  “revenue  only.”  The  phrase 
is  often  used  in  a still  looser  sense,  as  repre- 
senting undefined  opposition  to  the  protective 
system  as  developed  in  more  recent  years.  For 
example,  in  1876  the  Democratic  platform  de- 
manded that  “custom-house  taxation  be  only 
for  revenue.”  It  was  not,  however,  intended 
that  the  phrase  should  be  taken  literally.  See 
Tariff  Policy  of  the  United  States;  Tariff 
Reform.  D.  R.  D. 


TARIFF  LEGISLATION,  FRAMING  OF 


Parliamentary  Theory. — The  theory  of  leg- 
islation in  America  is  that  a bill  shall  be 
offered  by  an  individual  member,  referred  to  a 
committee  to  be  perfected,  reported  to  the  main 
body  for  discussion,  submitted  to  a formal  vote, 
subject  to  yea  and  nay  record  if  a sufficient 
number  of  members  so  desire.  In  practice  not 
one  of  these  steps  is  considered  essential,  and 
many  bills  are  enacted  into  ordinances  and 
laws  which  observe  almost  none  of  them. 
Measures  are  frequently  prepared  by  persons 
not  members  of  the  legislative  body;  thousands 
of  propositions  are  every  year  pigeon-holed 
by  committees;  hundreds  of  statutes  have  never 
been  voted  upon  at  all,  being  carried  by  un- 
animous consent;  and  on  many  important 
measures  no  yea  and  nay  vote  is  secured. 

No  form  of  legislation  is  more  subject  to 
extra-parliamentary  influences  than  the  tariff 
hills  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States.  So 
far  from  springing  from  individual  initiative, 
every  single  general  tariff  from  1789  to  1913 


has  gone  through  a preparation  outside  of  Con- 
gress; and  since  1877  every  tariff  has  been 
decided  upon  in  the  last  resort  by  a small 
minority  in  both  Houses,  acting  as  a party 
committee  and  securing  the  assent  of  party 
colleagues,  so  as  to  make  a majority.  The 
principal  features  in  this  method  of  preparing 
legislation  may  be  analyzed  as  follows: 

Bills  Prepared  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treas- 
ury.— In  other  countries,  similar  financial 
measures  are  usually  brought  in  by  the  finance 
minister  or  Prime  Minister.  In  the  United 
States  this  practice  has  been  infrequent  and 
there  has  been  no  case  in  late  years.  Alexander 
Hamilton  did  not  take  office  until  after  the  first 
tariff  was  framed,  but  he  did  prepare,  and 
Congress  accepted,  several  minor  acts  for 
slightly  increasing  tariff  duties.  The  doubling 
of  the  duties  in  the  War  of  1812  was  an  ad- 
ministration measure.  The  tariff  of  1816  was 
in  most  features  acceptable  to,  if  not  actually 
drawn  by,  Secretary  Dallas.  In  1846,  Secre- 


473 


TARIFF  LEGISLATION,  FRAMING  OF 


tary  Walker,  in  conference  with  some  officers 
of  the  customs,  drafted  a tariff  bill  which  was 
substantially  enacted  under  the  name  of  the 
Walker  tariff.  Some  changes,  chiefly  admin- 
istrative, were  made  under  the  influence  of 
Secretary  Chase  during  the  Civil  War.  Secre- 
tary Manning,  in  Cleveland’s  first  administra- 
tion, carefully  prepared  an  administration 
tariff  bill,  partly  a codification  of  preexisting 
law,  and  partly  a measure  of  administrative 
reform.  This  was  taken  up  in  Harrison’s  ad- 
ministration and  made  a separate  statute 
alongside  the  McKinley  Tariff  Act  of  1890; 
while  adopting  a different  principle  for  the 
ascertainment  of  values  from  that  proposed  by 
Manning,  the  statute  retained  many  reform 
features.  The  McKinley  Tariff  Act  of  the 
same  years  was  prepared  by  the  committee 
on  ways  and  means  with  very  little  heed  to 
the  advice  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 
Since  that  time,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
has  sometimes  been  called  upon  to  prepare 
statements  of  the  results  of  tariffs  then  in 
force,  but  never  has  been  recognized  as  a 
legislative  party  to  the  framing  of  a tariff 
bill. 

Bills  Prepared  by  Committees. — In  the  early 
Congresses,  bills  were  framed  by  special 
committees  formed  for  that  sole  purpose;  but 
in  1794  was  appointed  a ways  and  means  com- 
mittee of  the  House,  which  proved  to  be  the 
body  most  interested  in  the  methods  of  raising 
funds  for  the  public  service.  Hence,  the  tariff 
eventually  came  under  its  jurisdiction.  For 
many  years  the  committee  from  time  to  time 
brought  forward  measures  which  were  duly 
debated  in  the  House,  and  which  underwent 
considerable  changes  through  amendments  pro- 
posed and  voted  on  the  floor.  A striking  ex- 
ample is  the  Tariff  of  Abominations  of  1828, 
which  was  amended  out  of  shape  and  passed 
in  a form  unwelcome  to  its  friends. 

In  the  twenties  and  thirties  there  was  an 
occasional  fight  on  the  floor  over  the  question 
to  which  committee  proposed  tariff  bills  should 
be  sent.  The  committee  on  commerce  and  the 
committee  on  manufactures  sometimes  claimed 
them.  Since  1861,  however,  such  measures 
have  invariably  sprung  from  the  House  com- 
mittee on  ways  and  means.  Since  1890  each 
tariff  law  has  been  named  from  the  chairman 
of  the  committee  on  ways  and  means  which 
framed  it;  thus,  the  McKinley  tariff  of  1890, 
the  Wilson  tariff  of  1894,  the  Dingley  tariff  of 
1897,  the  Payne  tariff  of  1909,  and  the  Under- 
wood tariff  of  1913. 

For  many  years  the  bill  thus  prepared  by  the 
committee  on  ways  and  means  has  lacked  the 
participation  of  the  minority  members  of  that 
committee.  The  method  followed  is  for  the  ma- 
jority members  to  hold  sessions  and  prepare 
a bill  which  for  form’s  sake,  is  finally  laid 
before  the  whole  committee  and  there  voted 
upon.  But  the  minority  members,  so  far 
from  sharing  in  framing  the  bill,  include  the 


strongest  and  most  determined  opponents  of 
tariff  which  their  committee  reports. 

Hearings  by  committees  before  report  is 
made  are  not  required  by  any  statute  or  by 
unvarying  practice.  Since  1882,  the  commit- 
tee in  charge  has  usually  held  some  open  ses- 
sions and  listened  to  suggestions  and  argu- 
ments in  which  individuals  and  corporations 
which  desire  or  disapprove  particular  parts  of 
the  bill  have  an  opportunity  to  present  their 
views.  There  is  a general  belief  that  public 
arguments  coming  from  the  party  or  the  side 
which  is  unfavorable  to  the  pending  bill  have 
little  chance  to  affect  the  opinions  of  the 
committee.  The  hearings  are  commonly  looked 
upon  as  simply  a method  of  disarming  any 
later  criticism  to  the  effect  that  no  opportun- 
ity was  given  to  point  out  mistakes  in  the 
bill.  In  practice,  the  bill  is  not  prepared  even 
by  the  majority  of  the  ways  and  means  com- 
mittee. The  chairman,  in  conference  with 
other  leaders  of  his  party  in  the  House,  in  the 
Senate,  and  outside  of  Congress,  sometimes  in- 
cluding the  President  of  the  United  States, 
decides  what  shall  be  the  general  type  of  the 
bill;  and  it  is  in  practice  launched  by  a party 
steering  committee.  The  Underwood  Tariff  of 
1913  was  by  exception  several  times  discussed 
by  a Democratic  party  caucus,  which  settled 
contested  details. 

Discussion  in  the  House  of  Representatives. 
— Once  the  bill  is  duly  reported  to  the  House, 
debate  follows,  which  lasts  for  weeks  or 
months.  Members  of  the  majority  party  take 
the  opportunity  to  show  their  zeal  for  the 
party  measure;  members  of  the  minority  at- 
tack the  bill  in  principle  and  in  detail.  In 
some  tariff  discussions  those  in  charge  of  the 
bill  have  allowed  to  the  minority  and  to  their 
own  friends  no  fair  chance  for  a vote  on 
amendments  unwelcome  to  them.  In  the  de- 
bates of  1913,  free  opportunity  was  given  for 
amendments,  all  of  which,  however,  were  in- 
variably voted  down  unless  accepted  by  those 
in  charge  of  the  bill.  Tariff  debates  are  often 
lively  and  lead  to  direct  personal  discussion  in 
short  and  pointed  speeches.  In  order  to  reach 
any  result,  debate  must  close  in  the  teeth  of 
opposition;  but  there  is  little  complaint  of 
lack  of  an  opportunity  to  talk  against  the  bill. 

The  Tariff  in  the  Senate. — Since  1880,  the 
Senate  has  been  a powerful  factor  in  the  ad- 
justment of  all  tariff  questions.  Notwithstand- 
ing the  constitutional  provision  that  all  bills 
for  revenue  must  originate  in  the  House  of 
Representatives,  the  Senate  has  full  power  to 
amend  any  measure  that  comes  before  it  and 
liberally  exercises  this  power  upon  tariff  bills; 
so  much  so,  that  the  tariff  of  1894  has  been 
commonly  known  as  the  Wilson-Gorman  tariff, 
because  of  the  great  influence  of  Senator  Gor- 
man upon  its  text;  and  the  tariff  of  1909  is 
known  as  the  Payne-Aldrich  tariff.  The  Senate 
has  once  or  twice  framed  tariff  bills  on  its 
own  account  but  the  House  has  always  ignored 


474 


TARIFF  LEGISLATION,  FRAMING  OF 


them.  Nevertheless,  the  Senate  reached  the 
same  end  by  so  amending  the  bills  in  commit- 
tees and  in  later  discussions  that  it  practically 
framed  new  measures.  This  was  especially 
notable  in  the  case  of  the  tariffs  of  1883  and 
of  1894;  in  the  latter  case  the  bill  which  issued 
from  Congress  was  so  unsatisfactory  to  Presi- 
dent Cleveland  that  he  refused  to  sign  it,  and 
it  became  a law  by  ten-days  rule. 

The  Senate  committee,  like  that  of  the 
House,  sometimes  has  open  hearings,  but  this 
legislative  branch  is  smaller  and  is  easier  to 
manage  through  a small  steering  committee. 
In  general,  the  Senate  has  for  many  years  been 
more  favorable  to  a high  scale  of  duties  than 
the  House,  and  its  amendments  are  usually  in 
an  upward  direction.  In  1913,  however,  the 
Senate  committee,  followed  by  the  party  ma- 
jority in  the  Senate,  reduced  many  rates  as 
they  stood  in  the  House  bill. 

Committees  of  Conference.— Tariffs  are  more 
hotly  debated  than  almost  any  other  kind  of 
bill,  because,  since  1883,  the  tariff  has  been  a 
burning  party  issue,  and  because  so  many  man- 
ufacturing interests  have  a voice  through  mem- 
bers of  the  House  and  Senate.  Hence  there  is 
extreme  difficulty,  first  in  framing  any  bill  ac- 
ceptable to  the  majority  of  the  committee  on 
ways  and  means;  then  in  getting  for  the  com- 
plicated measure  the  necessary  party  majority 
in  the  House;  and  finally  in  establishing  an 
agreement  between  the  two' houses.  This  neces- 
sary adjustment  in  the  last  resort  has  been 
commonly  made  by  a conference  committee, 
which,  in  practice,  is  disposed  to  accept  rather 
the  Senate  than  the  House  point  of  view,  and 
frequently  inserts  provisions  which  have  re- 
ceived the  assent  of  neither  house.  This  is  a 
clumsy  method  of  securing  agreement,  which, 
under  other  forms  of  government,  is  secured 
by  a responsible  ministry  which  makes  the 
bill  a party  issue.  No  adequate  debate  can  be 
had  on  a conference  report  and  it  offers  ample 
opportunity  to  slip  in  “jokers.” 

Influences  out  of  Doors. — In  1789  merchants 
of  Baltimore  petitioned  Congress  to  pass  a pro- 
tective tariff,  and  ever  since  that  time  peti- 
tions, delegations,  and  members  acting  under 
the  pressure  of  their  constituents  have  brought 
to  bear  upon  Congress  powerful  and  conflict- 
ing influences.  From  1828  to  1832  several  in- 
formal conventions  were  held  for  and  against 
the  protective  system.  Since  the  Civil  War 
organizations  of  manufacturers  or  producers 
of  raw  products  have  arisen  which  keep  up 
agencies  and  often  lobbies  in  Congress  to  stimu- 
late public  opinion  in  favor  of  their  interests. 
In  1890  and  at  various  times  thereafter,  repre- 
sentatives of  protected  industries,  such  as  the 
silk  and  woolen,  have  been  invited  to  draft 
sections  of  a tariff  bill  which  would  be  accept- 
able to  them.  This  in  part  accounts  for  the 
complications  of  some  of  the  tariff  schedules, 
which  make  it  impossible  for  anyone  but  an 
expert  to  understand  the  precise  protective  ef- 
128 


feet  of  the  tariff.  Under  such  provisions  du- 
ties have  sometimes  amounted  to  a hundred 
per  cent  of  the  value  of  foreign  goods.  The 
fact  that  many  protected  concerns  have  been 
in  the  habit  of  contributing  to  campaign  funds 
has  concentrated  political  attention  upon  their 
influence  over  the  framing  of  tariffs.  In  1913 
the  revelation  of  the  methods  of  lobbying  in 
the  interest  of  manufacturers  helped  to  break 
down  opposition  to  the  Underwood  bill. 

Commissions. — In  1882  an  effort  was  made 
to  avoid  the  wrangles  of  the  tariff  by  appoint- 
ing a supposedly  non-partisan  committee  which 
should  hold  public  hearings  and  discuss  details 
and  then  report  to  Congress.  This  plan 
worked  admirably,  except  that  Congress  prac- 
tically overrode  the  commission’s  report,  and 
in  the  end  the  tariff  of  1883  established  a 
higher  scale  of  duty  than  the  previous  tariff 
and  than  that  provided  for  in  the  commission’s 
report.  In  1909  President  Taft  secured  a 
statute  for  a Tariff  Board  which  was  to  pre- 
pare statistics  showing  the  actual  cost  of 
goods  to  foreign  manufacturers.  This  board 
made  several  reports.  Congress,  however,  was 
hostile  to  it  from  the  beginning,  and  eventual- 
ly cut  off  the  appropriation,  though  both  the 
Republican  and  Progressive  parties,  in  their 
platforms  of  1912,  advocated  tariff  boards. 

The  President. — Under  the  strict  theory  of 
separation  of  powers  (see),  the  President  has 
no  part  in  tariff  legislation  until  it  has 
been  laid  before  him;  and  there  is  no  case  of 
the  veto  of  a general  tariff  bill  during  the 
whole  century  of  tariff  history.  In  practice, 
Presidents,  partly  as  party  leaders,  and  partly 
from  a desire  to  act  for  the  whole  people,  have 
frequently  shared  in  tariff  discussions.  Jack- 
son  was  a factor  in  framing  the  tariff  of  1833; 
and  his  good  will  was  essential  to  its  passage. 
Polk  was  interested  in  the  tariff  of  1846.  The 
tariff  of  1894  was  the  result  of  a direct  issue 
raised  by  President  Cleveland  in  his  annual 
message  of  1887,  and  he  took  an  active  part 
in  trying  to  secure  a different  tariff  from  that 
finally  passed  under  the  name  of  the  Wilson- 
Gorman  tariff.  The  Dingley  tariff  of  1897 
had  the  good  will  of  President  McKinley,  who 
had  been  the  responsible  framer  of  the  tariff 
of  1890.  The  tariff  of  1909  was  for  a time 
held  up  by  objections  of  President  Taft,  who 
apparently  doubted  whether  it  squared  with 
the  party  promises  in  the  platform  of  1908. 
He  signed  the  bill,  however,  and  became  its 
warm  advocate  in  public  addresses.  In  1913, 
President  Wilson  took  a more  prominent  part 
in  the  tariff  than  any  President  in  the  pre- 
vious history  of  the  country,  holding  political 
conferences  with  party  leaders,  calling  a spe- 
cial session  of  Congress  for  the  express  pur- 
pose of  enacting  the  tariff,  using  his  personal 
influence  in  the  direction  of  particular  clauses 
of  the  bill,  and  pressing  the  responsible  fram- 
ers to  accept  his  views  on  the  admission  of 
raw  materials. 


475 


TARIFF,  MAXIMUM  AND  MINIMUM— TARIFF  POLICY  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


See  Executive  and  Congress;  Free  Trade 
and  Protection;  Tariff  Commissions;  tariff 
acts  by  name;  and  under  Tariff. 

References:  J.  L.  Bishop,  Hist,  of  Manufac- 
tures (1861-4);  J.  D.  Goss,  Hist,  of  Tariff 
Administration  (1890);  F.  W.  Taussig,  Tariff 
Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (rev.  ed.,  1910)  ; Edward 
Stanwood,  American  Tariff  Controversies 
(1904)  ; Congressional  Globe  and  Congres- 
sional Record  for  the  sessions  of  tariff  de- 
bates; A.  B.  Hart,  Ed.,  The  American  Nation 
(1906-8),  chapters  on  the  various  tariffs; 
D.  R.  Dewey,  Financial  Hist,  of  the  U.  S. 
(1902),  passim.  Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

TARIFF,  MAXIMUM  AND  MINIMUM.  The 

Payne-Aldrich  tariff  act  (see)  of  August  23, 
1909,  provided  that  after  March  31  of  the 
following  year  there  should  be  added  to  the 
duties  specified  in  the  act,  constituting  the 
minimum  tariff,  further  duties  amounting  to 
25  per  cent  of  the  value  of  goods  imported, 
when  such  goods  were  imported  from  a coun- 
try which  imposed  any  undue  discrimination 
against  the  exports  of  the  United  States.  Such 
provisions  are  in  use  in  European  tariffs  and 
are  designed  to  place  nations  on  a common  foot- 
ing in  their  commercial  relationships. 

A somewhat  similar  provision,  though  lim- 
ited in  its  application,  was  incorporated  in 
the  tariff  act  of  1890,  when  power  was 
given  to  the  President  to  levy  by  proclama- 
tion certain  duties  upon  imports  from  certain 
countries  if  it  appeared  that  unreasonable 
duties  were  levied  upon  certain  productions  of 
the  United  States  ( see  McKinley  Tariff 
Act).  Undue  discrimination,  under  the  act 
of  1909,  may  be  either  in  the  way  of  tariff 
rates  or  by  export  bounty  or  export  duty  or 
prohibition  upon  exports.  Decision  as  to  the 
existence  and  discrimination  lies  with  the 
President,  and  the  power  thus  granted  is 
continuous. 

This  plan  of  maximum  duties  was  strongly 
opposed  when  under  consideration.  There  was 
fear  of  tariff  wars  and,  if  necessity  caused  its 
enforcement,  of  creating  complications  in 
schedules  regularly  established  in  the  act  for 
certain  definite  ends.  For  example,  if  dispute 
should  arise  with  Australia  and  cheap  wool 
be  barred  from  this  country  by  the  maximum 


rate,  the  wool  might  be  diverted  to  the  mills 
of  other  countries  and  when  manufactured 
compete  successfully  with  American  cloth. 
So  too  there  was  fear  that  preference  given  by 
Canada  to  British  imports  might  be  con- 
strued as  a discrimination  against  the  United 
States.  Fortunately  these  fears  proved 
groundless.  Negotiations  were  immediately 
entered  into,  particularly  with  Canada  and 
Germany,  and  by  March  31,  1910,  all  obstacles 
were  removed.  The  maximum  and  minimum 
provisions  of  the  act  of  1909  were  abolished 
in  the  Underwood  act  of  1913. 

The  term  “maximum  and  minimum  tariff” 
is  to  be  distinguished  carefully  from  minimum 
duties  which  involves  the  arbitrary  valuation 
of  goods  to  which  rates  are  applied. 

See  Duties  on  Imports,  Average  Rate  of; 
Payne-Aldrich  Tariff;  Reciprocity;  Tariff 
Policy  of  the  U.  S.  Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TARIFF,  MINIMUM.  A term  applied  to  the 

lower  of  two  scales  of  duties,  one  or  the  other 
of  which  is  to  be  applied  to  foreign  countries 
according  as  they  are  considered  to  be  fair 
or  unfair  to  American  exportations.  See 
Tariff,  Maximum  and  Minimum.  D.  R.  D. 

TARIFF  OF  ABOMINATIONS.  This  term 
was  applied  to  the  tariff  of  1828.  The  pro- 
tectionist party  at  that  time  was  divided 
between  the  followers  of  John  Quincy  Adams, 
for  the  most  part  from  New  England,  who 
wished  high  duties  on  the  manufactures  of 
that  section,  but  low  duties  on  raw  materials; 
and  partisans  of  Jackson  from  middle  and 
western  states,  who  labored  for  duties  on 
pig  iron,  hemp,  flax  and  wool.  The  low  tariff 
men  were  in  minority,  but  supported  the  bill 
with  high  rates  especially  on  raw  materials 
in  the  expectation  that  it  would  be  made  so 
obnoxious  that  the  New  England  representa- 
tives would  refuse  to  support  it  in  its  final 
form.  The  plan  miscarried,  and  the  bill,  with 
all  its  objectionable  features,  passed.  See  Tar- 
iff Legislation,  Framing  of;  Tariff  Rates. 
References:  F.  W.  Taussig,  Tariff  Hist,  of 
the  U.  S.  (5th  ed.,  1910),  84-103;  E.  Stan- 
wood, Am.  Tariff  Controversies  ( 1903 ) , I,  269- 
288 ; D.  R.  Dewey,  Financial  Hist,  of  the  U.  S. 
(1903),  176-181.  D.  R.  D. 


TARIFF  POLICY  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


Revolutionary. — At  the  time  of  the  American 
Revolution,  the  prevailing  opinion  of  politi- 
cal leaders  was  in  favor  of  freedom  in  trade 
relations.  This  was  natural,  for  the  revolt 
was  partly  caused  by  exasperation  over  the 
commercial  restrictions  of  England.  After 
independence  was  achieved,  discriminating  leg- 
islation on  the  part  of  Great  Britain  took 


the  place  of  direct  regulation,  and  the  inef- 
fectiveness of  the  government  of  the  new  re- 
public soon  dissipated  the  cherished  expecta- 
tions of  Americans  that  the  United  States 
would  share  in  the  commerce  of  the  world. 
Six  of  the  seven  northern  states  in  the  Union 
adopted  tariffs  for  the  purpose  of  protecting 
their  local  industries. 


476 


TARIFF  POLICY  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


Arguments  of  1791. — By  the  Constitution, 
drawn  up  in  1787,  the  exclusive  power  to  im- 
pose customs  duties  was  granted  to  Congress 
(Art.  I,  Sec.  viii,  If  1).  For  the  first  quarter 
century,  the  tariff  was  framed  primarily  to 
yield  revenue.  The  nation  was  chiefly  engaged 
in  agriculture  and  commerce.  The  southern 
planter  and  the  New  England  ship-owner  met 
on  common  ground;  the  one  wished  to  buy 
his  finished  product  as  cheaply  as  possible; 
the  other  found  his  profit  in  expanding  com- 
merce. Manufacturing  houses  were  beginning 
to  be  established,  and  there  were  producers 
of  raw  materials,  like  hemp  and  iron,  who  de- 
sired protective  duties.  Though  agriculture 
was  regarded  by  no  inconsiderable  number  as 
the  most  important  and  profitable  industry, 
to  be  nurtured  even  at  the  expense  of  manu- 
factures and  commerce,  this  view  rapidly  dis- 
appeared early  in  the  nineteenth  century.  The 
desirability  of  protection  was  recognized  in 
the  preamble  of  the  first  tariff  act  in  1789. 
Although  the  duties  then  adopted  as  measured 
by  subsequent  rates  were  low,  and  the  dura- 
tion of  the  tariff  was  limited  to  seven  years, 
the  arguments  presented  in  support  of  the 
duties  show  that  there  was  a general  determi- 
nation to  aid  American  industry  by  legisla- 
tion, if  necessary. 

Arguments  in  favor  of  protection  were  form- 
ulated more  precisely  by  Hamilton  in  his  Re- 
port on  Manufactures  in  1791.  The  document 
was  justly  regarded  as  the  Magna  Charta  of 
protectionism.  Some  of  the  factors  which 
influenced  his  reasoning  no  longer  exist,  and 
conditions  have  since  arisen  which  were  then 
unknowm;  but  notwithstanding  these  changes 
Hamilton’s  brief  still  remains  a source  of  in- 
spiration to  the  protectionist  school.  Hamil- 
ton’s argument  applies  more  specifically  to  the 
development  of  the  manufacturing  industry  by 
protection,  of  which  the  advantages  are  sum- 
marized as  follows:  (1)  extension  of  division 
of  labor;  (2)  extension  of  the  use  of  ma- 
chinery; (3)  additional  employment  for 
classes  in  the  community  not  ordinarily  en- 
gaged in  manufacturing;  (4)  promotion  of 
emigration  from  foreign  countries;  (5)  di- 
versification of  enterprise;  (6)  a home  mark- 
et for  the  products  of  agriculture. 

Protective  Spirit  of  1816. — For  twenty-five 
years  there  was  little  further  serious  discus- 
sion of  a tariff  policy.  Between  1794  and 
1816,  twenty-four  acts  were  passed  affecting 
tariff  duties,  but  the  changes  as  a rule  were 
in  the  interest  of  revenue,  or  in  continuing 
previous  acts  of  temporary  duration.  In  1812 
duties  were  doubled  so  as  to  provide  addi- 
tional revenue  for  the  war  with  Great  Britain, 
to  continue  for  one  year  after  the  establish- 
ment of  peace.  In  1815  the  need  of  recasting 
the  revenue  system  was  evident,  the  internal 
revenue  duties  which  had  been  imposed  as  an 
emergency  war  measure  were  regarded  as  only 
temporary,  and  there  was  a heavy  debt  to  be 


cared  for.  Even  if  these  reasons  had  not 
existed,  it  is  probable  that  the  urgent  demands 
of  manufacturers  would  have  forced  upon  Con- 
gress the  revision  of  the  tariff  in  the  interest 
of  protection.  Since  the  establishment  of  a 
vigorous  and  stable  national  form  of  govern- 
ment, the  manufacturing  industry  had  thrived 
with  almost  uninterrupted  success.  Non-in- 
tercourse with  England,  and  the  lessening  of 
imports  during  the  war,  gave  an  added  im- 
petus. When  peace  was  established  in  Feb- 
ruary, 1815,  there  was  an  outpouring  of  for- 
eign goods  into  the  American  markets,  and  by 
1816  the  imports  were  almost  double  that  of 
any  year  before  the  war.  England  was  de- 
nounced on  the  ground  that,  unsuccessful  in 
war,  she  was  endeavoring  by  organized  effort 
to  ruin  American  industry.  Manufacturers 
promptly  presented  their  grievances,  and  Con- 
gress was  almost  unanimous  in  its  opinion 
that  there  was  need  of  further  protection.  The 
only  differences  were  over  the  extent  to  which 
the  principle  was  to  be  carried.  Even  Jeffer- 
son frankly  acknowledged  the  necessity  for 
vigorous  action,  and  Calhoun,  who  later  led 
the  assaults  upon  protectionism,  favored  the 
“fostering  care  of  government”  to  manufac- 
turers. The  extremists  were  not  successful 
in  securing  as  high  rates  as  they  desired.  The 
mercantile  and  shipping  interest  of  New  Eng- 
land was  still  powerful ; and  while  the  mem- 
bers from  that  section  were  protectionists  at 
heart,  they  would  not  consent  to  sacrifice 
commerce  in  behalf  of  manufactures.  Special 
consideration  was  given  to  cotton  manufac- 
ture, and  for  this  purpose  the  minimum  prin- 
ciple was  devised. 

Protectionism  from  1816-1824. — Recovery 
after  the  war  was  slow;  the  banking  system 
was  disordered;  a flood  of  foreign  goods  over- 
stocked the  market,  and  in  the  imports  of 
commodities  there  was  gross  undervaluation. 
In  1818  the  temporary  higher  duties  on  cot- 
tons and  woolens  were  continued,  and  the 
rates  on  iron  products  were  raised.  In 
the  latter  part  of  that  year,  extending  into 
1819,  there  was  a severe  industrial  and  finan- 
cial crisis,  and  general  distress  again  brought 
the  tariff  before  Congress.  Then  began  an 
almost  endless  series  of  pamphlets  and  me- 
morials which  characterized  tariff  discussion 
during  the  next  twenty  years.  There  was  no 
longer  that  general  agreement  of  opinion  wit- 
nessed in  1816 : protectionism  was  now  openly 
assailed,  especially  by  representatives  from  the 
South;  agriculture  was  once  more  extolled  as 
superior  to  manufactures.  In  the  House  of 
Representatives  New  England  gave  a majority 
of  but  one  vote  for  the  bill  of  1820,  which 
provided  for  a further  increase  of  duties; 
while  the  representatives  from  the  South,  by 
a vote  of  63  to  8,  were  overwhelmingly  against 
the  bill. 

Though  temporarily  checked,  protectionists 
kept  up  the  contest,  and,  countenanced  by 


477 


TARIFF  POLICY  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


recommendations  of  President  Monroe,  a new 
tariff  bill  was  passed  in  1824.  Protection  was 
now  advocated  as  a system  of  political  philoso- 
phy, apart  from  particular  schedules.  Clay, 
foremost  among  the  protectionists,  based  his 
arguments  upon  the  broad-  foundations  of  an 
American  system  (see).  Especially  did  he 
emphasize  the  superior  advantage  of  a home 
to  a foreign  market;  only  through  this  could 
the  surplus  products  of  agriculture  be  ab- 
sorbed. In  opposition  objections  were  for- 
cibly made  that  Congress  had  no  consti- 
tutional right  to  impose  duties  for  the  en- 
couragement of  particular  industries  aside 
from  purposes  of  revenue. 

As  in  1820,  sectional  interest  controlled  the 
vote;  in  the  South  there  was  but  one  vote 
in  favor.  Higher  rates  were  placed  upon  iron, 
hemp,  glass,  lead,  and  wool.  The  middle  and 
western  states  were  especially  interested  in 
these  products,  and  united  were  able  to  over- 
come the  commercial  interests  of  New  England 
and  the  planting  interest  of  the  South. 

Protectionism  in  the  Ascendant,  1824-1828. — 
The  protectionists,  however,  were  not  satis- 
fied ; especially  the  wool  manufacturers  com- 
plained. The  placing  of  a duty  on  the  raw 
material,  wool,  an  agricultural  product,  intro- 
duced a complication  which  has  continued  to 
perplex  tariff-making  until  the  present  time. 
The  tariff  more  than  ever  before  became  a 
political  issue.  New  England  now  applied 
herself  to  manufacturing  with  greater  energy 
and  with  remarkable  success.  There  was  con- 
sequently a rapid  shifting  of  opinion  in  that 
section,  favorable  to  increased  protection. 
Webster,  who  opposed  the  tariff  of  1824,  was 
called  upon  by  his  constituents  to  present  to 
the  House  of  Representatives  resolutions 
passed  by  the  legislature  of  Massachusetts 
in  favor  of  increased  duties  on  woolens. 

The  contest  was  especially  keen  in  the  three- 
cornered  fight  between  Adams,  Jackson  and 
Clay  for  the  presidency  in  1828.  As  the 
several  political  groups  devoted  to  the  fort- 
tunes  of  the  political  leaders  named  were 
more  concerned  with  intrigue  than  with  per- 
fecting the  details  of  a harmonious  tariff  bill, 
the  protectionists  were  enabled,  by  playing 
one  party  over  against  the  other,  to  raise 
duties  to  the  highest  level  which  was  reached 
before  the  Civil  War.  The  woolen  industry 
received  special  consideration,  and  as  a possi- 
ble solution  of  the  conflicting  claims  of  the 
manufacturers  and  the  producers  of  raw  wool, 
compound  duties  (see)  were  introduced.  Un- 
der this  principle  fhe  finished  product  was 
given  an  ad  valorem  duty  for  protection 
against  foreign  cloths  plus  a specific  duty  to 
compensate  for  the  rate  on  wool  (see  Takiff 
of  Abominations). 

The  doctrine  of  protection,  however,  had 
been  carried  to  such  a point  that  the  manu- 
facturers were  disappointed  in  not  securing 
$1.00  a yard  as  the  lowest  limit  of  valuation. 


The  southern  members  in  the  House,  with  the 
exception  of  three,  voted  against  the  measure; 
and  from  that  section  there  arose  after  the 
passage  of  the  bill  the  most  bitter  opposition, 
which  in  South  Carolina  gave  impetus  to  the 
nullification  movement.  The  South  desired 
the  widest  possible  market  for  its  cotton,  rice, 
and  tobacco;  it  had  few  manufactures,  and 
consequently  was  a large  purchaser  from 
northern  states  or  abroad.  Influenced  by 
these  considerations,  their  leaders  put  forth  the 
argument  that  a tax  on  imports  was  a tax 
on  exports,  that  the  tax  on  cloths  imported 
was  a tax  on  cotton  exported.  In  the  opinion 
of  even  many  northerners  the  principle  of  pro- 
tection had  been  pushed  too  far. 

Reaction  of  1832-1833. — Apart  from  objec- 
tions to  particular  rates  it  was  found  expedi- 
ent to  allay  the  political  discontent  in  the 
South,  and  in  1832  the  tariff  was  revised  in 
accordance  with  recommendations  made  by 
John  Quincy  Adams,  then  a member  of  the 
House.  An  ardent  protectionist,  he  endeav- 
ored, as  Taussig  states  it,  “to  clear  the  tariff 
of  the  excresences  which  had  grown  on  it  in 
1828,  and  to  put  it  into  a form  in  which  the 
protectionists  could  advocate  its  permanent 
retention.”  Although  this  measure  received 
in  the  House  the  support  of  Virginia  and 
North  Carolina,  it  was  not  acceptable  to  South 
Carolina  and  Georgia.  The  nullification  move- 
ment grew  apace,  and  in  November,  1832,  the 
legislature  of  South  Carolina  passed  a nulli- 
fication (see)  ordinance  to  the  effect  that  the 
tariff  law  was  null  and  void  and  not  binding 
upon  the  citizens  of  that  state. 

Again  conciliation  was  attempted.  Clay 
now  came  forward  with  a proposition  for  a 
gradual  reduction  of  duties,  extending  over 
eight  years.  In  return  the  protectionists  se- 
cured the  principle  of  home  valuation  of  com- 
modities as  well  as  the  abolition  of  credit  in 
payment  of  duties  after  1842.  This  measure, 
known  as  the  “Compromise  Tariff,”  while  it 
relieved  the  tension  in  South  Carolina,  was 
not  regarded  by  protectionists  as  a satisfac- 
tory recognition  of  their  doctrine.  There  was, 
however,  little  disposition  to  disturb  a settle- 
ment which  might  be  interpreted  as  a pledge; 
and  public  attention  was  soon  diverted  to  prob- 
lems relating  to  the  Bank,  the  surplus,  and  the 
safe-keeping  of  public  funds. 

Revenue  Tariffs,  1842-1846. — Industrial  de- 
pression and  loss  of  revenue  which  followed 
the  panic  of  1837  awakened  a demand  for  an- 
other revision  of  the  tariff.  The  Whigs  were 
successful  in  the  elections  of  1840  and  prompt- 
ly proceeded  to  make  a revision  in  the  inter- 
est of  protection.  Duties  were  restored  in 
1842  on  an  average  to  the  level  of  the  tariff 
of  1832.  The  triumph  of  protectionism  was 
short-lived,  for  the  Democrats  again  gained 
control  in  1845.  Although  Polk,  the  success- 
ful candidate  for  President,  had  made  no 
clear  utterance  as  to  his  own  convictions,  he 


478 


TARIFF  POLICY  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


chose  for  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  Robert  J. 
Walker  of  Mississippi,  who  had  clear-cut  opin- 
ions as  to  revenue  policy. 

Walker  did  not  wait  for  Congress  to  enter 
upon  a revision.  In  his  first  report  he  laid 
before  Congress  recommendations  that  no 
duty  be  imposed  above  the  lowest  rate  which 
would  yield  the  largest  amount  of  revenue; 
that  below  such  rate  discriminations  might  be 
made  descending  in  the  scale  of  duties;  that 
the  maximum  duty  be  imposed  on  luxuries; 
and  that  all  minimums  and  specific  duties  be 
abolished.  Congress  accepted  his  leadership, 
except  in  refusing  to  impose  duties  on  coffee 
and  tea,  taxes  which  had  been  dropped  in 
1832.  Walker’s  influence  was  so  complete 
that  the  measure  of  1846  is  generally  known 
as  the  Walker  Tariff.  It  is  the  nearest  ap- 
proach to  a free-trade  measure  framed  since 
the  formulation  of  the  protectionists’  philoso- 
phy. Wool,  a raw  material  to  be  sure,  was 
taxed,  and  the  luxuries,  tea  and  coffee,  were 
left  untaxed  but  these  are  but  minor  devia- 
tions from  the  orderly  principles  upon  which 
the  bill  was  drawn. 

How  could  there  be  so  quick  a shifting  of 
opinion  from  protectionism  to  free-trade  prin- 
ciples? The  answer  is  partly  political  and 
partly  economic.  The  Whigs  were  discredited 
by  Tyler’s  administration,  and  the  Democracy 
which  came  into  control  was  more  closely 
allied  to  the  South  and  more  sympathetic  with 
its  point  of  view  than  was  the  Democracy  of 
Jackson’s  time.  The  protectionists,  by  de- 
veloping their  arguments  into  a complete  and 
well-rounded  system  of  political  philosophy, 
and  by  denying  the  efficacy  of  a half-way  or 
temporizing  policy,  had  practically  driven 
their  opponents  not  only  to  deny  the  value 
of  protection  but  to  advocate  aggressively  the 
virtue  of  freedom  in  commerce.  The  condi- 
tion of  the  treasury  was  also  favorable  for 
introducing  a new  tariff  policy,  for  the  coun- 
try was  finally  extricating  itself  from  the  em- 
barrassments of  1837. 

Period  of  Lower  Tariffs,  1846-1861. — The  so- 

called  free  trade  experiment  was  successful, 
whether  due  to  any  inherent  virtue  in  the 
tariff  itself  or  to  more  general  causes  attend- 
ing the  remarkable  development  of  the  coun- 
try, it  is  difficult  to  say.  The  new  transpor- 
tation agency  of  railways,  the  settlement  of 
the  Mississippi  Valley,  and  the  gold  discov- 
eries in  California,  all  contributed  to  economic 
growth  and  prosperity.  The  revenue  from 
customs  and  the  sale  of  public  lands  was  in 
excess  of  ordinary  expenditures,  so  that  by 
1857  it  was  deemed  wise  to  make  further  re- 
ductions. The  rates  of  1846  were  sealed  down, 
and  the  free  list  enlarged.  The  enactment  of 
this  legislation  hardly  caused  a ripple;  the 
public  had  apparently  lost  all  interest  in  the 
tariff.  In  Congress  questions  relating  to 
slavery  and  the  admission  of  new  states  were 
the  absorbing  topics  of  debate. 


Civil  War  Tariff,  1861-1865. — Soon  after  the 
passage  of  the  tariff  of  1857  a panic  occurred. 
Treasury  deficits  followed  and  additional  reve- 
nue was  deemed  imperative.  The  newly  or- 
ganized Republican  party,  which  inherited  the 
protective  philosophy  of  the  old  Whig  party,- 
gained  control  of  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives. A tariff  measure,  only  moderately  pro- 
tective in  character  was  introduced  by  Morrill 
of  Vermont  and  pasked  by  the  House  in  1860. 
Owing  to  Democratic  superiority  in  the  Sen- 
ate, action  was  delayed,  and  not  until  March, 
1861,  was  the  bill,  passed  (see  Morrill  Tar- 
iff). 

Protection  finally  won  a lasting  victory  as 
a result  of  the  financial  straits  of  the  Govern- 
ment during  the  Civil  War.  At  first  reliance 
was  placed  upon  loans,  internal  revenue  duties, 
and  forced  issues  of  treasury  notes.  But  the 
imposition  of  internal  revenue  duties  which 
fell  heavily  upon  the  domestic  manufactures, 
demanded  as  a measure  of  equity  an  accom- 
panying increase  in  import  duties.  Tariff  rates 
were  consequently  pushed  to  higher  and  higher 
levels  by  the  acts  of  1862  and  1864.  Aside 
from  the  need  of  adjustment,  the  pressing  de- 
mand for  revenue  discouraged  careful  con- 
sideration of  fundamental  principles.  To  the 
bill  of  1864  the  House  devoted  but  two  days’ 
debate,  and  the  Senate  but  one.  Between  1861 
and  1864  the  free  list  was  greatly  restricted. 
As  the  historian  of  the  tariff  (Stanwood)  says, 
“As  for  the  manufacturers  they  had  only  to 
declare  what  rate  of  duty  they  deemed  es- 
sential, and  that  rate  was  accorded  to  them.” 

Protection  Retained,  1865-1881. — At  the 
close  of  the  war,  it  was  generally  believed  that 
the  tariff  would  be  revised,  or  at  least  over- 
hauled, to  remove  the  many  inconsistencies 
and  absurdities  which  hasty  legislation  had 
grafted  upon  the  schedules;  nothing  of  im- 
portance was  done.  Many  Republicans  were 
in  sympathy  with  the  revision,  but  on  the 
other  hand  there  were  other  pressing  prob- 
lems to  be  settled.  The  stupendous  national 
debt  counselled  caution  in  reducing  customs 
receipts,  paid  in  gold,  for  gold  was  needed  to 
pay  the  interest  on  the  public  debt.  By  com- 
mon consent  the  internal  revenue  duties,  tra- 
ditionally regarded  as  war  taxes,  were  to  be  re- 
duced, if  not  repealed,  as  soon  as  possible. 
The  manufacturers  were  also  powerful,  being 
already  entrenched  behind  protectionist  forti- 
fications. 

Although  Congress  followed  a drifting  poli- 
cy, the  period  is  of  interest  in  marking  several 
movements  which  have  had  a durable  influence 
upon  tariff  discussion.  The  agricultural  dis- 
tricts in  the  West  began  to  complain  that  they 
were  overtaxed  for  the  benefit  of  eastern  man- 
ufacturers. The  conflict  between  the  wool- 
grower  and  the  woolen  manufacturer  was 
pacified  by  an  open  alliance  of  the  national 
organizations  of  these  industries;  and  under 
pressure  of  this  agreement  Congress  passed 


479 


TARIFF  POLICY  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


in  18G7  the  Wool  and  Woolen  Act,  the  most 
important  tariff  change  in  the  years  immedi- 
ately succeeding  the  war.  Moreover  there  was 
some  recognition  of  the  need  of  expert  investi- 
gation as  a basis  of  revenue  law-making  ( see 
Tariff  Reform;  Tariff  Commissions).  In 
1870  and  1872  Congress  made  some  concessions 
to  the  advocates  of  lower  rates,  more  particu- 
larly to  allay  discontent  in  the  West.  The 
protective  system,  however,  remained  intact, 
notwithstanding  the  loss  of  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives to  the  Democrats  in  1875.  A 
Democratic  House,  opposed  by  a Republican 
Senate  and  President,  could  not  expect  to  en- 
act a new  tariff  measure.  The  Democrats 
themselves  were  divided,  for  their  representa- 
tives from  Pennsylvania  were  as  staunch  ill 
defense  of  protectionism  as  were  the  Republi- 
cans. Even  Goneral  Hancock,  the  Democratic 
candidate  for  President  in  1880,  declared  that, 
notwithstanding  the  plank  in  the  party  plat- 
form “in  favor  of  revenue  only,”  there  would 
be  as  much  protection  under  a Democratic  as 
under  a Republican  administration,  and  that 
“the  tariff  is  a local  affair”  (see). 

Standstill,  1881-1887. — Finally,  in  1882, 
there  seemed  to  be  promise  of  more  thorough- 
going action.  Congress  authorized  the  ap- 
pointment of  a tariff  commission  (see)  to 
investigate  actual  conditions  and  make  recom- 
mendations. The  commission  recommended 
an  average  reduction  of  duties  of  over  20  per 
cent,  but  Congress  played  havoc  with  these 
recommendations.  It  refused  to  revise  the 
tariff  upon  any  consistent  principle,  confined 
itself  to  making  a few  unimportant  changes 
in  rates,  and  concentrated  its  legislative  ac- 
tion upon  further  reductions  in  internal  reve- 
nue duties.  Such  an  impotent  ending  brought 
inquiry  by  commission  into  disrepute. 

As  a matter  of  fact  the  country  did  not  de- 
sire a change.  Industry,  agriculture  as  well 
as  manufacturing,  had  become  so  dependent 
upon  government  aid  by  protection,  that  even 
the  Democrats  were  afraid  to  take  a bold 
stand.  President  Cleveland,  elected  in  1884, 
though  favoring  reductions,  declared  that 
there  was  no  occasion  for  the  discussion  of  the 
wisdom  of  the  protective  system.  To  revise 
the  tariff  without  imparing  the  protective  sys- 
tem was,  however,  no  easy  task.  The  efforts 
of  the  Democrats,  as  shown  by  the  Morrison 
(1884)  and  the  Mills  (1888)  bills,  presented 
no  genuine  principle  of  reform  (see  Tariff 
Reform  ) . These  measures  were,  of  course, 
blocked  by  Republican  majorities  in  the  Sen- 
ate. 

Renewed  Controversy,  1888-1909. — In  1888 

the  Republican  party  came  out  uncompromis- 
ingly in  favor  of  protection,  and  made  the 
tariff  the  supreme  issue  of  the  campaign.  They 
won,  and  in  fulfilment  of  their  pledge  enacted 
the  McKinley  tariff  (see)  in  1890.  Protec- 
tion was  no  longer  the  chance  product  of  war 
and  an  embarrassed  treasury;  it  was  now  de- 


liberately accepted  and  incorporated  into  the 
revenue  policy  of  the  country.  Nor  was  this 
policy  changed  in  any  vital  feature  by  the 
tariffs  of  1894,  1897  and  1909.  The  first,  the 
Wilson-Gorman  tariff  (see),  illustrated  the 
continued  lack  of  any  solid  convictions  on  the 
part  of  the  Democrats.  Duties  were  changed, 
but  the  net  result  was  a protective  tariff.  The 
Dingley  tariff  (see)  of  1897  represented  the 
more  unified  opinion  of  the  Republicans,  and 
the  Payne-Aldrieh  tariff  (see)  of  1909  simply 
the  need  of  readjusting  rates  to  meet  changed 
industrial  conditions. 

In  enacting  the  last  measure  something 
more  indeed  was  expected.  During  the  twelve 
years  of  the  Dingley  tariff  discontent  with  the 
high  rates  on  manufactured  goods  was  mani- 
fested, particularly  in  the  agricultural  West. 
Many  Republicans  believed  that  the  protective 
tariff  gave  shelter  to  the  growth  of  trusts,  and 
finally  the  rise  of  prices,  which  became  par- 
ticularly burdensome  after  the  panic  of  1907, 
led  to  an  expectation  that  the  next  tariff  would 
lighten  the  cost  of  living  and  indirectly  curb 
the  monopolistic  power  of  the  trusts.  Re- 
vision downward  was  accepted  as  the  pledge 
of  Republican  victory,  but  the  advocates  of 
lower  rates  failed  to  reckon  with  the  strength 
of  protected  interests.  The  House  bill  of  1909 
reflected  with  some  degree  of  accuracy  the 
popular  desire,  but  the  Senate,  less  sensitive 
to  the  varying  tides  of  public  sentiment,  a star 
chamber  in  its  archaic  methods  of  committee 
procedure, and  more  easily  controlled  by  its 
system  of  representation,  reshaped  the  House 
bill.  There  was  an  angry  protest  that  the  pub- 
lic had  been  betrayed.  Such  judgments,  how- 
ever, failed  to  take  into  account  the  expand- 
ing influence  of  protection  through  the  estab- 
lishment of  manufactures  in  the  South.  No 
longer  was  that  section  exclusively  devoted  to 
agriculture.  While  politically  the  South  re- 
mained Democratic,  it  was  nevertheless  inclined 
to  be  cautious  in  enacting  legislation  which 
might  cripple  its  new  enterprises. 

Democratic  Revision,  1913. — Popular  resent- 
ment at  the  failure  of  the  Republican  party 
to  carry  out  its  pledge  of  tariff  reform  was 
shown  in  no  uncertain  way.  In  the  congres- 
sional elections  of  1910  the  Democrats  secured 
a large  majority  in  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives, and  proceeded  with  the  aid  of  the  Pro- 
gressives (see)  in  the  Senate  to  enact  a down- 
ward revision,  of  the  tariff.  In  a special  ses- 
sion of  Congress  in  1911,  called  by  President 
Taft  to  approve  a proposed  reciprocity  (see) 
agreement  with  Canada,  bills  were  passed 
placing  on  the  free  list  a large  number  of 
commodities  largely  used  by  farmers,  and  mak- 
ing extensive  reductions  in  the  duties  on  wool 
and  woolens,  manufacture  of  cotton,  iron  and 
steel  products,  and  chemicals.  All  these  bills, 
however,  were  vetoed  by  President  Taft  on  the 
ground  that  no  attempt  should  be  made  to  re- 
vise the  tariff  before  the  Tariff  Board  (see) 


TARIFF,  PREFERENTIAL— TARIFF,  PROTECTIVE,  CONSTITUTIONALITY  OF 


created  by  the  Payne- Aldrich  Act  of  1909 
should  have  an  opportunity  to  report.  In 
1912  Congress  passed  new  measures  dealing 
with  the  steel,  chemical  and  wool  schedules, 
and  also  a bill  placing  sugar  on  the  free  list, 
but  these  bills  also  were  vetoed  by  President 
Taft  on  the  ground  that  they  failed  to  take 
account  of  the  basis  for  scientific  reduction 
available  in  the  reports  of  the  Tariff  Board. 

In  the  presidential  election  of  1912  the  en- 
try of  the  Progressive  party  (see)  into  the 
political  field  enabled  the  Democrats  to  elect 
their  candidate,  to  secure  an  overwhelming  ma- 
jority in  the  House,  and  to  overturn  the  Re- 
publican majority  in  the  Senate.  The  leading 
plank  of  the  Democratic  platform  declared 
again  for  a tariff  for  revenue  only,  on  the 
ground  that  a protective  tariff  is  unconstitu- 
tional. For  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  this 
pledge,  President  Wilson  summoned  Congress 
in  special  session  in  April,  1913.  The  result 
was  the  Underwood  tariff  (see)  which  re- 
ceived the  President’s  signature  on  October  3, 
1913.  The  original  bill  prepared  by  the  ways 
and  means  committee,  under  the  leadership  of 
Oscar  W.  Underwood,  of  Alabama  and  with  the 
supervision  of  the  President,  was  based  on  the 
theory  of  a competitive  tariff,  namely,  “to 
introduce  in  every  line  of  industry  a competi- 
tive basis  providing  for  a substantial  amount 
of  importation,  to  the  end  that  no  concern  shall 
be  able  to  feel  that  it  has  a monopoly  of  the 
home  market  given  other  than  through  the  fact 
that  it  is  able  to  furnish  better  goods  at  lower 
prices  than  others.”  It  proposed  additions  to 
the  free  list  and  reductions  in  rates  in  the  tariff 
schedules  estimated  to  lower  the  average  rate 
of  duty  from  40.12  per  cent  in  1912  under  the 
Payne- Aldrich  Act  to  29.60  per  cent.  Certain 
clauses  of  the  bill  were  strongly  opposed  by 
members  of  the  majority  party,  especially  those 
adding  sugar  and  raw  wool  to  the  free  list. 
The  Senate,  however,  which  had  hithereto  been 
considered  the  bulwark  of  protectionism,  re- 
versed in  this  instance  its  traditional  attitude, 
approved  these  clauses,  and  made  further  re- 
ductions in  rates  which  would  have  reduced  the 
average  rate  of  duty  to  26.67  percent.  In  con- 
ference, however,  the  Senate  receded  from 
many  of  its  amendments,  and  the  measure  as 
finally  approved  provided  for  an  average  rate 
of  duty  in  the  neighborhood  of  28  per  cent. 

See  Reciprocity;  Tariff  Legislation, 
Framing  of;  Tariff,  Maximum  and  Mini- 
mum; Tariff  Rates;  Tariff  Reform;  Tariff 
Statistics. 

References:  F.  W.  Taussig,  Tariff  Hist,  of 
the  V.  S.  (1910)  ; E.  Stanwood,  Am.  Tariff 
Controversies  (1903)  ; D.  R.  Dewey,  Financial 
Hist,  of  the  United  States  (1903),  bibliogra- 
phies, 75,  142,  172,  223,  248,  298,  383,  414, 
435,  463;  W.  Hill,  “First  Stages  of  the  Tariff 
Policy  of  the  U.  S.”  in  Am.  Econ.  Assoc., 
Publications  (1893)  ; O.  L.  Elliott,  Tariff  Con- 
troversy in  the  U.  S.,  1180-1833  (1892)  ; M.  E. 


Kelley,  “Tariff  Acts  under  the  Confederation” 
in  Quart.  Journ.  of  Econ.,  II  (1886),  473-481; 
Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  and  year  by  year. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TARIFF,  PREFERENTIAL.  A preferential 
tariff  is  one  which  provides  for  lower  rates 
on  goods  coming  from  certain  specified  coun- 
tries, or  countries  which  will  agree  to  enter 
into  reciprocal  arrangements  of  commerce  and 
trade;  for  example,  there  is  a system  of 
preferential  duties  between  Great  Britain  and 
some  of  her  colonies.  See  Reciprocity;  Tar- 
iff, Maximum  and  Minimum.  D.  R.  D. 

TARIFF,  PROTECTIVE,  CONSTITUTION- 
ALITY OF.  The  question  as  to  the  constitu- 
tionality of  a protective  tariff,  though  once 
earnestly  debated,  has  now  little  more  than 
academic  interest  in  as  much  as  the  matter 
may  be  considered  conclusively  settled  in  the 
affirmative.  It  is  true  that  in  the  Constitution 
Congress  has  not  been  given  express  authority 
to  legislate  for  the  economic  protection  of 
American  industries,  but  it  has  been  given  a 
general  taxing  power,  and  an  authority  to 
regulate  commerce  with  foreign  nations.  If 
it  be  argued  that  a protective  tariff  is  not  a 
regulation  of  commerce,  but  is,  in  so  far  as  it 
is  effective,  a prohibition  thereof,  it  may  be 
replied  that  the  Supreme  Court  has  held,  as 
to  interestate  commerce,  that  the  power  to 
regulate  includes  the  power  to  prohibit  (Cham- 
pion vs.  Ames,  181  U.  S.  321)  and  that  a 
parity  of  reasoning  makes  this  doctrine  ap- 
plicable to  foreign  commerce.  If,  again,  it 
be  urged  that  a schedule  of  customs  dues  lev- 
ied primarily  and  solely  for  the  protection  of 
domestic  industries  is  neither  a revenue  meas- 
ure nor  a regulation  of  commerce,  the  answer 
is,  as  declared  by  the  court  in  the  case  of  Mc- 
Cray vs.  United  States  (195  U.  S.  27)  that 
a law,  upon  its  face  a revenue  measure,  may 
not  have  its  constitutionality  questioned  by  a 
judicial  injury  into  the  motives  of  its  enactors 
or  into  its  ultimate  effect  when  enforced.  In 
this  case  an  act  of  Congress  levying  a tax  of 
ten  cents  a pound  upon  oleomargarine,  arti- 
ficially colored  to  resemble  butter,  was  up- 
held as  a revenue  measure,  the  court  declining 
to  consider  the  argument  that  the  tax  was 
so  high  as  to  be  surely  prohibitive  of  the  manu- 
facture of  such  oleomargarine,  that  those  who 
enacted  the  law  must  have  known  this,  and 
that,  therefore,  they  could  not  have  intended 
the  act  to  be  a revenue  measure,  and  must  have 
sought  the  regulation  or  prohibition  of  the 
manufacture  of  oleomargarine  within  the 
states — a subject  over  which  Congress  pos- 
sesses no  constitutional  control.  See  Con- 
struction and  Interpretation;  Free  Trade 
and  Protection;  Implied  Powers;  Result- 
ing Powers.  Reference:  E.  S.  Stanwood,  Am. 
Tariff  Controversies  in  the  10th  Century 
W.  W.  Willoughby. 


(1903). 
481 


TARIFF  KATES 


TARIFF  RATES 


Methods. — Duties  which  are  levied  upon 
imports  may  be  either  specific  (see)  or  ad 
valorem  (see).  The  former  are  imposed  ac- 
cording to  a specific  unit  of  quantity,  and  the 
latter  according  to  value,  or  they  may  be 
combined,  making  compound  (see)  or  com- 
pensating duties.  Whatever  the  technical 
method,  rates  are  regarded  as  high  or  low  in 
the  proportion  the  amoun'  levied  bears  to  the 
value  of  the  commodity.  Unless,  therefore, 
the  value  of  the  unit  affected  by  a specific  duty 
is  accurately  known,  the  significance  of  the 
specific  duty  is  not  clearly  understood. 

Number  of  Rates. — In  the  earlier  tariffs  com- 
paratively few  rates  were  enumerated.  Com- 
modities were  grouped  into  large  classes,  with 
the  same  rate  applicable  to  all  goods  within 
the  given  class.  In  the  first  tariff  of  1789 
there  were  approximately  45  specific  rates 
enumerated,  of  which  12  applied  to  different 
kinds  and  grades  of  teas;  all  other  merchan- 
dise, except  that  placed  on  the  free  list,  was 
grouped  into  four  classes,  on  which  ad  valorem 
rates  of  5,  74,  10,  and  15  per  cent  respectively 
were  imposed.  Gradually  as  industries,  and 
more  particularly  manufactures,  developed  in- 
to specialized  branches  and  products,  and  as 
the  desire  to  give  every  product  its  own  meas- 
ure of  protection  became  more  insistent,  the 
number  of  enumerated  rates  increased.  In  the 
act  of  April  27,  1816,  there  were  over  100 
specific  rates  named;  and  in  the  act  of  July 
14,  1832,  there  were  24  specific  rates  applied 
to  the  single  class  of  iron  and  steel  and  their 
products.  Definitions,  specifications  and  pro- 
visos became  more  and  more  elaborate.  The 
iron  and  steel  schedule  of  the  act  of  August 
30,  1842,  is  by  itself  half  as  long  as  the  entire 
act  of  1789.  In  this  earlier  act  there  were 
less  than  150  different  articles  or  classes  of 
articles  named,  while  in  later  acts  the  num- 
bers run  into  the  thousands.  Careful  specifica- 
tion was  characteristic  of  low  as  well  as  of 
high  tariffs : the  index  of  the  tariff  of  1846 
has  over  400  entries.  In  the  Dingley  Act  of 
1897  the  total  number  of  dutiable  items  was 
2,024.  By  schedules  they  were  distributed  as 
follows : 


A — Chemicals,  oils  and  paints  222 

B — Earths,  earthenware  and  glassware 170 

C— Metals  and  manufactures  321 

D — Woods  and  manufactures  of 35 

E— Sugar,  molasses  and  mfs.  of  33 

F — Tobacco  and  manufactures  of  3 

G — Agricultural  products  and  provisions 137 

H— Spirits,  wines  and  other  beverages  33 

I — Cotton  manufactures  261 

J — Flax,  hemp  and  .iute  manufactures 214 

K — Wool  and  manufactures  of 73 

L — Silks  and  silk  goods  73 

M — Pulp  papers  and  books 59 

N— Sundries  270 


Significance  of  Changes. — Owing  to  changes 
in  methods  of  valuation  of  goods  or  of  assess- 
ment of  duties,  it  is  often  difficult  to  deter- 
mine the  exact  significance  of  a change  in 
rates.  Caution,  therefore,  must  be  exercised 
in  drawing  conclusions  as  to  the  incidence  of 
taxation  by  comparisons  of  rates  or  of  the 
amounts  of  duties  collected  under  different 
systems  of  rates.  The  average  rate  (see  Duty 
on  Imports,  Average  Rate  of)  may  be  mis- 
leading and  so  also  is  the  comparison  of  the 
numbers  of  increases  and  decreases  in  rates 
of  different  tariffs.  For  example,  the  Payne- 
Aldrich  law  left  1,150  of  the  2,024  dutiable 
items  in  the  Dingley  law  undisturbed;  made 
654  decreases  and  220  increases.  From  this 
it  was  superficially  concluded  that  the  tariff 
of  1909  was  lower  in  its  incident  than  its 
predecessor.  It  is,  however,  obvious  that  nom- 
inal reductions  in  rates  may  have  no  signifi- 
cance, for  the  rates  retained  may  still  be  pro- 
hibitive, or  the  reductions  may  apply  to  items 
in  any  case  of  little  significance. 

Illustrative  Changes,  1789-1909. — As  illus- 
trative of  the  variations  in  duties  in  succes- 
sive tariff's,  some  selected  rates  are  given  for 
a few  important  commodities,  not  including 
the  gradual  reductions  authorized  by  the  com- 
promise tariff  of  1833.  For  many  articles  of 
common  use  the  rates  are  too  complicated  in 
recent  tariffs  to  admit  of  tabular  presenta- 
tion : 


PIG  IRON 

1816 20  per  cent 

1818  50  cents  per  cwt. 

1828  * 621  cents  per  cwt. 

1832  .. 50  cents  per  cwt. 

1842  45  cents  per  cwt. 

1846  30  per  cent 

1857  24  per  cent 

1861 $6.00  per  ton 

1864  9.00  per  ton 

1870  7.00  per  ton 

1883  6.72  per  ton 

1894  4.00  per  ton 

1909  2.50  per  ton 

1913 free 

STEEL  RAILS 

1346  20  per  cent 

1857  15  per  cent 

1861  30  per  cent 

1862  35  per  cent 

1864  45  per  cent 

1370  $28.00  per  ton* 

1883  17.00  per  ton 

1390  13.44  per  ton 

1894  7.84  per  ton 

1909  3.92  per  ton 

1913  free 


* For  a few  years  this  was  approximately  equiva- 
lent to  the  former  45  per  cent  ad  valorem  rate.  By 
1877  it  became  equivalent  to  100  per  cent. 

COPPER  (BARS  AND  INGOTS) 

1846  5 per  cent. 

1357  free 

1861  2 cents  per  lb. 

1364  21  cents  per  lb. 

1S69  5 cents  per  lb. 

1883  4 cents  per  lb. 

1890  . U cents  per  lb. 

1894  and  subsequently  free 


2,024 

482 


Total 


TARIFF  RATES 


BITUMINOUS  COAL 
( Per  Ton ) 


1789  $ .56 

1790  .84 

1792  1.26 

1794  1.40 

1812 2.80 

1816  1.40 

1824  1.68 

1842  1.75 

1S46  65-. 75 

1857  5S-.65 

1S61  1.00 

1862  1.10 

1S64  1.25 

1872  .75 

1894  .40 

1897  .67 

1909  .45 

1913  free 


HIDES 

Free  until  1842 

1842  5 per  cent. 

1857  4 per  cent. 

1861  10  per  cent. 

1872  free. 

1890  free. 

1894  free. 

1897  15  per  cent. 

1909  and  subsequently  free. 


WOOL 

(186 7;  Clothing,  Wool) 


1789— Free. 

1824 — 30  per  cent.1 

1828 — 1 cents  per  lb.  plus  50  per  cent  ad  valorem. 

1832 — 4 cents  per  lb.  plus  40  per  cent  ad  valorem. 

1842 — 3 cents  per  lb.  plus  30  per  cent  ad  valorem. 
1846 — 30  per  cent. 

1857—24  per  cent. 

1861 — 10  per  cent. 

1S64 — 3-10  cents  per  lb.  plus  10  per  cent  ad  valorem 
on  better  grades. 

1867 — 10  cents  per  lb.  plus  11  per  cent  ad  valorem  to 
12  cents  plus  10  per  cent.2 
1883—10-12  cents  per  lb.3 
1890 — 11  cents  per  lb. 

1894 — Free. 

1897—11  cents  per  lb. 

1909—11  cents  per  lb. 

1913— Free. 


1 If  valued  at  less  than  10  cents  per  lb.,  duty  was 
15  per  cent. 

2 Wool  valued  at  32  cents  or  less  per  lb.  took  the 
lower  rate. 

3 The  dividing  line  was  changed  to  30  cents  per  lb. 


BRUSSELS  CARPETS  (Body) 


1789 —  5 per  cent. 

1790 —  7J  per  cent. 

1792 — 10  per  cent. 

1794 — 15  per  cent. 

1804 — 17J  per  cent. 

1812 — 35  per  cent. 

1824 — 50  cents  per  sq.  yard. 

1828 — 70  cents  per  sq.  yard. 

1832 — 63  cents  per  sq.  yard. 

1842 — 55  cents  per  sq.  yard. 

1846 — 30  per  cent  ad  valorem. 

1857 — 24  per  cent  ad  valorem. 

1861 — 50  cents  per  sq.  yard  but  not  less  than  25  per 
cent  ad  valorem. 

1864 — 80  cents  per  sq.  yard  but  not  less  than  50  per 
cent  ad  valorem. 


1883 — 30  cents  per 
valorem. 

sq. 

yard 

plus 

30 

per 

cent 

ad 

1890 — 44  cents  per 
valorem. 

1894 — 40  per  cent  ad 

sq.  yard 

valorem. 

plus 

40 

per 

cent 

ad 

1897 — 44  cents  per 
valorem. 

sq. 

yard 

plus 

40 

per 

cent 

ad 

1909 — 44  cents  per 
valorem. 

sq. 

yard 

plus 

40 

per 

cent 

ad 

1913—25  per  cent. 


COTTON  CLOTH 


(Not  otherwise  Provided  for) 


1790—1816—71  per  cent  increasing  to  35  per  cent. 

— 25  per  cent ; minimum  valuation  at  25  cents 
per  yard. 

1824 — Minimum  changed  to  30  cents. 

1842 — 30  per  cent,  with,  varying  minimums. 

1846 — 25  per  cent. 

1857 — 19  per  cent. 

1861 —  30  per  cent. 

1862 —  35  per  cent. 

1890 — 50  per  cent. 

1894 — 35  per  cent. 

1897 — 45  per  cent. 

1909 — 45  per  cent. 

1913 — 30  per  cent. 


COTTON  STOCKINGS 


1883 — 40  per  cent. 

1890 — 50  cents  per  dozen,  plus  30  per  cent,  if  value 
is  between  60c.  and  $2.00  per  dozen  pairs. 
Other  rates  for  stockings  at  other  values. 
The  class  named  constitutes  the  largest  part 
of  the  importation. 

1894 — 50  per  cent  ad  valorem. 

1897 — (1)  50  cents  per  dozen  plus  15  per  cent,  if 
valued  not  more  than  $1.00  per  dozen  pairs. 

(2)  60  cents  plus  15  per  cent,  if  $1.00  to  $1.50 
per  dozen. 

(3)  70  cents  plus  15  per  cent,  if  $1.50  to  $2.00 
per  dozen. 

(4)  $1.20  plus  15  per  cent,  if  $2.00  to  $3.00  per 
dozen. 

(5)  $2.00  plus  15  per  cent,  if  $2.00  to  $5.00 

(6)  55  per  cent,  if  over  $5.00. 

1909 — Duties  (1).  (2),  (3)  increased  to  70,  85.  and 
90  cents  respectively  plus  15  per  cent ; duties 
(4),  (5)  and  (6)  retained. 

1913 — 30  per  cent,  if  valued  at  less  than  70  cents  per 
dozen  pairs  ; 40  per  cent  if  valued  at  70  cents 
to  $1.20  per  dozen  ; 50  per  cent  if  over  $1.20 
per  dozen. 


SUGAR 

(Raw,  formerly  Known  as  Brown) 


1789— 1  cent  per  lb. 

1790 —  15  cents  per  lb. 

1797—2  cents  per  lb. 

1812 — 4 cents  per  lb. 

1816 — 3 cents  per  lb. 

1832—21  cents  per  lb. 

1S46 — 30  per  cent. 

1857 — 24  per  cent. 

1861 — 2 cents  per  lb. 

1S62 — 2£-3J  cents  per  lb.1 
1864 — 3-3£  cents  per  lb. 

1870 — 1^-4  cents  per  lb. 

1883—1  4/10-3  5/10  cents  per  lb. 

1890 — Free  to  5/10  cents  per  lb.2 
1894 — 40  per  cent. 

1897 — 0.95-1.825  cents  per  lb. 

1909 — 0.95-1.9  cents  per  lb. 

1913 — From  March  1,  1914  to  May  1,  1914,  0.72  cent 
per  lb.  plus  0.026  cent  per  lb.  for  each  addi- 
tional degree  shown  by  polariscope  test 
above  75  ; after  May  1,  1914,  free. 


1 Sugar  is  henceforth  classified  according  to  Dutch 
standard  in  color  with  an  increasing  scale  of  duties 
according  to  degree  of  refining. 

2 Additional  duty  of  1/10  cent  per  lb.  if  imported 
from  country  paying  bounty. 


COFFEE 


1789— 1816— Increasing  rates  from  21  to  10  cents  per 
lb 

1816 — 5 cents  per  lb. 

1830 — 2 cents  per  lb. 

1832— Free. 

1861—5  cents  per  lb. 

1870— 3 cents  per  lb. 

1872 — and  subsequently,  free. 


TARIFF  REFORM 


TEA 

17S9 — 6-45  cents  per  lb.1 

1790— 1816— Former  rates  gradually  increased. 

1816— 12-68  cents  per  lb.1 
1830— Reduction. 

1832— Free  on  10  cents  per  lb.2 
1841 — Free. 

1861 — 15  cents  per  lb. 

1864 — 25  cents  per  lb. 

1870 — 15  cents  per  lb. 

1872— and  subsequently,  free. 

1 Varying  according  to  kind,  and  whether  import- 
ed in  American  or  foreign  vessels. 

2 Free  if  imported  in  United  States  vessels  from 
beyond  Cape  of  Good  Hope. 

See  Duty  on  Imports,  Average  Rate  of; 
Duties,  Ad  Valorem;  Tariff  Legislation, 
Framing  of;  Tariff  Policy  of  the  United 
States;  Underwood  Tariff. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TARIFF  REFORM.  The  term  tariff  reform 
as  used  in  the  United  States  has  no  clear  and 
settled  significance.  In  general  it  means  the 
protest  against  the  high  duties  of  protective 
tariffs  perpetuated  since  the  Civil  War  period. 
In  1874  and  1876  there  were  efforts  to  make 
tariff  reform  a campaign  issue,  but  there  were 
too  many  other  more  absorbing  public  ques- 
tions to  afford  opportunity  for  this. 

The  election  of  a Democratic  President, 
Cleveland,  together  with  a Democratic  House 
of  Representatives  in  1884,  first  brought  tariff 
reform  to  the  front  as  a national  issue  of  im- 
portance. President  Cleveland  approached 
the  question  with  caution;  he  denied  that 
there  was  any  occasion  for  a discussion  of  the 
wisdom  or  expediency  of  a protective  system 
— “we  are  confronting  a condition,  not  a 
theory” — but  in  view  of  the  surplus  revenues 
suggested  a reduction  in  taxes  beginning  with 
duties  upon  imported  necessaries  of  life.  In 
following  years  he  took  more  advanced  ground ; 
he  held  that  taxation  in  excess  of  the  needs 
of  the  Government  was  extortion;  and  that  a 
freer  entrance  should  be  given  to  raw  mater- 
ials (see  Taxation  of  Raw  Materials) 
which  would  stimulate  manufactures  and  thus 
create  a demand  for  American  labor.  In  1887 
he  devoted  his  entire  message  to  tariff  reform, 
setting  forth  that  taxes  were  too  exclusively 
laid  for  the  farmer;  combinations  strangled 
competition  which  otherwise  might  lower 
domestic  prices;  tariff  rates  raised  prices  by 
“precisely”  the  sum  paid  for  such  duties.  In 
undertaking  reform  he  admitted  that  consider- 
ation must  be  given  invested  capital  and  to 
labor  trained  to  establish  industrial  pursuits. 

The  Democratic  House  responded  to  this 
leadership  and  passed  the  Mills  bill  (1888) 
in  which  both  recommendations  as  to  change 
in  duties  were  followed — reduction  on  the 
necessaries  of  life  and  free  raw  materials. 
On  the  free  list  were  placed  wool,  hemp,  flax, 
and  lumber — raw  materials — and  also  such 
necessities  as  soap,  bricks,  salt,  and  lime.  On 
cotton  and  woolen  goods  there  were  substan- 
tial reductions.  The  bill,  however,  as  a re- 


form measure  did  not  ring  true.  Coal  and 
iron — raw  materials — were  still  taxed,  and 
such  necessities  as  sugar  and  rice  were  given 
ample  protection. 

Tariff  reform  was  defeated  in  the  election 
of  1888;  the  protectionists  were  too  strongly 
intrenched;  the  appeal  for  free  raw  materials 
was  easily  construed  as  an  attack  upon  the 
domestic  farmer  and  ranchman;  and  the  in- 
consistencies of  the  Democratic  program  as 
evidenced  in  the  Mills  bill  chilled  popular 
enthusiasm. 

Recent  Statutes. — In  1894,  the  Democrats 
had  the  opportunity  of  accomplishing  a genuine 
tariff  reform.  Again  emphasis  was  placed 
upon  free  raw  materials  and  reduction  in 
duties  upon  the  necessaries  of  life.  The 
House  now  took  a consistent  stand  and  put 
iron  ore,  coal,  and  sugar  as  well  as  lumber, 
jute,  flax,  and  hemp,  on  the  free  list.  The 
Senate  abandoned  principle  and  resorted  to  the 
traditional  method  of  bargaining  and  sectional 
advantage.  Tariff  reform  was  again  dis- 
credited (see  Wilson-Gorman  Tariff)  and 
from  that  date  it  was,  if  anything,  less  signifi- 
cant than  before  Cleveland  endeavored  to  give 
it  a concrete  meaning.  Presidential  cam- 
paigns continued  to  be  fought  over  the  tariff, 
but  congressional  debate  and  votes  were  con- 
cerned more  with  rates  than  with  principles. 
In  1913,  however,  a Democratic  administration 
assumed  office  and  in  the  same  year  fulfilled  the 
pledge  of  their  platform  by  enacting  the  Under- 
wood Tariff  (see)  which  added  many  articles 
in  common  use  to  the  free  list  and  affected  a 
revision  of  the  tariff  schedules  which  reduced 
the  average  rate  of  duty  on  imports  by  about 
30  per  cent. 

Tariff  reformers  do  not  agree,  some  wish 
to  free  sugar  of  all  taxation  as  a concession 
to  the  consumer;  others,  following  English 
precedent,  favor  its  taxation  in  order  to  prov- 
vide  a revenue  which  otherwise  must  come 
from  duties  on  manufactured  products  in- 
extricably bound  up  in  the  protective  system. 
It  is  not  probable  that  any  decisive  step  will 
be  taken  in  the  near  future;  but  that  changes 
will  be  gradual  until  it  is  clearly  apparent 
that  American  manufactures  and  producers 
do  not  need  high  protective  duties  in  order 
to  obtain  their  share  of  the  foreign  markets  of 
the  world  in  the  selling  of  American  mer- 
chandise. 

See  Democratic  Party  ; Republican  Party  ; 
Tariff  for  Revenue  Only;  Tariff  Legisla- 
tion, Framing  of;  Tariff  Policy  of  the 
United  States;  Tariff  Rates;  Taxation  of 
Raw  Materials;  Underwood  Tariff;  and 
tariffs  by  name. 

References:  W.  G.  Sumner.  Protectionism 
(1885);  D.  A.  Wells,  Recent  Economic 
Changes  (1893);  J.  Sherman,  Recollections, 
(1895),  II,  1201-1208,  “Tariff  Literature  in 
the  Campaign”  in  Quart.  Joum.  of  Econ.,  Ill 
Davis  R.  Dewey, 


(1889),  212-217. 
484 


TARIFF  STATISTICS 


TARIFF  STATISTICS 


Classification. — Efforts  have  been  made  to 
classify  imported  merchandise  according  to 
degree  of  manufacture  and  use,  and  from  such 
tables  to  compare  how  far  duties  fall  upon  the 
necessaries  of  life  and  luxuries  respectively, 
and  to  distinguish  between  taxation  on  raw 
materials  and  finished  products.  Such  classi- 
fications are  more  or  less  arbitrary.  For 
many  years  the  Bureau  of  Statistics  (in  1912 
incorporated  in  the  Bureau  of  Foreign  and 
Domestic  Commerce)  in  the  annual  Statistical 


Abstract  classified  imported  merchandise  by 
the  following  groups:  (1)  articles  of  food 
and  animals;  (2)  articles  in  the  crude  condi- 
tion which  enter  into  the  various  processes  of 
domestic  industry;  (3)  articles  wholly  or 
partially  manufactured  for  use  as  materials 
in  manufactures  and  the  mechanic  arts;  (4) 
articles  manufactured,  ready  for  consumption ; 
(5)  articles  of  voluntary  use,  luxuries,  etc. 
More  recently  this  classification  has  been 
modified  as  follows:  (1)  foodstuffs  in  crude 


I.  FREE  AND  DUTIABLE  IMPORTS  AND  AVERAGE  DUTIES,  1791—1912 


Fiscal  Year 

Free 

(Millions) 

Per  Cent  of 
Free  Goods 

Dutiable 

( Millions ) 

Per  Gent  of 
Duties  to 
Value  of 
Dutiable 
Imports 

Total 

(Millions) 

Per  Cent  of 
Duties  to 
Total  Im- 
ports 

1791  

$ 28.7 

15 

1800  

52.1 

17 

1810  

61.0 

14 

1820  

56.4 

27 

1830  

$ 3.5 

7 

$ 46.1 

62 

49.6 

57 

1840  

42.1 

49 

44.1 

34 

86.3 

18 

1850  

16.0 

9 

148.1 

27 

164.0 

25 

1860  

68.4 

20 

267.9 

20 

336.3 

16 

1861  

67.4 

25 

207.2 

19 

274.6 

14 

1862  

49.8 

28 

128.5 

36 

178.3 

26 

1863  

30.0 

12 

195.3 

33 

225.4 

28 

1864  

38.2 

13 

262.9 

37 

301.1 

32 

1S65  

40.1 

19 

169.6 

48 

209.6 

38 

1866  

57.1 

16 

366.3 

49 

423.5 

42 

1867  

17.0 

5 

361.1 

47 

378.2 

45 

1868  

15.1 

4 

329.7 

49 

344.8 

46 

1869  

21.7 

6 

372.8 

47 

394.4 

45 

1870  

20.2 

5 

406.1 

47 

426.3 

42 

1871  

40.6 

8 

459.6 

44 

500.2 

39 

1872  

47.7 

9 

512.7 

41 

560.4 

37 

1873  

178.4 

27 

484.7 

38 

663.1 

27 

1874  

151.7 

27 

415.7 

39 

567.4 

27 

1875  

146.6 

28 

379.8 

41 

526.3 

28 

1876  

140.6 

30 

324.0 

45 

464.6 

30 

1877  

140.8 

32 

299.0 

43 

439.8 

27 

1878  

141.3 

32 

297.1 

43 

438.4 

27 

1879  

142.6 

32 

296.7 

45 

439.3 

29 

1880  

208.0 

33 

419.5 

43 

627.6 

29 

18S1  

202.6 

31 

44S.1 

43 

650.6 

30 

1882  

210.7 

29 

505.5 

43 

716.2 

30 

1883  

206.9 

30 

493.9 

42 

700.8 

30 

1884  

211.3 

31 

456.3 

42 

667.6 

28 

1885  

192.9 

33 

386.7 

46 

579.6 

31 

1886  

211.5 

34 

413.8 

46 

625.3 

30 

1887  

233.1 

34 

450.3 

47 

683.4 

31 

1888  

244.1 

34 

468.1 

46 

712.2 

30 

1889  

256.6 

35 

484.0 

45 

749.3 

30 

1890  

258.1 

34 

507.6 

44 

765.7 

29 

1891  

379.0 

45 

466.5 

46 

845.5 

25 

1892  

448.8 

56 

355.5 

49 

804.3 

21 

1893  

432.5 

52 

400.3 

50 

832.7 

23 

1894  

372.5 

59 

257.6 

50 

630.1 

20 

1895  

376.9 

52 

354.3 

42 

731.2 

20 

3896  

368.9 

49 

390.8 

40 

759.7 

21 

1897  

381.9 

48 

407.3 

42 

789.3 

22 

1898  

291.5 

50 

295.6 

49 

587.2 

25 

1899  

299.7 

44 

385.8 

52 

685.4 

29 

1900  

366.8 

44 

463.8 

49 

830.5 

28 

3901  

339.1 

42 

468.7 

50 

807.8 

29 

1°02  

396.5 

44 

503.3 

50 

899.8 

28 

3903  

437.3 

43 

570.7 

49 

1008.0 

28 

1°04  _ 

454.2 

46 

527.7 

49 

981.8 

26 

1905  

517.1 

48 

570,0 

45 

1087.1 

24 

3996  

548.7 

45 

664.7 

44 

1213.4 

24 

1907  

642.0 

45 

773.4 

43 

1145.4 

23 

1908  

525.7 

44 

657.4 

43 

1183.1 

24 

1909  

599.4 

47 

682.3 

43 

1281.6 

23 

1930  

761.4 

49 

785.8 

42 

1547.1 

21 

1911  

776.9 

51 

750.9 

41 

1527.9 

20 

1912  

881.5 

54 

759.2 

40 

1640.7 

19 

485 


TARIFF  STATISTICS 


II. 


RECEIPTS  FROM  CUSTOMS  AND 


INTERNAL  REVENUE, 
1791—1912 


AND  PROPORTION  OF  CUSTOMS, 


Year 

Customs 

Millions 

Internal 

Revenue 

Millions 

Total 

Ordi- 

nary 

Receipts 

Millions 

Percent- 
age of 
Customs 

Year 

Customs 

Millions 

Internal 

Revenue 

Millions 

Total 

Ordi- 

nary 

Receipts 

Millions 

Percent- 
age of 
Customs 

1791  

1792  

1793  

$ 4.4 

3.4 

4.3 

2 

.3 

$ 4.4 

3.7 

4 7 

100 

92 

92 

1852  

1853  

1854  

$47.3 

58.9 

64.2 

— 

$49.8 

61.6 

73.8 

95 

95 

87 

1794 

4.8 

.3 

5.4 

91 

1855  

53.0 



65.4 

81 

1795  

1796 

5.6 

6.6 

.3 

.5 

6.1 

8 4 

92 

79 

1856  

1857  

64.0 

63.9 

— 

74.1 

69.0 

86 

92 

1797 

7.5 

.6 

8.7 

86 

1858  

41.8 



46.7 

89 

1798 

7.1 

.6 

8.0 

89 

1859  

49.6 



52.8 

94 

1799 

6.6 

.8 

7.5 

88 

1860  

53.2 



56.1 

95 

1800  

9.1 

.8 

10.8 

84 

1861  __  __ 

39.6 

— 

41.5 

95 

1801  

1802 

10.8 

12.4 

1.0 

.6 

12.9 

15  0 

84 

83 

1862  

1863  

49.1 

69.1 

$37.6 

51.9 

112.1 

95 

62 

1803 

10  5 

.2 

11  1 

95 

1864  

102.3 

109.7 

262.7 

38 

1804 

11.1 

.1 

11  8 

94 

1865  

84.9 

209.5 

327.3 

25 

1805 

12  9 

13  6 

95 

1866  

179.0 

309.2 

557.8 

32 

1806 

14  7 

15  6 

94 

1867  

176.4 

266.0 

477.0 

37 

1807 

15  8 

16  4 

96 

1868  

164.5 

191.1 

398.4 

41 

1808  . 

16.4 

17.1 

96 

1869  

180.0 

158.4 

369.6 

49 

1809 

7*3 

7 8 

95 

1870  

194.5 

184.9 

411.3 

47 

1810 

8 6 

9 4 

92 

1871  

206.3 

143.1 

383.3 

51 

1811  

1812 

13.3 

9.0 

— 

14.4 

9.8 

92 

92 

1872  

1873  

216.4 

188.1 

130.6 

113.7 

374.1 

333.7 

58 

56 

1813  

1814  

1815 

13.2 

6.0 

7 3 

"i~7 

4 7 

14.3 

11.2 

15  7 

92 

54 

46 

1874  

1875  

1876  

163.1 

157.2 

148.1 

102.4 

110.0 

116.7 

305.0 

288.0 
293.8 

53 

54 
50 

1816  

1817  

1818 

36.3 

26.3 
17.2 

5.1 

2.7 

1.0 

47.7 

33.4 

21.6 

74 

79 

80 

1877  

1878  

1879  

131.0 

130.2 

137.3 

118.6 

110.6 

113.6 

281.3 
257.8 

272.3 

46 

51 

50 

1819  ... 

20.3 

.2 

24  6 

82 

1880  

186.5 

124.0 

333.5 

51 

1820  

1891 

15.0 

13.0 

.1 

.1 

17.8 

14.6 

84 

89 

1881  

1882  

198.2 

220.4 

135.3 

146.5 

360.8 

403.5 

55 

54 

1822 

17.6 

.1 

20.2 

87 

1883  

214.7 

144.7 

398.3 

54 

1828 

19.1 

20.5 

93 

1884  

195.1 

121.6 

348.5 

56 

1824 

17  9 

19  4 

92 

1885  

181.5 

112.5 

323.7 

56 

1825  - 

20  1 

21  8 

92 

1886  

192.9 

116.8 

336.4 

57 

1826 

23  3 

25  2 

92 

1887  

217.3 

118.8 

371.4 

58 

1827 

19  7 

23  0 

86 

1888  

219.1 

124.3 

379.3 

58 

1828 

23  2 

24  8 

95 

1889  

223.8 

130.9 

387.1 

58 

1829  _ 

22.7 

24.8 

93 

1890  

229.7 

142.6 

403.1 

57 

1830  . 

21.9 

24  8 

88 

1891  

219.5 

145.7 

392.6 

56 

1821 

24.2 

28.5 

85 

1892  

177.5 

154.0 

354.9 

50 

1832  . 

28  5 

31  9 

89 

1893  

203.4 

161.0 

385.8 

53 

1823 

29.0 

33.9 

85 

1S94  

131.8 

147.1 

297.7 

44 

1834  

16.2  . 

21.8 

74 

1895  

152.2 

143.4 

313.4 

48 

1825 

19.4 

35  4 

55 

1896  

160.0 

146.8 

327.0 

49 

1826 

23.4 

50.8 

46 

1897  

176.6 

146.7 

347.7 

51 

1837 

11.2 

25.0 

45 

1898  

149.6 

170.9 

405.3 

37 

1838  

16.2 

26.3 

62 

1S99  

206.1 

273.4 

516.0 

40 

1839  

23.1 

31.5 

73 

1900  

233.2 

295.3 

567.2 

41 

1840  

13.5 

19.5 

69 

1901  

238.6 

807.2 

587.7 

41 

1841 

14.5 

16.9 

86 

1902  

254.4 

271.9 

562.5 

45 

1842  

18.2 

20.0 

91 

1903  

284.5 

230.8 

560.4 

51 

1843  

1844  

1845  - _ 

7.0 

26.2 

27.5 

— 

8.2 

29.3 

30.0 

85 

89 

92 

1904  

1905  

1906  

261.3 
261.8 

300.3 

232.9 

234.1 

249.2 

539.7 

544.6 

594.7 

48 

48 

50 

1846  

1847  

26.7 

23.7 

— - 

29.7 

26.5 

90 

90 

1907  

1908  

332.2 

286.1 

269.7 

251.7 

663.1 

601.1 

49 

48 

1848  - 

31.8 

35.7 

89 

1909  

300.7 

246.2 

603.6 

50 

1849  

1850  

1851  

28.3 

39.7 

49.0 

— 

30.7 

43.6 

52.6 

92 

91 

93 

1910  

1911  

1912  

333.7 

314.5 

311.3 

289.9 

322.5 

321.6 

6i5.5 

701.4 

691.8 

49 

45 

45 

condition,  and  food  animals;  (2)  foodstuffs 
partly  or  wholly  manufactured;  (3)  crude 
materials  for  use  in  manufacturing;  (4) 
manufactures  for  further  use  in  manufactur- 
ing; (5)  manufactures  ready  for  consump- 
tion; (6)  miscellaneous.  Selecting  the  year 
1895  for  illustration,  “manufactures  ready  for 
consumption”  according  to  the  first  classifica- 
tion contributed  19.25  per  cent  of  the  total 
imports,  and  under  the  second,  27.26  per  cent. 

Two  sets  of  statistics  are  in  current  use 
relating  to  imported  merchandise  under 
classified  headings.  One  classification  is  by 
schedules  of  the  tariff  acts;  the  other  disre- 
gards the  schedules  and  classifies  articles  ac- 


cording to  their  commercial  and  industrial 
definition.  The  result  is  wide  variation  for 
some  classes  and  confusion  in  their  use.  For 
example,  under  the  head  of  “spirits,  wines  and 
liquors”  the  figures  of  the  Bureau  of  Statistics 
of  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor 
which  follows  the  natural  classification  of  use, 
do  not  include  fruit  juices,  ginger  ale,  soda,  or 
mineral  waters,  all  of  which  are  covered  in  the 
same  tariff  schedule.  As  a consequence  we 
find  different  average  ad  valorem  rate  calcula- 
tions. In  the  debate  on  the  tariff  bill  of  1909, 
the  Senate  committee  on  finance  stated  that 
the  average  ad  valorem  rate  of  duty  in  1907 
for  the  above  schedule  was  44.68  per  cent. 


III.  DUTIES  ON  SELECTED  CLASSES  OF  IMPORTS,  WITH  PERCENTAGES  OF  TOTAL  DUTIES 


TARIFF  STATISTICS 


Percent- 
age of 
Duties  to 

Total 

Customs 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 lNNHlflN(MH(MNNM(MeocqMTfrfH  l I I <M  M CO  CO  •<*  rt<  t-  CO  CO  CO  ^ ^ 

Wool,  Raw 

Average 

Ad  Valor- 
em Rate 

:::::::::  : isssssissssssssss 

Duties 
( Millions ) 

2.7 

2.7 

2.0 

7.4 

4.9 

3.9 

3.2 

4.6 

3.2 

5.1 

5.9 

4.7 

6.0 

5.5 

6.6 

7.8 

8.1 

2.1 

.2 

‘2’ 4 

4.0 

7.4 

8.1' 

10.8 

11.6 

10.9 

16.5 

17.8 

16.6 

11.4 

17.1 

21.1 

12.5 

14.5 

o 

Percent- 
age of 
Duties  to 
Total 
Customs 

:!!!!!!!! 

1 

Average 
Ad  Valor- 
em Rate 

::::::::: 

Wool, 

Duties 
( Millions ) 

!!!!!!!!! 

o 

Percent- 
age of 
Duties  to 
Total 
Customs 

^^^10»»t0t0lOU5WU,u=«!!D<0®®<olou3u3iot-t-o!aooJa!ooJo01a;oooHaaH3s« 

0 

-T 

Average 

Ad  Valor- 
Total 

O 

s 

o 

o 

Duties 
( Millions ) 
em  Rate 

tONNNWCOCDOOOCOlfl«lOCOlMNlf50500t-lOOON05'^0(NII>OOM«Dt>OOOU500eOCOMOCDHHOOM 

gi^oooSgejjloioSodBioqioggg^gjHjjjHgpj^goijijgjjjg^^^jH^gjggcogjggjGotgg 

rO 

a 

Percent- 
age of 
Duties  to 
Total 
Customs 

ar,  Molasses 
lonfectioner; 

Average 
Ad  Valor- 
em Rate 

6X3^ 

0 

Xfl 

Duties 
( Millions ) j 

OC5HI>CD00  05(MO>HOOCOC<10N'M05NOOOOONll5HN««D05MU5«5b*00(CC<|Tj'«DMN^HoOO> 

s558ss3ss35ss5is5s^?3«'s5s«sas's£§ss  ' ' 'sss'sdfessssss'sgssg's 

6/5- 

487 


III.  DUTIES  ON  SELECTED  CLASSES  OF  IMPORTS,  WITH  PERCENTAGES  OF  TOTAL  DUTIES  (1867— 1912)—  Continued 


TARIFF  STATISTICS 


Tobacco  and  Manufactures  of 

Percent- 
age of 
Duties  to 

Total 

Customs 

,-(M<>lMC<lC0C0^C0C0C0M<C0C0MC0^T*^Tt<^^u3<0t-Ot^O©0:£I<©U3<r>t>»l>*C000050000CQC0t~CaG0 

Average 

Ad  Valor- 
em Rate 

COC'lOOlOJCOL-P-L-L-l'-L-I-L'-l-l-L'&OOOOOCOl'CiOCiOt-OHiMOOHiNHOHHflrtOOOOCOCOCCCCMX) 
rH  1—1  TH  HHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 

Duties 

(Millions) 

o3^asi^©Lqcocv3eo['--H<cDeot>-c^©t';a5'H<eorHt''-rHcoc<icooot>'as©s©ascD-'H['-c©csc'iC'-asrHC'3cor-‘e<icD 
od  cd  cd  eo  ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ■'*  ^ h*  cd  cd  cd  oo  ad  ad  r-5  cd  cd  © cd  ^ -d  r-i  ad  ©’  h<  cd  oo’  rd  r-i  cd  cd  cd  cd  cd  cd  id 

HHHHHHHHINI  tH  rH  tH  iH  CM  C<l  CQ  <M  03  <M  <M  <M  C3 

Spirits,  Wines  and 

Malt  Liquors 

Percent- 
age of 
Duties  to 
Total 
Customs 
_ 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ■ 1 l'^'^”^COCOCO'^CO'^'^CO'^CO-7<^LOlOlOlO'>^La^COeOCO-^T}-'^iO'^llOlOLf5lOLf2CO 

Average 
Ad  Valor- 
em Rate 

I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I KOMHtDNOJ^OJ^.Tj.cOMHr-OlOOOOWHCSCOOHOHNMN'tCO-^N^Oai 

I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I iO0  00  00L'-L-'"CDCDt^t>*t'«'L'-L'-t'-CDI>-CDCDt>-CDCOCDCDt'"t'-C'-t>'[~C'-C--t>-C'-t'-C~C~cS00 

Duties 

(Millions) 

1 t I I I 1 I 1 I iCON^Nt^NCOOTC'I(Nj’tiI>OqiOlOOOC0  0505t>Ot>HOHH(MtOHLOOOt^U-Ot^CO 

! ! | 1 ! ! J { | ! lc  id  id  ©’  cd  i - ad  cd  td  i>-  oo  ad  oo  ad  cd  cd  cd  cd  lo  oo  cd  o’  t-h  t-h  cd  cd  ld  h*  ld  u-  cd  cd 

I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I H rH  H t— t H r- 1 tH  H H H H 

Iron  and  Steel,  and 
Manufactures  of 

Percent- 
age of 
Duties  to 
Total 
Customs 

I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I HOlfl^(MfOMOU»NE>OOOOt>0005HOOOCi^'>tNMM'^CO’^MCO'^eOCOT}'COM 

1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I HHHH  HH  HH 

Average 
Ad  Valor- 
em Rate  j 

1 i 1 l l 1 1 1 1 IHCWU-O5HC0'Hic3C0H(MCmOC0LnC00000a5OC0^,NC0U"'Mh-00(Nia3in00CCiMTt< 

■ i i i i i i i i i co  co  co  co  co  ■<*<  co  co  co  co co  co  co  id  cd  cd -cf  co h*  ■'tf*  co  co  co  co  co  co  eo  cvj  co  co  co  eo  eo 

Duties 

(Millions) 

I l 1 l l l l I l KMC5i>(NJ«£>OC5COO«fi!>'COC5'^COlrtO>HCCH?£)CiOTHOOOR5C5l>Tt;OOeOCOeQTflMCO 

! | J ! j j ! ! J J co  to  ld  cd  uo  ad  t-h  od  o i-i  co  lo  od  co  t-5  r-i  o’  co  ud  o co  as  oo  ad  e4  ai  oo  od  o od 

l,I,l,,,l,  CUM(MMHhH(MC4HHHHCQHHH  rH  r-i  rH  Hri 

Silk,  Manufacturers  of 

Percent- 
age of 
Duties  to 
Total 
Customs 

cDCDt^-i>-asasasasasasoasooooasOooi>-i>-i>-ooooasooas©oot>*ooi>’t^cDt>’t>*cDCDCDcDCDLOiDioiD 

rH  rH  tH  rH  rH  rH  rH  tH  tH 

Average 
Ad  Valor- 
em Rate 

aM^P-P-00  00i>CDNCS05  0Sa5C5a5  05C5C>OOOOOO(NHH<C000t^U"HH'iMC0H‘HC0C0C0C0ClMMC<5N 
lOujtoioioimoioioioioioioioioiotmoioimmousimototoinH'H'H'iotoioioioinioifiioioioioioioio 

Duties 

(Millions) 

Ol0D-a5qMC0(MO0500ClOiaoy:t>Ooa5lrtT}<C0C5'>tOM0qt>inH'Nl000NC0C0CJ5OH|CJl0CJP*i00H 
r-5  cd  cd  co’  oo  © ih  -h  co  cd  cd  -h*  oo’  od  cd  ad  ad  H’  co  id  cd  tH  oo  ad  in  © cd  rjJ  cd  cd  ad  co’  id  ad  cd  tn  c~**  © cd  co  tn  co  rr 

HHHHHdHHHHHiHHHH  C-3  rH  rH  rH  HHHHHHH  04  rH  rtHHHHHHHHHHH  OQ  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH 

oo- 

Year  ^ 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 < 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 

h-OOOSOHlMCOHlOCOf-OOaSOHNMHlO'at^OOaiOHlMCOHlOtDP'OOCSOHlNlCOH'lOCPD'OOCSOHM 

cDCDOi-t^'i^t^i^t^’t'-t^t-^t^GooQoooocoooooooooooosasasasascysasasasasoooooocoocrHr-rH 

ooooiooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooocoooooooooososcsoscfcosososcsasasasas 

HHHHHHHHHHHHH  rH  r— < »H  ?— 1 rH  y-H  rH  rH  rH  rH  i — 1 rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  HrHrHrtrtrHrHriT— irH 

488 


TATTOOED  MAN— TAX  COMMISSIONER  AND  COMMISSIONS 


while  the  rate,  according  to  the  Bureau  of 
Statistics,  was  53.38  per  cent. 

Consumption  Value  and  Average  Rates. — An 
illogical  method  of  comparing  the  tariff  with 
another  by  statistical  data  is  to  use  the  con- 
sumption values  of  goods  on  which  duties  are 
increased  and  decreased.  For  example,  in  the 
schedule  devoted  to  agricultural  products  and 
provisions,  the  value  of  the  articles  consumed 
in  this  country  upon  which  duties  were  de- 
creased by  the  Payne-Aldrich  tariff  of  1909 
was  $483,000,000;  the  consumption  value  of 
the  articles  on  which  duties  were  increased 
was  $4,000,000.  Taking  all  the  schedules  to- 
gether, the  duties  were  decreased  on  articles 
having  a consumption  value  of  $4,952,000,000, 
and  increased  on  $879,000,000.  Such  a con- 
parison  is  specious  as  a test  of  the  incidence 
of  taxation;  many  articles,  such  as  those  in  the 
agricultural  schedule,  are  produced  at  home 
because  of  natural  advantages,  never  enter 
into  foreign  commerce,  and  would  not  if  there 
were  no  tariff  at  all.  No  expansion  of  their 
production  and  no  lowering  of  duties  on  for- 
eign products,  which  as  a matter  of  fact  are 
not  going  to  be  imported,  affect  the  question 
whether  there  has  been  a lowering  of  the 
particular  tariff  or  general  scale. 

The  need  of  care  in  the  use  of  tariff  statis- 
tics may  again  be  seen  from  the  following  il- 
lustration: In  the  first  six  months  after  the 
passage  of  the  tariff  act  of  1909  the  average 
rate  of  duty  paid  on  all  imports  was  21.09  per 
cent  ad  valorem  as  compared  with  24.03  per 
cent  for  the  corresponding  six  months  in  the 
four  preceeding  years.  From  this  it  might  be 
inferred  that  there  had  been  a general  re- 
duction in  duties.  Moreover  in  the  first  six 
months  of  the  tariff  of  1909,  51.6  per  cent  of 
the  total  imports  came  in  free  as  compared 
with  45.5  per  cent  in  the  previous  period.  On 
the  other  hand  the  per  capita  receipts  under 
the  Payne-Aldrich  tariff  of  1909  were  $3.71  as 
compared  with  $3.23  under  the  Dingley  tariff. 

Tables. — The  accompanying  tables  contain 
facts  which  are  helpful  for  forming  a judgment 
concerning  the  real  incidence  of  the  tariff : 

I.  Imports,  free  and  dutiable  1791-1912. 

II.  Receipts  from  customs,  internal  revenue 
and  ratio  of  customs  to  total  ordinary  revenue, 
1791-1912. 

III.  Duties  on  certain  clases  of  imports  with 
percentage  of  each  to  total  customs  duties, 
1867-1912. 

See  Duty  on  Imports,  Average  Rate  of; 
Public  Revenue,  Sources  of.  References: 
Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  Annual 
Statistical  Abstract-,  William  W.  Evans  “Im- 
ports and  Duties,  1894-1907”  in  Committee 
on  Ways  and  Means,  Report  (1908)  ; Import 
Duties  from  1867  to  1883,  House  Misc.  Docs., 
48  Cong.,  1 Sess.,  No.  49  ( 1884)  ; F.  W.  Taussig, 
Tariff  Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (1903),  409-417; 
Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  and  year  by  year. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 


TATTOOED  MAN.  A nickname  applied  to 
James  G.  Blaine  (see)  by  the  Democrats  in 
the  campaign  of  1884.  It  had  its  origin  in 
a cartooon  by  Thomas  Nast  published  in  Puck, 
representing  Blaine  as  indelibly  tattooed  with 
expressions  suggesting  corruption. 

O.  C.  II. 

TAX  COMMISSIONER  AND  COMMIS- 
SIONS. Tax  commissions  are  of  two  kinds: 
(1).  Special  or  temporary  commissions  are 
created  by  legislative  authority,  to  investigate 
and  report  on  the  nature  and  working  of  the 
state  revenue  system,  to  ascertain  defects  and 
suggest  methods  of  improvement.  To  these 
ends,  comparison  of  arrangements  and  experi- 
ence in  other  states  is  often  specifically  or- 
dered. Growing  discontent  with  state  and 
local  systems  of  finance  has  occasioned  special 
tax  commissions  with  increasing  frequency  in 
the  last  quarter  century — fifteen  reports  in 
different  states  having  appeared  from  1808  to 
1812. 

(2).  Permanent  tax  commissions  exist 
in  thirteen  states  (New  York,  New  Jersey, 
North  Carolina,  Alabama,  Ohio,  Indiana, 
Michigan,  Wisconsin,  Minnesota,  Kansas, 
Washington,  Oregon,  Arkansas)  ; a permanent 
tax  commissioner  in  six  other  states  (Mass- 
achusetts, Connecticut,  Vermont,  Maryland, 
West  Virginia,  Wyoming).  They  are  elected 
in  North  Carolina,  appointed  by  the  governor 
in  other  states.  Most  of  them  originated, 
others  were  strengthened,  in  the  decade  from 
1900  to  1910. 

Though  their  functions  and  powers  vary 
from  state  to  state,  the  tendency  is  to  in- 
crease both.  The  more  efficient  have  for  main 
functions  to  supervise  tax  assessment  and 
administration,  state  and  local ; to  assess  cer- 
tain classes  of  property  which  are  specially 
difficult  to  assess  locally,  such  as  railways, 
telegraphs,  telephones,  express  and  sleeping 
car  services,  other  public  utilities;  to  equal- 
ize assessments  between  localities,  requiring 
reassessments  if  deemed  expedient.  They  in- 
struct assessors  and  tax  officials  how  to  per- 
form their  duties,  and  to  keep  their  records; 
they  may  prescribe  uniform  methods  of  pro- 
ceeding, recording,  accounting.  They  must 
periodically  visit  counties  and  make  investiga- 
tions, must  prosecute  delinquent  officials  or 
taxpayers,  and  make  periodical  reports  ex- 
plaining conditions  and  suggesting  possible 
improvements  in  the  revenue  system.  By 
their  agency,  the  inequality  and  inadequacy 
of  assessments  have  been  ameliorated,  tax 
evasion  diminished,  revenues  expanded,  tax 
rates  reduced.  Their  reports  are  educative, 
revealing  defects  and  showing  superior  feat- 
ures in  the  tax  systems  of  other  states  and 
countries. 

See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Finance,  State 
Systems  of;  Public  Accounts;  Revenue, 
Public,  Collection  of;  Taxation. 


TAX,  DIRECT— TAX,  INCOME 


References:  E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  “Recent  Re- 
ports on  State  and  Local  Taxation”  in  Am. 
Econ.  Review,  I (1911),  272-295;  Essays  in 
Taxation  (2d  ed.,  1897),  ch.  xiii;  J.  W.  Chap- 
man, State  Tax  Commissions  in  the  U.  S. 
(1897)  ; J.  A.  Fairlie,  “Taxation  and  Rev- 
enue System  of  Illinois”  in  Illinois  Special 
Tax  Commission,  Report  (1910),  ch.  ix;  Re- 
ports of  State  Tax  Commissions  and  Special 
Tax  Commissions.  E.  H.  Vickers. 

TAX,  DIRECT.  See  Taxes,  Direct. 

TAX  DODGING.  This  term  refers  to  the 
practice  whereby  a taxpayer  who  has  a nomi- 
nal business  residence  in  a city  chooses  for  a 
legal  residence  a town  where  the  tax  rate  is 
low,  or  assessment  made  at  a low  valuation. 
In  Massachusetts  there  are  said  to  be  a score 
of  towns  within  easy  reach  of  Boston,  which 
are  settled  and  controlled  by  wealthy  families 
whose  social  and  commercial  interests  are 
with  Boston  rather  than  with  the  town  of 
legal  residence.  See  Assessment  of  Taxes; 
Tax,  Personal  Property.  Reference:  F.  W. 
Taussig,  Principles  of  Economics  (1911),  II, 
533.  D.  R.  D. 

TAX,  DOG.  A widely  distributed  tax  on 
personal  property,  intended  chiefly  to  identify 
the  animals.  In  many  parts  of  the  country, 
dogs  do  great  damage  to  sheep  and  even 
cattle;  and  a tax  tends  to  keep  down  the 
number.  To  identify  dogs  which  may  have 
injured  persons,  in  some  cities  they  must 
wear  a collar  with  their  license  number.  The 
tax  is  commonly  a flat  rate  of  so  much  a 
year;  the  proceeds  are  nowhere  significant. 
See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Tax,  Personal 
Property;  Taxation,  Subjects  of. 

A.  B.  H. 


TAX,  DUPLICATE.  Term  applied  in  state 
and  local  taxation  to  the  assessment  roll  on 
which  real  and  piersonal  property  is  listed. 
This  roll  is  also  known  in  some  localities  as 
the  grand  duplicate,  and  in  others  as  the 
grand  list.  See  Assessment  of  Taxes. 

D.  R.  D. 

TAX,  EXCISE.  See  Excise  Tax. 

TAX,  FRANCHISE.  See  Franchise  Tax. 

TAX,  HABITATION.  The  habitation  or 
building  tax  is  a tax  on  the  rental  value  of 
buildings,  more  particularly  those  occupied  as 
dwellings.  As  yet  it  has  not  been  used  in  the 
revenue  systems  of  cities  of  the  United  States. 
It  has,  however,  been  proposed  by  several  com- 
missions of  inquiry  as  a substitute  for  the  tax 
on  personal  property,  as  for  example,  by  the 
New  York  Tax  Commission  of  1871;  by  R. 
T.  Ely,  of  the  Maryland  Tax  Commission  of 
1888;  by  the  Massachusetts  Tax  Commission 
of  1897;  and  by  the  minority  of  the  New  York 
Special  Tax  Commission  of  1906.  It  is  advo- 
cated on  the  ground  that  a man’s  residence 
is  an  index  of  his  income,  and  furnishes  a con- 
venient measure  of  his  ability  to  pay  a tax  on 
intangibles  which  escape  taxation.  The  ob- 
jection is  that,  while  the  relation  between  in- 
come to  rental  may  be  true  of  classes  of  so- 
ciety as  a whole,  it  is  not  trap  of  individuals. 
In  substance  it  is  a form  of  income  tax,  using 
rental  as  a measure  of  income.  See  under 
Taxation.  Reference:  J.  B.  Phillips,  “The 
Habitation  Tax”  in  National  Tax  Association, 
State  and  Local  Taxation,  Addresses  and  Pro- 
ceedings (1908),  168-182.  D.  R.  D. 

TAX,  HEAD,  ON  IMMIGRANTS.  See  Im- 
migrants, Head  Tax  On. 


TAX,  INCOME 


Definition. — According  to  strict  economic 
definition,  income  means  net  income,  and  an 
income  tax  signifies  a tax  on  net  income.  As 
used,  however,  in  American  experience  this 
term  has  not  been  confined  to  such  precise  sig- 
nificance. The  term  is  applied  indiscriminately 
to  taxes  imposed  upon  assumed  as  well  as 
actual  earnings.  Again,  the  income  tax  is  to 
be  distinguished  from  the  tax  on  corporate 
earnings,  which  forms  a part  of  the  taxes  on 
corporations  in  many  states.  In  popular  ac- 
ceptance an  income  tax  is  a tax  upon  a per- 
son’s income,  from  whatever  source,  rather 
than  upon  the  thing  itself  which  produces  the 
income. 

Early  State  Taxes. — The  American  colonies 
early  introduced  into  their  revenue  systems  a 
tax  on  faculty  or  ability,  to  supplement  the 
tax  on  land  and  estates.  It  first  appeared  in 


explicit  form  in  the  Plymouth  Colony  in  1643, 
and  in  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony  in  1646. 
Later  it  was  adopted  in  most  of  the  other 
colonies,  the  marked  exception  being  New 
York.  No  systematic  attempt,  however,  was 
made  to  determine  the  real  income  of  the  tax- 
payer. These  taxes  were  for  the  most  part 
levied  arbitrarily  upon  the  occupation  of  the 
individual,  in  order  to  reach  those  who  did 
not  gain  their  livelihood  by  farming,  and  con- 
sequently did  not  contribute  under  the  gen- 
eral property  tax.  During  the  latter  half  of 
the  eighteenth  and  the  first  quarter  of  the 
nineteenth  centuries,  these  taxes  dropped  out 
of  use  except  in  Massachusetts  and  South 
Carolina. 

About  1840  various  forms  of  an  income  tax 
were  imposed  in  a number  of  states.  For 
example,  Pennsylvania  authorized  a tax  of 


490 


TAX,  INCOME 


one  per  cent  upon  all  salaries,  and  of  one 
mill  upon  each  dollar  of  income  received  by 
persons  engaged  in  trade  or  professions,  who 
were  not  otherwise  taxed.  In  Maryland  a tax 
of  two  and  a half  per  cent  upon  salaries  and 
incomes  from  professions  and  employment  was 
imposed  in  1842.  Virginia,  in  1843,  levied  a 
tax  of  one  per  cent  on  all  incomes  over  $400, 
exempting,  however,  ministers  and  laborers 
engaged  in  mechanic  arts,  trade,  and  manu- 
factures. In  North  Carolina,  a tax  of  three 
per  cent  was  placed  (1849)  upon  money  at 
interest  and  profits  derived  from  investments. 
Similar  taxes  were  imposed  in  Alabama  and 
Florida.  These  taxes  were  frequently  modi- 
fied by  subsequent  legislation.  Strictly  inter- 
preted they  resembled  license  taxes  rather 
than  an  income  tax,  as  now  used. 

Further  attempts  were  made  by  southern 
states  during  the  period  of  the  Confederacy 
to  give  greater  vigor  to  this  tax.  The  re- 
sults, however,  were  not  successful,  and  as  a 
rule  the  tax  was  dropped  shortly  after  the 
close  of  the  war.  It  survived  only  in  Virginia 
and  North  Carolina.  To  these  two  states 
should  be  added  Massachusetts  in  the  North, 
which  had  retained  the  tax  from  the  colonial 
period.  In  this  state  the  old  faculty  tax  had 
been  transformed  into  a true  income  tax.  In 
1821  it  was  enacted  that  the  tax  be  levied 
upon  “the  amount  of  the  income  .... 
from  any  profession,  handicraft,  trade  or  em- 
ployment, or  gained  by  trading  at  sea  or  on 
land,  and  also  all  other  property  . . . .” 

In  1849,  $600  of  income  was  exempted;  in 
1866,  $1000;  and  in  1873,  $2000.  The  tax 
has  practically  been  a failure.  In  Boston,  for 
example,  in  1894,  the  assessed  incomes  were 
only  $742,000. 

Recent  State  Taxes. — Virginia,  in  1898,  re- 
vised its  income  tax  law,  levying  a tax  of  one 
per  cent  upon  incomes  over  $600.  In  1910  it 
yielded  $107,000.  North  Carolina,  in  1887, 
distinguished  between  income  from  salaries 
and  income  from  property,  and  for  a few 
years  (1893-1901)  made  the  rates  progressive. 
In  the  latter  year,  however,  it  returned  to 
the  proportional  method.  In  1909  the  total 
yield  was  only  $37,000.  In  South  Carolina 
an  income  tax  was  once  more  authorized  in 
1907,  and  in  1908  a progressive  income  tax 
was  imposed  in  Oklahoma  exempting  incomes 
up  to  $3500.  In  1911,  Wisconsin,  after  long 
discussion  and  careful  deliberation,  enacted  an 
income  tax  law  which  ultimately  is  to  take 
the  place  of  the  personal  property  tax.  The 
original  act  was  repealed  in  1913  and  a new 
law  enacted,  more  simple  in  its  administrative 
provisions  than  the  first.  Supervision  of  as- 
sessment is  exercised  by  the  state  tax  com- 
mission. Incomes  under  $800  are  exempt,  with 
increasing  amounts  according  to  the  size  of  the 
family.  The  rate  is  one  per  cent  on  the  first 
$1,000  and  is  progressive  to  six  per  cent  on 
incomes  above  $12,000. 

129 


The  reason  for  the  failure  of  state  income 
taxes  is  not  far  to  seek.  It  is  practically  the 
same  as  that  which  limits  the  general  property 
tax,  namely,  self-assessment  instead  of  apply- 
ing the  principle  of  collection  at  the  source, 
as  in  England  and  in  the  federal  system  adopt- 
ed in  1913. 

First  Federal  Income  Tax  (1862). — In  its 

search  for  revenue  during  the  emergency  period 
of  the  Civil  War,  Congress  in  1862  enacted 
an  income  tax,  to  be  levied  upon  annual  gains 
or  incomes  “derived  from  any  kind  of  prop- 
erty, rents,  interest,  dividends,  salaries,  or 
from  any  profession,  trade,  employment,  or 
vocation.”  The  rate  was  three  per  cent  for 
incomes  under  a thousand  dollars,  and  five 
per  cent  for  those  above.  An  exemption  of 
$600  was  allowed.  In  addition,  certain  classes 
of  corporations  paid  taxes  on  gross  receipts  or 
on  dividends.  The  principle  of  stoppage  at 
the  source  was  adopted  for  government  em- 
ployees, the  tax  being  withheld  by  disbursing 
officers.  The  tax  was  temporary,  running  for 
three  years. 

In  1864  the  law  was  revised,  the  principle  of 
graduation  was  developed,  and  rates  were  in- 
creased to  five  per  cent  on  the  excess  of  $600 
up  to  $5,000;  seven  and  a half  per  cent  on 
the  excess  over  $5,000  up  to  $10,000;  and  ten 
per  cent  on  the  excess  over  $10,000.  The  tax 
was  to  expire  in  1870.  In  that  year,  however, 
it  was  extended  through  1871,  the  rate  being 
changed  to  two  and  a half  per  cent  on 
incomes  above  $2,000.  By  this  time  the  fiscal 
needs  of  the  government  had  so  improved  that 
proposals  for  the  continuance  of  the  tax  re- 
ceived little  support.  The  yield  by  years,  and 
also  the  number  of  persons  paying  the  tax, 
was  as  follows: 


Year 

Number 
of  Persons 

Amount 

Collected 

1863  

$ 2 741  000 

1864  

20,294,000 

1865  _ 

32,050  000 

1866  

460,170 

72,982,000 

1867  

266,135 

66,014,000 

1868  

254,617 

41,455,000 

1869  

272,843 

34,791,000 

1870  

276,661 

37,775,000 

1871  

74,775 

19,000.000 

1872  

72,949 

14,436,000 

1873  „ 

5,062,000 

The  total  revenue  for  the  entire  period  was 
$347,000,000,  more  than  one-fourth  of  which 
came  from  incomes  between  $1,000  and  $2,000. 
Notwithstanding  the  productiveness  of  this 
tax,  which  was  paid  largely  because  of  pa- 
triotism and  loyalty  during  the  period  of  a 
great  national  struggle,  it  had  many  defects. 
The  principle  of  stoppage  at  the  source  was 
applied  (with  few  exceptions)  only  to  gov- 
ernment employees.  The  administration 
opened  the  way  to  deceit  in  permitting  the 
rental  value  of  home  property  to  be  deducted 
in  the  determination  of  income;  the  progres- 
sive scales  for  graduating  the  tax  were  crude; 


491 


TAX,  INCOME 


and  the  reliance  placed  upon  self-assessment 
involved  many  of  the  evils  of  the  general  prop- 
erty tax. 

Second  Federal  Tax  (1894). — A federal  in- 
come tax  was  again  incorporated  into  the  rev- 
enue system  when  the  Democrats  planned  to  re- 
duce customs  duties,  and  it  was  argued  that 
new  sources  of  revenue  were  required  to  make 
good  the  possible  deficit.  Moreover  the  treasury 
was  embarrassed  owing  to  the  loss  of  confi- 
dence in  national  credit  occasioned  by  the 
silver  agitation.  Aside  from  these  fiscal  needs 
was  the  growing  feeling  that  wealth  should 
contribute  a larger  share  to  the  support  of 
the  government.  The  agitation  of  Populism 
(see),  and  less  consciously  of  socialism  (see), 
had  made  great  headway;  and  the  sudden 
growth  of  large  fortunes,  accompanied  by  the 
trust  movement,  convinced  many  that  the  ex- 
isting system  of  the  distribution  of  wealth  was 
inequitable,  and  that  a special  taxation  of  the 
rich  was  justified. 

The  Wilson-Gorman  tariff  (see),  August 
28,  1894,  provided  for  a tax  for  five  years  of 
two  per  cent  on  incomes  in  excess  of  $4,000, 
to  be  laid  both  upon  persons  and  upon  cor- 
porations. In  most  of  its  details  the  law  was 
modelled  upon  those  enacted  during  the  Civil 
War.  No  deduction,  however,  was  allowed  for 
the  estimated  rental  of  the  home ; and  in  some 
particulars  the  methods  of  assessment  were 
made  more  exacting  and  precise.  The  chief 
difference,  however,  was  in  placing  the  point 
of  exemption  at  the  high  limit  of  $4,000.  Ob- 
viously only  a comparatively  few  taxpayers 
would  be  brought  within  its  scope. 

Court  Decisions. — Doubts  as  to  the  constitu- 
tionality of  the  tax  were  immediately  raised. 
It  was  asserted  that  an  income  tax  was  a 
direct  tax  (see  Taxes  Direct),  and  according 
to  the  Constitution  must  be  levied  in  pro- 
portion to  population.  The  same  objection 
had  been  made  to  the  earlier  income  tax  acts, 
but  a series  of  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court 
upheld  that  legislation.  The  Court,  however, 
had  not  expressed  itself  specifically  as  to 
whether  a tax  on  income  from  real  estate  was 
a direct  tax  or  not,  and  this  particular  issue 
was  now  made  the  center  of  attack. 

Notwithstanding  the  earlier  decisions,  it  was 
also  contended  that  a tax  on  income  from 
personalty  was  an  income  tax;  and  that  a 
tax  on  income  from  state  bonds  was  uncon- 
stitutional, inasmuch  as  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment had  no  right  to  tax  the  agencies  of 
state  governments.  The  contention  as  to  the 
tax  on  income  from  land  and  from  state 
bonds  was  upheld  by  the  Supreme  Court  in 
the  case  of  Pollock  rs.  Farmers  Loan  and  Trust 
Company  (157  U.  S.  429).  On  the  first  issue 
the  Court  divided,  and  on  the  latter  it  was 
unanimous.  As  to  whether  a tax  on  income 
from  personalty  was  a direct  tax  or  not,  the 
Court  was  evenly  divided.  As  the  result  of  a 
rehearing,  however,  the  Court,  by  a majority 


of  five  to  four,  decided  conclusively  against 
the  act  on  all  three  points. 

Sixteenth  Amendment  (1913). — In  1908  the 
Democrats  in  their  national  platform  advo- 
cated an  amendment  to  the  Constitution 
whereby  an  income  tax  might  be  levied,  and 
in  the  following  year  the  Republicans,  in  order 
to  secure  support  for  the  Payne-Aldrich  tariff 
bill,  proposed  the  following  Constitutional 
amendment  (see  Sixteenth  Amendment)  : 

Congress  shall  have  power  to  lay  and  collect 
taxes  on  income  from  whatever  source  derived, 
without  apportionment  among  the  several  states, 
and  without  regard  to  any  census  or  enumeration. 

This  amendment  was  submitted  to  the  state 
legislatures  and  February  4,  1913,  was  rati- 
fied by  Wyoming  and  Delaware,  making  one 
more  than  the  three-fourths  necessary.  The 
amendment  was  opposed,  on  the  grounds:  (1) 
that  it  was  an  unjustifiable  extension  of 
federal  sovereignty,  likely  to  conflict  with  state 
revenue  incomes;  (2)  that  it  opened  the  way 
to  taxation  of  interest  in  securities  of  state 
and  local  governments,'  and  thus  subjected 
these  bodies  to  the  power  of  oppressive  fed- 
eral taxation.  An  income  tax  had  been  ad- 
vocated for  the  reason  that  it  is  a tax  on 
ability;  and,  as  Walker  states  it,  “faculty  is 
the  true  natural  basis  of  taxation.”  Added  to 
the  theoretical  attractiveness  of  this  norm  was 
its  successful  operation  in  Great  Britain  and 
Russia.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  urged  that 
foreign  experience  is  not  a conclusive  guide. 
Territorial  and  industrial  conditions  are  so 
vast  in  the  United  States  as  compared  with 
single  European  nations;  the  complications 
arising  from  state  governments  within  the 
federal  sovereignty,  and  the  failure  of  past 
efforts  all  argued,  it  was  urged,  against  the  in- 
corporation of  an  income  tax  into  the  revenue 
system.  . 

Third  Federal  Tax  (1913). — In  1912,  how- 
ever, the  Democrats  carried  the  Presidential 
election  on  a platform  which  pledged  them  to 
an  immediate  downward  revision  of  the  tariff, 
and  shortly  after  the  inauguration  of  President 
Wilson  in  1913,  Congress  was  convened  in  spe- 
cial session  to  carry  out  this  pledge.  The  result 
was  the  Underwood  Tariff  Act  (see)  of  October 
3,  1913,  which  by  sweeping  reductions  in  the 
tariff  schedules  and  important  additions  to  the 
free  list,  lowered  the  average  rate  of  duty  on 
imports  by  about  25  per  cent.  To  make  up  the 
loss  of  revenue,  recourse  was  had  to  the  power 
granted  to  Congress  by  the  Sixteenth  Amend- 
ment (see),  which  had  just  been  proclaimed  on 
February  25.  The  Underwood  Tariff  Act  im- 
posed on  every  citizen  of  the  United  States,  and 
every  person  residing  in  the  United  States,  a 
personal  income  tax  on  his  entire  net  income 
in  excess  of  $3,000.  Income  from  property  or 
business  in  the  United  States  is  also  subject 
to  the  personal  income  tax.  Besides  the  spe- 
cific exemption  of  $3,000,  there  is  an  additional 
exemption  of  $1,000  for  a married  man  whose 


492 


TAX,  INCOME,  GRADUATED— TAX,  INHERITANCE 


wife  lives  with  him  or  for  a married  woman 
whose  husband  lives  with  her.  In  calculating 
taxable  incomes  various  deductions  are  permit- 
ted, the  most  important  of  which  are:  (1) 
expenses  of  carrying  on  any  business;  (2)  in- 
terest paid  on  a person’s  indebtedness;  (3) 
all  state  and  local  taxes;  (4)  losses  not  com- 
pensated by  insurance;  (5)  uncollectable  debts 
charged  off;  (6)  a reasonable  allowance  for 
depreciation;  (7)  dividends  of  corporations 
paying  the  one  per  cent  tax  on  corporations ; 
(8)  income  upon  which  the  tax  has  been  col- 
lected at  the  source;  (9)  interest  received 
from  public  securities  and  salaries  of  state  and 
local  officials. 

The  rate  of  one  per  cent  on  taxable  incomes 
up  to  $20,000  is  known  as  the  “normal  tax.” 
Incomes  exceeding  $20,000  are  subject  to  an 
additional  tax,  or  surtax,  as  follows: 

Per  Cent 


$20,000  to  $50,000  1 

50.000  to  75.000  2 

75.000  to  100,000  3 

100.000  to  250,000  4 

250.000  to  500,000  5 

Over  500,000  6 


It  should  be  noted  that  these  higher  rates 
do  not  apply  to  total  income,  but  only  to  the 
fraction  in  excess  of  the  amount  which  calls 
for  the  higher  rate. 

In  calculating  net  income  subject  to  the  sur- 
tax, all  profits  of  companies  earned  but  not 
distributed  are  included.  Personal  returns  are 
required  of  all  individuals  having  an  income 
of  over  $3,000,  unless  the  entire  income  is 
taxed  at  the  source.  Individuals  subject  to 
the  additional  tax,  however,  must  report  total 
income  from  all  sources. 

Collection  at  the  Source. — The  collection-at- 
tlve-source  method  of  administration  is  one  of 
the  most  important  features  of  the  law.  All 
persons  or  corporations  paying  to  other  per- 
sons income  in  the  form  of  rent,  interest,  wages, 
etc.,  in  excess  of  $3,000  must  deduct  the  one 
per  cent  tax  and  pay  it  over  to  the  collector  of 
internal  revenue,  reporting  at  the  same  time 
the  name  and  address  of  the  person  for  whom 
the  return  is  made.  Persons  or  corporations 
engaged  in  the  business  of  collecting  interest 
or  dividends  on  foreign  obligations  not  payable 
in  the  United  States  must  obtain  a license  from 
the  collector  of  internal  revenue  and  be  sub- 
ject to  regulations  enabling  him  to  verify  the 
proper  payment  of  taxes  on  such  foreign  se- 
curities. 

American  income  taxes,  as  noted  above,  have 
heretofore  made  little  use  of  the  collection-at- 
the-source  method.  The  Civil  War  federal  tax 
and  state  income  taxes  have,  almost  without 
exception,  depended  on  the  so-called  “self-as- 
sessment” method.  In  England,  however,  stop- 
page at  the  source  has  long  been  employed 
with  success.  Conditions  in  the  United  States 
are  peculiarly  favorable  to  the  use  of  this 
method  the  business  of  the  country  being  so 
largely  in  the  hands  of  corporations  and  for- 


eign investments  so  relatively  unimportant. 
The  objection  that  collection  at  the  source 
would  tend  to  deprive  the  taxpayer  of  the  ben- 
efit of  exemptions  and  deductions  is  met  in 
the  present  law  by  providing  for  the  filing  of 
claims  for  exemption,  either  with  the  collector 
of  internal  revenue,  or  with  the  person  or  cor- 
poration required  to  withhold  the  tax. 

See  Sixteenth  Amendment;  Tax,  Person- 
al Property;  Taxes,  Direct;  Taxation,  Sub- 
jects of;  Underwood  Tariff. 

References:  D.  O.  Kinsman,  “The  Income 
Tax  in  the  Commonwealth  of  the  U.  S.”  in 
Am.  Econ.  Assoc.,  Publications,  3d  Series,  IV 
(1903),  553-686;  E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  Income 
Tax  (1914),  367-673,  687-691;  T.  S.  Adams, 
“Wisconsin  Income  Tax”  in  Am.  Ecom.  Rev.,  I 
(1911),  906;  ibid,  II  (1912),  194;  H.  R.  Sea- 
ger,  Introduction  to  Economics  (3d  ed.,  1905), 
572-576;  F.  Walker,  Pol.  Econ.  (3d  ed.,  1888), 
495-496;  H.  C.  Adams,  Finance  (1898),  356- 
360 ; Library  of  Congress,  List  of  Works  Re- 
lating to  Taxation,  Inheritances  and  Incomes 
(1907) ; E.  M.  Phelps,  Selected  Articles  on  the 
Income  Tax  with  Special  Reference  to  Gradua- 
tion and  Exemption  (1909)  ; J.  A.  Hill,  “Civil 
War  Income  Tax”  in  Quart.  Journ.  Econ., 
VIII  (1894),  416-459,  491-498;  Am.  Year 
Book  1910,  327,  and  year  by  year. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TAX,  INCOME,  GRADUATED.  Many  of  the 
favorers  of  an  income  tax  wish  to  make  it  a 
deterrent  to  the  accumulation  of  large  for- 
tunes and  hence  provide  that  as  the  income 
increases,  the  proportionate  rate  of  taxation 
increases  still  more,  till  in  some  cases  there  is 
a confiscatory  rate  on  all  incomes  above  a 
fixed  figure.  In  most  systems  of  income  tax, 
in  all  that  have  ever  been  adopted  in  the 
LTnited  States,  either  federal  or  state,  there  is 
an  exemption  of  a few  hundred  dollars,  some- 
times of  several  thousand  dollars;  so  that  the 
principle  of  graduation  is  indirectly  applied. 
See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Tax,  Income; 
Taxes,  Indirect.  References:  R.  Foster 
and  E.  V.  Abbott,  Income  Tax  Law  of  1891/ 
(1895),  clis.  iv,  v;  Irving  Fisher,  Nature  of 
Capital  and  Income  (1906),  400-403;  E.  R.  A. 
Seligman,  Essays  on  Taxation  (2d  ed.,  1897). 

A.  B.  H. 

TAX,  INHERITANCE.  Definition.  — The 

term  inheritance  tax  as  used  in  the  United 
States  broadly  includes  all  .duties  imposed  upon 
the  transfer  of  property  at  the  death  of  the 
owner,  whether  by  will  or  without.  It  is  in- 
discriminately applied  to  what  are  known  in 
Europe  as  death,  legacy  and  succession,  and 
probate  duties.  Such  taxes  have  been  imposed 
both  by  the  Federal  Government  and  by  many 
of  the  states.  Federal  legislation  is  considered 
first. 

Federal  Taxes,  1797-1902. — The  Stamp  Act 
of  July  6,  1797,  imitating  recent  legislation  in 


TAX,  INHERITANCE 


England,  which  was  in  turn  borrowed  from 
Holland,  placed  a tax  upon  legacies  and  shares 
of  personal  estates  in  excess  of  fifty  dollars. 
The  rates  were  low,  and  exemptions  were  made 
in  favor  of  the  nearest  kin.  The  tax  was  re- 
pealed July  1,  1802. 

A second  trial  of  such  duties  was  made  dur- 
ing the  Civil  War  by  the  act  of  July  1,  1862. 
This  imposed  a legacy  tax  on  the  devolution  of 
personal  property;  and  stamp  duties  on  pro- 
bates of  wills  and  letters  of  administration. 
The  legacy  duties  were  graduated  from  three- 
fourths  of  one  per  cent  to  five  per  cent,  accord- 
ing to  the  degree  of  relationship.  The  duties 
were  slightly  increased  in  1864  (June  30), 
and  to  them  was  added  a succession  tax  on  real 
estate.  These  duties  were  not  strictly  enforced, 
the  yield  in  1865  being  only  $547,000.  In  1870, 
the  taxes  were  repealed.  The  total  receipts  for 
the  entire  period  of  operation  (1862-1871) 
were  less  than  $15,000,000,  amounting  in  no 
single  year  to  two  per  cent  of  the  internal 
revenue  duties.  The  income  tax  law  of  1804, 
which  was  declared  unconstitutional,  included 
as  income  property  acquired  by  gifts  or  by  in- 
heritance. 

The  Spanish  War  Revenue  Act  of  1898  im- 
posed duties  on  legacies  and  distributive 
shares  of  personal  property.  The  rates  on 
amounts  between  $10,000  and  $25,000  ranged 
from  three-fourths  of  one  per  cent  to  five  per 
cent,  and  for  larger  amounts  increased  by  a 
highly  progressive  graduated  scale,  until  for 
an  individual  share  of  more  than  a million 
dollars  the  rate  was  fifteen  per  cent.  These 
duties  were  repealed  in  1902.  The  total  yield 
during  the  short  period  of  levy  was  $22,500,- 
000,  two-thirds  of  which  was  paid  by  relatives 
who  were  taxed  at  the  lowest  rate. 

State  Taxes. — Pennsylvania,  in  1826,  imposed 
a tax  on  collateral  inheritances,  which  was  in- 
creased in  1849  to  five  per  cent,  at  which  rate 
it  permanently  remained.  At  least  five  states 
— Louisiana,  1828;  Virginia,  1844;  Maryland, 
1845;  North  Carolina,  1847;  and  Alabama, 
1848 — introduced  some  form  of  an  inheritance 
tax  before  the  Civil  War.  Not  all  of  them, 
however,  permanently  retained  this  form  of 
taxation.  In  1892  this  tax  was  levied  in  nine 
states — Connecticut,  Massachusetts,  New  York, 
New  Jersey,  Delaware,  Pennsylvania,  Mary- 
land, West  Virginia,  and  Tennessee.  Shortly 
after  this  date  such  taxes  found  increasing 
favor  until  in  1914  there  are  few  states  with- 
out such  duties. 

According  to  an  exhaustive  study  made  in 
1908,  inheritances  were  taxed  in  thirty -six 
states;  twenty  states  imposed  both  direct  and 
collateral  duties,  and  thirteen  states  had  a 
progressive  scale  of  rates.  In  most  of  the 
states  the  maximum  rate  for  collaterals  is  five 
per  cent,  the  marked  exceptions  being  Cali- 
fornia, Idaho,  North  Carolina,  and  Wisconsin, 
where  rates  run  up  to  fifteen  per  cent.  In 
Texas  and  Washington  they  reach  twelve  per 


cent.  The  rates  on  direct  inheritances  range 
from  one-half  to  five  per  cent,  the  latter  be- 
ing found  in  Minnesota  and  Utah.  In  New 
York  the  basis  of  assessment  is  the  amount 
received  by  each  beneficiary,  rather  than  the 
estate  itself.  The  tax  also  extends  to  non-resi- 
dent beneficiaries  who  might  be  taxed  in  their 
own  states  for  the  inheritance  or  legacy  re- 
ceived, thus  resulting  in  double  taxation.  The 
rates  are  also  highly  progressive;  for  bene- 
ficiaries outside  of  certain  degrees  o,f  relation- 
ship rates  run  as  high  as  25  per  cent  for  in- 
heritances in  excess  of  $1,000,000. 

Nor  is  there  any  uniformity  as  to  exemption: 
for  collaterals,  the  amounts  ranging  from  no 
exemption  in  several  states  to  $25,000  in  North 
Dakota;  and  for  direct  inheritances  to  $20,000 
in  Illinois  and  West  Virginia. 

Discussion. — There  has  been  much  discus- 
sion as  to  whether  inheritance  taxes  should  be 
retained  exclusively  by  the  states  or  whether 
the  tax  more  properly  belongs  to  the  Federal 
Government.  Such  controversy  was  stimulated 
by  the  declaration  of  President  Roosevelt,  in 
1906,  that  “fortunes  swollen  beyond  all  healthy 
limits”  should  be  controlled  through  inherit- 
ance taxes,  and  that  this  instrument  of  special 
control  could  effectively  be  applied  only 
through  the  federal  authority.  This  view, 
however,  has  not  met  with  general  acceptance, 
it  being  argued  that  regulation  of  individual 
wealth : ( 1 ) does  not  remove  the  causes ; 

(2)  punishes  the  just  with  the  unjust;  (3) 
and  would  be  difficult  to  enforce.  To  be  puni- 
tive, rates  would  have  to  be  greatly  increased ; 
and  this  would  lead  to  evasion  and  the  break- 
ing down  of  the  administrative  machinery. 

Constitutionality. — The  incorporation  of  in- 
heritance taxes  into  the  revenue  systems  of 
the  several  states  has  met  prolonged  opposi- 
tion, based  on  arguments  that  such  legislation 
was  unconstitutional.  In  particular  it  was 
declared  to  controvert  the  requirement  that  all 
taxes  on  property  be  uniform,  as  found  in 
many  state  constitutions.  As  a rule,  however, 
the  courts  have  decided  that  an  inheritance 
tax  is  not  a tax  upon  property,  but  a tax  upon 
the  succession  or  devolution  of  property — in 
other  words  a tax  upon  a privilege;  in  accord- 
ance with  this  principle  the  United  States  Su- 
preme Court  has  even  held  that  government 
bonds  are  subject  to  inheritance  taxes  imposed 
by  a state. 

As  to  the  legality  of  progressive  rates  and 
provisions  for  exemption,  there  has  been  great- 
er difference  of  opinion  on  the  part  of  the 
courts.  In  Ohio  a graduated  scale  has  been 
declared  unconstitutional,  while  in  Illinois  the 
decision  was  favorable. 

A serious  administrative  difficulty  is  that  of 
determining  the  domicile  of  the  property,  par- 
ticularly personal  property,  which  is  concerned 
in  the  inheritance  or  succession.  Is  the  in- 
heritance to  be  taxed  at  the  residence  of  the 
decedent  or  at  the  situs  of  the  property?  Dr. 


494 


TAX,  LAND  AND  REAL  ESTATE— TAX,  PROPERTY,  GENERAL 


Max  West,  who  has  made  a most  exhaustive 
study  of  inheritance  taxes,  concludes  that,  while 
real  estate  is  taxed  only  where  it  is  situated, 
personal  property  may  be  included  in  inherit- 
ance-tax appraisals,  either  where  it  is  situated 
or  at  the  domicile  of  the  decedent,  or  even  in 
both  places;  while  corporation  stocks  may  be 
reached  also  at  the  corporation’s  home  office. 
This  means  double  taxation,  with  the  possi- 
bility of  triple  taxation. 

See  Tax,  Personal  Property;  Taxation, 
Double;  Taxation,  Subjects  of. 

References:  Max  West,  Inheritance  Tax  (2d 
ed.,  1909),  “State  and  Local  Taxation”  in 
International  Tax  Assoc.,  Addresses  and  Pro- 
ceedings (annual  since  1907)  ; Knowlton  vs. 
Moore,  178  D.  S.  41;  S.  S.  Huebner,  “Inherit- 
ance Tax  in  Am.  Commonwealth”  in  Quart. 
Journ.  Econ.,  XVIII  (1904),  529-550;  H.  A. 
Millis,  “Inheritance  Tax  in  Am.  Common- 
wealth,” in  ibid,  XIX  (1905),  288-308. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TAX,  LAND  AND  REAL  ESTATE.  Import- 
ance.— Owing  to  the  widespread  evasion  of  the 
personal  property  tax,  the  taxes  on  real  estate 
assume  special  importance,  and  constitute  by 
far  the  largest  part  of  the  general  property 
taxes  in  American  cities.  In  1908,  the  valu- 
ation of  the  real  property  in  cities  of  30,000 
population  or  over  was  $19,077  millions,  with 
$3,098  millions  of  personalty. 

When  the  population  is  congested,  the  value 
of  land  becomes  high  and  the  tax  on  land  con- 
stitutes a large  proportion  of  the  assessment. 
In  New  York  City  a little  over  one-lialf  of  the 
total  real  estate  valuation  is  on  land  alone. 
The  assessed  value  of  six  square  miles  on 
Manhattan  Island  nearest  Central  Park  is 
greater  than  that  of  all  the  real  estate  in  some 
states,  as,  for  example,  Missouri. 

Improvements. — A distinction  is  to  be  made 
between  the  taxation  of  the  land  and  of  the 
permanent  improvements  upon  the  land,  like 
drainage,  fencing,  buildings.  Taxation  of 
the  former  only  is  advocated  by  supporters 
of  the  single-tax  principle,  on  the  ground 
that  land  is  a natural  monopoly,  whose  value 
is  determined  by  social  rather  than  individual 
effort.  In  western  Canada  there  is  a notice- 
able tendency  to  lower  the  rate  of  taxation 
on  improvements;  in  British  Columbia,  the 
maximum  assessment  of  improvements  is  lim- 
ited to  50  per  cent;  and  in  Alberta  improve- 
ments are  exempt. 

Distinct  from  Personal. — The  distinction  be- 
tween “real”  and  “personal”  estate  is  not  al- 
ways clear,  and  for  purposes  of  taxation  rests 
upon  legal  definition ; for  example,  slaves  used 
to  be  considered  real  estate  in  some  states; 
engines,  water  wheels  and  shafting  may  be 
classified  as  real  estate;  machines,  such  as 
looms  and  lathes,  are  personal  property.  In 
Wisconsin  the  rolling  stock  of  railroads  is  re- 
garded as  real  estate.  In  New  York  special 


franchises  or  the  right  to  use  the  public 
streets  are  also  held  to  be  real  estate;  in  Mas- 
sachusetts and  California  mortgages  on  real 
estate  are  regarded  as  realty.  In  New  York 
the  real  estate  valuation  includes  telegraph 
lines,  wires,  poles  and  appurtenances,  and  all 
surface,  underground,  or  elevated  railroads, 
while  in  Ohio  the  personal  property  valuation 
includes  the  roadbed,  water  and  wood  stations, 
and  such  other  realty  as  is  necessary  for  the 
daily  operation  of  railroads.  Comparisons  of 
assessments  of  different  states  must,  therefore, 
be  used  with  caution. 

See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Tax,  Personal 
Property;  Taxation,  Mortgage;  Taxation, 
Subjects  of. 

References:  C.  C.  Plehn,  Introd.  to  Public 
Finance  (3d  ed.,  1909),  295,  299;  C.  F.  Bas- 
table,  Public  Finance  (2d  ed.,  1895),  395,  412; 
C.  B.  Fillebrown,  A B C of  Taxation  (1909)  ; 
E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  Essays  in  Taxation  (2d  ed., 
1897).  Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TAX,  OLEOMARGARINE.  SeeOLEOMARGAR- 
ine  Tax. 

TAX  ON  INSURANCE  COMPANIES.  See 

Insurance  Companies,  Tax  on. 

TAX,  POLL.  See  Poll  Tax. 

TAX,  PROPERTY,  GENERAL.  This  “may 
be  defined  as  a tax  in  which  the  base  is  the  en- 
tire amount  of  the  property,  real  and  personal, 
owned  by  the  tax-payer”  (Plehn).  As  used 
by  the  Bureau  of  the  Census  in  its  analysis  of 
revenue  of  cities  the  term  refers  to  direct  taxes 
upon  property  or  upon  persons,  natural  or  cor- 
porate, in  proportion  to  their  property.  Broad- 
ly used,  the  tax  may  include  the  franchise  of 
a corporation.  It  may  be  collected  under  a 
general  or  a specific  levy,  the  latter  being  lim- 
ited to  certain  classes  of  property,  or  to  a re- 
stricted territorial  district. 

This  tax  provides  by  far  the  largest  amount 
of  local  revenue  in  the  United  States.  In  1908 
the  receipts  from  this  source,  in  cities  having 
a population  of  30,000  or  over,  amounted  to 
$377,000,000  out  of  total  receipts  from  general 
revenue  of  $480,000,000.  In  all  but  four  states, 
Delaware,  New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania  and  Wis- 
consin, this  tax  also  provides  revenue  for  gen- 
eral state  purposes. 

As  the  states,  however,  are  relying  more  and 
more  upon  taxes  on  corporations  and  inherit- 
ances, the  general  property  tax  plays  a less 
important  part  in  state  revenue.  It  has  rare- 
ly been  employed  by  the  Federal  Government, 
and  if  so  levied  must  be  apportioned,  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  Constitution,  as  a direct  tax 
among  the  several  states  according  to  popula- 
tion (see  Taxes,  Direct). 

When  industrial  society  was  more  simply  or- 
ganized, the  general  property  tax  could  be  suc- 
cessfully levied  and  collected.  Under  modern 


495 


TAX,  PROPERTY,  PERSONAL— TAX,  SINGLE 


conditions  it  is  open  to  many  objections.  It  is 
difficult  to  secure  the  assessment  of  personal 
property,  and  there  are  in  many  states  gross 
undervaluations  of  real  property.  Influenced, 
however,  by  historical  tradition,  there  is  a 
deep-rooted  and  widespread  prejudice  in  favor 
of  the  tax  which  has  thus  far  withstood  efforts 
of  tax-reformers  to  substitute  other  agencies 
for  local  revenue. 

See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Tax,  Personal 
Property. 

References:  C.  C.  Plehn,  Introduction  to 
Public  Finance  (3d  ed.,  1909),  246-310; 
E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  Essays  in  Taxation  (2d 
ed.,  1897),  ch.  ii;  U.  S.  Census  Bureau,  Sta- 
tistics of  Cities  Having  a Population  of  over 
30,000  (1908)  ; R.  T.  Ely,  Taxation  in  Ameri- 
can States  and  Cities  (1888)  ;'  C.  J.  Bullock, 
Selected  Readings  in  Public  Finance  (1906), 
202-253;  Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  331. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TAX,  PROPERTY,  PERSONAL.  The  term 
“personal  property”  is  applied  to  household 
goods,  mercantile  and  manufacturers’  wares, 
tools,  machinery,  livestock,  evidence  of  own- 
ership in  corporate  property,  such  as  stocks, 
bonds,  mortgages,  notes,  negotiable  instruments, 
copyrights,  patents,  book  credits  and  money,  in 
short,  to  all  property  other  than  land  and  real 
estate.  It  includes,  therefore,  visible  property 
and  intangibles.  Personal  property  taxes  are 
to  be  distinguished  from  personal  taxes,  which 
include  the  poll  tax  and  the  income  tax. 

In  the  earlier  stage  of  revenue  development, 
practically  all  property  was  visible  and  could 
easily  be  assessed  to  the  owner.  With  the 
growth  of  corporate  enterprise  owned  by  share- 
holders living  elsewhere  than  at  the  situs  of 
the  business,  and  often  in  another  political 
jurisdiction,  it  became  impossible  to  assess  the 
owners  if  they  did  not  voluntarily  make  re- 
turns. Evasion  has  been!  justified  on  the 
ground  that  the  physical  property  of  the  cor- 
poration is  taxed  at  its  situs;  and  that  to 
tax  the  evidence  of  ownership  constitutes 
double  taxation  (see  Taxation,  Double). 
To  counteract  evasion  some  states  have  adopted 
the  system  of  taxing  the  stock  at  the  home  of 
a corporation  and  then  distributing  it  to  the 
towns  wherein  the  stockholders  live.  Various 
attempts  have  been  made  to  secure  a more 
complete  assessment  of  personal  property,  but 
punitive  measures  have  been  of  little  avail  ( see 
Taxes,  Dooming  of).  As  property  is  locally 
assessed,  tax-payers  in  many  instances  have 
chosen  legal  residence  in  a town  where  the  rate 
was  low,  or  favorable  arrangements  could  be 
made  with  assessors  in  order  to  secure  a low 
valuation  ( see  Tax  Dodging). 

Because  of  the  failure  to  reach  personal 
property  several  methods  of  reform  have  been 
proposed,  among  which  may  be  noted:  cen- 
tralization of  administration,  particularly  in 
assessment;  abandonment  of  effort  to  secure 


complete  assessment,  by  permitting  exemption; 
the  substitution  of  a system  whereby  certain 
forms  of  personal  property  shall  be  taxed  at 
rates  sufficiently  low  to  disarm  opposition,  thus 
securing  more  complete  returns.  The  adop- 
tion of  the  last  method,  however,  is  barred  in 
many  states  by  the  constitutional  requirement 
that  taxes  shall  be  uniform  on  all  kinds  of 
property.  The  principle  of  classification  of 
property  is  recognized  in  Pennsylvania  where 
the  flat  rate  levied  upon  credits,  stock,  bonds, 
moneys,  mortgages  and  promissory  notes  is  4 
mills  per  $1.00;  in  Maryland  4.6  mills.  Other 
substitutes  for  personal  property  tax  are  busi- 
ness or  rental  taxes,  as  developed  in  Canada. 

As  illustrating  the  small  part  which  the  per- 
sonal property  tax  plays  in  the  revenue  sys- 
tem of  American  cities,  the  summary  prepared 
by  the  Bureau  of  the  Census  for  cities  of  30,- 
000  population  and  over,  for  the  year  1908, 
may  be  cited;  the  assessed  valuation  of  per- 
sonal property  was  $3,098,000,000,  as  compared 
with  $19,077,000,000  of  real  property. 

See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Tax,  Land  and 
Real  Estate;  and  under  Tax. 

References:  D.  A.  Wells,  Theory  and  Prac- 
tice of  Taxation  (1900),  ch.  xix;  C.  J.  Bullock, 
“The  Taxation  of  Intangible  Property”  in  Int. 
Tax  Association,  Proceedings  (1909),  127-137; 
T.  N.  Carver,  “Ohio  Tax  Inquisitor  Law”  in 
Economic  Studies,  III  (1898),  No.  3;  E.  R.  A. 
Seligman,  Essays  in  Taxation  (2d  ed.,  1897). 
24-61.  Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TAX,  ROAD.  See  Road  Tax. 

TAX,  SINGLE.  A proposed  plan  of  placing 
all  taxes  save  those  levied  for  restrictive  or 
regulative  purposes,  upon  the  unimproved  value 
of  land — i.  e.,  the  whole  value  of  land  less  the 
appraised  value  of  improvements  upon  it.  The 
single  tax  on  land  was  first  proposed  by  the 
French  economistes,  or  physiocrats,  in  the  sec- 
ond half  of  the  eighteenth  century.  Accord- 
ing to  the  physiocratic  theory  of  distribution, 
land  is  the  only  factor  of  production  which 
yields  a net  return  above  subsistence  or  main- 
tenance. It  follows  from  this  theory  that 
taxes  on  labor  and  capital,  business  and  com- 
modities, must  inevitably  be  shifted  to  the 
land,  with  much  incidental  hardship  to  indi- 
viduals and  disturbance  of  industry.  Accord- 
ingly, all  taxes  should  be  levied  directly  upon 
the  land. 

When  the  classical  economic  theory  of  Adam 
Smith  and  his  school  supplanted  that  of  the 
physiocrats,  the  single  tax  plan  practically  dis- 
appeared from  view.  It  again  became  the  sub- 
ject of  general  interest  upon  the  publication,  in 
1879,  of  Henry  George’s  Progress  and  Poverty. 
Working  in  complete  ignorance  of  the  earlier 
physiocratic  doctrine,  Henry  George  propound- 
ed a similar  plan  of  taxation.  On  the  basis 
of  the  classical  economics,  George  reasoned  that 
the  tendency  of  progress  is  toward  a constant 


496 


TAX,  STAMP— TAXATION,  CONSTITUTIONAL  BASIS  OF 


reduction  in  wages  and  interest  and  a corre- 
sponding rise  in  rents.  Since  rent  is  a form 
of  income  produced  by  society  itself,  George 
argued  that  natural  justice  required  its  appro- 
priation to  general  social  uses  instead  of  its 
monopolization  by  private  individuals.  To  tax 
the  products  of  labor,  on  the  other  hand,  he 
held  to  be  inherently  unjust,  on  the  ground 
that  each  person  has  a natural  right  to  the 
whole  product  he  creates. 

Considerations  of  social  utility  were  also 
employed  by  Henry  George  and  his  followers 
in  their  defence  of  the  single  tax.  The  aboli- 
tion of  taxes  upon  labor  and  its  products  would 
increase  wages  and  the  profits  of  capital,  thus 
stimulating  industry  and  encouraging  accumu- 
lation. Land  values  would  practically  dis- 
appear; hence  no  man  would  care  to  hold  more 
land  than  he  could  properly  exploit,  .and  the 
areas  now  held  for  speculative  purposes  would 
be  thrown  open  to  labor,  with  resultant  in- 
crease in  production  and  rise  in  wages.  The 
crises  that  have  in  the  past  attended  periods 
of  general  land  speculation  would  no  longer  be 
possible. 

The  doctrines  of  Henry  George  soon  gained  a 
wide  popularity,  both  in  America  and  in  Eng- 
land. In  Germany  they  were  received  with 
favor  by  the  radical  land  reformers,  and  con- 
tributed to  the  introduction  of  increment  taxes. 
In  Australasia  the  single  tax  movement  has 
been  not  without  practical  effect.  In  New  Zea- 
land, under  the  act  of  1897,  land  taxes  are 
levied  upon  the  unimproved  value  alone.  By 
an  act  of  1896  local  bodies  are  given  an  option 
of  levying  all  taxes  upon  the  unimproved  value 
of  land;  and  the  plan  is  now  in  force  in  a large 
number  of  districts.  In  New  South  Wales  the 
municipalities  have  a similar  option,  and  avail 
themselves  of  it  in  many  cases.  These  taxes 
are  comparatively  light,  in  only  a few  cases 
amounting  to  as  much  as  2 per  cent  of  the 
capital  value  of  the  land. 

The  single  tax  doctrine  has  found  few  ad- 
herents among  professional  economists.  The 
position  that  progress  means  a decline  in  wages 
and  interest  is  untenable  in  view  of  the  al- 
most universal  rise  in  wages  in  the  last  cen- 
tury and  the  vast  increase  in  the  aggregate 
returns  to  capital.  The  doctrine  that  an  in- 
come accruing  in  consequence  of  social  causes 
can  not  rightfully  be  appropriated  by  private 
individuals  rests  upon  the  obsolete  “natural 
rights”  philosophy,  as  does  also  the  doctrine 
that  the  state  can  not  rightfully  tax  the  pro- 
ducts of  labor.  More  serious  are  the  ethical  crit- 
icisms of  the  single  tax.  Granting  that  it 
would  be  justifiable  to  appropriate  to  the  state 
future  increments  in  land  value,  to  appropri- 
ate by  taxation  present  land  values  would  be 
unjustifiable  confiscation.  Land  is  an  article 
of  commerce  recognized  by  law,  and  investments 
in  land  are  entitled  to  the  same  protection  as 
other  investments.  The  injustice  of  the  proposal 
is  heightened  by  the  fact  that  in  many  coun- 


tries land  is  chiefly  the  investment  of  persons 
of  moderate  means.  Some  of  these  might  se- 
cure adequate  compensation  through  relief  from 
other  forms  of  taxation,  but  this  could  not  be 
generally  true.  Fiscal  objections  to  the  tax  are 
that  it  would  yield  an  uncertain  and  inelastic 
revenue,  and  one  that  could  with  difficulty  be 
properly  distributed  among  the  different  gov- 
ernmental bodies.  From  the  point  of  view  of 
wealth  production,  the  single  tax  would  have 
various  injurious  effects,  among  them  the  dis- 
couragement of  improvement  in  advance  of  im- 
mediate needs,  and  a tendency  in  agriculture 
toward  soil  robbing  methods. 

See  Rent;  Tax,  Property,  General;  Tax, 
Property,  Personal;  Taxation,  Principles 
of;  Unearned  Increment;  and  under  Po- 
litical Theories. 

References:  H.  George,  Progress  and  Pov- 
erty (1879);  T.  S.  Shearman,  Natural  Tax- 
ation (1898)  ; C.  B.  Fillebrown,  The  A B C of 
Taxation  (1909);  E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  Essays 
in  Taxation  (2d  ed.,  1897),  ch.  iii. 

Alvin  S.  Johnson. 

TAX,  STAMP.  See  Stamp  Tax. 

TAX,  TONNAGE.  A tonnage  tax  is  a duty 
on  shipping.  Such  duties  have  been  imposed 
since  colonial  times  either  for  revenue  or  for 
protection  to  domestic  industry.  By  the  ton- 
nage act  of  1789  a tax  of  6 cents  a ton  was  im- 
posed on  American  built  and  owned  vessels,  30 
cents  upon  vessels  American  built  and  foreign 
owned,  and  50  cents  upon  foreign  built  and  for- 
eign owned  shipping.  Such  discriminating 
duties  have  been  abandoned  (see  Commercial 
Policy  and  Relations,  United  States),  taxes 
now  being  imposed  rather  to  secure  proper  po- 
lice regulation  than  revenue.  By  the  act  of 
1909  a duty  of  two  cents  a ton,  not  to  exceed  10 
cents  in  any  one  year,  is  imposed  at  each 
entry  of  vessels  from  any  port  in  North  and 
Central  America,  the  adjacent  islands  belong- 
ing to  the  British  Government,  or  the  northern 
part  of  South  America.  A duty  of  6 cents  per 
ton,  not  to  exceed  30  cents  in  any  one  year, 
is  imposed  on  vessels  from  other  foreign  ports. 
There  is  also  levied  an  annual  tonnage  tax 
upon  foreign  built  vessels  or  yachts  used  for 
pleasure  purposes,  which  now  amounts  to 
about  $1,000,000  per  annum.  See  Shipping, 
Regulation  of;  Subsidies  to  Shipping.  Ref- 
erences: 0.  L.  Elliott,  Tariff  Controversy  in  the 
U.  S.  (1892),  89-90;  A.  S.  Bolles,  Financial 
Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (1883),  I.  D.  R.  D. 

TAXABLE  PROPERTY,  VALUATION  OF. 

See  Assessed  Valuations,  Comparative; 
Assessment  of  Taxes;  Assessment,  Special; 
Taxation,  Constitutional  Basis  of. 

TAXATION,  CONSTITUTIONAL  BASIS 

OF.  Taxation  was  originally  based,  undoubt- 
edly, on  the  strong  arm  of  the  king  and  was 


497 


TAXATION,  DOUBLE— TAXATION,  EXEMPTIONS  FROM 


merely  predatory.  Very  soon,  however,  he 
came  to  justify  this  by  the  necessity  of  pro- 
tecting his  subjects  in  war.  The  modern 
theory  is,  of  course,  quite  different,  that  the 
state,  no  longer  the  king,  administers  many 
functions  besides  that  of  making  war,  and 
therefore  collects  the  cost  thereof  from  the 
people.  The  English  constitution  develops  the 
principle  that  such  taxes  can  exist  but  by 
common  consent  and  for  the  general  good;  and 
the  American  Constitution  goes  farther  and 
states  it  must  be  equal  or  proportional  (Art. 
I,  Sec.  viii,  If  1,  Sec.  ix.  If  4,  Amend.  XVI). 

The  right  to  tax,  even  under  the  American 
Constitution,  however,  is  probably  limitless. 
Either  state  or  federal  government  would 
probably  have  the  constitutional  right  to  take 
all  a man’s  property  or  income  and  expend  it 
generally  among  the  public,  or  for  their  good, 
i.  e.,  to  enact  absolute  socialism;  and  under 
our  system  there  may  be  double  taxation,  state 
or  federal,  or  even  double  or  triple  taxation  by 
the  several  states,  as  has  happened  in  the 
case  of  succession  taxes.  Such  laws  are  la- 
mentable, and  to  be  interpreted  away  so  far 
as  possible;  but  there  appears  to  be  no  con- 
stitutional objection. 

A taxpayer  has  his  remedy  for  unconsti- 
tutional taxation,  either  by  refusing  to  pay 
the  tax  and  contesting  the  matter  in  the  courts, 
or  by  paying  the  tax  and  suing  the  officer  who 
receives  the  tax  for  the  amount  paid,  on  the 
ground  that  it  was  extorted  by  such  individual 
under  an  unconstitutional  law.  Or  when  a 
corporation  is  concerned,  as  in  the  corporation 
tax  cases,  U.  S.  Supreme  Court,  March,  1911 
(220  U.  8.  107),  a shareholder  may  bring  a 
bill  in  equity  against  a corporation  which  is 
about  to  pay  the  tax,  asking  for  injunction. 

Owing  to  the  fact  that  the  Federal  Consti- 
tution requires  that  there  shall  be  no  federal 
direct  tax  that  is  not  apportioned  per  capita 
among  the  states  (with  the  exception  of  the 
income  tax),  that  is  to  say,  that  the  state  tax 
thus  raised  by  each  state  must  depend  upon 
the  number  of  its  inhabitants  and  not  on  the 
value  of  its  property,  the  distinction  hitherto 
academical  between  direct  and  indirect  taxes 
became  of  immense  importance.  Although  in 
the  earlier  case  (Hylton  vs.  U.  S.  3 Dallas 
171)  it  was  decided  that  a tax  upon  carriages 
was  not  a direct  tax,  it  would  seem  to  be 
pretty  well  settled  now  by  the  latest  case, 
(Pollock  vs.  Farmers’  Loan  & Trust  Co.,  157 
U.  8.  429)  that  a direct  tax  is  a tax  on  the 
property  or  the  income  of  the  property,  and 
is  therefore,  paid  by  the  owner  of  the  property, 
and  presumably  out  of  the  property.  It  is  not 
a tax  upon  the  use  of  the  property  nor  upon 
any  other  commodity  connected  therewith.  The 
old  distinction  that  a direct  tax  was  one 
which  could  not  be  shifted  upon  others  would 
today  seem  misleading. 

But  it  is  noteworthy  that  although  we  in 
America  have  got  all  the  great  principles  of 


English-American  taxation,  yet  in  England  un- 
til the  present  proposed  tax  upon  the  un- 
earned increment  there  was  rarely  any  direct 
tax  upon  the  land;  although,  indeed,  we  do 
find  early  “aids”  of  such  much  per  “hide,”  the 
practice  seems  to  have  wholly  disappeared, 
and  the  English  land  tax  has  always  "been 
imposed  upon  the  rental  value  of  the  prop- 
erty, making  it  more  in  the  nature  of  an  in- 
come tax  than  a direct  tax.  Our  constitutions, 
on  the  other  hand,  federal  and  state,  usually 
provide  that  taxation  shall  be  “equal”  or  “uni- 
form,” or  in  Massachusetts  and  New  Hamp- 
shire “proportionate,”  and  the  courts  have 
decided  that  this  makes  it  necessary  that  the 
tax  should  be  imposed  equally  upon  land  and 
personal  property  (Gilman  vs.  Sheboygan 
City,  2 Black  510). 

Efforts  are  now  being  made  to  have  various 
classifications  made  constitutional,  “classifica- 
tion” being  the  phrase  employed  in  modern 
America  by  any  jurist  who  wishes  to  get 
around  the  clauses  requiring  “due  process  of 
law”  and  “equality  before  the  law”  in  the 
state  constitutions  and  the  Fourteenth 
Amendment.  For  instance,  in  Massachusetts, 
there  was  proposed  a law  to  make  a large 
reduction  of  the  tax  upon  intangible  personal 
property  to  such  persons  as  make  a sworn 
return ; in  several  states  there  is  an  exemption 
of  agricultural  products,  or  of  growing  trees, 
in  the  interest  of  forestry.  The  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States  seems  likely  to  hold  that 
so  far  the  Fourteenth  Amendment  is  concerned 
there  is  no  constitutional  necessity  of  an  equal 
and  identical  treatment.  This,  however,  would 
presumably  not  be  held  by  state  supreme  courts 
interpreting  the  constitutions  of  their  own 
states. 

See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Corporations, 
Taxes  on  ; Financial  Powers  ; Revenue,  Pub- 
lic, Collection  of;  Taxes,  Direct. 

Reference:  F.  J.  Stimson,  Federal  and  State 
Constitutions  (1907),  85,  268-287. 

Frederick  J.  Stimson. 

TAXATION,  DOUBLE.  This  denotes  the 
taxation  of  the  same  person  or  thing  twice 
over.  For  example,  a person  may  be  taxed 
on  his  property  and  on  the  income  from  his 
property;  or  property  against  which  there  is 
debt  obligation  may  be  taxed  as  well  as  the 
creditor  who  has  loaned  the  money.  The  most 
familiar  ease  is  that  of  taxes  on  land  and 
also  on  mortgages  secured  by  the  land.  Ref- 
erences: E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  Essays  in  Taxa- 
tion (1897),  95-120;  F.  Walker,  Double  Taxa- 
tion in  the  United  States  (1895).  D.  R.  D. 

TAXATION,  EXEMPTIONS  FROM.  Certain 
classes  of  property  are  in  some  jurisdictions 
exempted  from  taxation  for  one  or  the  other 
of  the  following  reasons: 

(1)  Political  Units. — To  protect  the  integ- 
rity of  political  sovereignty;  for  example,  no 


TAXATION,  LIMITATIONS  ON 


state  can  tax  federal  property  or  the  instru- 
ments whereby  the  national  Government  car- 
ries on  its  operations.  Treasury  notes  and 
government  bonds  are  consequently  exempt 
from  state  and  local  taxation.  Under  the 
same  principle,  state  property  is  exempt  from 
local  taxation,  and  in  some  states,  as  in 
Massachusetts  since  1908,  municipal  bonds  are 
free  from  taxation. 

(2)  Promotion  of  Social  Welfare.— Taxes 
are  frequently  remitted  for  the  advancement 
of  morality  and  education  by  churches  and 
colleges;  and  in  the  care  of  the  poor  and  un- 
fortunate by  charitable  associations  and  hos- 
pitals. All  the  states  and  territories  except 
Alaska  are  in  agreement  in  exempting 
churches;  one-third  of  the  states  exempt  par- 
sonages, and  some  exempt  all  property  which 
is  held  for  religious  purposes.  With  few  ex- 
ceptions all  of  the  states  exempt  property  de- 
voted to  benevolent  and  charitable  purposes; 
and,  with  the  same  object  in  view,  all  of  the 
states  except  California  exempt  cemeteries.  In 
some  of  the  states  there  are  additional  special 
exemptions;  for  example,  three  of  the  states 
exempt  the  property  of  fraternal  organiza- 
tions; Michigan,  the  personal  property  of  the 
Young  Men’s  Christian  Association;  and 
Massachusetts,  the  property  of  temperance 
societies. 

(3)  Personal. — Some  of  the  states  exempt, 
up  to  certain  sums,  the  property  of  widows 
and  orphans,  aged  and  infirm,  deaf,  dumb,  and 
blind,  soldiers  and  sailors  of  the  United  States, 
and  unmarried  women  over  twenty-one  years 
of  age.  So  too  exemptions  are  made  to  lighten 
the  burdens  of  the  poor  or  even  in  favor  of 
those  of  moderate  means,  as  in  exempting 
household  furniture,  tools  or  wearing  apparel, 
or  live  stock  on  farms  up  to  a certain  num- 
ber. 

(4)  Educational. — Exemptions  are  generally 
made  in  favor  of  school  property,  colleges,  pub- 
lic libraries,  literary  and  scientific  institutions 
and  societies,  and,  in  some  states,  of  the  prop- 
erty of  agricultural  societies,  and  industrial  ex- 
positions. 

(5)  Economic. — Frequently  in  the  interest  of 
economic  development  exemptions  are  made  for 
limited  periods  in  favor  of  new  manufactur- 
ing establishments,  irrigation  projects,  grow- 
ing orchards  and  young  forests.  Again  there 
are  numerous  exemptions  allowed  on  the 
ground  of  fiscal  expediency.  Here  are  to  be 
found  exemptions  to  adjust  inequalities  in  the 
operation  of  the  revenue  laws,  or  to  prevent 
double  taxation.  Those  exemptions  are  made 
in  favor  of  growing  crops,  or  of  indebtedness 
and  mortgages. 

In  1910  the  value  of  the  real  estate  exempted 
from  taxation,  out  of  a total  valuation  of 
$7,044,000,000,  amounted  to  $1 ,359,000,000, 
or  over  one-fifth.  Of  this,  $322,000,000  was 
credited  to  churches,  hospitals,  colleges,  libra- 
ries, cemeteries,  etc. 


See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Church  and 
State  in  United  States;  Tax,  Income;  Tax, 
Inheritance. 

References:  U.  S.  Census  Bureau,  Revenue 
Systems  of  State  and  Local  Government 
(1907),  623-626;  H.  C.  Adams,  Finance 

(1898),  316-320.  Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TAXATION,  LIMITATIONS  ON.  Unwritten 

Limitations. — The  fundamental  doctrine  of  tax- 
ation is  that  the  state  in  consideration  of  its 
protection  of  the  individual,  its  protection  of 
property,  and  its  maintenance  of  a system  f 
government,  has  a right  to  subtract  whatever 
part  of  the  property  of  the  citizens  or  sub- 
jects of  the  state  it  may  deem  necessary.  In 
practice  this  power  is  subject  to  several  prac- 
tical limitations.  (1)  An  annual  tax  amount- 
ing to  more  than  the  annual  product  of  a piece 
of  productive  property  will  eventually  cause 
the  abandonment  of  that  property.  Taxes  ap- 
proaching the  annual  product  (whether  rental 
or  profit)  will  tend  to  prevent  the  accumula- 
tion of  capital.  Therefore  any  attempt  to 
realize  by  unduly  raising  the  rate  of  taxation 
will,  beyond  a certain  point,  cause  a reduc- 
tion in  the  proceeds.  (2)  People  get  accus- 
tomed to  a certain  rate  of  taxation  as  about 
the  normal;  thus,  in  Massachusetts,  $20  on 
each  thousand  is  thought  a high  tax;  and  any 
rate  above  that  will  cause  discontent  and  very 
likely  overthrow  the  administration  which  is 
responsible. 

Exclusions  from  Taxation. — Either  because 
of  the  nature  of  government  or  from  federal 
or  state  constitutional  provisions,  large  areas 
of  property  are  set  aside  as  untaxable.  Such 
is,  first  of  all,  public  property — it  being  mani- 
festly absurd  and  unproductive  for  a govern- 
ment to  raise  money  by  taxing  itself;  nor  can 
the  Federal  Government  tax  state  property,  or 
vice  versa;  and  municipal  and  local  units  of 
government  are  considered  to  be  part  of  the 
government  of  the  state  within  which  they 
exist.  In  the  District  of  Columbia  (see)  the 
Federal  Government  makes  an  annual  appro- 
priation equal  in  amount  to  the  taxation  laid 
upon  the  present  property  owners,  but  that  is 
an  act  of  grace.  The  property  of  educational, 
religious  and  philanthropic  institutions  is,  in 
most  states,  outside  the  tax  duplicate  (see 
Taxation,  Exemptions  from).  Under  the  in- 
come tax  system  ( see  Tax,  Income)  it  is  usual 
to  exempt  small  incomes;  and  sometimes  small 
holdings  of  personal  or  real  estate  are  ex- 
empted or  specially  favored  in  taxation. 

Subjects  of  Taxation. — By  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution neither  the  Federal  Government  nor 
the  states  can  lay  any  export  duty,  though 
it  is  a common,  and  in  many  ways  a useful 
form  of  taxation  (Art.  I,  Sec.  ix,  % 5).  In 
addition  the  states  can  lay  no  import  duties. 
Further  the  Federal  Government,  in  laying  di- 
rect taxes,  must  subdivide  them  in  proportion 
to  the  population,  and  in  1894  the  Supreme 


499 


TAXATION,  MORTGAGE 


Court  held  that  a federal  income  tax  was  a di- 
rect tax  ; in  1012  a federal  constitutional  amend- 
ment was  ratified  removing  the  restriction  so 
far  as  it  applied  to  the  income  tax  ( see  Six- 
teenth Amendment).  The  Constitution  limits 
taxation  by  the  provision  that  duties,  imposts 
and  excises  shall  be  uniform  throughout  the 
United  States,  and  that  there  shall  be  no  pref- 
erences to  ports  (Art.  I,  Sec.  viii,  H 1,  Sec. 
ix,  If  6).  It  has  been  held  that  uniformity 
does  not  mean  that  the  subject  of  taxation 
must  exist  in  every  part  of  the  country.  Simi- 
lar provisions  can  be  found  in  the  constitu- 
tions of  many  of  the  states. 

Purposes. — Since  taxation  is  based  upon  a 
public  need,  the  Federal  Constitution  and 
many  of  the  state  constitutions  contain  clauses 
intended  to  assure  the  use  of  the  proceeds  of 
taxes  for  public  purposes.  In  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution, after  the  clause  granting  the  taxing 
power  comes  the  phrase,  “to  pay  the  debts; 
and  provide  for  the  common  defense  and  gen- 
eral welfare  of  the  United  States”  (Art.  I,  Sec. 
viii,  If  1).  By  many  constitutional  authorities 
this  is  considered  a limitation  on  the  taxing 
power ; others  have  treated  it  as  an  independ- 
ent power;  others  have  held  that  it  was  an 
additional,  or  a broader,  definition  of  the 
power  of  appropriating  money. 

Amount  of  Taxation. — There  is  no  limitation 
upon  the  total  or  proportional  taxes  levied  by 
the  United  States;  and  in  general  any  tax 
which  Congress  deems  necessary  may  be  laid, 
at  least  for  a purpose  set  forth  in  the  Con- 
stitution outside  the  taxation  clause.  In  times 
of  stress  the  Federal  Government  has  always 
been  slow  to  increase  taxes,  and  has  provided 
for  immediate  necessities  by  loans — for  which, 
in  most  cases,  interest  must  be  provided  and 
eventually  the  principal  be  paid  through  fu- 
ture taxation.  Some  states  under  their  con- 
stitutions are  limited  in  annual  taxes  to  a 
fixed  proportion  of  the  valuation ; and  cities 
and  other  forms  of  local  government  are  fre- 
quently restricted  in  the  tax  rate  which  they 
may  impose  for  their  own  purposes.  Partic- 
ular taxes  are  sometimes  earmarked,  their 
proceeds  to  go  for  a particular  purpose;  and 
in  many  of  the  western  states  there  is  a fixed 
rate  of  taxation  for  the  support  of  public 
schools,  or  public  higher  institutions  of  learn- 
ing, or  both,  so  that  the  amount  realized  in- 
creases with  the  property  within  the  state. 

Methods. — State  constitutions  and  statutes 
abound  in  limitations  upon  the  assessment  and 
collection  of  taxes;  and  under  the  Fourteenth 
Amendment  to  the  Constitution  the  states  are 
forbidden  to  deprive  any  person  of  property 
without  due  process  of  law;  under  which  clause 
many  suits  have  been  brought.  The  purpose 
of  this  restriction  is  in  general  to  secure  rea- 
sonable equality  in  the  assessment  and  col- 
lection of  taxes,  and  a reasonable  assurance 
that  the  proceeds  shall  be  devoted  to  the  public 
use.  No  limitation  can  prevent  inequalities: 


some  taxes  (as,  for  example,  the  graduated  in- 
come tax,  see)  are  intended  to  bear  harder 
on  one  property  owner  than  upon  another. 

See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Assessment, 
Special  ; Revenue,  Public,  Collection  of  ; 
and  under  Tax,  Taxes,  Taxation. 

References:  J.  M.  Cooley,  Constitutional 
Limitations  (1890)  ; F.  J.  Stimson,  Law  of  the 
Federal  and  State  Constitutions  (1908),  Bk. 
Ill,  §§  330-350;  E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  Essays  in 
Taxation  (6th  ed.,  1910),  Shifting  and  Inci- 
dents of  Taxation  (3d  ed.,  1909)  ; N.  Y.  State 
Library,  Index  of  Legislation  (annual). 

Albebt  Bush nell  Hakt. 

TAXATION,  MORTGAGE.  Basis.— In  ac- 
cordance with  the  principle  that  all  personal 
property  should  be  taxed,  mortgages  have  been 
included  with  notes,  book-credits,  and  other 
forms  of  intangibles  as  a fit  subject  of  taxa- 
tion. As  the  real  estate  which  is  mortgaged 
is  taxed,  the  result  is  double  taxation.  When 
mortgages  are  recorded,  as  they  uniformly  are, 
this  species  of  intangibles  cannot  be  so  easily 
secreted  as  can  many  other  forms  of  personal 
property. 

Holders  of  mortgages,  therefore,  who  suc- 
cessfully avoided  the  listing  of  other  intangi- 
bles, have  endeavored  to  secure  the  passage  of 
laws  exempting  mortgages  from  taxation.  It 
was  argued  that  the  borrower  or  mortgagor 
really  paid  the  tax;  for  the  lender  in  fixing 
the  rate  of  interest  counted  in  the  tax,  inas- 
much as  he  had  the  option  of  investment  in 
property  upon  which  he  could  avoid  taxation. 
On  the  other  hand  the  borrower  objected  to 
paying  a tax  on  property  which  was  encum- 
bered and  in  which  he  held  eventually  only  a 
partial  ownership. 

On  the  general  question  there  are  thus  three 
points  of  view : ( 1 ) all  property  in  accord- 

ance with  the  general  principle  should  be 
taxed;  (2)  the  lender,  or  mortgagee,  should 
be  exempt;  (3)  the  borrower,  or  mortgagor, 
should  be  exempt  from  land  taxes  by  as  much 
as  the  sum  named  in  the  mortgage.  Over 
these  several  issues  there  has  probably  been 
more  discussion  than  over  any  other  question 
of  local  taxation  in  the  United  States. 

Avoidance. — When  mortgages  are  taxed,  dis- 
honorable practices  liave  often  been  resorted 
to  in  order  to  avoid  taxation.  For  example: 

( 1 ) a loan  may  be  made  in  the  name  of  a 
non-resident  friend,  protected  by  a perpetual 
power  of  attorney  in  respect  to  the  mortgage; 

(2)  the  lender  may  receive  from  the  mortgagor 
a deed  for  the  premises  and  then  present  a 
quit  claim  in  escrow  to  be  delivered  upon  pay- 
ment of  the  note;  (3)  a corporation  may  be 
organized  under  the  laws  of  another  state 
which  then  makes  out  the  mortgage.  In  gen- 
eral the  only  class  of  mortgages  which  the 
assessor  can  hope  to  reach  are  those  secured 
by  property  within  the  state  and  owned  by 
taxable  residents  of  the  state. 


500 


TAXATION  OF  EXPORTS— TAXATION  OF  RAILROADS 


Exemption  Law. — In  Massachusetts  mort- 
gages were  made  exempt  in  1881.  Mortgagors 
and  mortgagees  are  for  the  purposes  of  taxa- 
tion deemed  to  be  joint  owners,  and  the  as- 
sessor is  obliged  to  assess  upon  the  land  the 
amount  of  the  mortgagee’s  interest  and  also 
the  amount  of  the  mortgagor’s  interest  after 
deducting  the  assessed  value  of  the  mortgagee’s 
interest.  Loans  on  mortgages  thus  taxable  arc 
not  to  be  included  in  debts  due  to  the  person 
to  be  taxed.  This  law  does  not  interfere  with 
or  control  the  relation  existing  by  special  con- 
tract between  the  mortgagor  and  mortgagee. 
The  parties  can  therefore  arrange  between 
thmselves  as  to  who  shall  pay  the  tax.  Vir- 
tually this  is  an  exemption  of  mortgages  for 
practically  all  mortgages  now  contain  a cove- 
nant whereby  the  mortgagor  assumes  the  tax 
on  the  mortgagee’s  interest.  In  California  the 
amount  of  the  mortgage  is  deducted  from  the 
assessed  value  of  the  real  estate,  and  either 
the  owner  of  the  real  estate  or  of  the  mort- 
gage pays  the  tax.  In  such  instances  the  mort- 
gagor finally  pays  the  whole  tax,  for  the  mort- 
gagee increases  the  rate  of  interest  to  cover 
the  tax.  In  Maryland  the  holder  of  a mort- 
gage is  required  to  pay  an  annual  tax  of  eight 
per  cent  on  the  gross  amount  of  interest 
paid  by  the  mortgagor;  one-fourth  of  this  goes 
to  the  state,  and  the  balance  to  the  state  or 
city.  In  Pennsylvania  mortgages  are  taxed 
four  mills  on  the  dollar,  the  proceeds  being 
divided  between  the  state  and  counties. 

A marked  point  in  remedial  legislation  is 
whether  the  parties  to  the  mortgage  be  per- 
mitted to  enter  into  a contract  concerning  the 
payment  of  the  taxes.  In  Massachusetts,  Con- 
necticut, New,  Jersey,  Wisconsin  and  California 
this  is  done.  As  the  mortgagor  generally  pays 
the  tax,  it  is  assumed  that  the  rate  of  interest 
will  be  lowered  as  the  mortgagee  is  relieved. 
In  a few  states  contracts  are  not  permitted, 
and  each  pays  a tax,  the  mortgagor,  however, 
being  relieved  of  that  value  of  the  real  estate 
represented  by  the  debt. 

Recording  Tax. — Within  recent  years  a few 
states,  in  order  to  reduce  evasion  of  the  tax 
on  mortgages,  have  adopted  a tax  on  the  re- 
cording of  the  instrument.  In  1905  New  York 
imposed  a lump  recording  tax  of  50  cents  upon 
each  $100.  As  a result,  the  mortgage  interest 
rate  declined  about  one-half  of  one  per  cent. 
In  Minnesota,  similar  action  in  1907  reduced 
the  interest  rate  by  nearly  one-half  of  one 
per  cent  in  cities,  and  by  two  per  cent  in 
small  towns. 

See  Taxation,  Double;  Taxation,  Exemp- 
tions from;  Tax,  Land  and  Real  Estate; 
Tax,  Personal  Property. 

References:  R.  A.  Campbell,  “Mortgage  Taxa- 
tion” in  Wisconsin  Library  Commission,  Bulle- 
tin No.  17  (Dec.,  1908),  law's  and  judicial  de- 
cisions ; “Mortgage  Taxation”  in  National  Civic 
Federation,  Taxation  Dept.,  Bulletin  No.  1 
(Nov.,  1902),  New  York  conditions;  F.  N. 


Judson,  “Mortgage  Taxation  in  Missouri”  in 
Quart.  Journ.  Econ.,  XV  (1901),  287;  F.  A. 
Fetter,  “Change  in  Mortgage  Taxation  in  New 
York”  in  ibid,  XX  (1906),  613;  T.  S.  Adams, 
“Mortgage  Taxation  in  Wisconsin”  in  ibid, 
XXII  (1908),  1;  J.  H.  Hollander,  “Taxation 
of  Intangibles  in  Maryland”  in  ibid,  XXII 
(1908),  196-209.  Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TAXATION  OF  EXPORTS.  The  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States  declares  that  no  tax 
or  duty  shall  be  laid  on  articles  exported  from 
any  state  (Art.  I,  Sec.  ix,  If  5).  This  is  a 
prohibition  directed  to  the  Federal  Government. 
The  Constitution  also  says  that  no  states  shall 
without  the  consent  of  Congress  lay  any  im- 
posts or  duties  on  imports  or  exports,  except 
what  may  be  absolutely  necessary  for  executing 
its  inspection  laws;  and  the  net  produce  of  all 
duties  and  imposts  laid  by  any  state  on  im- 
ports or  exports  shall  be  for  the  use  of  the 
treasury  of  the  United  States,  and  all  such 
laws  shall  be  subject  to  the  revision  and  con- 
trol of  Congress  ( Art.  I,  Sec.  x,  If  2 ) . The 
exports  intended  to  be  exempt  from  taxation 
are  exportations  to  foreign  countries.  It  was 
held  in  the  case  of  Dooley  vs.  U.  S.  (183  U.  S. 
151)  that  the  prohibition  of  congressional  tax- 
ation does  not  apply  to  goods  passing  between 
the  United  States  and  Porto  Rico.  A tax  upon 
property  is  not  a tax  upon  exports  even  though 
the  goods  so  taxed  are  afterwards  actually  ex- 
ported. The  clause  in  question  is  intended 
to  prohibit  laying  a tax  on  the  business  of 
exporting  or  upon  goods  because  they  are  in- 
tended to  be  exported.  In  the  case  of  Fair- 
bank  vs.  U.  S.  (181  U.  S.  283),  it  was  held 
that  a tax  imposed  upon  bills  of  lading  for 
goods  exported  from  the  United  States  was 
to  all  intents  and  purposes  a tax  upon  ex- 
ports. References:  J.  P.  Hall,  Constitutional 
Law  (1911),  280-281;  Turner  vs.  Maryland, 
107  U.  S.  38.  A.  C.  McL. 

TAXATION  OF  RAILROADS.  Assessment. 
— During  the  earlier  period  of  railroad  opera- 
tion, railways  were  brought  under  the  general 
property  tax  and  subject  only  to  local  assess- 
ment. The  system  wras  unsatisfactory,  for  not 
only  w'as  there  great  inequality  in  the  assess- 
ment of  real  estate  in  the  towns  through  which 
the  railroad  ran:  but  in  restricting  taxation  to 
physical  property  there  was  considerable  value 
not  reached.  Special  taxes,  therefore,  were 
imposed,  such  as  a tax  on  mileage,  on  capital 
stock,  on  stocks  and  bonds,  net  earnings,  gross 
earnings,  equipment  and  the  franchise.  Al- 
though the  property  tax  principle  has  generally 
been  retained,  the  valuation  has  been  often 
entrusted  to  a state  board.  An  example  of 
this  may  be  found  in  Michigan,  where  the  in- 
ventory, or  “Cooley- Adams”  method  is  in 
operation:  a state  board  makes  a complete  in- 
ventory by  engineering  experts  of  all  the 
physical  elements  of  the  road,  showing  the  cost 


TAXATION  OF  RAW  MATERIALS 


of  reproduction  and  present  value.  A physical 
appraisal  has  also  been  made  in  Wisconsin  and 
other  states. 

Ad  Valorem  and  Specific. — In  general,  the 
taxes  imposed  on  railroads  fall  into  two  main 
classes:  (1)  an  ad  valorem  tax;  (2)  a specific 
tax.  The  first  may  be  levied  on  the  value  of 
the  real  and  personal  property;  or  on  the 
value  of  stocks  or  bonds;  or  on  the  valuation 
based  on  earnings,  dividends,  or  other  results 
of  operation.  The  specific  tax  may  be  levied 
on  securities;  or  on  net  earnings;  or  on  traffic; 
or  some  physical  property  operated;  or  on 
privilege.  Specific  taxes  are  especially  char- 
acteristic of  the  revenue  systems  of  Maine, 
Vermont,  Delaware,  Pennsylvania,  Maryland, 
Virginia,  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  and  Minnesota. 

The  most  common  method  is  through  the 
ad  valorem  tax,  that  is,  a tax  based  on  the 
value  of  the  real  and  personal  property.  In 
the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1906,  the  total 
taxes  upon  all  the  railroads  of  the  country 
amounted  to  $74,602,000.  Of  this,  $62,809,000 
came  from  the  ad  valorem  or  property  tax. 

In  the  assessment  of  the  real  and  personal 
property,  under  an  ad  valorem  tax,  the  work  is 
generally  performed  by  the  state  and  sometimes 
by  towns  or  cities.  In  Wisconsin  and  Minne- 
sota the  whole  tax  is  retained  by  the  state, 
but  in  most  of  the  others  it  is  distributed  ac- 
cording to  a mileage  basis.  In  Massachusetts, 
Connecticut  and  Pennsylvania  the  property 
valuation  is  based  upon  stock  or  bonds.  In 
Massachusetts,  for  example,  there  is  a local 
tax  on  physical  property,  and  also  a tax  on 
the  corporate  excess,  that  is,  the  value  of  the 
stock  less  the  real  estate. 

Gross  Receipts. — Minnesota  is  a notable  ex- 
ample of  taxation  of  gross  receipts  by  a specific 
tax  of  four  per  cent.  The  special  merit  claimed 
in  behalf  of  this  system  is  its  simplicity,  as 
compared  with  the  difficulty  of  obtaining  actual 
valuation  through  assessment.  An  objection, 
however,  is  that  railway  receipts  are  not  a 
true  index  of  a railway’s  earning  power,  or 
its  real  value. 

Terminals. — The  question  of  distributing  the 
tax  on  terminal  property  has  been  the  sub- 
ject of  much  contention  and  litigation  in  states 
where  the  tax  is  locally  retained,  for  it  is 
urged  that  outlying  sections  ought  also  to 
enjoy  a part  of  the  revenue  thus  collected. 

See  Corporations,  Taxes  on;  Franchise 
Tax;  Railroad  Capitalization;  Transporta- 
tion, Regulation  of. 

References:  Interstate  Commerce  Commis- 
sion, Annual  Report,  1906;  J.  E.  Brindley, 
History  of  Taxation  in  Iowa  (1911),  II,  141— 
168;  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Corporations,  Taxation 
of  Corporations  (1909—1911),  Pts.  I-ITI ; G. 
E.  Snider,  “Taxation  of  the  Gross  Receipts  of 
Railways  in  Wisconsin”  in  Am.  Econ.  Assoc., 
Publications,  Third- Series,  VII,  No.  4 (1906)  ; 
Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  and  year  by  year. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 


TAXATION  OF  RAW  MATERIALS.  In  the 

framing  of  a tariff  with  protective  aims  and 
with  recognition  of  all  classes  of  industry 
there  is  necessarily  a conflict  of  interest  be- 
tween the  producer  of  raw  materials  and  the 
manufacturer  of  finished  products.  The 
farmer  and  the  miner  are  subject  to  competi- 
tion as  well  as  the  manufacturer.  Possibly 
the  volume  of  competition  is  not  so  severe  with 
the  former  since  crops  of  the  soil  and  min- 
erals are  bulky  in  volume,  thus  giving  a nat- 
ural protection  through  the  expense  of  trans- 
portation. However,  farmers  established  along 
the  northern  frontier  are  open  to  competition 
from  the  Canadians,  who  have  substantially 
the  same  railway  facilities.  With  all  the 
natural  advantages  which  the  United  States 
enjoys,  it  is  not  always  able  to  produce  raw 
material  as  cheaply  as  other  parts  of  the 
world. 

The  contest  over  the  taxation  of  raw  ma- 
terials through  import  duties,  arose  in  the 
first  tariff  debate  of  1789.  Hemp  growers  of 
the  West  demanded  protection,  but  on  the 
other  hand  there  was  general  agreement  in 
favor  of  a duty  on  cordage  (made  from  hemp) 
in  order  to  favor  ship-building  for  which  cord- 
age was  a raw  material.  As  a result,  rope 
makers  received  a higher  duty  than  was  at 
first  proposed;  but  such  adjustments  work  out 
to  unexpected  results.  There  are  different 
kinds  of  hemp,  and  for  the  finer  grades  of 
rope  water-rotted  hemp  only  was  serviceable. 
This,  on  account  of  the  large  amount  of  manual 
labor  required  for  its  manufacture,  was  not 
produced  in  this  country;  the  result  was  that 
certain  qualities  of  rope  were  increased  in 
price  without  a compensating  advantage  to  any 
producer  in  the  United  States. 

The  foregoing  example  is  typical  of 
many  other  conflicts,  the  most  notable 
of  which  came  into  view  in  the  tariff 
debate  of  1824  over  wool  and  woolens, 
and  has  remained  an  unsolvable  puzzle  until 
the  present  time.  Secretary  Walker  who 
framed  the  tariff  of  1846,  favored  taxation  on 
imported  raw  materials  in  the  interest  of  the 
farmer.  Mills,  leader  of  the  Democrats  in  the 
House,  in  1888,  desirous  of  lowering  the  tariff, 
yet  fearing  to  disturb  too  seriously  existing 
manufactures,  advocated  the  placing  of  raw 
materials  on  the  free  list,  and  so  did  Presi- 
dent Cleveland  and  Representative  Wilson  in 
1894.  Tariff  reform,  indeed,  has  concentrated 
its  effort  in  recent  years  upon  securing  exemp- 
tion from  taxation  of  raw  materials  necessary 
for  manufactures.  The  Republican  party,  on 
the  other  hand,  has,  notwithstanding  the  load 
placed  upon  manufacturing  industries  by  the 
taxation  of  raw  material,  accepted  the  bur- 
den, for  it  has  clearly  recognized  that  the  sup- 
port of  the  farmers  alongside  the  manufactur- 
ers was  essential  if  protectionism  were  to  hold 
its  own  in  the  making  of  tariffs.  The  Demo- 
crats, in  the  Underwood  tariff  of  1913, 
502 


TAXATION,  PRINCIPLES  OP 


placed  many  raw  materials  on  the  free  list. 

As  a question  of  economic  policy,  little  de- 
fense can  be  made  in  behalf  of  the  taxation  of 
raw  materials.  The  production  of  wool,  sugar, 
hemp,  hides,  and  lumber  is  dependent  upon 
natural  advantages.  The  soil  is  capable  of 
other  products  and  the  transfer  from  one  agri- 
cultural pursuit  to  another  can  be  made  with 
no  great  loss  of  invested  capital  or  unsettle- 
ment of  labor.  An  exception  should  possibly 
be  made  in  the  case  of  sugar.  The  sugar  plan- 
tations of  Louisiana  are  especially  adapted  to 
that  particular  crop;  and,  accompanying  the 


production  of  beet  sugar  in  the  West,  factories 
have  been  established  which  represent  a con- 
siderable amount  of  invested  capital. 

See  Agriculture,  Relations  of  Govern- 
ment to;  Tariff  Legislation,  Framing  of; 
Tariff  Policy  of  the  United  States;  Tariff 
Reform;  Tariff  Rates;  Taxation  of  Raw 
Materials. 

References:  F.  W.  Taussig,  Tariff  History  of 
the  U.  8.  (5th  ed.,  1910),  382-384;  E.  Stan- 
wood,  American  Tariff  Controversies  (1903), 
II,  97-110,  232-236,  343-357. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 


TAXATION,  PRINCIPLES  OF 


Definition. — A tax  is  a compulsory  payment 
exacted  by  a government  from  persons  subject 
to  its  authority  for  the  purpose  of  defraying 
the  expenses  incurred  in  the  general  interest. 
A tax  is  distinguished  from  such  sources  of 
public  revenue  as  receipts  from  the  public 
domain  or  profits  from  public  industries  by 
the  fact  that  the  former  is  compulsory  in  its 
nature  while  the  latter  are  contractual.  A tax 
is  distinguished  from  such  sources  of  revenue 
as  fees  and  special  assessments  in  that  the 
former  is  levied  to  meet  the  general  expenses 
of  government,  while  the  latter  are  assigned  to 
some  service  supposed  to  confer  special  benefit 
upon  the  persons  from  whom  the  payments  are 
exacted.  Under  modern  conditions  taxation  is 
the  chief  source  of  public  revenue,  and  tends 
constantly  to  increase  in  relative  importance, 
although  in  the  public  ownership  movement 
there  may  perhaps  be  discerned  the  germ  of  a 
counter-tendency. 

Classification. — Taxes  may  be  levied:  (1) 
directly  upon  persons,  like  poll  taxes,  class 
taxes,  income  taxes ; ( 2 ) upon  property,  like  the 
general  property  tax  of  the  American  common- 
wealths, the  land  tax  of  Prussia;  (3)  upon 
business  enterprises,  like  the  license  taxes  of 
some  of  the  southern  states;  (4)  upon  acts 
of  exchange,  such  as  the  transfer  of  real  estate 
or  of  credits;  (5)  upon  the  production  and 
sale  of  commodities  (excises)  ; (6)  upon  the 
importation,  or  exportation  of  commodities 
(customs  duties).  In  the  individual  instance, 
it  is  often  difficult  to  say  in  what  class  a tax 
falls.  According  to  the  manner  in  which  it 
is  levied,  a tax  on  houses  may  be  either  a 
special  property  tax  or  a crude  form  of  income 
tax.  In  a commercial  community  a general 
system  of  business  taxes  may  be,  in  effect,  an 
income  tax. 

Taxes  may  be  classified  as  fiscal  or  regu- 
lative according  to  the  primary  purpose  for 
which  they  are  levied.  Taxes  upon  alcoholic 
liquors  are  commonly  imposed  partly,  at  least, 
for.  the  sake  of  discouraging  their  use.  Cus- 
toms duties,  in  a majority  of  instances,  are 


intended  to  restrict  foreign  competition  in 
the  domestic  market.  The  tax  upon  the  im- 
portation of  tea  in  Great  Britain,  and  the  tax 
upon  the  manufacture  of  tobacco  in  the  United 
States,  are  levied  solely  for  the  purpose  of 
raising  a revenue. 

The  classification  of  taxes  as  direct  and  in- 
direct is  the  one  most  commonly  employed. 
Direct  taxes  (see)  are  those  which  are  ex- 
pected to  rest  finally  on  the  persons  who  pay 
them  in  the  first  instance,  as  does  the  general 
property  tax ; indirect  taxes  are  those  which  are 
expected  to  shift  from  the  payer  to  other  per- 
sons, as  do  customs  or  excise  duties.  The  classi- 
fication is  not  satisfactory  from  an  economic 
point  of  view,  because  of  its  implication  of  a 
certainty  in  the  principles  of  shifting  and  in- 
cident of  taxation  which  is  belied  by  the 
facts.  It  has  nevertheless  played  an  important 
part  in  practical  legislation.  Thus  the  United 
States  Government  is  restricted  to  indirect  tax- 
ation by  the  constitutional  clause  (Art.  I,  Sec. 
ix,  If  4),  which  requires  the  apportionment  of 
direct  taxation  among  the  states  according  to 
population. 

Shifting  and  Incidence. — A tax  is  shifted 
when,  through  economic  readjustment,  the 
burden  of  the  tax  is  transferred  from  the  per- 
son who  pays  it  in  the  first  instance  to  other 
persons  with  whom  he  enters  into  contractual 
relations.  The  final  resting  point  of  the  tax 
is  its  incidence.  Thus  the  tax  on  tea  imported 
into  England  is  shifted  from  the  importer, 
who  pays  it,  to  the  retailer,  who  in  turn  shifts 
it  to  the  consumer,  upon  whom  is  the  inci- 
dence of  the  tax. 

The  principles  governing  the  shifting  of 
taxation  are  complex.  In  the  field  of  customs 
and  excise  duties,  where  the  investigation  of 
shifting  presents  the  fewest  difficulties,  an 
examination  of  the  conditions  of  both  supply 
and  demand  is  essential  to  a judgment  upon 
each  concrete  ease.  If  the  supply  is  produced 
under  conditions  of  competition,  with  unit 
costs  practically  stationary,  whether  the 
volume  of  production  is  great  or  small,  as  in 


503 


TAXATION,  PRINCIPLES  OF 


the  case  of  some  common  manufactured,  the 
tax  will,  in  the  end,  be  shifted  to  the  consumer. 
The  promptness  or  tardiness  with  which  this 
result  is  attained  depends  upon  the  state  of 
the  demand:  whether  an  increased  price  is 
borne  without  serious  curtailment  of  consump- 
tion or  not.  If  the  supply  is  produced  com- 
petitively, but  with  unit  costs  increasing  with 
the  volume  of  supply,  as  in  the  case  of  many 
agricultural  products,  the  tax  can  be  shifted 
only  in  part.  How  much  of  the  tax  is  shifted 
depends  largely  upon  the  character  of  the 
demand;  if  a rise  in  price  occasions  only  a 
slight  diminution  in  demand,  most  of  the  tax 
will  be  shifted;  if  the  diminution  in  demand 
is  great,  almost  all  the  tax  may  rest  with  the 
producer.  In  the  case  of  commodities  the  unit 
costs  of  which  decrease  with  increase  in  pro- 
duction, the  burden  shifted  to  the  consumer 
will  exceed  the  tax. 

In  the  case  of  commodities  produced  under 
conditions  of  monopoly,  the  entire  tax  will 
be  shifted  only  where  public  opinion  has  exer- 
cised an  effective  restraint  upon  price  fixation. 
Where  the  policy  of  “charging  what  the  traffic 
will  bear”  has  been  followed,  only  a part  of 
the  tax  can,  as  a rule,  be  shifted,  since  the 
traffic  will  not  bear  the  original  monopoly 
price  together  with  the  tax.  The  character 
of  the  demand  is  the  chief  factor  in  de- 
termining the  proportions  in  which  the  tax  is 
distributed  between  the  producer  and  the  con- 
sumer. Whether  the  commodity  is  produced 
at  constant,  increasing  or  diminishing  unit 
costs  must  also  be  taken  into  account.  A 
monopoly  producing  at  unit  costs  diminishing 
with  volume  of  production  finds  the  greatest 
difficulty  in  shifting  the  burden  of  a tax;  a 
monopoly  producing  at  increasing  unit  costs 
finds  the  least  difficulty  in  shifting  the  burden. 
In  this  respect  the  situation  of  a monopoly  is 
the  reverse  of  that  of  a competitive  enterprise. 

A tax  may  be  shifted  forward  to  the  con- 
sumer, or  backward  to  an  antecedent  producer. 
Thus  the  effect  of  a tax  on  flour  may  be  a rise 
in  the  price  of  bread,  or  a reduction  in  the 
price  of  wheat.  An  import  duty  on  leather 
may  raise  the  price  of  leather  goods  to  the 
consumer,  or  it  may  depress  the  price  of  hides 
purchased  by  the  tanner.  The  direction  of  the 
shifting  depends  upon  the  elasticity  of  demand, 
on  the  one  hand,  and  the  elasticity  of  the 
supply  of  raw  materials,  on  the  other. 

Whether  a tax  on  income  or  property  can 
be  shifted  or  not  depends  upon  the  practica- 
bility of  removing  the  source  of  the  income, 
or  the  property,  from  the  field  of  the  tax. 
General  income  taxes  ( so  far  as  the  minimum 
of  existence  is  exempted)  cannot  be  shifted. 
The  same  thing  is  true  of  general  property 
taxes,  if  effectively  administered.  Special 
taxes  imposed  upon  the  rent  of  land,  or  upon 
the  value  of  land,  cannot  be  shifted;  special 
taxes  upon  the  income  from  improvements 
upon  land,  or  upon  their  value,  can  be  shifted 


in  part,  though  a considerable  time  may  be 
required  to  effect  this  result.  Special  taxes 
upon  the  net  profits  of  a monopolistic  enter- 
prise cannot  be  shifted.  The  monopoly  has 
fixed  its  prices  so  as  to  secure  the  greatest  sum 
of  net  profits;  no  increase  in  price  can  com- 
pensate it  for  a burden  imposed  upon  it  by 
the  state.  A special  tax  upon  capital  invested 
in  forms  requiring  periodical  replacement,  such 
as  mercantile  stocks  or  the  machinery  or  ma- 
terials of  manufacture,  can  usually  be  shifted. 
Special  taxes  upon  credits,  such  as  realty  mort- 
gages and  bank  loans,  are  readily  shifted  to  the 
debtor  through  an  advance  in  interest  rates. 

A special  tax  that  cannot  be  shifted  com- 
monly results  in  a reduction  in  the  capital 
value  of  the  source  of  the  tax.  A permanent 
tax  upon  the  net  profits  of  a monopolistic 
corporation,  reduces  the  aggregate  value  of  the 
shares  of  the  corporation  by  a sum  equivalent 
to  a capital  yielding  the  amount  of  the  tax. 
By  the  same  principle,  a permanent  land  tax 
reduces  the  value  of  land.  A tax  thus  sunk 
in  the  capital  value  of  its  source  is  said  to 
be  “capitalized.”  Such  a tax  is  no  burden 
upon  one  who  invests  in  the  property  taxed, 
since  the  price  which  he  pays  is  reduced  ac- 
cordingly. Hence  the  paradox  that  an  old 
land  tax,  however  onerous  originally,  is  no 
burden  to  the  present  body  of  land-owners. 

Distribution  of  the  Burden. — Taxes  levied  for 
purely  fiscal  purposes  represent  a burden  which 
ought  to  be  distributed  equitably  among  the 
several  citizens  of  the  state.  If  the  services 
of  government  to  the  individual  were  capable 
of  definite  appraisal,  the  accepted  rule  of  ap- 
portionment would  doubtless  rest  upon  the 
benefits  conferred  by  government  upon  the 
several  citizens.  Such  appraisal  is  impossible; 
hence  the  attempts  that  have  been  made  to 
found  a theory  of  apportionment  of  taxes  upon 
this  basis  have  proven  futile.  The  weight  of 
present  day  financial  authority  accepts  ability 
to  pay  taxes,  or  “faculty,”  as  the  proper  basis 
of  apportionment. 

The  measurement  of  “faculty”  presents 
serious  difficulties,  both  in  theory  and  in  prac- 
tice. Such  a crude  test  as  ownership  of  prop- 
erty alone  may  be  rejected  without  discussion. 
A more  satisfactory  test  is  income.  In  order 
to  arrive  at  actual  tax -paying  ability,  however, 
not  income  alone,  but  also  necessary  expendi- 
tures, must  be  taken  into  account.  In  prac- 
tical systems  of  income  taxation,  some  attempt 
is  made  to  allow  for  necessary  expenditures, 
through  the  exemption  of  very  small  incomes 
and  abatements,  or  reductions  in  the  rate 
of  tax,  upon  moderate  incomes. 

Whether  the  rate  of  taxation  on  incomes 
above  the  exempted  minimum  should  remain 
the  same,  whatever  the  magnitude  of  the  in- 
come (proportional  taxation),  or  should  be- 
come heavier  with  increase  in  the  magnitude 
(progressive  taxation),  is  an  unsettled  ques- 
tion in  taxation  theory.  The  view  that  ability 


504 


TAXATION,  PROGRESSIVE— TAXATION,  SUBJECTS  OF 


to  pay  taxes  increases  more  rapidly  than  in- 
come, and  that  progressive  taxation  is  there- 
fore theoretically  justified,  is  gaining  ground 
among  financial  authorities. 

A further  qualification  of  the  income  test  of 
faculty  arises  from  the  fact  that  incomes  are 
not  homogeneous.  An  income  from  property 
differs  in  permanence  and  security  from  an 
income  from  labor;  within  each  class  of  in- 
comes marked  differences  in  security  appear. 
Theoretically  the  more  permanent  and  secure 
incomes  represent  the  higher  degree  of  tax- 
paying  ability;  in  actual  systems  of  income 
taxation,  property  and  labor  incomes  are  some- 
times differentiated,  either  through  heavier 
rates  on  incomes  from  property  or  through 
supplementary  taxes  on  property  (see  Tax, 
Income)  . 

Political. — In  practice  political,  adminis- 
trative and  sociological  considerations  as  well 
as  considerations  of  equity,  play  a part  in  the 
construction  of  a tax  system  and  in  the  distri- 
bution of  its  burdens.  Of  these  the  most  im- 
portant are  adequacy  of  taxation  to  the  needs 
of  the  state,  ease  and  economy  of  administra- 
tion, and  harmony  with  popular  opinion. 
These  considerations  may  conflict,  in  concrete 
eases,  with  one  another,  as  well  as  with  the 
fundamental  consideration  of  equity.  In  a 
time  of  crisis,  such  as  the  American  Civil  War, 
all  other  considerations  are  apt  to  be  sub- 
ordinated to  that  of  adequacy.  Even  under 
ordinary  conditions,  most  modern  states  are 
compelled  to  rely  in  large  measure  upon  in- 
direct taxes,  the  incidence  of  which  is  inde- 
terminate, and  the  equitable  distribution  im- 
possible. A tax  on  income  or  property  (see 
Tax,  Property),  rigidly  enforced,  as  equity 
requires,  is  likely  to  be  unpopular,  and  hence 
politically  inexpedient.  Taxes  on  luxuries 
consumed  only  by  the  wealthier  classes  are  un- 
productive and  difficult  to  administer,  and 
hence  are  often  practically  inferior  to  the 
less  equitable  taxes  upon  necessaries,  or 
luxuries  of  wide  consumption. 

See  Revenue,  Public,  Sources  of;  and 
under  Tax;  Taxation;  Taxes. 

References:  H.  C.  Adams,  Science  of  Finance, 
(1905),  Bk.  II,  chs.  i,  v;  C.  C.  Plehn, 
Introduction  to  Public  Finance  (3d  ed., 

1909) ,  Pt.  II,  chs.  ii,  x;  E.  R.  A.  Seligman, 
Essays  in  Taxation  (5th  ed.,  1905),  ch.  ix, 
Shifting  and  Incidence  of  Taxation  (3d.  ed., 

1910) ,  The  Income  Tax  (1911),  3-48:  C.  F. 

Bastable,  Public  Finance  (3d  ed.,  1903),  Bk. 
Ill,  chs.  i— v;  G.  Cohn,  Science  of  Finance 
(trans.  by  T.  B.  Veblen,  1895),  Bk.  II,  chs. 
i-iv.  Alvin  S.  Johnson. 

TAXATION,  PROGRESSIVE.  The  term 
progressive  taxation  is  applied  to  a tax  system 
where  the  rate  increases  at  a more  rapid  rate 
than  the  base  upon  which  the  rate  is  calcu- 
lated. In  England  such  a principle,  known  as 
graduated  taxation,  is  characteristic  of  the 


income  tax  (see)  ; and  it  is  quite  generally 
found  in  schedules  of  inheritance  taxes  (see). 
Such  a principle  has  been  justified,  as  by  Wag- 
ner, as  a means  to  secure  a more  equitable 
distribution ; or  it  may  be  defended  as  the 
logical  development  of  the  faculty  theory 
of  taxation.  See  Tax,  Income;  Tax,  Inherit- 
ance; Taxation,  Constitutional  Basis  of. 
References:  E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  “Progressive 
Taxation  in  Theory  and  Practice”  in  Am.  Econ. 
Assoc.,  Publications,  IX  (1894)  ; C.  F.  Bas- 
table, Public  Finance  (rev.  ed.  1895),  288-300. 

D.  R.  D. 

TAXATION,  PUBLIC  PURPOSES  OF. 

Taxes  can  be  imposed  for  public  purposes  only; 
there  is,  however,  no  clear  line  of  demarcation 
between  purposes  of  a public  and  private 
nature.  As  social  needs  change,  what  was 
formerly  regarded  as  a private  purpose  may 
now  be  held  to  be  of  public  service.  See 
Cost  of  Government  in  the  United  States; 
Expenditures,  State  and  Local;  Financial 
Powers,  Constitutional  Basis  of. 

D.  R.  D. 

TAXATION,  SUBJECTS  OF.  Historical  De- 
velopment.— The  imposition  of  taxes  has  been 
developed  under  three  controlling  influences; 
(1)  the  need  of  a government  to  secure  revenue 
for  its  support;  (2)  the  demands  of  theory, 
in  which  emphasis  is  placed  upon  justice  and 
equity:  (3)  the  growth  of  a more  complex 
economic  life.  Formerly,  taxation  turned  to 
whatever  object  was  available  for  the  raising 
of  funds,  with  little  regard  to  the  principle 
of  justice  to  the  taxpayers.  The  tax  sys- 
tem was  also  largely  shaped  by  the  power 
of  privilege,  which  endeavored  to  escape  the 
burden  of  taxation  and  to  thrust  this  upon 
the  weaker  classes.  Gradually  legislation  was 
more  consciously  influenced  by  principles  of 
equity  in  behalf  of  the  taxpayer,  and  by  con- 
sideration of  certain  indirect  social  and  po- 
litical advantages  to  be  gained  by  the  adoption 
of  a particular  revenue  system.  Finally,  mod- 
ern economic  organization,  with  varied  forms 
of  property  and  intricate  relationships,  has  in- 
vited a series  of  revenue  experiments. 

From  the  point  of  view  of  historical  develop- 
ment, Seligman  notes  five  stages:  (1)  taxes 
on  individuals;  (2)  taxes  on  property;  (3) 
taxes  on  expenditures;  (4)  taxes  on  products; 
(5)  taxes  on  ineome.  In  this  development  is 
to  be  found  a more  or  less  conscious  desire  to 
attain  a norm  whereby  taxpayers  shall  pay 
according  to  ability,  thus  fulfilling  the  require- 
ments of  social  justice.  In  these  successive 
attempts  various  subjects  have  been  chosen 
for  taxation:  (1)  persons,  seen  in  poll  or 
capitation  taxes;  (2)  property,  both  real  and 
personal,  found  in  the  general  property  tax; 

(3)  consumption  or  expenditures,  seen  in  cus- 
toms and  excise  or  internal  revenue  duties ; 

(4)  products,  as  seen  in  business  taxes  and 


505 


TAXATION,  SUBJECTS  OF 


land  and  house  taxes — a distinction  being 
made  between  property  in  general  and  property 
which  yields  a direct  return;  (5)  income  as 
seen  in  the  income  tax. 

Classification. — Writers  on  finance  differ  in 
the  classification  of  taxes.  Taxes  may  be 
classified,  according  to  their  incidence,  as  di- 
rect or  indirect;  according  to  the  source  of 
the  productive  agent  from  which  they  are 
drawn,  as  taxes  on  rent,  interest,  wages  or 
profits;  or  according  to  their  form,  without 
regard  to  ulterior  analysis  of  incidence  and 
source.  The  Bureau  of  the  Census,  which  now 
publishes  an  annual  volume  on  the  receipts  of 
municipalities,  distinguishes  between:  (1) 
property  taxes,  divided  into  (a)  general,  and 
(b)  special;  (2)  business  taxes,  collected  from 
persons,  natural  or  corporate;  (3)  licenses  or 
permit  taxes;  (4)  poll  taxes.  Henry  C.  Adams 
classifies  taxes  as  those  of:  (1)  income;  (2) 
property;  (3)  business.  C.  C.  Plehn  adopts 
the  following  headings:  (1)  general  property 
tax;  (2)  poll  tax;  (3)  taxes  on  selected  kinds 
of  business;  (4)  taxes  on  certain  ways  of  con- 
ducting business,  such  as  the  corporate  form; 
(5)  inheritance  taxes;  (6)  income  taxes. 

Federal  and  State. — With  few  exceptions 
there  has  been  a sharp  line  drawn  in  the 
United  States  between  objects  chosen  for  na- 
tional and  for  local  taxation.  In  part  this 
is  due  to  the  requirements  of  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution, which  denies  to  the  states  the  right 
to  lay  impost  duties  (Art.  I,  Sec.  x,  H 2)  ; 
and  in  part  to  practical  consideration  of  con- 
venience and  expediency.  Taxes  on  expendi- 
tures levied  by  customs  and  internal  revenue 
duties  are  reserved  for  the  national  Govern- 
ment, while  taxes  on  property  are  employed 
by  states  and  towns.  Only  on  two  occasions 
have  direct  taxes  (see  Tax,  Direct)  on  prop- 
erty been  imposed  by  the  Federal  Government, 
and  owing  to  the  difficult  provisions  of  the 
Constitution  prescribing  the  method  of  assess- 
ing this  tax,  it  is  not  likely  to  be  again  laid. 
In  levying  duties  on  imports,  tariffs  may  em- 
brace a wide  range  of  commodities,  and  there 
has  been  a steady  tendency  to  decrease  the 
number  of  “free”  commodities.  The  duties 
may  be  levied  either  for  revenue  or  for  the 
encouragement  of  industry;  and  as  the  protec- 
tive policy  has  been  characteristic  of  our 
revenue  system,  practically  every  sort  of 
foreign  commodity  at  one  time  or  another  has 
been  taxed  in  the  interest  of  home  industry 
or  of  providing  a revenue. 

Except  during  the  Civil  War,  the  range  of 
subjects  upon  which  internal  revenue  duties 
have  been  laid  has  been  narrow.  For  the  most 
part  they  have  been  confined  to  distilled  and 
malt  liquors,  and  tobacco  in  its  various  forms. 
Upon  special  occasions  they  have  been  levied 
upon  business  transactions  and  collected 
through  stamp  duties,  and  during  the  Civil 
War  they  were  extended  to  practically  every 
kind  of  domestic  industry  and  their  products. 


In  recent  years  there  has  been  a tendency 
for  the  Federal  Government  to  extend  the  scope 
of  its  revenue  system  and  to  take  in  subjects 
which  had  hitherto  been  restricted  to  local 
taxation.  This  has  been  chiefly  due  to  the 
need  of  greater  revenue,  and  to  secure  this 
even  an  income  tax  was  imposed  during  the 
Civil  War.  There  are  also  indications  of  a 
conviction  that  certain  problems  of  social  con- 
cern require  for  their  solution  the  imposition 
of  special  taxes.  The  desire  to  impose  greater 
restrictions  upon  individuals  and  corporate 
wealth  was  in  part  responsible  for  the  income 
tax  of  1894,  and  later  for  the  tax  on  inherit- 
ances (see)  and,  to  a less  degree,  for  the 
federal  corporation  tax  (see)  of  1909  and  the 
income  tax  (see)  of  1913. 

The  state  governments,  like  the  local  govern- 
ments, have  until  recently  relied  upon  the 
general  property  tax,  but  with  the  growth  of 
corporations  there  has  been  an  increasing  tend- 
ency to  impose  special  taxes  upon  these  forms 
of  business  enterprise.  Even  in  the  first  half 
of  the  nineteenth  century  the  tax  on  banks  was 
a fruitful  source  of  state  revenue.  Some 
states,  indeed,  now  find  the  taxes  on  corpora- 
tions  so  productive  that  they  have  been  able 
to  dispense  with  the  general  property  tax  and 
leave  this  entirely  to  the  use  of  the  local 
units  of  government.  Such  is  the  case  in 
New  York. 

The  general  property  tax  (see),  if  strictly 
administered,  is  all  embracing  in  its  scope, 
for  property  may  include  not  only  real  estate, 
land,  houses,  factories  and  physical  equipment, 
such  as  livestock,  furniture  and  machinery, 
but  also  wearing  apparel,  watches  and  paint- 
ings; it  extends  to  mortgages  and  certificates 
of  ownership  in  corporate  property,  as  repre- 
sented in  securities  of  stocks  and  bonds.  In 
practice,  however,  the  effort  is  rarely  made  to 
list  all  the  forms  of  property  which  the  law 
justifies.  Beal  estate  and  property  in  in- 
tangibles, such  as  securities,  mortgages  and 
notes,  constitute  the  chief  object  of  the  as- 
sessor’s inquiry. 

Municipal. — As  illustrating  the  wide  range 
of  sources  from  which  revenue  is  derived  by 
cities,  it  may  be  noted  that  in  Massachusetts 
cities  obtain  revenue  not  only  from  poll  taxes 
and  the  general  property  tax,  but  also  from 
special  property  and  business  taxes,  such  as  a 
tax  on  capital  stock  of  banks,  street  railways 
and  other  corporations  ( collected  by  the  state 
but  apportioned  to  the  cities)  ; in  Illinois, 
Kansas,  New  Hampshire,  and  New  Jersey,  from 
a tax  on  given  premium  receipts  of  fire  and 
life  insurance  companies;  in  Maryland  from 
taxes  on  savings  bank  deposits;  and  in  Wiscon- 
sin from  an  inheritance  tax. 

As  the  personal  property  tax  has  generally 
proved  unsatisfactory,  there  is  a tendency  to 
substitute  other  taxes  like  income  and  inherit- 
ance taxes.  In  fact  the  general  property  tax 
is  rapidly  becoming  a tax  on  land  and  real 


506 


TAXES,  APPORTIONMENT  OF— TAXES,  DIRECT 


estate  only.  In  the  southern  states,  business 
taxes  are  largely  used  in  addition  to  the  prop- 
erty tax. 

See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Assessment, 
Special;  Bank  Taxes;  Betterments,  As- 
sessment for;  Corporations,  Taxes  on; 
License  Taxes  on  Occupations;  Revenue, 
Internal;  Tariff  Rates;  See  also  Tax,  Tax- 
ation, Taxes. 

References:  C.  F.  Bastable,  Public  Finance 
(2d  ed„  1895),  Bk.  IV;  C.  J.  Bullock,  Selected 
Readings  in  Public  Finance  (1906),  193-424; 
C.  C.  Plelin,  Introduction  to  Public  Finance 
(3d  ed.,  1909),  79-132,  218-335;  R.  T.  Ely, 
Taxation  in  Am.  States  and  Cities  (1888), 
246-349.  Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TAXES,  APPORTIONMENT  OF.— The  term 
is  frequently  used  for  assessment  of  taxes ; 
more  correctly  it  applies  to  the  fixing  by  the 
Federal  Government  of  the  amounts  payable 
by  the  state  for  direct  taxes  or  the  assignment 
of  sums  payable  by  counties  or  cities  for  state 
purposes.  See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Boards 
of  Review;  Taxation,  Constitutional  Basis 
of;  Taxes,  Direct.  A.  B.  H. 

TAXES,  ASSESSMENT  OF.  See  Assess- 
ment of  Taxes. 

TAXES,  BACK.  A cause  of  uncertainty  and 
disorder  in  all  city  finances  is  the  habit  of 
assuming  that  all  assessed  taxes  will  be  paid. 
Poll  taxes,  whether  made  a condition  of  the 
suffrage  or  not,  always  much  underrun  the 
number  assessed,  and  are  not  likely  to  be 
recovered  later  on.  Taxes  on  personal  prop- 
erty are  frequently  avoided  by  removal  of  the 
property  from  the  district  in  which  it  is  as- 
sessed. Real  estate  taxes,  though  based  upon 
visible  and  immovable  property,  are  in  some 
communities  (as  in  Buffalo,  New  York)  some- 
times allowed  to  run  indefinitely,  usually  with 
a penalty  of  a high  rate  of  interest;  and  the 
property  may  ultimately  not  be  worth  the  face 
of  the  accumulated  taxes. 

To  allow  for  this  regular  diminution  of  the 
income  in  some  communities  (as  in  Massachu- 
setts) it  is  customary  to  include  an  “overlay,” 
as  one  of  the  liabilities  which  much  be  provided 
for  in  the  total  amount  of  taxation  for  the 
year.  Where  the  overlay  is  omitted,  or  is 
insufficient,  there  will  be  a steady  accumu- 
lation of  debt  somewhere  because  of  the  insuffi- 
ciency of  the  income.  In  some  communities 
the  collector  is  allowed  a commission  upon 
the  collection  of  back  taxes,  and  therefore  en- 
courages people  to  let  their  taxes  run  over. 
In  other  cases  back  taxes  are  put  into  the 
hands  of  a special  collector  who  makes  personal 
visits;  but  any  tax  (other  than  on  real  estate) 
which  is  unpaid  for  one  year  will  probably 
never  be  collected. 

The  system  of  assessments  for  local  improve- 
ments usually  includes  a distribution  of  the 
130 


payment  over  a series  of  years,  in  instalments 
calculated  to  include  interest;  but  most  grow- 
ing cities  have  considerable  sums  thus  locked 
up  in  what  constitute  practically  a body  of 
taxes  assessed  but  not  yet  paid. 

See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Betterments, 
Assessments  for;  Revenue,  Public  Collec- 
tion of;  Tax  Dodging;  Tax,  Personal  Prop- 
erty. A.  B.  H. 

TAXES,  BANK.  See  Bank  Taxes. 

TAXES,  DIRECT.  Economic  Distinction.— 
In  the  classification  of  taxes  the  most  obvious 
distinction  is  between  direct  and  indirect  taxes. 
According  to  Mill:  “A  direct  tax  is  one  which 
is  demanded  from  the  very  persons  who  it  is 
intended  or  desired  should  pay  it.  Indirect 
taxes  are  those  which  are  demanded  from  one 
person  in  the  expectation  and  intention  that 
he  shall  indemnify  himself  at  the  expense  of 
another.”  As  Bastable  points  out,  tire  differ- 
ence is  made  to  turn  on  the  mode  of  incidence, 
which  is  often  difficult  to  determine,  and  al- 
ways useless  for  administrative  purposes.  “A 
natural  result  has  been  that  practical  finan- 
ciers have  adopted  a different  basis  of  distinc- 
tion, and  regard  those  taxes  as  direct  which 
are  levied  on  permanent  and  recurring  occa- 
sions; while  charges  on  occasional  and  par- 
ticular events  are  placed  under  the  category 
of  indirect  taxation.”  By  either  classification 
an  income  tax  would  be  direct,  and  internal 
revenue  and  customs  duties  indirect;  an  in- 
heritance tax,  however,  according  to  Mill  would 
be  direct;  but  according  to  frequent  adminis- 
trative use,  indirect. 

Other  criteria  of  classification  have  also 
been  suggested  but  none  receive  general  ac- 
ceptance. As  a result  there  is  not  agreement 
even  in  administrative  classification.  In  gen- 
eral, apart  from  federal  judicial  interpre- 
tation, it  would  be  agreed  that  direct  taxes 
include  taxes  on  land,  buildings,  property, 
polls,  income  and  business. 

Constitutional  Question. — The  question  of 
classification  has  assumed  more  than  academic 
importance  in  the  United  States  because  of 
the  requirement  of  the  Constitution,  up  to  the 
adoption  of  the  Sixteenth  Amendment  (see) 
in  1913,  that  direct  taxes  shall  be  apportioned 
among  the  several  states  according  to  popula- 
tion (Art.  I,  Sec.  ix,  jj  4).  The  provision  was 
accepted  without  opposition,  on  the  assumption 
that  wealth  was  on  the  whole  equally  distribut- 
ed throughout  the  country,  and  that  no  state 
could  evade  such  taxes.  No  statement  was 
made  in  the  debates  of  the  constitutional  con- 
vention which  would  indicate  just  what  taxes 
were  included  under  the  term  direct. 

According  to  Seligman,  there  is  only  one 
known  prior  use  of  the  term  in  the  United 
States,  namely,  in  an  act  of  Massachusetts  in 
1786.  Adam  Smith,  whose  work,  The  Wealth 
of  Nations,  was  possibly  familiar  to  some 


507 


TAXES,  DIRECT 


members  of  the  convention,  did  not  use  the 
classification  of  direct  and  indirect,  though 
he  referred  to  taxes  on  expenditures  as  in- 
direct. The  writings  of  the  French  physio- 
crats, however,  were  not  unknown,  and  it  is 
probable  that  from  this  source  the  distinc- 
tion was  derived,  though  not  carefully  defined. 
According  to  the  French  school,  taxes  were 
direct  when  laid  immediately  upon  the  land- 
owner,  and  indirect  when  laid  upon  somebody 
else. 

In  the  state  conventions  which  ratified  the 
Constitution,  five  different  meanings  were  sug- 
gested for  “direct  tax” : ( 1 ) a tax  on  the 

states;  (2)  land  tax;  (3)  poll  and  land  tax; 
(4)  poll  tax,  with  a general  assessment  on 
property;  (5)  a tax  on  land  and  on  specific 
articles  of  personal  property.  The  interpre- 
tation, therefore,  devolved  upon  the  Su- 
preme Court  in  deciding  the  case  Hylton  vs. 
U.  S.  in  1794  (3  Dallas  171).  Congress  im- 
posed a tax  on  carriages;  Hylton  claimed  that 
this  was  a direct  tax  and  should  therefore  be 
apportioned  among  the  states.  The  court,  how- 
ever, held  that  it  was  a tax  on  the  expenses 
of  living  and  not  a direct  tax;  there  were  only 
two  forms  of  direct  taxation,  poll  and  land 
taxes.  In  this  decision  the  court  early  set  its 
seal  of  approval  upon  a workable  administra- 
tive distinction,  rather  than  upon  the  academic 
definition  which  economists  have  been  disposed 
to  accept. 

Early  Levies.— Direct  taxes  have  been  im- 
posed by  Congress  on  five  different  occasions, 
1798,  1813,  1815,  1816,  and  1861.  The  act  of 
1798  apportioned  $2,000,000  among  the  states; 
prescribed  the  machinery  of  assessment  and 
collection,  and  placed  the  levy  upon  lands, 
houses,  and  slaves.  Slaves  were  assessed  at 
fifty  cents  each,  and  houses  at  uniform  rates 
throughout  the  country.  Here  the  rate  was 
progressive,  varying  on  houses  from  two- 
tenths  of  one  per  cent  to  one  per  cent.  If 
these  requisitions  did  not  fulfill  a state’s  ap- 
portionment, rates  were  applied  to  land  and 
improvements  to  meet  the  deficiency.  As  a 
fiscal  measure  the  tax  was  not  a great  success ; 
payments  were  delayed,  one-fifth  being  unpaid 
at  the  end  of  three  years. 

The  act  of  1813  called  for  $3,000,000 ;~  and 
that  of  1815  for  an  annual  tax  of  $6,000,000. 
The  act  of  1816  repealed  the  provision  for 
an  annual  tax,  and  substituted  a current  tax 
of  $3,000,000.  Some  deviation  was  made  in 
these  later  acts  in  the  method  of  collection, 
opportunity  being  given  to  the  state  to  pay 
directly  their  quotas  in  a lump  sum,  with  a 
discount  of  15  per  cent  as  an  allowance  for 
expense  of  collection  and  for  prompt  payment. 
This,  however,  did  not  change  the  administra- 
tive character  of  the  tax;  it  was  a tax  upon 
individuals  in  the  states  and  not  upon  the 
states. 

Direct  Tax  of  1861. — In  1861  (August  5)  a 
direct  tax  of  $20,000,000  was  authorized,  again 


based  upon  lands,  houses,  and  slaves.  The 
states  were  also  given  the  privilege  of  assum- 
ing the  tax.  Economic  conditions  now  made 
the  tax  an  anachronism ; wealth  was  not  distrib- 
uted according  to  population,  and  personal 
property  had  increased  far  more  rapidly  than 
real  estate.  The  eastern  manufacturing  centers 
were,  therefore,  favored  at  the  expense  of 
agricultural  districts.  All  the  loyal  communi- 
ties, except  Delaware  and  the  territory  of  Colo- 
rado, assumed  the  apportionments.  Settle- 
ments, however,  were  slow,  payments  being 
made  as  late  as  1870. 

From  the  eleven  southern  states  it  was  diffi- 
cult to  make  collections.  Out  of  their  quotas 
of  $4,972,000  there  remained  $2,731,000  un- 
collected. 

In  1868  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  decided  that  the  direct  tax  act  did  not 
create  any  liability  on  the  part  of  a state  to 
pay  the  tax,  but  that  the  tax  was  upon  prop- 
erty of  individuals.  The  collection  of  the 
unpaid  balances  was  for  years  a subject  of 
congressional  debate.  Congress  authorized  the 
appointment  of  special  officials  to  levy  the  tax 
and  sell  real  property,  but  it  was  soon  realized 
that  this  was  a harsh  procedure  to  apply 
in  a section  already  impoverished  and  em- 
bittered by  the  mistakes  of  reconstruction 
policy.  Finally,  all  efforts  ceased,  and  it  was 
proposed  that  the  tax  already  paid  in  should 
be  refunded  to  the  states.  A bill  to  this 
effect,  passed  in  1889,  was  vetoed  by  President 
Cleveland  as  a “sheer,  bold  gratuity.”  In  1891 
after  a change  of  party  the  advocates  were 
more  successful,  and  $15,000,000  was  repaid 
to  the  several  states  which  had  formerly  con- 
tributed, partially  as  a means  of  cutting  down 
the  surplus. 

Court  Decisions. — The  federal  courts  have 
had  to  render  decisions  involving  the  definition 
of  a direct  tax  in  several  cases  besides  that  of 
the  carriage  tax.  In  1868  the  tax  on  incomes 
of  insurance  companies  (Pacific  Insurance 
Company  vs.  Soule,  7 Wallace  433)  was  de- 
clared to  be  an  indirect  tax.  The  same  con- 
clusion was  reached  in  regard  to  the  federal 
tax  on  state  bank  notes  (Veazie  Bank  vs. 
Fenno,  8 Wallace  533)  ; in  regard  to  tax  on 
incomes  in  1870  (Springer  vs.  U.  S.,  102 
U.  S.  586)  ; and  in  regard  to  a tax  on  inherit- 
ance of  real  estate  (Scholey  vs.  Rew,  23  Wal- 
lace  231 ) . In  1895  the  Supreme  Court  held 
that  a tax  on  income  from  land  was  a direct 
tax,  thus  defeating  the  objects  of  the  income 
tax  law  of  1894  ( see  Wilson-Gorman  Tariff). 
While  this  latter  decision  is  more  in  accord 
with  academic  definition,  it  was  a reversal  of  the 
interpretation  long  admitted  under  adminis- 
trative practice. 

See  Tax,  Income;  Tax,  Land  and  Real  Es- 
tate; Tax,  Personal  Property;  Taxation, 
Subjects  of;  Taxes,  Indirect. 

References:  C.  F.  Dunbar,  Econonvic  Es- 
says (1904),  94-115;  E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  In- 


508 


TAXES,  DOOMING  OF— TAYLOR,  JOHN 


come  Tax  (1914),  531-589;  C.  J.  Bullock, 
‘‘Origin  and  Effect  of  the  Direct-Tax  Clause” 
in  Pol.  Sci.  Quart.,  XV  (1909),  470—481;  C.  F. 
Bastable,  Public  Finance  (2d.  ed.,  1895),  256- 
7,  326-7.  Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TAXES,  DOOMING  OF.  This  term  is  ap- 
plied to  the  practice  whereby  assessors  arbi- 
trarily increase  the  assessments  of  taxpayers 
as  a penalty  for  not  making  a complete  return. 
In  some  states  the  law  authorizes  the  assessors 
to  multiply  by  two,  or  even  by  four,  the  value 
of  the  property  which  can  be  ascertained,  on 
the  theory  that  the  taxpayer  cannot  secrete 
more  than  half  or  a quarter  of  the  property; 
and  if  doomed  he  will  be  induced  to  make  a 
return.  See  Assessment  of  Taxes  ; Tax, 
Personal  Property.  Reference:  D.  A.  Wells, 
Theory  and  Practice  of  Taxation  (1900),  431, 
550.  D.  R.  D. 

TAXES,  EQUALIZATION  OF.  As  the  as- 
sessment of  property  is  generally  undertaken 
by  local  officials  (see  Assessors  of  Taxes), 
who  are  independent  in  their  standards  of 
appraisement,  much  unevenness  in  valuation 
results.  This  becomes  a serious  difficulty  when 
a part  of  the  taxes  thus  locally  collected  have 
to  be  paid  into  the  treasury  of  the  state.  Each 
township  or  county  finds  it  to  its  interest  to 
undervalue  its  own  property,  in  order  to  lessen 
its  contribution  to  the  state.  As  a remedy, 
some  states  have  established  county  boards 
of  equalization,  whose  business  it  is  to  review 
the  assessments  of  township  officials,  and,  if 
necessary,  to  apportion  the  state  tax  arbitra- 
rily among  the  smaller  units,  thus  forcing  them 
to  revise  the  assessments  in  order  to  secure 
the  required  amount  of  tax.  In  a few  states, 
there  is  a state  board  which  adjusts  differ- 
ences between  counties.  In  some  states  a board 
may  change  the  valuation  of  an  individual,  or 
of  classes  of  property.  Boards  of  equalization, 
however,  have  not  been  successful  in  securing 
equality  of  assessment.  In  Ohio,  for  example, 
in  1907,  the  ratio  of  assessment  to  estimated 
true  value  of  real  property  in  the  several  coun- 
ties ranged  from  27  to  70  per  cent,  and  in 
Kansas  from  17  to  42  per  cent.  See  Assess- 
ment of  Taxes;  Boards  of  Review;  Taxa- 
tion, Public  Purposes  of.  Reference:  C.  C. 
Plehn,  Introduction  to  Public  Finance  (3d  ed., 
1909),  435.  D.  R.  D. 

TAXES,  INDIRECT.  Indirect  taxes  are  to 
be  distinguished  from  direct  taxes  in  so  far 
as  they  involve  a shifting  of  the  burden  from 
the  immediate  payer  to  the  ultimate  user  or 
consumer  of  the  thing  taxed;  while  direct 
taxes  fall  where  they  are  levied  ( see  Taxes, 
Direct).  According  to  Wagner,  as  summar- 
ized by  Plehn,  a further  distinction  is  to  be 
found  in  the  different  methods  of  administra- 
tive procedure.  Direct  taxes  are  laid  accord- 
ing to  some  fixed  fact,  as  of  personality,  rank, 


property,  or  earnings,  and  are  consequently 
assessed  according  to  some  list  or  roll.  In- 
direct taxes  are  laid  according  to  some  chang- 
ing, temporary,  more  or  less  accidental  fact, 
the  result  of  processes  and  transactions,  and 
are  laid  and  collected  according  to  tariffs. 

In  American  usage,  indirect  taxes  generally 
refer  to  customs  and  internal  revenue  duties. 
On  the  continent  of  Europe  they  include  the 
octroi  and  other  forms  of  municipal  taxes. 
Historically,  indirect  taxes  preceded  direct 
taxes,  because  sovereigns  found  it  necessary  to 
disguise  the  collection  of  revenue  and  secure 
it  by  methods  more  or  less  concealed.  Al- 
though this  motive  no  longer  exists  in  its 
cruder  aspects,  there  is  no  doubt  that  it  is 
easier  to  collect  revenue  through  increased 
prices  of  commodities  than  by  direct  payments 
to  the  treasury.  Concealment  of  the  real  tax 
in  part  explains  the  general  acceptance  of  high 
tariff  duties  without  protest.  Practically  all  of 
the  federal  revenue,  so  far  as  taxation  is  in- 
volved, is  derived  from  indirect  taxes,  while 
local  revenue  is  derived  from  direct  taxes.  The 
cost  of  collecting  indirect  taxes  is  as  a rule 
greater  than  that  of  direct  taxes. 

See  Imposts;  Revenue,  Internal;  and  un- 
der Tax. 

References:  E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  Essays  in 
Taxation  (1897)  ; W.  M.  Daniels,  Elements  of 
Public  Finance  (1899),  98-110;  C.  C.  Plehn, 
Introduction  to  Public  Finance  (1909),  105. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TAXES,  LICENSE,  ON  OCCUPATIONS.  See 

License  Taxes  on  Occupations. 

TAXES  ON  CORPORATIONS.  See  Cor- 
porations, Taxes  on. 

TAYLOR,  JOHN.  John  Taylor  was  horn  in 
Orange  county,  Virginia,  1750,  and  died  in 
Caroline  county,  Virginia,  August  20,  1824. 
Educated  at  William  and  Mary  College,  he  be- 
came a lawyer -planter  and  also  a leader  in  the 
Revolutionary  movement.  From  1792  to  1794 
he  was  a member  of  the  United  States  Senate 
and  an  ardent  Jeffersonian.  He  was  an  elector 
on  the  Republican  ticket  in  1796,  leader  of  the 
Virginia  legislature  in  1798-99;  and  he  exer- 
cised a great  influence  in  the  campaign  of  1800. 
Though  an  opponent  of  Madison  in  1808,  he 
brought  about  a reconciliation  between  the 
President  and  Monroe  which  resulted  in  the 
appointment  of  the  latter  as  Secretary  of 
State  in  1812.  From  1815  to  his  death  he 
fought  the  centralizing  tendency  of  the  Feder- 
al Government  and  to  this  end  wrote  many 
books,  the  principal  of  which  were:  An  En- 
quiry into  the  Principles  and  Policy  of  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  (1814),  Con- 
struction Construed  (1820),  Tyranny  Un- 
masked (1822),  and  New  Views  of  the  Con- 
stitution (1823).  Taylor  was  also  a scientific 
agriculturist  and  published  Arator,  an  impor- 


509 


TAYLOR,  ZACHARY— TELEGRAPHS,  REGULATION  OF 


tant  work  on  the  subject  which  passed  through 
many  editions.  He  was  a member  of  the 
United  States  Senate  at  the  time  of  his  death. 
See  Political  Theories  of  Recent  American 
Publicists.  Reference:  Randolph  Macon  Col- 
lege, Historical  Papers,  II  (1907). 

W.  E.  D. 

TAYLOR,  ZACHARY.  Zachary  Taylor 
(1784-1850),  twelfth  President  of  the  United 
States,  was  born  in  Orange  county,  Va.,  No- 
vember 24,  1784.  He  entered  the  Army,  be- 
came a captain  in  1810,  and  until  the  close  of 
the  War  of  1812  served  with  credit  on  the 
frontier.  In  1832  he  was  made  colonel,  served 
in  the  Black  Hawk  war,  and  in  1836  fought 
the  Seminoles  in  Florida.  For  this  latter  serv- 
ice he  was  made  brigadier-general.  At  the 
beginning  of  the  Mexican  troubles  he  was  in 
command  of  the  southern  division  of  the  west- 
ern department,  with  headquarters  in  Louisi- 
ana. In  November,  1845,  he  occupied  Corpus 
Christi,  from  which  point,  under  order  from 
Washington,  he  advanced  to  the  Rio  Grande. 
May  8 and  9,  1846,  he  defeated  the  Mexicans 
at  Palo  Alto  and  Resaca  de  la  Palma.  Pro- 
moted to  major-general,  he  took  Monterey  in 
September,  and  in  February,  1847,  defeated 
the  Mexicans  at  Buena  Vista.  He  was  disliked 
and  distrusted  by  President  Polk,  however,  and 
saw  no  further  active  service.  In  1848  he 
was  nominated  for  President  by  the  Whig  na- 
tional convention  at  Philadelphia,  and  elected, 
receiving  163  electoral  votes  against  127  for 
Lewis  Cass.  He  refused  to  approve  the  com- 
promise of  1850,  thus  breaking  with  the 
southern  Whigs.  He  died  in  office,  July  9, 
1850. — See  Wars  of  the  United  States. 
References:  O.  0.  Howard,  General  Taylor 
(1892)  J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (1893- 
1905 ) , I ; E.  Stanwood,  Hist,  of  the  Presidency 
(1898),  ch.  xviii.  W.  MacD. 

TEACHERS  IN  PUBLIC  SCHOOLS,  LEGAL 
RIGHTS  OF.  See  Schools,  Public,  Legal 
Rights  of  Teachers  in. 

TEACHERS,  LEGAL  QUALIFICATIONS  OF. 

Certificates  to  teach  are  issued  by  state,  county 
and  district  (city  or  town)  education  officers, 
but  several  of  these  units  may  certify  the  same 
person.  We  have:  (1)  the  state  system  (Ver- 
mont-Iowa)  ; (2)  the  state-county  system 

(Georgia-Indiana)  ; (3)  the  state-county -local 
system  (New  York-Texas)  ; (4)  the  state-local 
system  (Massachusetts-Alabama)  ; (5)  the 

county  system  (found  only  in  Delaware). 
There  is  a universal  demand  that  certificates 
be  issued  only  to  persons  of  good  moral  char- 
acter; that  experience  to  be  accepted  as  a 
qualification  for  a certificate  must  be  success- 
ful experience;  and  that  whatever  examina- 
tions are  given  in  physiology  and  hygiene,  the 
nature  and  effects  of  stimulants  and  narcotics 
are  included.  Every  certificate  specifies  the 


territory  within  which  the  holder  may  teach, 
the  kinds  of  positions  for  which  it  is  valid,  and 
the  length  of  time  for  which  it  is  issued. 

There  is  a great  variation  in  these  factors 
which  is  defined  by  the  laws  in  the  various 
states.  Certificates  are  issued  on  the  success- 
ful completion  of  an  examination  set  by  the 
proper  authorities  provided  all  other  require- 
ments are  met.  In  nearly  all  states,  graduates 
of  the  normal  schools  are  certified  to  teach  the 
common  branches,  usually  for  life  after  success- 
ful experience.  College  graduates  receive  a 
special  certificate  in  many  states  after  having 
finished  a certain  amount  of  professional  work. 
More  and  more  states  are  requiring  high  school 
graduation  or  equivalent  for  all  certificates. 
Most  of  the  states  require  knowledge  in  at 
least  three  professional  subjects.  The  most  fre- 
quent age  requirement  for  the  lowest  grade 
certificate  or  license  to  teach  is  18  years;  25 
states  have  fixed  this  limit;  2 states  require 
16  years;  8 states,  17  years;  and  1 state,  21 
years;  12  states  have  no  fixed  limit  of  age. 
No  state  makes  any  experience  requirement  for 
the  lowest  certificate.  Twelve  states  require 
experience  for  the  middle  certificate.  Exami- 
nations and  certificates  are  issued  for  high 
school  teachers  in  nearly  all  the  states  but 
the  better  high  schools  have  set  their  stand- 
ards higher,  so  that  the  practical  certificate 
for  many  of  them  has  become  graduation  from 
a reputable  college. 

Diplomas  from  certain  educational  institu- 
tions are  generally  recognized  as  valid  teacher’s 
certificates  or  as  a partial  or  complete  fulfill- 
ment for  certain  certificates.  Twenty-one 
states  keep  lists  of  accredited  educational  insti- 
tutions whose  diplomas  are  recognized.  There 
is  a reciprocal  adjustment  of  grades  and  cer- 
tificates among  most  of  the  states. 

See  Education,  Recent  Tendencies  in; 
Pensions  for  Teachers;  and  under  Schools, 
Public. 

References:  H.  UpdegrafT,  “Teacher’s  Cer- 
tificates” in  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Education, 
Bulletin  No.  If 65  (1911);  F.  E.  Bolton,  “Pre- 
paration of  High  School  Teachers”  in  School 
Review,  XV  (Feb.,  1907),  97-122;  S.  T.  Dut- 
ton and  D.  Snedden,  Administration  of  Public 
Education  in  the  U.  S.  (1908);  A.  R.  Hill, 
“Preparation  and  Certificates  of  Teachers”  in 
Missouri  State  Teachers’  Assoc.,  Proceedings 
and  Addresses  (1904).  J.  V.  Breitwieser. 

TECHNICAL  EDUCATION.  See  Education, 

Technical. 

TELEGRAPHS,  REGULATION  OF.  Soon 
after  the  invention  of  the  electromagnetic  tele- 
graph, Professor  S.  F.  B.  Morse  petitioned  Con- 
gress for  an  appropriation  for  the  construction 
of  a line  for  the  practical  test  of  the  invention. 
Having  thoroughly  investigated  the  matter,  the 
Committee  on  Commerce  of  Congress  on  De- 
cember 30,  1842,  advised  Congress  as  follows: 


510 


TELEPHONES,  REGULATION  OF 


So  inviting,  indeed,  are  the  prospects  of  profit 
to  individual  enterprise,  that  it  is  a matter  of 
serious  consideration,  whether  the  Government 
should  not,  on  this  account  alone,  seize  the  pres- 
ent opportunity  of  securing  to  itself  the  regulation 
of  a system  which,  if  monopolized  by  a private 
company,  might  be  used  to  the  serious  injury  of 
the  Post  Office  Department. 

As  a first  step  the  Committee  recommended 
the  appropriation  of  $30,000  to  be  expended  in 
constructing  a line  of  electromagnetic  tele- 
graphs between  Washington  and  Baltimore. 
The  line  completely  demonstrated  its  practibil- 
ity  and  utility. 

Rejection  of  Proposition  of  Sale  of  Invention 
to  Government. — Professor  Morse  then  made  a 
complete  report  of  the  experiment  to  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasury,  and  suggested  as  fol- 
lows : 

Should  the  Government  be  now  disposed  to  pos- 
sess the  right  of  the  proprietors,  by  giving  thorn 
a fair  consideration,  I shall  be  ready  to  treat  with 
them  on  the  terms  of  transfer. 

For  myself,  I should  prefer  that  the  Government 
should  possess  the  invention,  although  the  pecun- 
iary interests  of  the  proprietors  induce  them  to 
lean  towards  arrangements  with  private  compa- 
nies. 

A proposition  by  Professor  Morse  that  the 
Government  should  purchase  the  whole  inven- 
tion for  the  sum  of  $100,000  was  rejected. 

Further  measures  looking  toward  the  Gov- 
ernment acquisition  of  the  telegraphic  system 
of  the  country  have  been  introduced  into  Con- 
gress in  the  unsuccessful  Washburn  Bill  of 
1870  and  Postal  Telegraph  Bill  of  1872. 

Constitutional  and  Statutory  Basis  of  Gov- 
ernment Regulation. — Having  declined  to  adopt 
any  plan  of  government  ownership  of  the  tele- 
graphs, the  United  States  for  its  power  to 
regulate  telegraphs  and  telephones  relies  on : 
(1)  its  constitutional  right  (Art.  I,  Sec.  viii, 
u 3)  to  regulate  interstate  commerce;  (2)  its 
constitutional  right  to  establish  post  roads 
(Art.  I,  Sec.  viii,  If  7),  and  the  Post  Roads  Act 
of  1866;  (3)  a statutory  law  enacted  June  18, 
1910. 

Upon  the  application  of  the  interstate  com- 
merce clause  of  the  Constitution  to  telegraphs 
there  is  a decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  in 
Telegraph  Co.  vs.  Texas  (105  U.  S.  460)  : 

In  Pensacola  Telegraph  Co.  vs.  Western  Union 
Telegraph  Co.  (96  U.  S.  1),  this  court  held  that 
the  telegraph  was  an  instrument  of  commerce,  and 
that  telegraph  companies  were  subject  to  the  reg- 
ulating power  of  Congress  in  respect  to  their  for- 
eign and  interstate  business.  A telegraph  com- 
pany occupies  the  same  relation  to  commerce  as 
a carrier  of  messages  that  a railroad  company 
does  as  a carrier  of  goods.  Both  companies  are 
instruments  of  commerce,  and  their  business  is 
commerce  itself. 

Post  Roads  Act.— By  Act  of  Congress  passed 
in  1866  and  by  subsequent  legislation,  all  tele- 
graph companies  have  a right  of  way  over 
public  lands  and  over  all  military  and  post 
roads.  Since  post  roads  include  all  railroads 
and  all  letter  carrier  and  free  delivery  routes, 
this  act  guarantees  the  possible  extension  of 
the  benefits  of  telegraphic  service  to  all  parts 
of  the  United  States  accessible  to  the  mails. 


A railroad  company  has  no  right  to  grant 
telegraphic  monopoly  of  its  right  of  way  to  a 
single  telegraph  company.  The  poles  of  one 
company  along  a railroad  right  of  way  may, 
however,  be  held  for  the  exclusive  use  of  the 
owner  of  the  poles.  By  a statute  of  June  18, 
1910,  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission 
receives  almost  absolute  jurisdiction  over  rates, 
routes  and  service  of  interstate  carriers,  and 
the  provisions  of  this  statute  expressly  apply 
to  telegraph,  telephone  and  cable  companies 
(whether  wire  or  wireless). 

See  Commerce;  Post  Roads;  Postal  Sys- 
tem of  the  U.  S. ; Public  Service  Commis- 
sions; Telephones,  Regulation  of;  Wire- 
less Telegraphy. 

References:  A.  Vail,  Magnetic  Telegraph 
(1845)  ; D.  A.  Wells,  Relation  of  the  Govern- 
ment to  the  Telegraph  (1873)  • N.  Green,  “Post- 
al Telegraphs”  in  House  Committee  on  Post 
Offices  and  Post  Roads,  Statement  (1890)  ; H. 

R.  Meyer,  British  State  Telegraphs  (1907); 

S.  W.  Jones,  Telegraph  and  Telephone  Law 

(1906)  ; J.  A.  Joyce  and  H.  C.  Joyce,  Treatise 
on  Electric  Law  (1912)  ; F.  Parsons,  Telegraph 
Monopoly  (1900)  ; E.  B.  Vedder,  Government 
Telegraph  (1888)  ; U.  S.  Census,  “Telegraph 
Systems”  in  Bulletin  No.  102  (1901);  Am. 
Year  Book,  1910,  534,  ibid,  1911,  461,  ibid, 
1912.  G.  W.  Pierce. 

TELEPHONES,  REGULATION  OF.  The 

general  statutes  under  which  telephone  com- 
panies are  organized,  as  well  as  the  provisions 
of  their  charters  and  by-laws,  compose  the 
three  bodies  of  law  by  which  all  such  organiza- 
tions or  corporations  are  governed.  The  right 
to  carry  on  a telephone  business,  known  usually 
as  a franchise,  is  exercised  by  legislative  au- 
thority, although  a municipality  may  have  the 
right  to  regulate  and  control  the  manner  in 
which  it  is  exercised,  for  example,  in  respect 
to  its  occupying  the  public  streets. 

Whenever  a telephone  company  holds  it- 
self out  to  the  people,  after  obtaining  power 
of  exercising  the  right  of  eminent  domain,  it 
then  becomes  a public  servant  to  be  controlled 
by  the  people.  Though  an  individual  may  own 
and  conduct  a telephone  system  without  legis- 
lative authority,  assuming  there  is  no  statutory 
prohibition,  yet  for  the  exercise  of  the  right 
of  eminent  domain,  and  to  occupy  public  streets 
or  highways,  legislative  authority  is  neces- 
sary. 

A municipality  may  legally  annex  to  the 
grant  of  a telephone  franchise  a condition  limit- 
ing the  rates  to  be  charged  to  its  citizens. 
Furthermore  it  is  well  settled  that  a grant  by 
a municipality  of  rights  or  franchises  to  a 
telephone  company  and  their  acceptance  by 
such  company,  constitute  a contract  which  is 
binding  upon  the  municipality  so  that  it  can- 
not be  changed  without  cause,  or  made  subject 
to  new  and  burdensome  conditions  not  justifi- 
able under  the  municipality’s  police  power. 


511 


TELEPHONES,  REGULATION  OF 


In  applying  the  principles  of  the  common 
law,  or  in  construing  statutes,  the  telephone 
is  to  be  considered  a telegraph  unless  express 
statutory  provisions  govern. 

In  an  interesting  case  in  Virginia  a telephone 
company  relied  upon  the  Post  Roads  Act  to 
occupy  the  streets,  although  when  that  act 
was  passed  the  company  had  not  yet  been  es- 
tablished. It  was  properly  held  by  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  United  States  that  the  in- 
tent of  Congress  in  the  term  “telegraph  com- 
panies” meant  and  could  have  intended  only 
such  companies  as  employed  the  means  then 
in  use  for  the  sending  of  messages  by  “sounds 
of  instruments  or  by  signs.”  This  indeed  is 
a leading  case  and  respecting  telephone  com- 
panies it  is  good  law  today  (City  of  Rich- 
mond vs.  Southern  Bell  Telephone  and  Tele- 
graph Co.,  174  U.  S.  761). 

It  is  the  New  York  rule  and  has  generally 
been  held  that  telegraph  and  telephone  com- 
panies, in  the  absence  of  a statute,  are  not 
common  carriers.  Nevertheless,  such  companies 
are  not  merely  private  companies  for  personal 
gain  only,  as  the  business  in  which  they  are 
engaged  is  for  the  benefit  of  and  used  for  the 
advantage  of  the  general  public.  Because  of 
the  public  nature  of  their  employment,  such 
companies  in  some  states,  notably  in  Virginia, 
have  been  held  to  a responsibility  very  similar 
to  that  of  a common  carrier.  So  in  South 
Carolina  and  Tennessee  it  has  been  held  that 
telegraph  and  telephone  companies  are  com- 
mon carriers  of  news.  It  follows  that,  while 
the  telephone  companies  are  considered  lia- 
ble for  negligence,  in  the  performance  of  their 
public  duties,  they  are  clearly  not  liable  as 
insurers. 

In  many  states,  general  laws  provide  that 
any  company,  organized  to  carry  on  a telephone 
or  telegraph  business,  shall  be  entitled  to  “the 
use  of  the  roads,  highways  and  public  lands 
of  the  state  in  the  telephone  business.”  And 
in  those  states  the  telephone  company  upon 
its  organization  becomes  vested  with  a franchise 
from  the  state  “to  use  the  roads,  highways  and 
lands  mentioned.”  A well  known  example  is 
the  Ohio  statute,  with  the  usual  provision  that 
such  construction  shall  not  “incommode  the 
public  in  the  use  of  the  said  roads,  or  high- 
ways, or  endanger  or  injuriously  interrupt 
the  navigation  of  any  waters”  within  the  lim- 
its of  said  state. 

In  return  for  franchise  of  this  character 
granted  by  these  states,  the  laws  of  the  states 
usually  obligate  the  telephone  company  to  per- 
form certain  specified  services  in  time  of  war 
or  of  civil  disturbance,  such  as  giving  prompt 
service  to  messages  of  the  state  or  Federal 
Government  in  such  troublous  times,  and  even 
specifically  for  the  arrest  of  criminals.  Under 
these  statutes  the  telephone  companies  may 
construct  their  lines  along  the  streets  and  pub- 
lic highways  of  municipal  corporations  without 
the  permission  of  the  city  authorities,  the  com- 


panies being  granted  by  the  legislatures  in ' 
such  states  the  rights  “to  use  the  streets  quite 
irrespective  of  any  consent  or  agreement  on  the 
part  of  any  municipality.” 

In  construing  such  statutes  emphasis  should 
be  laid  upon  the  well  recognized  principle  of 
law  that  the  term  “public  highways”  includes 
“city  streets,”  from  which  it  follows  that  the 
rights  of  a telephone  company  extend  to 
the  use  of  streets  of  a city  without  express 
mention  if  the  words  “public  highways”  are 
used. 

In  states  where  telephone  companies  enjoy 
a state  franchise  under  the  general  statutes, 
the  cities  are  normally  allowed  the  power  to 
regulate  the  use  of  streets,  or  to  designate  the 
streets  to  be  occupied,  the  kind  of  poles  and 
where  located,  the  heights  of  the  wires  and 
places  where  the  wires  may  be  run.  And, 
under  the  police  power,  the  municipal  au- 
thorities doubtless  have  such  rights,  even  where 
there  are  no  specific  stipulations  by  the  stat- 
utes giving  city  authorities  the  right  to  regu- 
late the  mode  or  manner  in  which  the  tele- 
phone companies  must  use  the  streets.  By 
police  power  is  meant  “that  authority  under 
which  everything  necessary  to  the  protection 
of  the  property  of  the  citizen  and  the  health 
and  comfort  of  the  public  may  be  done.” 

Telephones,  like  the  Post  Office,  naturally 
tend  to  a monopoly,  since  everybody  wants  to 
be  connected  with  everybody  else;  but  in  many 
parts  of  the  country  two  rival  systems  oper- 
ate side  by  side.  This  leads  to  difficulty  in 
connections  from  one  system  to  another;  and 
the  tendency  at  present  is  toward  consolida- 
tion under  one  great  national  company.  In 
1912  the  Bell  Telephone  Company,  the  largest 
corporation,  secured  the  control  of  the  West- 
ern Union  Telegraph  Company  so  that  the 
two  systems  of  transference  could  be  worked 
together. 

The  most  serious  public  question  related 
to  telephones  is  that  of  rates.  In  Boston  and 
other  cities,  elaborate  investigations  have  been 
made  by  public  experts;  and  the  companies 
have  revised  rates  in  consequence.  In  some  places 
the  telephones  are  subject  to  a local  or  state 
public  utility  commission.  Although  telephones 
in  England,  Switzerland,  and  some  other  coun- 
tries are  owned  and  operated  by  the  state,  there 
has  been  little  demand  for  a public  system  in 
the  United  States. 

See  Corporation  Charters;  Franchises, 
Corporation,  Financial  Aspects  of;  Public 
Service  Commissions;  Telegraph  Regula- 
tion. 

References:  A.  H.  McMillan,  Telephone  Law 
(1910)  ; W.  W.  Cook,  Corporations  (1912),  IV. 
933-943;  S.  W.  Jones,  Telegraph  and  Telephone 
Law  (1906);  U.  S.  Census,  Special  Report  on 
Telephones  and  Telegraphs  (1906);  Am.  Year 
Book,  1910,  534;  ibid,  1911,  461;  ibid,  1912, 
129,  286,  and  year  by  year. 

Ralph  Woodworth. 


512 


TELLER  RESOLUTIONS — TENEMENT  HOUSE  REGULATION 


TELLER  RESOLUTIONS.  While  the  Senate 
was  considering  a joint  resolution,  April  20, 
1898,  for  declaring  the  independence  of  Cuba, 
Senator  Teller  offered  a series  of  amendments 
which  were  accepted  as  a substitute  for  the 
proposal  to  recognize  the  insurgent  government 
of  the  island.  The  principal  clause  is  as  fol- 
lows : 

That  the  United  States  hereby  disclaims  any  dis- 
position or  intention  to  exercise  sovereignty,  juris- 
diction, or  control  over  said  island  except  for  the 
pacification  thereof,  and  asserts  its  determination, 
when  that  is  accomplished,  to  leave  the  govern- 
ment and  control  of  the  island  to  its  people. 

See  Cuba  and  Cuban  Diplomacy  ; Platt 
Amendment. 

References:  J.  D.  Richardson,  Messages  and 
Papers  of  the  Presidents  (1899),  X,  140-155, 
164,  201;  Cong.  Record,  55  Cong.,  2 Sess., 
(1898),  3776,  3954,  3993,  4040,  4062. 

C.  G.  C. 

TEMPERANCE  AGITATION.  From  the 

first  foundation  of  the  colonies  it  was  found 
necessary  to  regulate  the  business  of  selling 
alcoholic  liquors  by  license  and  positive  law. 
The  excise  laid  by  several  colonies  and  states, 
down  to  the  year  1789  and  incorporated  into 
the  federal  fiscal  system  from  1791  to  1802, 
and  from  1862  down  (see  Revenue,  Inter- 
nal), have  been  based  in  some  degree  on  a 
desire  to  limit  the  traffic.  The  first  formal 
propaganda  was  the  movement  of  the  Washing- 
tonian Societies  about  1830,  strongly  aided  a 
little  later  by  the  Catholic  temperance  societies 
inspired  by  Father  Matthew.  A Maine  statute 
of  1846,  elaborated  into  the  Maine  Law  (see) 
of  1851,  was  the  first  successful  legislative 
effort  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor  altogether. 
Local  and  general  societies  and  orders,  such 
as  the  Sons  of  Temperance,  and  the  Women’s 
Christian  Temperance  Union,  have  for  many 
years  carried  on  an  agitation,  in  most  cases 
demanding  prohibition  (see).  Since  1869  there 
has  been  a national  political  organization 
which  under  various  names  has  influenced  legis- 
lation and  has  put  candidates  for  the  presiden- 
cy into  the  field.  It  is  now  called  the  Prohib- 
ition Party  (see).  The  movement  has  been 
aided  in  recent  years  by  the  conviction  of  large 
employers  of  labor  that  the  use  of  liquor  in- 
terferes with  the  efficiency  of  their  workmen. 
In  the  South  this  motive  has  had  large  effect, 
particularly  because  of  the  great  number  of 
negro  hands.  The  railroads  have  taken  it  up 
and  several  roads,  among  them  the  Lackawan- 
na in  1912,  have  made  the  rule  that  they  will 
discharge  any  employee  known  to  use  liquor. 
On  the  other  hand  there  is  a steady  increase 
in  the  per  capita  consumption  of  beer  and 
wine,  and  perhaps  of  distilled  liquors  through- 
out the  country,  and  the  breweries,  distilling, 
and  wine  industries  are  among  the  most  pros- 
perous in  the  country.  See  Drunkenness, 
Regulation  of;  Health,  Public  Regulation 
of;  Labor  and  Wages;  Liquor  Legislation; 


Original  Package;  Prohibition;  Public  Mor- 
als, Care  for;  Revenue,  Internal;  Social 
Reform  Problem.  A.  B.  H. 

TEMPORARY  CHAIRMAN.  Presiding  officer 
of  a party  nominating,  convention  until  the 
permanent  organization  is  completed.  “The 
temporary  chairman  is  the  convention.”  He 
strikes  the  keynote  in  his  opening  speech,  and  in 
all  but  the  national  convention  he  appoints  the 
committee  on  credentials,  thus  deciding  which 
delegates  are  admitted.  The  national  conven- 
tion usually  accepts  the  chairman  nominated  by 
the  national  committee,  but  it  may  reject  him 
for  one  more  nearly  representing  the  sentiment 
of  the  majority  of  delegates.  After  his  speech 
setting  forth  the  ideals  of  his  colleagues  the 
temporary  chairman  proceeds  to  the  appoint- 
ing of  committees  and  other  business  incident 
to  permanent  organization.  See  Convention, 
Political;  Nomination  of  the  President. 
References:  J.  A.  Woodburn,  Pol.  Parties 
(1903),  177-178;  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Commomvealth 
(4th  ed.,  1910),  II,  182;  A.  B.  Hart,  Actual 
Government  (1903),  96.  J.  M. 

TENEMENT  HOUSE  REGULATION.  In 

the  regulation  of  tenement  houses  through  stat- 
ute and  ordinance  America  has  made  its  chief 
contribution  towards  the  solution  of  the  hous- 
ing problem.  Buildings  of  this  kind  have  been 
so  regulated  since  1867.  In  most  of  our  states 
and  in  many  of  our  large  cities  will  now  be 
found  either  a state  law  or  a local  ordinance 
dealing  with  this  question.  The  power  of  the 
state  to  enact  regulations  of  this  nature  is 
well  established  as  a legitimate  exercise  of  the 
police  power.  Most  such  enactments  even 
though  drastic  and  sweeping,  have  been  up- 
held by  the  courts. 

Most  tenement  laws  include  provisions  gov- 
erning the  construction  of  new  houses,  the  im- 
provement and  alteration  of  the  older  ones, 
and  the  maintenance  of  all.  They  also  fre- 
quently include  more  or  less  elaborate  pro- 
visions for  their  enforcement.  They  necessarily 
deal  with  questions  of  light  and  ventilation; 
sanitation;  fire  protection  and  social  welfare. 
Through  laws  of  this  kind  are  controlled  the 
proportion  of  lot  area  which  may  be  occupied; 
size  of  yards;  relation  of  height  to  the  width  of 
streets;  sizes  of  courts  and  similar  open  spaces 
reserved  for  light  and  air;  size  of  rooms,  light- 
ing and  ventilation  of  rooms  and  halls;  pri- 
vacy of  access;  occupancy  of  basements  and 
cellars;  precautions  against  dampness;  water- 
closet  accommodations;  sewer  connections; 
sanitary  plumbing;  fire  protection;  fireproof 
construction;  fire-escapes;  egress;  keeping  the 
building  in  repair;  water  supply;  cleanliness; 
improper  and  dangerous  occupancy;  room  over- 
crowding; congestion;  vaults  and  other  nui- 
sances; and  even  immorality.  In  practically 
every  city  the  tenement  house  laws  touch  upon 
all  of  these  subjects. 


TEN-HOUR-DAY— TENNESSEE 


The  fundamental  features  of  all  tenement 
laws  are  about  the  same,  because  most  of  them 
have  been  modelled  on  the  New  York  statute. 
Within  recent  years  a better  model  has  been 
found  and  is  now  being  used  generally. 

A tenement  house  for  purposes  of  the  law 
is  any  house  in  which  three  families  or  more 
live  independently  of  each  other  and  do  their 
cooking  on  the  premises  and  have  certain  com- 
mon rights  in  the  public  parts  of  the  build- 
ing, such  as  the  halls,  stairs,  yard,  cellar,  etc. 

It  thus  includes,  under  the  same  regulation, 
the  better  grade  multiple  dwellings,  popularly 
known  as  “flats”  and  “apartment  houses.”  In 
some  cities  the  standard  is  set  at  houses  oc- 
cupied by  two  families;  indeed,  the  present 
trend  is  to  include  even  single  family  dwellings 
under  the  same  requirements. 

See  Building  Laws;  Fire  Limits;  Health, 
Public  Regulation  of;  Hotels  and  Lodging 


Houses;  Lodging  Houses,  Regulation  of; 
Model  Dwellings;  Municipal  Housing;  Nui- 
sances, Abatement  of;  Poverty  and  Poor  Re- 
lief; Public  Morals,  Care  for;  Sewers  and 
Sewage  Disposal;  Social  Reform  Problems; 
Sweatshops. 

References:  Lawrence  Veiller,  Model  Tene- 
ment House  Law  (1910),  Housing  Reform 
(1910)  ; Am.  Year  Book,  1911,  244,  ibid,  1912, 
207.  Lawrence  Veiller. 

TEN-HOUR  DAY.  In  1840  the  United  States 
Government  by  statute  established  ten  hours  as 
the  normal  day’s  work  in  navy  yards  and  ar- 
senals. The  law  was  not  always  regarded. 
Ten  hours  is  the  legal  day  in  several  states 
though  contracts  for  longer  hours  are  usually 
permitted.  See  Hours  of  Labor.  Reference: 
Am.  Assoc,  for  Labor  Legislation,  Annual  Re- 
ports. C.  F.  G. 


TENNESSEE 


Sections. — The  pioneers  who,  shortly  before 
the  outbreak  of  the  American  Revolution, 
settled  upon  the  Watauga  and  neighboring 
streams  (1769—1770),  and  those  who  later 
(1779)  laid  the  beginnings  of  Nashborough 
(afterward  Nashville)  upon  the  Cumberland, 
were  accessible  to  each  other  only  by  long 
and  dangerous  routes  through  Indian  coun- 
try. Hostilities  with  the  natives  were  bitter 
and  constant — hence  the  militant  character- 
istics which  so  long  marked  the  politics 
and  government  of  Tennessee.  Differences  in 
time  and  manner  of  settlement  reinforced  by 
the  yet  stronger  influences  of  physical  geog- 
raphy, have  resulted  in  a marked  sectionalism 
within  the  state,  which  in  the  course  of  time 
has  become  so  well  accepted  that  the  constitu- 
tion and  laws  now  definitely  recognize  the 
three  “grand  divisions”  of  East,  Middle,  and 
West  Tennessee.  LTntil  1834,  there  were  first 
two,  then  three  treasurers ; even  now  the  su- 
preme court  sits  in  three  different  places  suc- 
cessively, there  are  three  state  hospitals  for 
the  insane,  and  recently  provision  has  been 
made  for  three  state  normal  schools.  This  sec- 
tionalism has  constituted  the  basis  of  much 
of  the  political  history  of  the  state. 

Admission  to  the  Union. — Before  the  mother 
state,  North  Carolina,  completely  extended  her 
jurisdiction  over  the  western  settlements,  the 
people  at  Watauga  and  those  at  Nashborough 
on  the  Cumberland  had  adopted  governmental 
agreements  of  no  little  interest  to  the  student 
of  institutional  beginnings.  Of  greater  im- 
portance, however,  was  the  endeavor  of  the 
East  Tennessee  counties  to  form,  in  1784,  the 
independent  state  of  Franklin  (see).  But 
North  Carolina  (see),  which  in  this  year  had 
acceded  to  the  request  of  Congress  for  a cession 
of  her  western  lands,  soon  took  back  her  gift 


and  maintained  her  jurisdiction  until  1789 
when  she  again  ceded  the  Tennessee  country 
to  the  United  States  (see  Cessions  by 
States  to  Federal  Government).  In  1790, 
Congress  established  the  territory  south  of  the 
River  Ohio  with  a form  of  government  like 
that  of  the  Northwest  Territory,  except  that 
the  prohibition  of  slavery  was  markedly  ab- 
sent. In  1796,  in  spite  of  dilatory  partisan 
tactics  on  the  part  of  the  Federalists,  Tennes- 
see was  admitted  to  statehood. 

Constitution  of  1796. — The  Tennessee  consti- 
tution of  1796,  in  general  like  that  of  North 
Carolina,  differed  in  that  the  election  of  the 
governor  was  given  to  the  people  instead  of 
to  the  Assembly.  The  legislature  moreover  was 
specifically  vested  with  the  power  to  erect 
courts.  In  both  the  executive  and  legislative 
branches  the  possession  of  a considerable 
amount  of  land  was  a necessary  qualification 
for  office.  Perhaps  unique  in  the  history  of 
taxation  in  the  United  States  was  the  inclu- 
sion in  the  constitution  of  1796  of  a provision 
which  limited  the  taxation  of  land  to  a specific 
tax  upon  the  hundred  acres,  without  regard 
to  location.  This  provision,  favorable  to  the 
speculators  in  land,  aroused  an  increasing  dis- 
approval. There  was  also  dissatisfaction  with 
the  judiciary  and  some  demand  for  a wider 
suffrage.  The  pursuits  of  the  state  were  from 
the  first  predominantly  agricultural.  County 
government  was  in  the  hands  of  justices  of 
the  peace  appointed  by  the  legislatures  and 
commissioned  by  the  governor.  There  was  a 
long  standing  quarrel  with  North  Carolina 
over  the  granting  of  titles  to  lands,  which  in- 
volved also  the  rights  of  the  United  States. 

Constitution  of  1834. — The  new  constitution, 
adopted  by  a convention  in  1834,  exhibited  im- 
portant changes.  The  supreme  court  was  con- 


514 


TENNESSEE 


stitutionally  established,  but  popular  election 
of  its  judges  was  not  attained  until  1853. 
The  suffrage  was  now  deliberately  limited  to 
white  men,  but  without  the  requirement  of  a 
freehold.  The  property  qualifications  for  gov- 
ernor, senators  and  representatives  were  re- 
moved. The  obnoxious  clause  as  to  land  taxa- 
tion was  eliminated,  and  the  way  paved  for  a 
general  property  tax.  Encouragement  was 
pledged  to  education  and  to  internal  improve- 
ment. Both  county  justices  and  sheriffs  were 
to  be  popularly  elected. 

Party  Controversies:  Secession. — Politics  ran 
high.  The  state  was  the  battleground  of  con- 
flicting southern  and  western  tendencies,  and 
the  middle  and  especially  the  western  part 
gradually  drew  closer,  both  in  finance  and  in 
politics,  to  the  cotton  states.  Slavery  pre- 
vailed, but  East  Tennessee  was  the  home  of  a 
strong  anti-slavery  sentiment.  Nullification 
(see)  was  disapproved  and  devotion  to  the 
Union  was  professed  by  both  Whigs  and  Demo- 


as  governor,  were  the  disfranchisement  of  prac- 
tically all  who  had  not  been  consistent  union- 
ists, and  the  domination  of  the  state  by  East 
Tennessee.  The  first  attempt  at  federal  recog- 
nition of  the  civil  government  failed  through 
entanglement  with  the  conflict  between  the 
presidential  and  the  congressional  plans  of  re- 
construction. However,  on  the  ratification  by 
the  Brownlow  regime  of  the  Fourteenth  Amend- 
ment (see)  to  the  Federal  Constitution,  Con- 
gress, on  July  1,  1866,  admitted  to  their  seats 
the  unionist  Senators  and  Representatives  from 
Tennessee. 

Constitution  of  1870. — Later,  out  of  a split 
which  developed  in  the  radical  ranks,  through 
the  election  of  Brownlow  to  the  Senate,  came 
the  opportunity  for  the  Democrats  to  regain 
control  of  the  government  and  to  remove 
the  discriminations  against  former  Confeder- 
ates. Under  these  auspices  a convention  as- 
sembled in  1870  to  frame  and  submit  to  the 
voters  a new  constitution.  Negro  suffrage  was 


crats,  which  parties,  from  the  time  of  Van 
Buren  until  the  eve  of  the  Civil  War,  were 
closely  matched. 

As  the  Whig  party  broke  up,  the  elections 
of  1857  and  1859  went  to  the  Democrats.  Gov- 
ernor Isham  G.  Harris  strongly  sympathized 
with  the  secessionist  movement.  This  course 
was  at  first  not  approved  by  the  electorate. 
In  1860  a proposal  for  a convention  was  de- 
feated. But  after  the  attack  on  Sumter,  party 
lines  were  obliterated  and  “separation”  was 
carried  over  “no  separation”  by  a vote  of  ap- 
proximately 105,000  to  47,000.  Of  the  latter 
vote,  33,000  came  from  East  Tennessee  where 
Andrew  Johnson  was  a tower  of  strength,  and 
where  now  the  people,  firmly  attached  to  the 
Union,  gravely  considered  the  erection  of  a 
new  and  separate  state. 

Reconstruction. — In  1862,  after  Union  vic- 
tories, Andrew  Johnson  was  appointed  military 
governor  by  President  Lincoln,  and  the  LTnion- 
ists  sought  the  restoration  of  Tennessee  to  her 
place  in  the  National  Government.  In  1865  a 
convention,  irregularly  assembled,  abolished 
slavery,  declared  the  nullity  of  secession,  and 
vested  the  legislature  with  power  to  fix  the 
terms  of  suffrage.  The  results  under  William 
G.  (“Parson”)  Brownlow,  Johnson’s  successor 


retained.  Otherwise,  changes  in  the  form  of 
government  were  surprisingly  moderate. 

Party  Conditions. — Since  the  restoration  of 
1870,  the  Democratic  party  has  been,  with  im- 
portant exceptions,  predominant  in  the  polit- 
ical control  of  the  government.  Through  strife 
between  Democratic  factions  over  a just  set- 
tlement of  the  enormous  state  debt,  a Repub- 
lican governor  was  elected  in  1880.  Again,  from 
1890  to  1895  the  People’s  party  helped  divide 
the  Democrats;  and  in  1894  the  Republican 
candidate  had  upon  the  face  of  the  returns 
a small  plurality.  The  Democratic  candidate, 
however,  contested  the  election  before  the  legis- 
lature, with  success.  Recently  the  Democratic 
party  again  split  over  the  issue  of  state  wide 
prohibition.  This  quarrel,  together  with  strong 
personal  rivalries,  resulted  in  a fusion  be- 
tween the  Republicans  and  the  prohibition 
Democrats,  and  in  the  election  in  1910  of  a Re- 
publican governor,  since  reelected.  But  the 
vote  of  the  state  in  federal  elections — -though 
often  by  very  moderate  majorities — has  been 
uniformly  Democratic. 

Present  Constitution. — The  present  constitu- 
tion of  Tennessee  provides  for  its  own  amend- 
ment by  the  action  of  .successive  legislatures 
(a  two-thirds  vote  being  required  in  the  sec- 


- 515 


TENNIS  CABINET— TENURE  OF  OFFICE 


ond  legislature)  with  a referendum,  but  for- 
bids the  proposal  of  amendments  oftener  than 
once  in  six  years.  The  legislature  may,  how- 
ever, at  any  time  submit  to  popular  vote  the 
calling  of  a convention  to  alter  the  constitu- 
tion. In  spite  of  agitation  at  various  times,  no 
change  has  been  made  since  1870. 

The  plan  of  representation  in  the  assembly 
(bicameral,  elected  for  two  years)  provides  for 
the  apportionment  of  senators  and  representa- 
tives among  counties  or  districts  according  to 
the  number  of  qualified  voters,  with  some  tech- 
nical limitations  upon  the  application  of  this 
principle.  The  existence  of  “floater”  districts 
for  representatives  gives  added  opportunity  for 
gerrymandering.  The  governor  is  elected  for 
two  years.  He  has  (only  since  1870)  a veto 
which  may  be  overriden  by  a majority  of  those 
elected  to  each  house.  The  governor  may  call 
out  the  militia  only  upon  the  declaration  of 
the  assembly  that  the  public  safety  requires 
it:  but  practical  necessity  has  led  to  a pal- 
pably evasive  statute  creating  the  “state  guard” 
for  “purely  domestic  purposes,”  an  “army  of 
Tennessee”  under  the  governor’s  control.  The 
judges  are  elected  by  the  people  for  eight 
years.  The  supreme  court  chooses  the  “attor- 
ney general  and  reporter”  and  elects  its  clerks. 
In  the  lower  courts,  equity  cases  come  before 
chancellors,  each  of  whom  appoints  a clerk  and 
master,  while  other  clerks  of  courts  are  elect- 
ed. The  legislature  is  given  power  to  vest 
such  powers  in  the  courts  as  to  private  or  local 
affairs  as  may  be  deemed  expedient. 

Local  government  is  based  upon  the  county. 
The  provisions  for  the  division  or  erection  of 
counties  (originating  in  1796)  are  very  de- 
tailed. Counties  are  divided  into  districts,  in 
which  justices  of  the  peace  and  constables  are 
elected.  The  justices  elect  coroners  and  rang- 
ers. The  sheriff,  trustee  (treasurer)  and  regis- 
ter are  elected  by  the  people  of  the  county. 

No  corporation  may  be  erected  or  its  powers 
increased  or  diminished  by  special  laws:  but 
general  laws  for  this  purpose  may  be  altered 
or  repealed.  In  the  application  of  this,  evasion 
has  been  practised  by  the  use  of  factitious  gen- 
eral classifications  which  really  affect  only  a 
single  city  or  county.  The  credit  of  the  state 
may  not  be  loaned  or  given,  nor  may  the  state 
be  a shareholder  in  any  bank,  association  or 
corporation.  The  credit  of  the  counties  and 
cities  may  be  given  or  loaned  only  upon  assent 
of  three-fourths  of  the  qualified  voters.  All 
property  is  to  be  taxed,  and  the  suffrage  may 
be  made  dependent  upon  the  payment  of  a 
poll  tax.  The  phrasing  of  the  clauses  as  to  the 
taxation  of  property  has  made  difficult  the 
laying  of  special  assessments  and  has  other- 
wise stood  in  the  way  of  tax  reform.  The 
present  system  includes  a general  property 
tax  supplemented  by  taxes  on  privileges  and  on 
corporations,  and  a collateral  inheritance  tax. 

In  regard  to  legislation  it  may  be  noted  that 
the  election  laws  provide  for  the  use  of  the 


Australian  ballot  of  the  “Massachusetts”  type 
( see  Ballot)  in  the  larger  counties  only.  In 
recent  years  legislation  as  to  primary  elections 
has  made  some  advance  and  voluntary  primar- 
ies for  the  direct  nomination  of  United  States 
Senators  have  occasionally  been  employed. 
State  wide  prohibition  exists  by  law,  but  en- 
forcement is  difficult  through  the  lack  of  sup- 
port in  the  cities.  The  educational  system  has 
recently  made  great  advance  and  improvements 
in  the. laws  as  to  employer’s  liability  and  child 
labor  have  been  agitated. 

There  is  a rising  demand  for  general  con- 
stitutional revision,  with  particular  emphasis 
upon  the  unsatisfactoriness  of  the  county 
courts,  the  evils  of  the  fee  system  for  county 
officers,  the  inequalities  and  difficulties  of  taxa- 
tion, the  interference  of  the  assembly  in  local 
matters,  and  the  lack  of  centralization  in  ad- 
ministration. 

Population. — In  1790  the  population  of  the 
state  was  35,691;  in  1800,  105,602;  in  1860, 
1,109,801;  in  1870,  1,258,520;  in  1900,  2,020,- 
616;  in  1910,  2,184,789. 

See  Constitutions,  State,  Characteristics 
of;  State  Governments,  Characteristics  of. 

References:  J.  W.  Caldwell,  Studies  in  the 
Constitutional  Hist,  of  Tennessee  (2d  ed., 
1907)  ; E.  T.  Sanford,  “The  Constitutional  Con- 
vention of  1776”  in  Tennessee  Bar  Association, 
Proceedings  (1896)  ; J.  Phelan,  Hist,  of  Tennes- 
see (1888)  ; W.  R.  Garrett  and  A.  V.  Good- 
pasture,  Hist,  of  Tennessee  (1900)  ; G.  F.  Mil- 
ton,  Constitution  of  Tennessee,  Considered 
with  Reference  to  the  Constitution  of  other 
States  (1897)  ; R.  E.  Manogue,  Why  Tennessee 
Needs  a New  Constitution  (1897)  ; F.  N. 
Thorpe,  Federal  and  State  Constitutions 
(1909),  VI,  3408-3473. 

St.  George  L.  Sioussat. 

TENNIS  CABINET.  A term  applied  by  the 
newspaper  press  to  the  personal  friends  of 
President  Roosevelt,  some  of  whom  played 
tennis  with  him,  and  with  whom  he  was  sup- 
posed to  have  had  special  confidential  rela- 
tions, even  to  the  extent  of  conference  on  im- 
portant public  questions.  O.  C.  H. 

TENURE  OF  OFFICE.  All  elective  officers 
are  chosen  for  a definite  term  fixed  by  law,  and 
are  in  general  irremovable  except  for  grave 
offenses  which  would  justify  impeachment  or 
removal  through  executive  action.  Usually  the 
law  imposes  no  limit  upon  reelection.  Ap- 
pointive officers  may  be  chosen  to  serve:  (a) 
during  good  behavior,  in  which  case  the  ap- 
pointing power  cannot  remove  them;  or  (b)' 
during  the  pleasure  of  the  appointing  power; 
or  (c)  for  a definite  term  fixed  by  law.  The 
actual  hold  which  an  officer  has  on  his  office 
is  affected  by  several  factors : ( 1 ) The 

protection  afforded  by  the  law  is  of  varying 
efficiency.  Officers  elected  for  a definite  term 
are  generally  secure  during  that  term,  but  at- 


516 


TENURE  OF  OFFICE  ACT— TERMS  OF  PUBLIC  OFFICERS 


tempts  to  protect  appointive  officers  from  re- 
moval by  the  power  that  appointed  them  have 
usually  failed.  (2)  The  fact  that  practically 
all  officers  in  the  United  States  receive  a sal- 
ary has  created  a class,  now  comprising  several 
hundred  thousand  persons,  to  whom  political 
activity  and  office-holding  are  the  chief  means 
of  livelihood.  Among  these  persons  the  com- 
petition for  office  is  strong  and  leads  to  fre- 
quent changes.  (3)  Those  in  power  try  to 
strengthen  themselves  by  means  of  the  pat- 
ronage at  their  disposal.  In  spite  of  the  in- 
creasing strength  of  the  merit  system  (see), 
the  power  of  appointment  is  still  largely  used 
for  promoting  political  fortunes.  In  order  to 
make  the  weapon  effective,  as  large  a number 
of  persons  as  possible  must  be  given  appoint- 
ments, even  if  for  but  a brief  term,  and  this 
necessitates  frequent  changes.  (4)  The  prin- 
ciple of  rotation  (see)  in  office  still  finds  wide 
acceptance.  When  this  is  the  case,  the  fact 
that  a man  has  held  an  office  for  one  or  two 
terms  is  sufficient  reason  for  expecting  him  to 
make  way  for  some  one  else.  This  is  espec- 
ially true  of  officers  representing  districts 
which  comprise  two  or  more  towns  or  counties. 
Local  leaders  make  more  or  less  open  bargains 
as  to  the  order  in  which  they  will  enjoy  a 
particular  office.  It  is  this  principle  of  rotation 
in  office  which  leads  Mr.  Bryce  to  remark, 
* “Uneasy  lies  the  head  of  an  ambitious  Con- 
gressman, for  the  chances  are  almost  even  that 
he  will  lose  his  seat  at  the  next  election”  (see 
Congress;  House  of  Representatives).  (5) 
Various  customs  which  have  almost  the  force 
of  law  have  an  important  bearing  on  certain 
officers’  tenure.  Thus  Washington  established 
the  precedent  which  limits  the  President  to 
two  terms,  and  a similar  custom  obtains  with 
reference  to  the  governors  in  several  states. 
By  custom,  also,  the  members  of  the  Cabinet 
(see)  resign  when  the  President  who  appointed 
them  goes  out  of  office.  In  several  states  a 
judge  who  has  served  satisfactorily  is  reelected 
without  opposition : in  Massachusetts  the  high- 
er state  officers  except  the  governor  and  lieu- 
tenant-governor  are  usually  unopposed  for  their 
party’s  nomination  so  long  as  they  care  to 
serve.  (6)  The  recall  (see),  now  being  widely 
adopted,  has  not  yet  been  tested  sufficiently  to 
determine  what  its  effect  will  be  on  official 
tenure.  Its  mere  existence,  however,  is  notice 
to  the  office  holder  that  a change  in  public 
sentiment,  whether  well  founded  or  not,  may 
bring  his  official  career  to  an  abrupt  end.  See 
Pensions;  Removal  of  Public  Officials; 
Retirement  of  Judges;  Rotation  in  Office: 
Terms  of  Public  Officers.  References:  J. 
Bryce,  Am.  Commomcealth  (4th  ed.,  1910),  II, 
ch.  lvii,  Ixv;  A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government 
(rev.  ed.,  1908),  285-288;  F.  J.  Goodnow, 
Comparative  Administrative  Lau ; (1897),  II, 
Bk.  IV,  ch.  vi;  F.  W.  Whitridge,  “Rotation  in 
Office”  in  Pol.  Sci,  Quart.,  IV  (1889),  279. 

Lawrence  B.  Evans. 


TENURE  OF  OFFICE  ACT.  By  an  act  of 
May  15,  1820,  Congress  provided  that  certain 
officers,  such  as  district  attorneys  and  col- 
lectors of  customs,  should  be  appointed  for  a 
term  of  four  years.  The  title,  Tenure  of  Office 
Act,  is  commonly  applied,  however,  to  the  act 
passed  in  1867.  The  bill,  after  passing  Con- 
gress, was  vetoed  by  President  Johnson  (see), 
but  was  passed  over  his  veto,  March  2.  It  pro- 
vided that  any  person  holding  any  civil  office 
to  which  he  had  been  appointed  with  the  advice 
and  consent  of  the  Senate  was  to  hold  office 
until  a successor  was  in  like  manner  appointed; 
that  members  of  the  Cabinet  were  to  hold  their 
office  during  the  term  of  the  President  appoint- 
ing them  and  one  month  thereafter;  that  when 
any  officer  thus  appointed,  except  judges,  should 
during  the  recess  of  the  Senate  be  shown  to 
the  President  to  be  guilty  of  misconduct  or  in- 
capable of  performing  his  duties,  the  President 
might  suspend  such  officer  and  designate  an- 
other person  ‘ to  perform  the  duties  of  the 
office  until  the  next  meeting  of  the  Senate  and 
until  the  Senate  should  act  upon  the  case;  that 
the  Senate  might  concur  in  such  suspensions 
or  refuse  to  concur,  and  in  case  of  refusal  the 
suspended  officers  should  immediately  resume 
the  functions  of  the  office.  The  act  also  in- 
cluded other  provisions  of  less  importance.  It 
was  intended  as  a means  of  curbing  the  power 
of  President  Johnson,  and  his  disregard  of  the 
act  by  the  removal  of  Secretary  Stanton  was 
one  of  the  grounds  given  for  impeaching  the 
President.  The  act  was  materially  altered  in 
1869,  and  large  portions  of  it  were  repealed 
in  1887.  See  Impeachment;  Tenure  of  Of- 
fice; Terms  of  Public  Officers.  References: 
Statutes  at  Large,  III,  582,  XIV,  430,  XVI,  6, 
XXIV,  500.  A.  C.  McL. 

TERMS  OF  PUBLIC  OFFICERS.  General 
and  Historical. — American  constitutional  and 
adminstrative  law  provides  for  definite  terms 
for  all  elective  officials.  Appointive  officers  are 
usually  commissioned  for  definite  terms,  if  the 
position  is  important,  hut  many  of  the  lesser 
officers  are  appointed  for  indefinite  periods; 
for  example — during  the  pleasure  of  the  ap- 
pointing power,  for  the  balance  of  the  term 
of  the  appointing  official,  or  until  a successor 
is  appointed.  Terms  are  almost  invariably 
short,  for  the  historical  and  practical  reason 
that  frequent  elections  give  opportunity  for 
popular  control  of  officials,  and  for  the  further 
reason  that  American  democracy  of  the 
nineteenth  century  insisted  upon  rapid  rota- 
tion in  office  (see).  In  colonial  times  the  peo- 
ple showed  their  attachment  to  the  short  term 
by  choosing  for  one  year  practically  all  officials 
whose  terms  they  could  control.  Colonial  offi- 
cials who  were  selected  by  English  representa- 
tives, including  most  of  the  colonial  governors 
and  judges,  held  office  during  the  pleasure  of 
the  appointive  power.  When  the  colonies 
separated  from  Great  Britain,  the  short  term 
517 


TERRITORIAL  JURISDICTION  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


TERMS  OF  STATE  AND  LOCAL  OFFICIALS 


(Years) 


State 

Legis 

laturc 

Governor 

. 

Judges  Highest 

State  Court 

County  Officials 

(Ordinary  Terms) 

Senate 

Lower 

House 

Alabama  

4 

4 

4 

6 

2 : 4 

Arizona  _ --  - . 

2 

2 

2 

6 

2 : 4 

Arkansas  

4 

2 

2 

6 

2 

California  

4 

2 

4 

12 

4 

Colorado  

4 

2 

2 

10 

2 : 4 

Connecticut  

2 

2 

2 

8 

4 

Delaware - 

4 

2 

4 

12 

2 : 4 

Florida  

4 

2 

4 

6 

2 : 4 

Georgia 

4 

2 

4 

6 

2 : 3 

Idaho  — - 

2 

2 

2 

6 

2 

Illinois  — 

4 

2 

4 

9 

3:4 

Indiana  — 

4 

2 

4 

6 

2 

Iowa  

4 

2 

2 

6 

2 : 3 

Kansas  

4 

2 

2 

6 

2 : 3 

Kentucky  

4 

2 

4 

6 

4 

Louisiana 

4 

4 

4 

12 

4 

Maine  --  — 

4 

2 

2 

6 

2 

Maryland  

4 

2 

4 

15 

2 

Massachusetts  — 

1 

1 

1 

3 

Michigan  -- 

2 

2 

2 

8 

2 

Minnesota 

4 

2 

2 

6 

2 : 4 

Mississippi  - 

4 

4 

4 

9 

4 

Missouri 

4 

2 

4 

10 

4 

Montana  -- 

4 

2 

4 

6 

2 : 6 

Nebraska  — — 

2 

2 

2 

6 

2 

Nevada  - 

4 

2 

4 

6 

2:  4 

New  Hampshire. 

2 

2 

2 

2 

New  Jersey 

3 

1 

3 

7 

3 

New  Mexico 

4 

2 

4 

8 

4 

New  York  .. 

2 

1 

2 

14 

3 

North  Carolina  - 

2 

2 

4 

8 

2 

North  Dakota  — 

4 

2 

2 

6 

2 : 4 

Ohio  — 

2 

2 

2 

6 

2 

Oklahoma  - 

4 

2 

4 

6 

2 

Oregon 

4 

2 

4 

6 

2 : 4 

Pennsylvania  — 

4 

2 

4 

21 

4 

Rhode  Island 

1 

1 

1 

3 

South  Carolina. 

2 

2 

2 

8 

_ 

South  Dakota  _ 

2 

2 

2 

6 

2 

Tennessee  

2 

2 

2 

8 

2 : 4 

Texas  - 

4 

2 

2 

6 

2 

Utah  

4 

2 

4 

6 

2 

Vermont  . 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

Virginia  

4 

2 

4 

12 

4 

Washington  

4 

2 

4 

6 

2 

W.  Virginia  

4 

: 2 

4 

12 

4 

Wisconsin  

4 

2 

2 

10 

1 : 2 

Wyoming  ..  - 

4 

2 

4 

4 

2 : 4 

1 Good  behavior. 

2 Until  70  years  of  age. 

•Until  removed  by  legislature. 

Was  continued  for  members  of  the  lower  house 
of  the  legislature,  and  one  year  was  the  term 
for  six  of  the  ten  senates  and  for  all  but  three 
of  the  thirteen  governors.  Judges  were  usually 
selected  for  good  behavior.  In  the  period  from 
the  Revolutionary  War  to  the  War  for  the 
Union,  judges  were  brought  under  the  rule  that 
democracy  demanded  short  terms,  but  the  short 
terms  for  the  legislators  gave  place  to  longer 
terms  for  senators,  although  in  1850  four 
states  still  elected  their  senators  annually,  and 
one  half  of  the  states  had  annual  elections  of 
representatives.  In  that  year,  one-third  of  the 
states  chose  their  governors  for  a four  year 
term. 

Terms  at  Present. — An  examination  of  the 
tables  below  shows  that  the  reaction  against 
very  short  terms  for  state  officials  did  not  cease 
with  the  Civil  War,  for  now  four  year  terms 


are  most  common  for  governor,  four  years  has 
become  the  rule  for  senators,  and  almost  with- 
out exception  two  years  is  the  term  of  members 
of  the  lower  house.  Terms  for  state  judges  and 
for  county  officers  are  longer  than  they  were  a 
half  century  ago,  while  for  city  officials  longer 
terms  have  been  looked  upon  with  greater 
favor  during  recent  years,  four  years  being 
more  common  than  two  years  in  the  larger 
cities,  except  for  the  office  of  mayor.  Appoint- 
ive state  and  local  officers  usually  have  the 
same  term  as  the  official  by  whom  they  were 
chosen,  although  their  commissions  frequently 
do  not  state  their  term  of  office.  The  terms 
of  most  national  officials  have  remained  un- 
changed since  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution. 
The  four  years’  term  for  the  President,  then 
considered  dangerously  long,  is  now  the  or- 
dinary term  of  the  state  governors.  The  na- 
tional Senators  have  now,  as  then,  the  longest 
legislative  term,  six  years.  The  national  Repre- 
sentatives are  chosen  for  two  years.  National 
judges  are  appointed  for  good  behavior  (the 
only  national  appointive  officials  whose  terms 
are  prescribed  by  the  Constitution),  their  long 
term  making  them  more  independent  than  the 
state  judges.  Foreign  representatives,  mem- 
bers of  the  Cabinet  and  other  national  appoint- 
ive political  officers  hold  their  positions  for  in- 
definite terms  unless  the  statute  creating  the 
office  states  the  term.  The  actual  tenure  of 
these  officials  and  of  state  and  locally  appointed 
officers  depend  on  the  power  of  removal  vested 
in  the  chief  executive. 

See  Appointments  to  Office;  Civil  Serv- 
ice; Inferior  Officers;  Office;  Officers, 
Military  anti  Naval;  Removal  of  Public 
Officials;  Tenure  of  Office. 

References:  R.  L.  Ashley,  Am.  Federal  State 
(rev.  ed.,  1911),  610-616;  F.  N.  Thorpe,  Con- 
stitutional Hist,  of  Am.  People  (1898),  II, 
409-421.  R.  L.  Ashley. 

TERRITORIAL  JURISDICTION  OF  THE 
UNITED  STATES  WITHIN  THE  STATES. 

The  United  States  has  full  jurisdiction  within 
the  states  with  reference  to  all  matters  of 
federal  concern.  Over  certain  areas  within  the 
states  it  has,  however,  exclusive  political  au- 
thority. This  is  provided  for  in  the  clause  of 
the  Constitution  which,  after  granting  to  Con- 
gress exclusive  legislative  authority  in  all 
cases  whatsoever  in  the  district  to  be  select- 
ed as  the  seat  of  the  national  Government,  goes 
on  to  declare  that  it  shall 

exercise  like  authority  over  all  places  purchased 
by  the  consent  of  the  Legislature  of  the  State 
in  which  the  same  shall  be.  for  the  erection  of 
forts,  magazines,  arsenals,  dockyards,  and  other 
needful  buildings  (Art.  I.  Sec.  viii,  U 17). 

The  exclusive  political  jurisdiction  thus  pro- 
vided for  is  to  be  clearly  distinguished  from 
the  proprietary  rights  which  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment may  have  over  lands  purchased  by  it  or 
obtained  by  the  right  of  eminent  domain  (see) 


518 


TERRITORIES  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  ORGANIZED 


without  the  consent  of  the  state  wherein  they 
are  situated  being  asked  or  given.  Such  lands 
being  the  property  of  the  United  States  may 
not  be  taxed  by  the  states,  nor  may  the  use 
of  them  or  of  the  buildings  erected  upon  them 
be  in  any  way  so  controlled  by  the  states  as 
to  interfere  with  the  public  purpose  for  which 
they  are  held  and  employed  by  the  Federal 
Government.  But  in  all  other  respects  the 
political  authority  over  them  by  the  states 
within  which  they  are  situated  is  complete. 
The  writs  of  the  state  courts  may  be  served  in 
or  upon  them,  and  acts  committed  therein  or 
thereupon  prohibited  by  the  laws  of  the  state 
are  offenses  against  the  peace  of  that  state 
and  may  be  punished  as  such.  Where,  however, 
the  unqualified  consent  of  the  state  has  been 
obtained  the  political  jurisdiction  of  the  state 
is  completely  ousted,  and  the  federal  author- 
ity exclusive.  It  would  seem,  however,  that  a 
state  may  qualify  its  consent  to  the  taking 
into  possession  by  the  Federal  Government  of 
tracts  of  land  situated  within  its  borders,  and 
may  reserve  to  itself  the  right  of  jurisdiction 
with  reference  to  specific  matters. 

The  general  extent  and  character  of  the 
federal  jurisdiction  over  these  interstate  areas 
is  discussed  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  cases 
of  Fort  Leavenworth  R.  R.  Co.  vs.  Lowe  (114 
U.  S.  525),  Kohl  vs.  United  States  (91  U.  S. 
367),  and  Van  Brocklin  vs.  Tennessee  (117 
U.  S.  151). 

Whether  the  Federal  Government  may,  by 
an  exercise  of  its  rights  of  eminent  domain, 
take  for  its  own  use  property  already  employed 
for  a public  purpose  by  a state,  may  be  doubted. 
It  would,  however,  seem  certain  that  the  court 


would  permit  this  to  be  done  only  in  cases 
where  the  federal  need  is  imperative,  and  one 
that  may  be  met  only  by  the  appropriation  of 
that  particular  piece  of  property.  Such  an 
occasion  has  never  arisen  and  the  probability 
of  its  ever  arising  in  the  future  is  not  great. 

With  reference  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
United  States  within  the  states  a word  needs 
to  be  said  regarding  the  status  of  the  Indians. 
Primarily  the  federal  authority  over  these  de- 
pendent peoples  is  personal  rather  than  terri- 
torial, but  where  definite  areas,  known  as 
reservations,  are  set  aside  for  occupancy  by 
the  Indians,  the  federal  jurisdiction  is  terri- 
torial and  exclusive  (Worcester  vs.  Georgia,  6 
Peters  515).  But  it  is  to  be  repeated  that 
the  federal  authority  follows  the  Indians  every- 
where outside  of  these  reservations,  and  within 
the  United  States.  Thus  it  has  been  held  that 
Congress  has  the  power  to  forbid  the  sale  of 
liquor  to  an  Indian  no  matter  where  he  is. 
“The  locality  of  the  traffic,”  it  was  declared, 
“can  have  nothing  to  do  with  this  power.  The 
right  to  exercise  it  with  reference  to  an  Indian 
tribe  or  any  person  who  is  a member  of  such 
a tribe,  is  absolute,  without  reference  to  the 
locality  of  the  traffic,  or  the  locality  of  the 
tribe,  or  of  the  member  of  the  tribe  with  whom 
it  is  carried  on”  (United  States  vs.  Holliday, 
3 Wallace  407 ) . 

See  Indian  Policy  of  United  States;  In- 
dian Reservations. 

References:  D.  K.  Watson,  Constitution  of 
the  U.  8.  (1910);  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Con- 
stitutional Law  of  the  U.  8.  (1910);  T.  M. 
Cooley,  Principles  of  Constitutional  Law  ( 3d 
ed. ; i 898 ) ; 102-104.  W.  W.  Willoughby. 


TERRITORIES  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  ORGANIZED 


Definition. — The  term  organized  territory  of 
the  United  States  is  applied  to  certain  divi- 
sions of  the  national  domain  which  have  been 
given  a form  of  partial  self-government  of  a 
definite  type.  They  are  distinguished  on  the 
one  hand  from  the  “unorganized  territories,” 
which  are  controlled  directly  by  the  federal 
legislature  and  executive;  and  on  the  other 
hand  from  those  other  dependencies  of  the 
United  States,  which,  although  possessing  an 
organized  government,  do  not  conform  to  the 
accepted  territorial  type.  The  term  “terri- 
tories” is  sometimes  employed  to  include  all 
the  dependencies  of  the  United  States,  but 
used  without  qualification  it  normally  has 
reference  to  the  organized  territories  and,  as 
usually  understood,  it  also  implies  the  idea 
of  a state  in  the  making. 

Present  Restriction  of  the  Term. — The  fed- 
eral Union  is  now  in  large  measure  composed 
of  states  which  have  come  up  from  the  terri- 
torial status.  New  Mexico  and  Arizona,  which 


passed  into  statehood  in  1912,  were  the  last 
remaining  territories  organized  from  the  con- 
tiguous domain  of  the  United  States;  so  that 
the  LTnion  now  embraces  the  entire  continental 
territory  of  the  United  States  except  Alaska, 
which  is  an  organized  territory,  and  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia,  which  had  indeed  for  a brief 
period  (1871-1874)  a territorial  form  of  gov- 
ernment, but  is  now  governed  under  acts  of 
Congress  through  a commission  appointed  by 
the  President.  The  form  of  government  which 
has  come  to  be  known  as  territorial  now  exists 
only  in  Hawaii,  since  Porto  Rico  and  the 
Philippines  are  not,  strictly  speaking,  terri- 
tories, and  the  other  dependencies,  Tutuila, 
Guam,  the  Pacific  islands  and  the  Canal  Zone, 
remain  without  government  of  an  organized 
sort. 

Northwest  Territory. — The  first  definite  leg- 
islation for  the  government  of  the  common 
territorial  possessions  of  the  United  States  was 
an  ordinance  drawn  up  by  Thomas  Jefferson, 


519 


TERRITORIES  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  ORGANIZED 


which  was  adopted  by  the  Congress  of  the 
Confederation  on  April  23,  1784,  but  never 
went  into  operation.  Instead,  on  July  13,  1787, 
was  adopted  the  more  definite  territorial  in- 
strument, “The  Ordinance  for  the  Government 
of  the  Territory  of  the  United  States  North- 
West  of  the  River  Ohio,”  which  laid  down  the 
fundamental  lines  on  which- the  government  of 
all  the  territories  since  that  time  has  been 
based  (see  Ordinance  of  1787).  The  Ordin- 
ance provided  first  for  a temporary  government 
of  the  territory  through  a governor,  a secre- 
tary, and  three  judges  appointed  by  Congress, 
the  governor  and  judges  having  a qualified 
legislative  power;  but  this  mode  was  to  give 
place,  as  soon  as  there  were  five  thousand  free 
male  inhabitants  of  full  age  in  the  territory,  to 
a more  permanent  form  of  government,  which 
should  include  a house  of  representatives  and 
an  appointed  council.  At  this  stage  the  terri- 
tory might  send  a representative  to  Congress, 
who  should  have  the  right  of  debating  but 
not  of  voting.  A few  of  the  earlier  territories 
were  governed  for  a time  by  the  first  method, 
but  the  majority  of  them  were  organized  at 
once  into  the  second,  the  legislative,  form.  The 
Ordinance  further  set  forth  as  the  fixed  policy 
of  the  nation  toward  its  dependent  territory 
the  promise  of  ultimate  admission  of  the  terri- 
tories into  full  fellowship  in  the  Union,  a policy 
which  had  been  adopted  by  Congress  as  early 
as  October  10,  1780.  The  Ordinance  contained 
two  other  notable  features:  (1)  a bill  of 
rights  such  as  found  place  in  most  of  the 
state  constitutions  of  the  period;  (2)  a pro- 
vision that  neither  slavery  nor  involuntary 
servitude  should  ever  exist  in  the  territory. 
Eventually  the  question  whether  Congress 
might  constitutionally  prohibit  slavery  in  the 
territories  became  the  subject  of  great  political 
contests  between  the  pro-slavery  and  anti- 
slavery forces,  a controversy  which  reached 
an  acute  stage  in  connection  with  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  Bill  (see). 

Under  the  Constitution. — When  the  new  gov- 
ernment was  organized  under  the  Constitution, 
which  provided  only  in  general  terms  that  new 
states  might  be  admitted  by  Congress  into 
the  Union,  and  that  Congress  should  have 
power  to  dispose  of  and  make  all  needful  rules 
and  regulations  respecting  the  territory  or 
other  property  of  the  United  States  (Art.  IV. 
Sec.  iii.  Iff  1.  2),  it  was  deemed  necessary  to 
“adapt”  the  Ordinance  to  the  Constitution  by 
giving  to  the  President,  with  the  advice  and 
consent  of  the  Senate,  the  appointing  power 
which  had  previously  reposed  in  the  old  Con- 
gress. In  the  organization  of  the  earlier  terri- 
tories Congress  did  little  more,  so  far  as  con- 
cerned the  general  scheme  of  government,  than 
merely  to  apply  the  Ordinance  bodily  to  the 
territory  or  substantiallv  to  reenact  its  pro- 
visions. On  Mav  26,  1790,  for  instance.  Con- 
gress created  “The  Territory  of  the  I nited 
States  South  of  the  River  Ohio,”  the  principal 


part  of  which  shortly  afterward  became  the 
state  of  Tennessee,  applying  to  it  the  North- 
west Ordinance,  except  the  provision  concern- 
ing slavery,  an  exception  later  made  for  the 
other  territories  organized  in  the  southern  part 
of  the  national  domain.  During  half  a century, 
in  fact,  Congress  was  working  out  the  details 
of  the  territorial  system;  during  the  last  three 
quarters  of  a century  the  system  has  been 
fairly  uniform  and  constant. 

Normal  Organization. — This  territorial  gov- 
ernment has  usually  consisted  of  a governor,  a 
secretary,  a legislature  of  two  houses,  and  a 
system  of  territorial  courts.  In  the  territories 
of  Orleans  (1804)  and  Florida  (1822)  author- 
ity was  at  first  vested  in  a governor  and  a 
legislative  council  of  thirteen,  appointed  by 
the  President;  but  this  autocratic  form  of  gov- 
ernment shortly  gave  place  to  one  of  the 
normal  type.  The  governor  is  appointed  by 
the  President,  with  the  advice  and  consent  of 
the  Senate,  for  a term  of  four  years  and  has 
much  the  same  powers  as  pertain  to  the  gov- 
ernor of  one  of  the  states.  That  is,  he  enforces 
the  laws,  may  grant  pardons  for  offenses 
against  the  laws  of  the  territory  and  reprieves 
for  offenses  against  the  laws  of  the  United 
States,  until  the  decision  of  the  President  can 
be  made  known;  is  commander-in-chief  of  the 
territorial  militia,  and  is  usually,  also,  super- 
intendent of  Indian  affairs.  He  has  the  veto 
power  over  legislation,  although  in  most  of  the 
territories  his  veto  may  be  overruled  by  a two- 
thirds  vote  of  both  houses.  The  principal 
duties  of  the  secretary,  who  is  similarly  ap- 
pointed, are  to  keep  the  territorial  records  and 
transmit  copies  of  them  to  the  President  and 
to  certain  other  officials,  but  he  also  acts  as 
governor  in  case  of  the  latter’s  death,  removal, 
or  other  necessary  absence. 

The  territorial  legislature  comprises  a legis- 
lative council  and  a house  of  representatives, 
both  (since  1836)  elected  by  the  qualified 
voters  of  the  territory  and  having  the  same 
qualifications  as  the  voters.  The  numbers  com- 
posing each  house  and  the  terms  for  which 
they  were  elected  have  varied  considerably 
from  time  to  time;  but  in  later  years  the  coun- 
cil has  been  limited,  in  most  of  the  territories, 
to  twelve  and  the  house  to  twenty-four  mem- 
bers, and  both  houses  are  elected  for  a term 
of  two  years.  The  legislature  is,  moreover, 
limited  to  biennial  sessions  of  a duration  not 
exceeding  sixty  days. 

Functions  of  the  Territories. — The  legislative 
power  of  the  territory  extends  to  “all  rightful 
subjects  of  legislation  not  inconsistent  with  the 
Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States” 
or  with  the  act  by  which  the  territory  is 
organized.  The  organic  act  itself  usually  places 
certain  restrictions  upon  the  territorial  legis- 
lature, and  these  restrictions  tend  to  become 
more  numerous  and  more  specific.  For  ex- 
ample, there  are  limitations  upon  the  author- 
ity of  the  territory  to  contract  debts,  as  also 


520 


TERRITORIES  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  ORGANIZED 


upon  territorial  expenditures.  Furthermore 
any  act  of  the  territorial  legislature  is  subject 
to  the  disapproval  of  Congress,  and  occasion- 
ally Congress  has  exercised  this  power,  not- 
ably in  the  case  of  Utah.  Another  kind  of 
limitation  is  the  retention  by  Congress  of  con- 
trol over  the  Indian  reservations  within  the 
territorial  boundaries. 

Make-up  of  the  Government. — The  qualifica- 
tions for  the  electoral  franchise  have  been  pre- 
scribed in  the  first  instance  by  the  organic 
act,  but  thereafter  subject  to  regulation  by  the 
territorial  legislature.  The  Northwest  Ordin- 
ance prescribed  rather  high  property  qualifi- 
cations both  for  office  holding  and  for  the 
suffrage;  but  in  the  early  part  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  these  restrictions  were  gradu- 
ally swept  away. 

The  judicial  system  of  the  territories  in- 
cludes a supreme  court,  consisting  of  a chief 
justice  and  two  or  more  associate  justices  ap- 
pointed for  a term  of  four  years  by  the  Presi- 
dent, with  the  consent  of  the  Senate;  and  dis- 
trict courts,  composed  of  the  same  justices 
sitting  separately.  From  the  district  court  ap- 
peals lie  to  the  supreme  court  of  the  terri- 
tory and  from  the  latter  to  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States.  The  jurisdiction  of  the 
several  courts  is  in  the  main  left  to  the  deter- 
mination of  the  territorial  legislature,  but 
jurisdiction  in  cases  arising  under  the  Con- 
stitution and  laws  of  the  United  States  and 
appeals  from  the  supreme  court  of  the  terri- 
tory to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  are  regulated  by  Congress.  There  are 
also  a prosecuting  attorney  and  a marshal  for 
each  territory  appointed  in  the  same  manner 
as  the  other  officers. 

Relation  to  the  Federal  Government. — The 

law  administered  is  both  federal  and  terri- 
torial. The  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
and  the  organic  act  are  the  fundamental  laws 
for  the  territory,  and  in  general  all  laws  of 
the  United  States  not  locally  inapplicable  have 
been  declared  by  Congress  to  be  in  force  in 
the  territories.  This  declaration  that  the  Con- 
stitution and  laws  of  the  United  States  apply 
to  the  territories  was  first  formally  made  in 
the  organic  act  for  New  Mexico  (1850)  and 
was  repeated  in  subsequent  organic  acts  as 
well  as  in  the  revised  statutes  of  1874. 
Whether  the  “Constitution  follows  the  flag” 

( see ) has  been  a much  controverted  question, 
but  in  the  famous  “Insular  Cases”  (see),  which 
concerned  the  acquisitions  as  a result  of  the 
war  with  Spain,  the  Supreme  Court  decided 
that  the  Constitution  does  not  apply  to  new 
territory  unless  formally  extended  to  it  by 
Congress. 

As  the  territorial  government  rests  entirely 
upon  congressional  enactment  the  territories 
have  no  share  in  the  Federal  Government  be- 
yond the  representation  of  each  territory  in 
Congress  by  one  delegate,  who,  although  he  is 
granted  most  of  the  other  privileges  of  mem- 


bers of  Congress,  does  not  have  the  right  of 
voting.  On  the  other  hand  the  cost  of  terri- 
torial administration  is  borne  by  the  Federal 
Government. 

Hawaii. — The  government  provided  for  the 
Hawaiian  Islands  by  the  act  of  April  30,  1900, 
which  created  the  territory  of  Hawaii  and  ex- 
tended to  it  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the 
United  States,  differs  in  some  particulars  from 
that  which  prevailed  in  the  continental  terri- 
tories. The  governor  and  the  secretary,  each 
appointed  by  the  President  for  a term  of  four 
years,  must  be  citizens  of  the  territory,  a quali- 
fication which  had  not  hitherto  been  requisite. 
The  upper  house  of  the  legislature,  called  the 
senate,  is  composed  of  fifteen  members  elected 
for  a term  of  four  years,  and  the  lower,  or 
house  of  representatives,  of  thirty  members 
elected  for  a term  of  two  years.  The  senator- 
ial elections  are  arranged  in  such  a way  that 
the  terms  of  only  half  the  members  ( accurate- 
ly seven  or  eight,  as  the  case  might  be)  expire 
at  one  time.  Senators  must,  moreover,  be 
thirty  years  of  age  and  members  of  the  house 
twenty-five,  and  both  must  have  resided  in 
the  territory  three  years. 

The  right  of  suffrage  in  Hawaii  is  more  defin- 
itely regulated  by  Congress  than  was  usual  in 
the  continental  territories.  Among  the  qualifi- 
cations required  is  the  ability  to  speak,  read, 
and  write  either  the  English  or  the  Hawaiian 
language.  The  administrative  system  is  also 
explicitly  determined  by  Congress,  although  the 
principal  administrative  officers  are  appointed 
and  may  be  removed  by  the  governor,  with  the 
consent  of  the  territorial  senate.  The  territory 
has  its  delegate  in  Congress,  as  had  the  other 
territories,  and  its  judicial  system  is  also  es- 
sentially the  same.  Of  local  self-government 
there  is  practically  none,  a condition  inherited 
from  the  highly  centralized  monarchy  and  not 
yet  altered. 

Change  to  Statehood. — There  are  two  modes 
bv  which  territories  have  become  states.  • In 
several  instances  the  territory  has  adopted  a 
constitution  and  applied  to  Congress  for  ad- 
mission; but  the  more  usual  method  has  been 
for  Congress  to  take  the  initial  step  and  pass 
an  “enabling  act”  authorizing  the  territory  to 
form  a constitution  and  prescribing  provisions 
which  the  constitution  must  contain.  Whether 
a state  after  its  admission  may  violate  these 
conditions  remains  an  unsettled  question.  The 
time  and  the  conditions  of  admission  are  never- 
theless absolutely  in  the  power  of  Congress  to 
determine.  In  theory  a territory  is  entitled 
to  become  a state  when  its  population  equals 
that  of  an  average  congressional  district,  hut 
for  political  and  other  reasons  this  principle 
has  been  honored  almost  as  much  in  the  breach 
as  in  the  observance.  Despite,  however,  any 
derelictions  of  conduct  on  the  part  of  Con- 
gress, the  policy  of  regarding  a territory  as 
merely  in  the  preparation  to  become  a state, 
and  therefore  to  be  trained  for  statehood 


TERRITORY,  ACQUIRED,  STATUS  OF 


through  the  largest  measure  of  self-govern- 
ment consistent  with  the  interests  of  the  terri- 
tory as  well  as  of  the  nation,  lies  at  the  foun- 
dation of  national  history.  As  regards  most 
or  all  of  the  present  dependencies  political 
education  is  still  an  essential  feature  of  the 
national  policy,  but  the  principle  of  ultimate 
admission  to  the  Union  is  at  the  present  time 
in  abeyance. 

See  Territory,  Acquired,  Status  of;  Ter- 
ritory, Constitutional  Questions  of;  Terri- 
tory South  of  the  Ohio. 

References:  W.  F.  Willoughby,  Territories 
and  Dependencies  of  the  U.  S.  ( 1905 ) , chs. 
i-iii ; C.  Meyerholz,  Federal  Supervision  over 
the  Territories  of  the  U.  S.  (1908)  ; J.  Bryce, 
Am.  Commonwealth  (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  eh. 
xlvii;  A.  B.  Hart,  Actual  Government  (3d.  ed., 


1908),  eh.  xx,  Foundations  of  Am.  Foreign 
Policy  (1901),  ch.  vi;  J.  A.  Woodburn,  Am. 
Republic  (1903),  ch.  viii;  T.  Donaldson, 
Public  Domain  (2d  ed.,  1884),  416-464,  1179- 
1214;  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Am.  Constitutional 
System  (1904),  chs.  xiii-xiv;  H.  W.  Bikle  Con- 
stitutional Power  of  Congress  over  Territory 
of  the  U.  S.  ( 1901 ) ; Max  Farrand,  Legislation 
of  Congress  for  the  Government  of  Organized 
Territories  (1896);  Library  of  Congress,  List 
of  Books  Relating  to  the  Government  of  De- 
pendencies, etc.  ( 1900 ) ; Organic  Acts  for 
the  Territories  of  the  U.  S.”  in  U.  S.  Senate 
Docs.,  56  Cong.,  1 Sess.,  No.  148  (1900)  ; U.  S. 
Statutes  at  Large,  1845-1913;  Am.  Year  Book, 
1910,  207-217,  ibid,  1911,  262-270,  ibid,  1912, 
222-228;  bibliography  in  A.  B.  Hart,  Manual 
( 1908 ) , § 154.  Edmund  C.  Burnett. 


TERRITORY,  ACQUIRED,  STATUS  OF 


Original  Territory. — The  status  of  newly  ac- 
quired territory  and  of  its  inhabitants  has  been 
a subject  of  discussion  from  the  early  days  of 
the  government,  and  has  been  only  partially 
settled  by  recent  decisions  of  the  Supreme 
Court. 

The  status  of  the  land  west  of  the  Alle- 
ghanies  at  the  time  of  the  formation  of  the 
Constitution  was  determined  by  the  Ordinance 
of  1787  (see),  which  provided  that  it  should 
“forever  remain  a part  of  this  confederacy  of 
the  United  States  of  America,  subject  to  the 
articles  of  confederation  . . . and  to  all 
the  acts  and  ordinances  of  . . . Congress”; 

and  that  it  should  eventually  be  admitted  into 
the  Union  as  states.  These  territories  were 
thus  clearly  made  an  integral  part  of  the 
United  States.  Therefore  the  revenue  clauses 
of  the  Constitution  which  provide  that  “all 
duties,  imposts  and  excises  shall  be  uniform 
throughout  the  United  States,”  legally  applied 
to  them ; although,  as  a matter  of  fact,  it  was 
ten  years  after  the  tariff  act  of  1789  before 
Congress  arranged  for  the  collection  of  duties 
in  the  Northwest  Territory.  The  ordinance 
specifically  granted  the  inhabitants  the  rights 
which,  for  the  most  part,  are  enumerated  in 
the  amendments  to  the  Constitution. 

Louisiana. — The  treaty  of  1803  which 
stipulated  for  the  purchase  of  Louisiana  pre- 
cipitated an  earnest  debate  in  Congress  over 
the  whole  question  of  the  relation  of  the  United 
States  to  new  territory;  it  centered  upon  the 
third  section  of  the  treaty: 

The  inhabitants  of  the  ceded  territory  shall  be 
incorporated  in  the  Union  of  the  United  States, 
and  admitted  as  soon  as  possible,  according  to  the 
principles  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  to  the  en- 
ioyment  of  all  the  rights,  advantages  and  im- 
munities of  citizens  of  the  United  States. 

The  extreme  Federalists  maintained  that  the 
President  and  Senate  could  acquire  territory 


by  treaty,  and  that  Congress  could  legislate 
for  it  as  for  a conquered  province;  but  that 
neither  the  treaty  power  nor  Congress  could 
admit  such  territory  as  an  integral  part  of 
the  United  States.  The  Republicans  regarded 
Louisiana  as  a territory  to  be  governed  by 
that  clause  of  the  Constitution  which  states: 

Congress  shall  have  power  to  dispose  of  and 
make  all  needful  rules  and  regulations  respecting 
the  territory  or  other  property  belonging  to  the 
United  States. 

They  pointed  out  that  the  treaty  itself  did 
not  grant  full  incorporation  into  the  Union 
of  states,  but  only  made  a promise  which  Con- 
gress was  morally  bound  to  fulfill  in  due 
season. 

Congress  legislated  for  the  cession  upon  the 
evident  theory  that  the  provisions  of  the  Con- 
stitution did  not  necessarily  all  apply  to 
Louisiana.  It  sanctioned  the  clause  of  the 
treaty  which  gave  Spanish  and  French  ships 
preferential  tariff  rates  in  Louisiana  ports ; 
and  denied  the  right  of  jury  trial  in  cases 
where  the  Constitution,  had  it  been  entirely  in 
force,  would  have  granted  it.  The  inhabitants, 
were  at  first  given  no  share  in  the  government, 
but  were  placed  under  the  practically  un- 
limited power  of  officers  appointed  by  the 
President.  In  1805  the  rights  and  privileges 
secured  by  the  Ordinance  of  1787  were  extended 
to  the  territory  of  Orleans,  which  was  ad- 
mitted as  the  state  of  Louisiana  in  1812. 

The  remainder  of  the  Louisiana  purchase  was 
at  first  administered  solely  by  appointed  offi- 
cials, and  not  until  1812  did  Congress  extend 
to  it  the  bill  of  rights  of  the  Ordinance  of 
1787.  In  1820,  Missouri,  a part  of  the  Louisi- 
ana purchase,  claimed  the  right  of  admission 
as  a state  because  of  the  promise  of  the  treaty 
of  1803.  and  insisted  that  any  anti-slavery 
provision,  which  would  place  it  under  a re- 


TERRITORY,  ACQUIRED,  STATUS  OF 


striction  to  which  the  other  states  were  not 
subject,  would  be  an  infringement  of  the  spirit 
of  the  treaty,  which  guaranteed  admission 
“according  to  the  principles  of  the  Federal 
Constitution.” 

Florida.— Florida  was  treated  substantially 
like  Louisiana.  The  treaty  of  1819  with 
Spain  stated: 

The  Inhabitants  . . , shall  be  incorporated  in 
the  Union  of  the  United  States  as  soon  as  may  be 
consistent  with  the  principles  of  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution, and  admitted  to  the  enjoyment  of  all 
the  privileges,  rights  and  immunities  of  the  citi- 
zens of  the  United  States. 

Before  this  treaty  went  into  effect  a motion 
was  made  in  Congress  declaring  that  the 
principles  of  the  Constitution  applied  to  the 
territory,  but  this  was  voted  down  on  the 
ground  that  the  constitutional  provisions  were 
made  applicable  to  newly  acquired  territory 
only  by  vote  of  Congress. 

When  General  Jackson,  who  had  been  ap- 
pointed governor  with  practically  absolute 
power,  imprisoned  three  Spanish  officials,  the 
local  federal  judge  issued  a writ  of  habeas 
corpus  for  their  release.  Jackson  refused  to 
honor  this,  for  the  reason  that  Congress  had 
not  extended  the  Constitution  and  the  laws 
to  Florida;  and  he  was  sustained  by  Secretary 
John  Quincy  Adams  and  President  Monroe. 

This  arbitrary  government  did  not  continue 
long;  in  1822  Congress  extended  to  the  terri- 
tory a number  of  United  States  laws  and  a 
short  bill  of  rights.  In  1838  the  inhabitants 
drew  up  a constitution  and  demanded  “ad- 
mission into  the  Union  as  one  of  the  United 
States  of  America  ...  by  virtue  of  the 
treaty”  of  1819.  They  were  not  admitted,  how- 
ever, until  1845. 

Some  of  the  questions  relating  to  the  status 
of  Louisiana  and  Florida  were  soon  settled 
by  the  Supreme  Court.  Marshall  decided 
(Sere  vs.  Pitot,  1810,  6 Cranch  332;  and  Am. 
Insurance  Co.  vs.  Canter,  1828,  1 Peters  511)  : 

(1)  That  the  United  States  had  the  right  to 
acquire  territory  either  by  conquest  or  treaty; 

(2)  that  both  from  the  express  grant  in  the 
Constitution  giving  to  Congress  power  “to  make 
all  needful  rules  and  regulations”  for  the 
territories,  and  from  “the  inevitable  conse- 
quence of  the  right  to  acquire  and  to  hold 
territory  ...  we  find  Congress  possessing 
and  exercising  absolute  and  undisputed  power 
of  governing  and  legislating  for”  the  terri- 
tories; (3)  that  the  treaty  promising  eventual 
statehood,  “was  the  supreme  law  of  the  land.” 

A number  of  points  remained  unsettled;  the 
possible  limitation  of  Congress,  in  its  power  of 
governing  territory,  by  specific  provisions  of 
the  Constitution;  the  right  of  the  inhabitants 
to  the  privileges  of  the  Constitution’s  bill  of 
rights  irrespective  of  grant  by  treaty  or  act 
of  Congress;  citizenship  of  the  inhabitants  in- 
dependent of  treaty  stipulation ; and  the  extent 
to  which  -newly  acquired  territory  is  a part 
of  the  United  States. 

131 


Mexican  Conquests  and  Military  Government. 

— During  the  Mexican  War  officers  acting  un- 
der the  authority  of  the  President  as  Comman- 
der in  Chief  administered  much  of  the  con- 
quered territory,  made  laws,  levied  and  col- 
lected taxes,  and  established  civil  government 
(see  Military  Occupation).  But  the  Su- 
preme Court  decided  (Fleming  vs.  Page,  9 
Howard  603)  that  although  “other  nations 
were  bound  to  regard  the  country,  while  our 
possession  continued,  as  the  territory  of  the 
United  States  . . . yet  it  was  not  a part 

of  this  Union”;  and  that  goods  coming  from 
Tampico,  Mexico,  then  under  the  military 
control  of  the  United  States,  came  from  a 
foreign  country. 

Conversely  when  a part  of  the  United  States 
is  occupied  by  the  enemy  it  is  regarded  as 
foreign  territory.  Castine,  Maine,  while  under 
the  control  of  the  British  in  the  War  of  1812, 
was  determined  by  the  Supreme  Court  (U.  S. 
vs.  Rice,  4 Wheaton  246)  to  be  “under  a tem- 
porary allegiance  to  the  British  Government.” 

After  the  treaty  of  1848,  the  military  govern- 
ment remained  in  force  in  California  and  New 
Mexico.  The  Supreme  Court  said  (Cross  vs. 
Harrison,  16  Howard  164)  : “It  was  rightfully 
continued  after  peace  was  made  with  Mexico, 
until  Congress  legislated  otherwise.” 

The  treaty  provided  that  the  inhabitants  of 
the  ceded  terrritory  who  did  not  take  measures 
to  preserve  their  Mexican  citizenship,  should 
be  “incorporated  into  the  Union  of  the  United 
States,  and  be  admitted  at  the  proper  time 
(to  be  judged  of  by  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States)  to  the  enjoyment  of  all  the  rights  of 
citizens  of  the  United  States,  according  to  the 
principles  of  the  Constitution.”  The  military 
government  continued  until  1850,  when  Con- 
gress admitted  California  as  a state,  and 
organized  the  rest  of  the  land  obtained  from 
Mexico  into  two  territories,  with  the  pro- 
vision that  “the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the 
United  States  are  hereby  extended  over  and 
declared  to  be  in  force  in  said  territory.” 

During  the  discussion  in  Congress  of  these 
acts,  occurred  the  debate  between  Webster  and 
Calhoun  over  the  status  of  newly  acquired 
territories.  Webster  maintained  that  the  Con- 
stitution did  not  apply  to  them;  “It  cannot  be 
extended  over  anything  except  over  the  old 
states  and  the  new  states.  . . . The  precise 

question  is  whether  a territory,  while  it  re- 
mains in  a territorial  state,  is  a part  of  the 
United  States.  I maintain  it  is  not.”  Cal- 
houn insisted  that  the  Constitution  applied  at 
once  to  California  and  New  Mexico;  “Where- 
ever  our  flag  waves,”  he  said,  “the  Constitu- 
tion in  part  goes,  not  all  its  provisions  cer- 
tainly, but  all  its  suitable  provisions  . . . 

if  the  Constitution  does  not  go  there  how 
are  we  to  have  any  authority  whatever?” 
Calhoun’s  view  was  upheld  by  Chief  Jus- 
tice Taney  in  the  Dred  Scott  Case  (see)  in 
1857 ; and  a modification  of  it,  that  the  gen- 


523 


TERRITORY,  ACQUIRED,  STATUS  OF 


eral  principles  of  justice  embodied  in  tlie  Con- 
stitution are  at  once  in  force  in  all  new  terri- 
tory, was  maintained  by  all  but  one  of  the 
judges  in  the  Insular  Cases  (see)  in  1901. 

Alaska. — The  treaty  admitting  Alaska,  in 
1867,  provided  that  the  inhabitants  who  did 
not  return  to  Russia  within  three  years  should 
“be  admitted  to  the  enjoyment  of  all  the  rights, 
advantages,  and  immunities  of  citizens  of  the 
United  States.  . . . Uncivilized  tribes  will 

be  subject  to  such  laws  and  regulations  as  the 
United  States  may  . . . adopt.”  The  Su- 

preme Court  decided  in  1905  (Rassmussen  vs. 
U.  S.,  197  77.  i S'.  516)  that  by  this  treaty  and 
subsequent  congressional  legislation  Alaska 
was  incorporated  into  the  United  States ; that 
the  Constitution  as  a whole  was  in  force  with- 
in it;  and  that  the  inhabitants  had  a right  to 
jury  trial  (see  Alaska). 

Hawaii. — Hawaii  was  annexed  in  1898,  “as  a 
part  of  the  territory  of  the  United  States”  by 
a joint  resolution  which  provided  that  until 
Congress  should  extend  the  United  States  cus- 
toms laws  “the  existing  customs  regulations  of 
the  Hawaiian  Islands  with  the  United  States 
and  other  countries  shall  remain  unchanged,” 
and  that  “the  municipal  legislation  not  . . . 

contrary  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  . . . shall  remain  in  force.”  The 

Supreme  Court,  however,  (Crossman  vs.  United 
States,  182  U.  8.  221)  decided  that  duties 
could  not  be  collected  upon  imports  into  the 
United  States  from  Hawaii  after  annexation; 
and  (Hawaii  vs.  Mankichi,  190  77.  8.  197)  that 
most  of  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  were 
in  force,  but  not  those  guaranteeing  trial  by 
jury.  Two  of  the  majority  of  the  Court  held 
specifically  that  Hawaii  was  not  incorporated 
into  the  United  States  until  the  organic  act 
of  1900,  which  definitely  extended  to  it  the 
Constitution  and  the  laws  of  the  United  States, 
and  made  citizens  of  its  people. 

Cuba,  Philippines  and  Porto  Rico. — During 
and  for  some  time  after  the  war  with  Spain, 
much  of  the  conquered  territory,  including 
Cuba,  was  under  the  military  government  of 
the  United  States.  Before  cession  the  military 
authorities  rightfully  exercised  absolute  power, 
subject  only  to  the  restraints  of  international 
law;  after  cession  they  acted  as  agents  of  the 
United  States  Government  and  were  controlled 
by  the  general  principles  of  the  Constitution; 
they  could  not  legally  levy  duties  between  the 
new  territories  and  the  United  States  (Dooley 
vs.  U.  S.,  182  77.  8.  222). 

The  treaty  of  1899  with  Spain  stated  that 
“the  civil  rights  and  political  status  of  the 
native  inhabitants  of  the  territory  hereby  ceded 
to  the  United  States  shall  be  determined  by 
Congress.”  Congress  treated  the  new  posses- 
sions as  mere  dependencies,  and  the  Supreme 
Court,  in  the  Insular  Cases  (see)  in  1901,  de- 
cided that,  although  they  were  not  foreign  in 
the  sense  of  the  tariff  laws,  yet  they  were  not 
an  integral  part  of  the  United  States,  but 


merely  appertained  to  it;  and  that  not  all  of 
the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  applied  to 
them. 

Incorporation. — From  the  first  acquisition  of 
territory  in  1803,  the  executive  and  Congress 
have,  for  the  most  part,  acted  upon  the  theory 
that  a new  possession  did  not  necessarily  be- 
come at  once  an  integral  part  of  the  United 
States.  Congress  has  passed  scores  of  laws 
either  bringing  the  new  territories  and  their 
subdivisions  within  the  revenue  limits,  or  ex- 
tending to  them  the  provisions  of  the  Consti- 
tution. The  Supreme  Court  never  passed  fully 
upon  this  question  of  the  status  of  new  terri- 
tory until  the  Insular  Cases.  In  these  and  in 
Rassmussen  vs.  U.  S.,  it  decided  that  the  Con- 
stitution when  first  put  into  operation  applied 
to  both  the  states  and  the  territories  then 
within  the  boundaries  of  the  United  States; 
that  new  territory  might  be  acquired  by 
treaty,  but  that  it  became  incorporated  as  an 
integral  part  of  the  United  States  only  by  the 
express  or  implied  assent  of  Congress;  that 
when  once  incorporated,  a territory  came  im- 
mediately under  the  general  revenue  laws  of 
the  United  States,  and  that  its  inhabitants 
were  entitled  to  all  general  privileges  of  the 
United  States  Constitution. 

Rights  of  Inhabitants. — To  what  constitu- 
tional privileges  the  inhabitants  of  unincorpo- 
rated territory  are  entitled  is  not  clear.  The 
Supreme  Court  decided  that  while  the  funda- 
mental rights  “of  human  liberty  are  applicable 
to  every  provision  or  status,”  the  applicability 
of  each  specific  provision  of  the  Constitution 
must  be  decided  by  itself.  Trial  by  jury  is 
not  a fundamental  right,  however  (Hawaii  vs. 
Mankichi) . 

Congress  may  extend  particular  provisions 
of  the  Constitution  by  statute.  It  has  granted 
the  Philippines  a bill  of  rights,  which  is 
practically  identical  with  that  in  the  Consti- 
tution with  the  exception  of  the  privilege  of 
keeping  and  bearing  arms  and  of  trial  by 
jury- 

United  States  citizenship,  in  each  newly  ac- 
quired territory  up  to  1898,  has  either  been 
granted  the  inhabitants  at  once,  or  promised 
them  by  treaty.  The  inhabitants  of  unincorpo- 
rated possessions,  however,  are  not  citizens 
of  the  United  States ; but,  on  the  other  hand, 
they  are  not  aliens  within  the  meaning  of 
immigration  laws  (Gonzales  vs.  Williams,  192 
77.  8.  1)  ; and  by  act  of  Congress,  June  14, 
1902,  are  entitled  to  United  States  passports. 

Political  privileges,  such  as  the  grant  of 
representative  government  and  suffrage,  depend 
in  both  incorporated  and  unincorporated  terri- 
tory solely  upon  the  decision  of  Congress. 

Present  Status  of  American  Territory. — 
Porto  Rico,  the  Philippines.  Guam.  Tutuila  and 
the  minor  Pacific  islands  are  not  complete  parts 
of  the  United  States ; they  are  outside  the 
customs  and  internal  revenue  limits.  The  Con- 
stitution in  its  entirety,  and  the  body  of  United 
524 


TERRITORY,  CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS  OF 


States  laws  do  not  apply  to  them  except  so 
far  as  extended  by  Congress;  their  inhabitants 
are  not  citizens;  and  they  have  no  promise  of 
eventual  statehood. 

Porto  Rico  and  the  Philippines  have  forms 
of  government  and  civil  and  political  rights 
which  were  granted  by  congressional  organic 
acts;  but  these  may  be  amended  or  withdrawn 
at  the  pleasure  of  Congress.  Guam  and  Tutuila 
have  no  legal  rights,  but  are  administered  by 
mere  decrees  of  their  naval  governors. 

Alaska  and  Hawaii  are  incorporated  within 
the  United  States;  their  inhabitants,  except 
native  Indians,  are  citizens;  but  they  have  no 
guarantee  of  future  statehood. 

The  United  States  as  a whole  is  composed  of : 
(1)  a union  of  States;  (2)  territories  in 
corporated  within  the  United  States;  (3)  de- 
pendencies unincorporated. 

See  Alaska,  Annexation  of;  Annexation, 
Diplomatic  Principles  of;  Annexations  to 
the  United  States;  Citizenship  in  the 
United  States;  International  Law,  Princi- 
ples of;  Peace,  Conclusion  of;  Territory  in 
International  Law;  War,  International 
Relations  of. 

References:  W.  F.  Willoughby,  Territories 
and  Dependencies  (1905),  i-iv,  vi,  ix;  S.  E. 
Baldwin,  Am.  Judiciary  (1905),  ch.  xxi;  J.  A. 
Woodburn,  Am.  Republic  (1903),  362-397;  L. 
S.  Rowe,  V.  S.  and  Porto  Rico  (1904)  ; W.  W. 
Willoughby,  Constitutional  Laic  of  the  U.  S. 
(1910),  ehs.  xviii,  xxii-xxxi;  J.  B.  Moore, 
Digest  of  Int.  Laic  (1906),  I,  45-51,  303-339, 
ibid,  III,  311-321;  H.  W.  Bikle,  Constitutional 
Power  of  Congress  over  Territories  (1901); 
A.  B.  Hart,  Foundations  of  Am.  Foreign  Policy 
(1901),  chs.  v,  vi;  A.-  P.  Morse,  “Civil  and 
Political  Status  of  Inhabitants  of  Ceded  Terri- 
tories” in  Harvard  Law  Rev.,  XIV,  262;  A.  II. 
Howe,  Insular  Cases  (1901);  Philippine  Com- 
mission, Reports  (1901-13)  ; D.  S.  Jordan,  Im- 
perial Democracy  (1899)  ; R.  D.  Hunt,  “Legal 
Status  of  California,  1846-1849,”  in  Am.  Acad, 
of  Pol.  Sci.,  Annals,  XII  (1898),  387;  D.  Y. 
Thomas,  Military  Government  in  Newly  Ac- 
quired Territory  (1904)  ; C.  F.  Randolph,  Law 
and  Policy  of  Annexation  (1901),  P.  S. 
Reinsch,  Colonial  Government  (1902);  G.  C. 
Lewis,  Government  of  Dependencies  (1901); 
A.  C.  Coolidge,  TJ.  S.  as  a World  Power  (1908), 
chs.  vii,  viii;  C.  E.  Magoon,  Law  of  Civil 
Government  in  Territory  Subject  to  Military 
Occupation  (1902),  Report  on  the  Legal  Status 
of  the  Territory  Annexed  to  the  TJ.  S.  in  the 
War  with  Spain  (1900)  ; Am.  Year  Book, 
1910,  and  year  by  year;  bibliography  in  A.  B. 
Hart,  Manual  (1908),  §§  153,  163,"  178,  201, 
218,  219.  George  H.  Blakeslee. 

TERRITORY,  CONSTITUTIONAL  QUES- 
TIONS OF.  Definition. — The  term  “territory” 
has  in  American  constitutional  law  a special 
meaning,  as  designating  areas  beneath  the  polit- 
ical sovereignty  of  the  United  States,  but  not 


included  within  the  borders  of  any  of  the 
states  of  the  Union.  Thus  it  is  in  this  sense 
that  the  Constitution  declares  that  “the  Con- 
gress shall  have  power  to  dispose  of  and 
make  all  needful  rules  and  regulations  respect- 
ing the  territory  or  other  property  belonging 
to  the  United  States”  (Art.  IV,  Sec.  iii,  U 2). 
At  the  time  the  Constitution  was  adopted  this 
related  to  vast  areas  of  western  lands  origin- 
ally belonging  to  the  states  and  by  them  trans- 
ferred to  the  general  government  (see  Ces- 
sions by  States  to  Federal  Government). 

Power  of  United  States  to  Acquire  Territory, 
— The  constitutional  authority  of  the  United 
States  to  acquire  additional  territory  has  been 
derived  from  several  sources.  First,  from  the 
right  to  admit  new  states  into  the  Union  (Art. 
IV,  Sec.  iii,  U 1).  Recourse  to  this  source  is, 
however,  unsatisfactory  in  that  it  would  seem 
to  limit  national  authority  to  the  annexation 
of  territory  suitable  and  intended  for  ultimate 
admission  into  the  Union  as  states.  Secondly, 
the  right  to  annex  is  based  upon  the  treaty 
and  war  making  powers  (Art.  I,  Sec.  viii, 
H 11,  Art.  II,  Sec.  ii,  If  2).  That  these  powers 
include  the  right  to  acquire  additional  terri- 
tory appeared  so  plain  to  Chief  Justice  Mar- 
shall that  he  did  not  deem  an  argument  neces- 
sary. “The  Constitution  confers  absolutely 
upon  the  Government  of  the  Union  the  power 
of  making  war  and  of  making  treaties; 
consequently  that  government  possesses  the 
power  of  acquiring  territory,  either  by  con- 
quest or  treaty”  (American  Insurance  Co.  vs. 
Canter,  1 Peters  511),  and  this  doctrine  has 
been  repeatedly  affirmed,  and  without  dissent, 
in  subsequent  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court. 
Finally,  it  is  established  that  territory  may  be 
annexed  by  discovery  and  occupation,  the  de- 
claration of  annexation  taking  the  form  of  a 
congressional  statute  or  joint  resolution.  Dis- 
covery followed  by  effective  occupation  is  a 
mode  of  annexation  recognized  as  valid  by  in- 
ternational law  and  practice,  and  the  con- 
stitutional authority  of  the  United  States  is 
drawn  from  the  fact  that  its  competency  in 
international  affairs  is,  generally  speaking, 
comprehensive.  In  1856  the  Guano  Islands 
were  annexed  by  simple  statute.  In  1898  the 
Hawaiian  Islands  were  declared  annexed  by  a 
joint  resolution  of  Congress.  In  1845  the  sov- 
ereignty of  the  United  States  over  Texas  was 
similarly  declared  by  a joint  resolution,  but  in 
this  case  the  acquired  territory  was  admitted 
directly  into  the  Union  as  a state,  the  author- 
ity so  to  do  being  derived  from  the  authority 
to  admit  new  states  into  the  Union.  In  the 
Insular  Cases  (see)  it  was  held  by  the  Supreme 
Court  that  the  treaty-making  power,  though 
competent  to  bring  foreign  territory  under 
American  sovereignty,  is  not  competent  to 
“incorporate”  such  territory  into  the  narrower 
constitutional  body  known  as  the  United 
States.  In  a broad  territorial  sense,  the 
United  States  is  thus  composed  of  states  and 


525 


TERRITORY,  CONSTITUTIONAL  QUESTIONS  OF 


territories.  These  latter  are,  in  turn,  with 
reference  to  the  governments  given  to  them, 
classified  as  organized  and  unorganized;  and, 
since  the  Insular  Cases,  with  reference  to 
their  constitutional  status,  as  incorporated 
and  unincorporated. 

Organized  Territories. — The  term  “organized 
territory”  has  never  received  an  authoritative 
and  technical  definition.  Generally  speaking, 
however,  territories  have  been  held  of  this 
class  when  they  have  received  governments 
under  which  the  chief  executive  and  judicial 
officers  are  nominated  by  the  President  and 
confirmed  by  the  Senate,  and  the  legislature  is 
locally  elected  upon  a manhood  suffrage,  and 
with  law-making  powers  substantially  commen- 
surate with  those  possessed  by  the  legislatures 
of  the  states.  In  the  comparatively  (1904) 
recent  case  of  Binns  vs.  United  States  ( 194 
U.  S.  480)  the  statement  was  made  that  Alaska 
is  an  organized  territory,  though  it  had  then 
no  local  legislature,  the  reason  given  being 
that  the  act  providing  for  its  civil  control 
speaks  of  a government  “which  shall  be  organ- 
ized and  administered”  as  thereafter  provided. 
If  this  view  be  adopted  any  territory  must  be 
said  to  be  “organized”  which  enjoys  a formal 
government  established  by  Congress.  In  a later 
case,  however,  ( Rassmussen  vs.  United  States, 
197  U.  S.  516)  in  which  an  argument  was 
based  upon  the  assertion  that  Alaska  was  not 
an  organized  territory,  the  court  did  not  meet 
the  point  by  the  simple  observation  that,  in 
fact,  the  territory  was  organized,  but  said 
that  incorporation  and  not  organization  was 
the  test  to  be  applied.  In  truth,  however,  the 
distinction  between  organized  and  unorganized 
territory  is  without  constitutional  importance, 
for  the  power  of  Congress  over  both  classes  is 
the  same. 

The  distinction  between  incorporated  and 
unincorporated  territories  is,  however,  funda- 
mental, the  extent  of  the  legislative  authority 
of  Congress  over  the  latter  being  much  greater 
than  it  is  over  the  former.  There  is,  indeed, 
no  question  but  that  Congress,  when  legislat- 
ing for  the  unincorporated  territories,  derives 
its  authority  from  and  is  limited  by  the  Con- 
stitution from  which  it  derives  whatever  au- 
thority it  possesses.  The  only  question  has 
been  as  to  which  of  the  limiting  provisions  of 
the  Constitution  are  to  be  held  to  apply  when 
Congress  is  legislating  for  the  states,  and 
which  when  it  is  enacting  laws  relating  to  the 
territories. 

Governments. — As  to  the  form  of  govern- 
ment which  shall  be  enjoyed  by  a territory, 
whether  incorporated  or  unincorporated,  there 
has  never  been  any  doubt  that  the  authority 
of  Congress  is  absolute.  There  is  no  consti- 
tutional requirement  that  the  government  es- 
tablished shall  be  republican  in  form,  that  the 
principle  of  the  separation  of  powers  shall 


establishment  or  operation  of  the  political 
machinery  by  which  they  are  controlled.  So, 
similarly,  it  lies  within  the  absolute  discre- 
tion of  Congress  to  determine  when  a terri- 
tory shall  be  incorporated  into  the  United 
States  or  admitted  into  the  Union  as  a state. 
This  general  power  of  control  is  derived  not 
only  from  the  express  grant  to  Congress  (Art. 
IV.  Sec.  iii,  jf  2),  but  is  implied  in  the  right 
to  acquire  territory. 

The  important  point  is  to  be  observed  that 
the  territorial  governments  established  by  Con- 
gress do  not  constitute  distinct  parts  of  the 
general  governmental  machinery  of  the  United 
States,  but  exist  simply  as  instrumentalities 
created  by  Congress  as  convenient  means 
through  which  it  may  exercise  its  authority 
over  the  territories.  These  governments  thus 
belong  to  the  same  class  of  administrative 
agencies  as  do  commissions  legislatively  creat- 
ed. Hence  it  follows  that  territorial  courts 
are  not  parts  of  the  general  judicial  system 
of  the  United  States,  and  their  judges  need 
not  be  given  a tenure  of  office  during  good 
behavior  as  is  constitutionally  obligatory  in 
the  cases  of  all  federal  judges  (American  In- 
surance Co.  vs.  Canter,  1 Peters  511). 

Presidential  Government. — Prior  to  congres- 
sional action  providing  civil  government  for 
an  annexed  territory,  the  authority  to  gov- 
ern resides  in  the  President  of  the  United 
States,  acting  under  his  authority  as  com- 
mander in  chief  of  the  army  and  navy,  or  in 
obedience  to  the  obligation  imposed  on  him  to 
take  care  that  the  laws  of  the  United  States 
are  faithfully  executed.  In  fulfilling  this  duty, 
however,  he  may  not  exercise  any  authority 
not  specifically  given  to  him  by  the  Consti- 
tution or  by  an  act  of  Congress.  The  presi- 
dential government  thus  maintained  may  be 
either  military  or  civil  in  form.  But  in  either 
case  it  is  strictly  administrative  in  character, 
and  is  subject  at  any  time  to  be  replaced  by 
a government  created  by  an  act  of  Congress. 

The  difficult  constitutional  question  with 
reference  to  the  territories  is  as  to  the  extent 
of  the  power  of  Congress  with  reference  to  the 
civil  rights  of  inhabitants  of  these  areas.  In 
the  Insular  Cases  (see)  it  was  held  that  terri- 
tory may  be  annexed  without  being  necessarily 
incorporated  into  the  United  States.  The  an- 
nexation may  be  by  treaty;  the  incorporation 
must  be  by  legislative  action.  Furthermore, 
it  was  held  in  these  cases  that  the  various 
limitations  placed  by  the  Constitution  upon  the 
exercise  by  Congress  of  its  various  powers,  do 
not  apply  when  that  body  is  legislating  for 
territories  which  have  not  been  incorporated. 
This  has  been  specifically  determined  by  the  Su- 
preme Court  with  reference  to  the  requirements 
that  duties,  imposts  and  excises  shall  be  uni- 
form throughout  the  United  States,  and  that 
the  right  of  jury  trial  shall  be  preserved.  The 
reasoning  that  has  been  employed  in  these  cases 
is,  liowe/er,  sufficient  to  free  Congress,  when 


be  applied,  or  that  the  local  inhabitants  shall 
be  given  any  right  of  participation  in  the 

526 


TERRITORY  IN  INTERNATIONAL  LAW 


dealing  with  the  unincorporated  territories, 
from  most,  if  not  all  of  the  other  limitations 
imposed  by  the  Constitution  upon  its  legis- 
lative powers.  Where,  however,  a power  is 
absolutely  denied  to  Congress,  that  body  is 
without  that  power,  whether  it  be  dealing  with 
an  unincorporated  or  an  incorporated  territory. 
Specific  determinations  by  the  Supreme  Court, 
must  be  had  before  lists  of  those  limitations 
that  are  absolute  and  complete  denials  of  au- 
thority, and  of  those  that  only  qualify  the 
exercise  of  the  powers  of  Congress,  can  be 
drawn  up  with  certainty. 

See  Annexation,  Diplomatic  Principles 
of;  Annexations  to  the  United  States; 
Citizenship  in  the  United  States;  Dred 
Scott  Case;  Territories  of  the  U.  S.,  Or- 
ganized; Territory  in  International  Law. 

References:  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Constitution- 
al Law  of  the  U.  S.  (1910),  I,  196,  320-442; 
D.  K.  Watson,  Constitution  of  the  U.  S.  (1910), 
II,  1066,  1255-1281.  W.  W.  Willoughby. 

TERRITORY  IN  INTERNATIONAL  LAW. 
Conception  of  Territory. — Territory  is  a term 
used  in  international  law  to  denote  that  por- 
tion of  the  earth’s  surface  over  which  a state 
exercises  sovereignty.  Owing  to  the  fact  that 
in  popular  usage  territory  is  applied  only  to 
land,  the  term  “domain”  is  being  more  and 
more  substituted  for  it.  As  territory,  or  do- 
main, denotes  a portion  of  the  earth’s  surface, 
it  includes  not  only  land,  but  the  waters  ap- 
purtenant to  it  and  appropriable  by  the  state, 
together  with  the  air  above  them  (see  Aerial 
Navigation).  Thus  a state  has  land-territory, 
or  terrestrial  domain,  water-territory,  or  flu- 
vial-maritime domain,  and  aerial  territory  or 
domain,  over  all  of  which  it  exercises  sov- 
ereignty. 

Enclaves. — The  territory  of  a state  may  be 
integrate  (contiguous)  or  dismembered  (non- 
contiguous). When  a portion  or  the  whole  of 
a state  is  completely  surrounded  by  the  terri- 
tory of  another  state  it  is  called  an  enclosure 
or  enclave,  as,  e.  g.,  Birkenfeld,  a part  of  the 
Grand  Duchy  of  Oldenburg,  is  an  enclosure  of 
Prussia;  San  Marino  is  an  enclosure  of  Italy. 

Colonies  and  dependencies. — A state’s  colo- 
nies are,  in  international  law,  as  much  a part 
of  its  territory  as  is  the  mother-country  it- 
self. When  there  exist  certain  peculiar  re- 
lations between  states,  as  when  one  is  half- 
sovereign,  or  dependent  upon  another,  a differ- 
ent status  obtains  as  to  territory.  Although  no 
general  rule  can  be  made  to  fit  all  such  cases, 
it  would  seem  that  the  dependent  state  fre- 
quently has  sovereignty  over  its  territories ; 
e.  g.,  Bulgaria,  before  it  became  independent, 
was  not  Turkish  territory  although  technically 
Turkey  was  sovereign  ( see  Dependent  States  ) . 
Of  recent  years  new  forms  of  territorial  juris- 
diction have  been  devised,  the  most  important 
of  which  are  colonial  protectorates,  spheres  of 
influence,  and  territorial  leases. 


The  colonial  protectorate  is  a temporary  and 
transitory  arrangement;  it  is  a step  toward 
colonial  incorporation.  As  against  third  powers 
the  protecting  state  generally  regards  such 
territory  as  its  own  ( see  Protectorates). 

Sphere  of  Influence. — Spheres  of  influence, 
which  “disclose  rather  the  desire  of  acquiring 
sovereignty  than  its  acquisition,”  may  be  creat- 
ed in  at  least  two  ways : ( 1 ) by  international 
agreements  for  reciprocal  abstention  from  terri- 
torial expansion;  (2)  by  agreements  not  to 
alienate  territory.  Those  of  the  first  type  arc 
by  no  means  a modern  device — examples  are, 
the  Treaty  of  Tordesillas1  ( 1493 ) between  Spain 
and  Portugal,  and  the  Russo-American  Treaty 
of  1824.  Spheres  of  the  second  type,  sometimes 
called,  more  cautiously,  “spheres  of  interest,” 
have  been  created,  e.  g.,  by  those  agreements 
made  in  1898  by  China  with  certain  European 
powers  by  which  China,  in  promising  not  to 
alienate  certain  provinces,  was  considered  to 
have  recognized  the  paramount  interest  there- 
in of  the  country  with  which  the  agreement 
was  made.  The  territory  obviously  remained 
Chinese. 

Territorial  Leases. — A recent  form  of  terri- 
torial interest  is  seen  in  international  leases 
like  the  English  title  to  Wei  Hai  Wei  dating 
from  1898.  As  these  are  in  effect  cessions  of 
territory,  leased  territories  are  generally  con- 
sidered to  be  a part  of  the  territory  of  the 
lessee  state  and  it  generally  administers  them 
as  such,  as  the  German  Empire  does  Kiao- 
cliau,  leased  from  China  in  1898  for  99  years. 
Pledges  of  territory  by  one  country  to  another 
create  a status  somewhat  similar;  as,  e.  g., 
the  pledge  of  Corsica  to  France  in  1768. 

Condominium. — When  two  states  hold  terri- 
tory jointly  the  relationship  of  the  states  to 
such  territory  is  called  condominium.  Both 
countries  exercise  sovereignty  and  jurisdiction 
jointly.  Examples  of  condominium  are:  Schles- 
wig-Holstein, 1864-1866,  under  Prussia  and 
Austria;  Moresnet  under  Belgium  and  Prussia; 
the  Soudan  under  Great  Britain  and  Egypt 
(Turkey).  Differing  from  condominium  in  that 
the  title  is  in  abeyance  and  the  territorial 
rights  are  therefore  reserved,  is  joint  occupa- 
tion ; such  was  the  status  of  the  Oregon  country 
from  1818  to  1846  under  the  Anglo-American 
conventions  of  1818  and  1827. 

Land-Territory. — Land-territory,  or  terres- 
trial domain,  comprises  not  only  the  surface 
of  the  soil  but  the  subsoil  and  its  contents  to 
an  indefinite  depth,  even  to  the  center  of  the 
earth.  It  is  the  original  form  of  territory, 
while  the  water  and  air  domains  are  derived 
from,  or  are  appurtenant  to,  it. 

Water-Territory.  — The  fluvial-maritime  do- 
main of  a state  is  appurtenant  to  the  land  and 
includes:  (1)  waterways,  whether  lakes,  in- 
land seas,  rivers,  or  canals,  lying  wholly  with- 
in a single  state;  (2)  waterways  which  extend 
beyond  the  land  of  one  state  into  that  of  an- 
other; (3)  those  which  lie  between  states  and 


527 


TERRITORY  IN  INTERNATIONAL  LAW 


form  a part  of  tlieir  boundaries,  like  Lake 
Erie;  (4)  the  marginal  sea,  or  maritime  belt, 
as  contrasted  with  the  open  sea;  (5)  portions 
of  the  great  oceans  and  seas  more  or  less 
enclosed  by  the  land,  as,  for  example,  Delaware 
Bay. 

As  to  those  of  the  first  class  a state’s  juris- 
diction is  exclusive  and  complete.  A state  has 
the  right,  in  the  absence  of  treaty-stipulations 
to  regulate,  control,  and  forbid  the  use  of  its 
national  waters,  even  those  which  are  navigable 
from  the  open  sea. 

As  to  those  of  the  second  class,  the  common 
practice  of  the  eighteenth  century  was  for  the 
state  to  assume  exclusive  control  over  the  por- 
tion of  the  waterway  within  its  boundaries. 
Since  that  time  claims  to  exclusive  jurisdic- 
tion over  international  rivers  have  been  sur- 
rendered by  most  states  through  treaty  ar- 
rangements, as  is  the  ease  with  the  River 
Danube. 

Where,  in  the  third  class,  rivers  form  the 
boundaries  between  states,  the  modern  rule  is 
that  the  territory  of  each  state  extends  to  the 
thalweg,  or  mid-channel.  If  inland  seas  or 
lakes  form  part  of  the  boundary,  the  line  fol- 
lows the  middle  of  the  waterway.  As  far  as 
the  boundary  line,  the  jurisdiction  of  a state 
over  a boundary  water  is  complete. 

The  marginal  sea  to  a width  of  at  least  three 
marine  miles  is  held  a part  of  the  state’s  terri- 
tory. Over  it  a state’s  jurisdiction  is  not 
complete,  as  modern  practice  recognizes  the 
right  of  innocent  passage  through  it  by  the 
ships  of  other  countries  ( see  Three-mile 
Limit)  . 

Whether  the  area  of  an  enclosed  gulf  or  bay 
be  large  or  small,  if  it  is  completely  surround- 
ed by  the  land-territory  of  a state,  with  an 
entrance  not  over  six  miles  in  width,  it  is  a 
part  of  the  territory  of  the  state.  As  to  such 
there  is  no  difference  of  opinion.  Where,  how- 
ever, the  entrance  is  more  than  six  miles  in 
width  much  depends  upon  the  acquiescence  of 
other  states  and  the  ability  of  the  state  to 
appropriate  and  defend  the  water-area  as  its 
own.  Thus  the  United  States  has  always  main- 
tained that  Chesapeake  and  Delaware  Bays  are 
a part  of  its  territory,  and  this  claim  has  not 
been  seriously  contested  by  other  states.  A 
state  has  exclusive  rights  over  such  territorial 
waters  as  fully  as  it  has  over  those  water-areas 
not  connected  with  the  open  sea  by  navigable 
outlets  (see  Bays  and  Gulfs,  Jurisdiction 
of)  . 

Aerial  Domain.  — Many  theories  have  been 
propounded  as  to  the  aerial  domain  of  the 
state,  of  which  three  are  the  most  important. 
( 1 ) The  sovereignty  theory  is  that,  as  a 
state’s  territory  extends  to  the  center  of  the 
earth,  so  the  atmosphere  above  its  territory, 
as  appurtenant  to  it,  is  also  territory  and  sub- 
ject to  the  sovereignty  of  the  state  which  may 
properly  control  its  use.  The  aerial  domain, 
according  to  this  theory,  extends  indefinitely 


upward,  at  least  as  far  as  the  atmosphere  ex- 
tends. (2)  Another  theory  is  that  the  air  is 
free  and  therefore  as  unappropriable  as  the  sea, 
and  that  no  state  can  rightfully  claim  sov- 
ereignty over  any  part  of  it.  The  advocates 
of  this  theory  admit,  however,  that  a state 
has  such  rights  over  the  air-space  above  it  as 
are  necessary  in  war  or  in  peace  for  its  safety 
and  preservation.  (3)  Such  an  admission 
seems  logically  to  lead  to  the  third  theory: 
that  the  air-zone  is  comparable  to  the  mar- 
ginal sea,  that  a state  may  exercise  such 
jurisdiction  over  it  as  it  can  enforce,  subject 
to  the  rights  of  innocent  passage  on  the  part 
of  other  states  and  their  nationals.  The  limits 
of  aerial  jurisdiction  are  as  yet  indetermin- 
able but  within  them  the  air-zone  is,  like  the 
marginal  sea,  subject  to  innocent  use  and  pas- 
sage, at  least  in  time  of  peace  (see  Aerial 
Navigation,  Regulation  of). 

What  seems  to  be  a fatal  error  in  the  appli- 
cation of  the  doctrine  of  harmless  use  to  the 
air-zone  is  that  it  is  an  argument  from  a false 
analogy.  The  idea  of  harmless  use,  as  applied 
to  maritime  transportation,  cannot  be  modified 
to  fit  the  dissimilar  circumstances  of  aerial 
navigation.  The  advocates  of  the  sovereignty 
theory  seem  to  have,  therefore,  the  strongest 
position. 

Acquisition  of  Territory  by  a State. — This, 

in  modern  usage,  is  synonymous  with  the  exten- 
sion of  a state’s  exercise  of  sovereignty,  and 
the  means  by  which  this  is  accomplished  are: 
cession,  occupation,  accretion,  and  subjuga- 
tion, to  which  may  be  added  prescription,  which 
is,  however,  a mode  of  securing  rather  than 
of  acquiring  title  to  territory. 

Cession  of  territory  by  one  state  to  another 
is  the  transfer  of  sovereignty  over  such  terri- 
tory. The  terms  of  such  transfer  are  set  forth 
in  treaties  of  cession,  and  actual  tradition,  or 
delivery,  of  the  territory  is  not  unusual  in  order 
to  complete  the  transfer  of  title.  A state  ac- 
quires territory  by  occupation  when  as  a 
state  it  extends  its  sovereignty  over  land  (and 
the  waters,  if  any,  appurtenant  thereto)  not 
then  subject  to  any  other  state.  Discovery 
alone  gives  only  an  inchoate  title,  which  is  to 
be  completed  by  effective  possession ; thus  occu- 
pation, like  cession,  is  a state  act.  Title  by 
occupation  may  be  lost  through  abandonment, 
although  the  precise  lapse  of  time  necessary  to 
extinguish  the  title  is  not  fixed.  The  territory 
becomes  again  a no  man’s  land  (res  nullius) 
and  subject  to  occupation  by  another  state  as 
in  the  case  of  the  guano  islands.  The  terri- 
tory of  a state  is  extended  by  accretion  when 
new  land  is  formed,  either  naturally  or  artifici- 
ally, as  an  extension  of  already  existing  land. 
Islands  formed  at  the  mouths  of  rivers  (e.  g., 
at  the  mouth  of  the  Mississippi)  belong  to  the 
state  which  holds  the  adjoining  land. 

Subjugation  is  the  mode  of  extending  terri- 
tory as  a result  of  conquest.  Frequently  the 
treaty  of  peace  sets  forth  the  terms  of  the 


528 


TERRITORY  SOUTH  OF  THE  OHIO— TEXAS 


transfer,  in  which  case  the  extension  is  proper- 
ly one  of  cession.  When,  however,  the  exist- 
ence of  a state  has  been  ended  by  war,  as 
was  the  case  of  the  Transvaal  in  1900,  its 
territory  is  acquired  by  subjugation.  Title  is 
also  gained  by  subjugation  if  there  is  no  treaty 
of  peace  recognizing  the  transfer  of  territory 
and  the  conquering  state  permanently  holds 
the  territory  captured  (uti  possidetis) . 

See  Annexation,  Diplomatic  Principles 
of;  Bays  and  Gulfs,  Jurisdiction  of;  Con- 
quest, Right  of;  Extraterritoriality;  High 
Seas;  Mare  Clausum;  Monroe  Doctrine; 
Navigation  of  International  Rivers;  Ports, 
Jurisdiction  in;  Seal  Fisheries;  Three-Mile 
Limit;  Tributary  States. 

References:  L.  Oppenheim,  Int.  Law  (1905), 
I,  217-299 ; J.  Westlake,  lnt.  Law  ( 1900 ) , I,  SI- 
174,  Principles  of  Int.  Law  (1894),  129-189; 
H.  Bonfils-Fauchille,  Droit  Int.  Public  (5th 
ed.,  1908),  278-315;  T.  J.  Lawrence,  Principles 
of  Int.  Law  (4th  ed.,  1910),  139—198;  J.  B. 
Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law  (1906),  I,  G12-939; 
E.  Nys,  Droit  International  (1904),  I,  402- 
532,  II,  1-131;  C.  Calvo,  Droit  International 
(5th  ed.,  1896),  I,  382-467;  E.  Von  Ullmann, 
Yolkerrecht  (1908),  287—343;  K.  F.  Heim- 
burger,  Ericerb  der  Gebietshoheit  (1888);  J. 
Imbart-Latour,  Mer  Territoriale  (1889)  ; J.  F. 
Lyeklama  a Nijeholt,  Air  Sovereignty  (1910)  ; 
A.  Fauchille,  Domaine  Aerien  (1901)  ; F.  Meili, 
Luftschiff  in  internen  Recht  und  Yolkerrecht 
(1908)  ; S.  E.  Baldwin,  “Law  of  the  Air-ship”  in 
Am.  Journal  lnt.  Law,  IV  (1910)  ; A.  K. 
Kuhn,  “Beginnings  of  an  Aerial  Law”  in  ibid, 
109,  132;  bibliography  in  A.  B.  Hart,  Manual 
(1908),  §§  167,  168,  171,  173. 

Jesse  S.  Reeves. 


TERRITORY  SOUTH  OF  THE  OHIO.  The 

territory  south  of  the  Ohio  was  the  area  ceded 
to  the  Federal  Government  by  the  state  of  North 
Carolina  early  in  1790  and  almost  immediately 
thereafter  organized  as  a territory.  The  people 
were  divided  into  two  groups,  those  living  in 
the  upper  Tennessee  valley  and  those  who  held 
the  country  about  Nashville,  the  former  led  by 
John  Sevier  the  latter  by  James  Robertson. 
There  was  little  harmony  between  either  the 
groups  or  their  leaders.  But  all  were  put 
under  one  government  modelled  after  that  of 
the  territory  northwest  of  the  Ohio,  except  that 
slavery  was  not  declared  to  be  unlawful.  The 
governor,  council,  circuit  judges,  Indian  and 
land  agents  were  appointed  by  Congress,  while 
the  legislature,  which  met  annually,  was  elect- 
ed by  the  people  of  the  territory.  The  magis- 
trates of  the  counties  were  appointed  by  the 
governor,  and  the  laws  under  which  the  people 
lived,  aside  from  the  clauses  of  the  Northwest 
Ordinance  (see)  which  applied,  were  those  of 
North  Carolina.  William  Blount,  the  first  gov- 
ernor, held  office  until  the  territory  became 
the  state  of  Tennessee  in  1796.  The  popula- 
tion in  1790  was  25,691  and  in  1795,  77,262. 
See  Mississippi;  Tennessee.  References:  J. 
Phelan,  Hist,  of  Tennessee  (1888)  ; T.  Roose- 
velt, The  Winning  of  the  West  (1889-96). 

W.  E.  D. 

TERTIUM  QUID.  Tertium  Quid  was  the 
term  applied  to  the  faction  led  by  John  Ran- 
dolph, in  Jefferson’s  administration  ( sec 
Quids).  Such  a faction  can  often  be  very 
effective,  as  seen  in  the  case  of  the  third  party 
in  the  English  Parliament.  See  Randolph, 
John.  References:  J.  A.  Woodburn,  Pol.  Par- 
ties (1909),  136.  T.  N.  H. 


TEXAS 


Settlement.— The  Anglo-American  occupation 
of  Texas  began  on  a permanent  basis  in  1821, 
when  Stephen  F.  Austin  arrived  with  the  first 
of  three  hundred  families  which  the  Spanish 
authorities  had  granted  his  father  a permit  to 
introduce  from  the  United  States.  The  same 
year  Mexico  became  independent  of  Spain,  and 
the  republican  constitution  and  the  liberal 
colonization  laws  which  it  soon  adopted  offered 
such  strong  attractions  to  immigrants  from  the 
United  States  that  Austin  and  other  empresar- 
ios  (contractors)  were  able  to  settle  some 
25,000  in  Texas  before  the  end  of  1835.  Many 
immigrants  brought  slaves,  and  there  were  al- 
ready in  the  province  several  thousand  Mex- 
icans and  a considerable  number  of  Indians. 
For  purposes  of  general  administration  Texas 
was  united  with  Coahuila.  In  1836  the  colon- 
ists revolted  from  Mexico  and  established  an 
independent  republic. 

Early  Constitutions. — Some  of  the  men  who 
came  to  Texas  during  the  colonial  period  lived 


to  see  the  state  governed  successively  under 
eight  constitutions.  The  first  of  these  was  the 
constitution  of  Coahuila  and  Texas,  adopted 
by  the  “congress”  (legislature)  of  the  state 
March  11,  1827.  It  recognized  the  customary 
legislative,  executive,  and  judicial  divisions 
of  the  government;  guaranteed  “liberty, 
security,  property  and  equality”  to  every  in- 
habitant of  the  state;  proclaimed  freedom  of 
speech  and  press  subject  to  legislative  regula- 
tion; decreed  the  establishment  of  primary 
schools;  provided  for  gradual  abolition  of 
slavery;  and  forbade  the  exercise  of  any  but 
the  Roman  Catholic  religion.  The  governor 
and  the  members  of  the  state  and  federal  con- 
gresses were  chosen  by  electors  who  were  them- 
selves elected  in  primary  municipal  assemblies. 
The  legislature  sat  in  one  house.  The  judicial 
system  included  a supreme  court  and  a number 
of  inferior  courts,  and  recognized  arbitration 
between  litigants  as  a preliminary  judicial 
process. 


529 


TEXAS 


The  second  constitution  was  a provisional  in- 
strument adopted  November  13,  1835,  by  an  as- 
sembly of  delegates  elected  originally  for  con- 
sultative purposes.  It  was  never  ratified  by 


except  that,  Texas  being  a unitary  state,  a divi- 
sion of  power  between  state  and  federal  gov- 
ernments was  unnecessary.  The  reaction 
against  clerical  influence  expressed  itself  in 


Boundaeies  of  the  State  of  Texas,  Showing  Terbitorial  Changes 


the  people  and  the  government  which  it  es- 
tablished was  in  operation  only  four  months. 
The  third  was  framed  March  17,  1836,  by  the 
convention  which  declared  Texas  independent. 
It  gave  the  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial 
departments  the  same  form  and  substantially 
the  same  functions  and  reciprocal  limitations 
as  their  counterparts  had  in  the  United  States, 


the  exclusion  of  clergymen  from  congress  and 
the  presidency  and  in  guaranteeing  freedom  of 
religion.  But  not  all  Mexican  institutions  were 
repudiated,  for  congress  was  instructed  to 
introduce  the  English  common  law  with  such 
modifications  as  existing  local  conditions 
should  suggest,  and  the  resultant  blending 
of  common  law  and  Spanish  (Roman)  law 


530 


TEXAS 


has  given  to  Texas  jurisprudence,  say  law- 
yers, a peculiar  excellence,  particularly  in 
rules  affecting  land  and  pleading.  It  was 
the  duty  of  congress  to  establish  an  edu- 
cational system;  and  individual  freedom 
was  generously  safeguarded  by  a bill  of  rights, 
which  extended  to  a prohibition  of  imprison- 
ment for  debt.  Slavery  was  legalized,  but  the 
importation  of  slaves  from  any  country  except 
the  United  States  was  forbidden. 

Under  its  fourth  constitution  which  was  ap- 
proved by  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  in 
December,  1845,  Texas  entered  the  Union  ( see 
Annexations  to  the  United  States).  It 
differed  little  from  the  constitution  of  1836 
except  in  so  far  as  was  necessary  to  adapt 
the  government  to  the  federal  relation,  yet 
a few  distinctive  features  demand  notice. 

(1)  Except  in  case  of  specified  emergencies, 
the  legislature  was  restrained  from  con- 
tracting a debt  of  more  than  $100,000. 

(2)  Not  less  than  one-tenth  of  the  annual 
revenue  derivable  from  taxation  was  devoted  to 
a permanent  fund  for  the  support  of  free 
schools,  and  the  legislature  was  authorized  to 
supplement  this  by  appropriations  of  land. 

(3)  Since,  to  its  lasting  advantage,  the  state 

retained  its  public  lands  on  entering  the  Union, 
it  was  necessary  to  continue  the  general  land 
office,  established  during  the  republic;  this 
still  remains  (1913).  (4)  The  legislature  was 

given  power  to  exempt  from  forced  sale  the 
homestead  (see)  of  a family,  and  a man  was 
declared  incapable  of  alienating  the  homestead 
without  his  wife’s  consent.  Thus  was  given 
a constitutional  sanctity  to  the  justly  vaunted 
homestead  law  of  Texas.  A statute  to  this 
effect  had  existed  since  1839.  The  principle 
was  inherited  from  the  Mexican  regime. 

The  next  three  constitutions  belong  to  the 
period  of  Civil  War  and  reconstruction  (see). 
In  February  and  March,  1861,  a convention 
adopted  an  ordinance  declaring  the  secession 
of  Texas  from  the  Union  and  its  adhesion  to 
the  Southern  Confederacy  (see  Cone'edeeate 
States)  and  amended  the  constitution  to  make 
it  conform  to  the  new  conditions.  The  state 
sought  restoration  to  the  Union  under  the 
constitution  of  1866,  which,  while  recognizing 
the  results  of  the  war,  retained  as  much  as 
possible  of  the  substance  of  the  constitution  of 
1845-1861.  Its  application  was  denied  by  Con- 
gress, and  readmission  was  only  effected  under 
the  constitution  of  1869.  By  this  constitution 
the  government  was  highly  centralized;  many 
of  its  provisions  were  irksome  to  the  people, 
and  in  1876  it  gave  place  to  the  present  con- 
stitution. 

Present  Constitution. — In  the  constitution  of 
1876  the  legislature  paid  a penalty  for  the  sins 
of  its  reconstruction  predecessors  by  suffering 
a drastic  definition  of  powers,  duties,  and 
limitations,  more  than  a fourth  of  the  docu- 
ment being  devoted  to  that  end.  The  maximum 
membership  of  the  senate  and  house  is  fixed 


respective  at  31  and  150,  and  there  are  now 
(1913)  31  senators  and  131  representatives. 
Senators  are  elected  for  four  years,  one-half 
retiring  biennially;  representatives  for  two 
years.  Beapportionment  is  required  after  each 
federal  census. 

As  originally  defined  by  the  constitution  the 
executive  department  consisted  of  the  gover- 
nor, lieutenant-governor,  secretary  of  state, 
comptroller  of  public  accounts,  treasurer,  com- 
missioner of  the  general  land  office,  and  attor- 
ney general.  The  secretary  of  state  is  ap- 
pointed by  the  governor;  the  other  officers  are 
elected  for  two  years,  and  are  indefinitely  re- 
eligible,  but  no  governor  has  been  elected  for 
more  than  two  terms.  Other  officers  belonging 
to  the  executive  department  have  been  created 
by  statute.  The  more  important  are  a commis- 
sioner of  insurance  and  banking,  a tax  commis- 
sioner, a commissioner  of  agriculture,  a super- 
intendent of  public  instruction  and  a railroad 
commission.  The  first  two  are  appointed  by  the 
governor,  the  others  are  elected.  The  commis- 
sioner of  insurance  and  banking  sees  to  the  * 
execution  of  the  laws  “relating  to  insurance  and 
insurance  companies” — both  life  and  fire — and 
supervises  state  banks,  somewhat  as  the  comp- 
troller of  the  currency  does  national  banks.  lie 
is  ex  officio  chairman  of  a board  for  fixing  fire 
insurance  rates  and  preventing  discrimination. 
To  the  tax  commissioner  is  entrusted  the  eval- 
uation of  the  intangible  properties  of  certain 
classes  of  public  service  corporations  for  the 
purpose  of  securing  taxation  thereon.  The 
superintendent  of  public  instruction  is  “charged 
with  the  administration  of  the  school  law  and 
a general  superintendency  of  the  business  re- 
lating to  the  public  schools  of  the  State.” 
The  railroad  commission  was  created  in  1891 
by  authority  of  a constitutional  amendment 
adopted  the  previous  year.  There  are  three 
commissioners.  Originally  they  were  appoint- 
ed by  the  governor  for  two  years,  but  in  1894 
a constitutional  amendment  increased  their 
term  to  six  years  and  made  them  elective.  One 
retires  every  two  years.  Among  the  commis- 
sion’s powers  are  the  classifying  of  freight; 
the  fixing  of  freight  and  express  rates  and 
passenger  fares ; the  control  of  the  issue  of 
railway  securities,  to  prevent  over  capitaliza- 
tion; and  the  power  to  see  that  all  state  laws 
“concerning  railroads  are  enforced  and  obeyed.” 
It  is  described  as  “one  of  the  strongest  of  the 
mandatory  commissions”  now  in  operation.  Its 
work  has  been  highly  beneficial  to  the  state. 
For  fixing  the  general  ad  valorem  rate  of  taxa- 
tion there  is  a board  composed  of  the  governor, 
comptroller,  and  treasurer,  who  act  under 
limitations  prescribed  by  the  law  creating  the 
board. 

At  the  head  of  the  judicial  system  are  the 
supreme  court  and  the  court  of  criminal  ap- 
peals, with  final  appellate  jurisdiction  re- 
spectively in  civil  and  criminal  cases.  Each  is 
composed  of  three  judges,  elected  for  six  years. 
531 


TEXAS  vs.  WHITE 


Below  these  are  the  courts  of  civil  appeals,  each 
with  three  judges,  having  appellate  civil  juris- 
diction alone,  and  the  district,  county,  and 
justices’  courts.  All  judges  are  elected,  and 
there  is  a strong  tendency  to  reelect  indefinite- 
ly. Jury  trial  is  obligatory  in  criminal  cases, 
and  optional  with  the  parties  in  civil  suits.  In 
the  district  courts  twelve  men  compose  the  jury, 
in  the  county  and  justices’  courts,  six.  A 
unanimous  verdict  is  required. 

The  constitution  makes  it  the  duty  of  the 
legislature  to  provide  an  “efficient  system  of 
public  free  schools,”  and  appropriates  for  that 
purpose  a vast  quantity  of  the  public  lands, 
a poll  tax,  and  portions  of  other  taxes  and 
revenues,  which  the  legislature  may  augment. 
Funds  are  apportioned  to  school  districts  an- 
nually on  the  basis  of  their  scholastic  popula- 
tion. Under  certain  regulations  districts  may 
organize  independently  and  vote  special  taxes 
to  supplement  the  state  apportionment.  In- 
struction is  free  to  all  pupils  between  the  age 
of  seven  and  seventeen.  Separate  schools  are 
maintained  equally  for  the  white  and  black 
races.  The  governor,  comptroller,  and  secre- 
tary of  state  are  made  by  the  constitution  a 
state  board  of  education,  but  the  active  direc- 
tion and  supervision  of  the  school . system  is 
vested  by  law  in  the  superintendent  of  public 
instruction,  and  he  is  ex  officio  secretary  of  the 
board  of  education.  Above  the  public  schools 
are  the  university,  the  agricultural  and  me- 
chanical college,  and  various  normal  and  tech- 
nical schools,  supported  by  endowments  and 
legislative  appropriations. 

Elections. — The  constitution  originally  pre- 
scribed the  usual  age  and  residence  qualifica- 
tions for  suffrage,  and  an  amendment  in  1902 
gave  the  legislature  power  to  require  in  addi- 
tion the  payment  of  a poll  tax.  Upon  this 
amendment  the  Terrell  election  law  is  based. 
Its  chief  aims  are  to  prevent  fraudulent  prac- 
tices in  elections,  and  to  secure  united  support 
of  party  candidates,  at  the  same  time  giving 
the  people  a direct  share  in  the  nomination 
of  those  candidates.  It  goes  far  toward  ac- 
complishing the  first  by  rigidly  regulating  the 
payment  of  poll  taxes,  the  preparation  of  the 
ballot,  and  the  conditions  under  which  the 
ballot  is  cast.  In  towns  of  above  10,000  in- 
habitants a voter  must  pay  his  poll  tax  in 
person,  and  one  may  not  lend  or  give  another 
money  with  which  to  pay  it.  The  second  ob- 
ject is  gained  by  requiring  parties  which  cast 
at  the  preceding  general  election  100.000  votes 
to  nominate  their  candidates  by  primary  elec- 
tions ( see  Primary,  Direct).  By  a party 
agreement  voters  in  the  primary  pledge  them- 
selves to  vote  for  the  party  nominees.  The  law 
requires  candidates  to  publish  their  campaign 
expenses. 

Party  Conditions. — The  Democratic  platform 
of  1910  congratulates  the  party  for  having 
“controlled  the  government  of  the  State  for 
nearly  forty  years.”  There  is  practically  no 


other  party  in  state  politics.  In  the  guber- 
natorial campaign  of  1910  there  were  356,506 
votes  cast  in  the  Democratic  primary  and 
173,993  in  the  final  election,  while  the  Repub- 
licans vote  in  the  final  was  26,000.  In  the 
presidential  election  of  1900  there  were  267,- 
423  Democratic  to  130,641  Republican  votes, 
but  in  1908  the  vote  was  217,302  to  65,666. 
Since  1891  the  regulation  of  corporations  has 
been  a leading  issue  in  state  policy. 

Prohibition  by  local  option  has  steadily 
gained  during  the  past  decade,  and  in  July, 
1911,  a constitutional  amendment  enjoining 
state  wide  prohibition  was  only  defeated  by  a 
majority  of  6,297  in  a total  vote  of  468,489. 
The  most  interesting  political  tendency  at 
present  is  in  local  affairs — toward  the  estab- 
lishment of  commission  government  in  cities 
and  towns. 

Population. — In  1850  the  population  was 
212,592;  in  1890,  2,235,523;  in  1910,  3,896,- 
542. 

See  Commission  System  of  City  Govern- 
ment ; South. 

References:  G.  P.  Garrison,  Texas  (1903), 
Civil  Government  of  Texas  (1899)  ; J.  P. 
Lightfoot,  Terrell  Election  Law  with  Anno- 
tations (1910);  C.  S.  Potts,  “Railroad  Trans- 
portation in  Texas”  in  University  of  Texas, 
Bulletin  (1909),  No.  119,  chs.  viii— x;  C.  W. 
Raines,  Year  Book  for  Texas,  1901  (1902); 
C.  W.  Ramsdell,  Reconstruction  in  Texas 
(1910),  chs.  i,  v,  ix;  F.  N.  Thorpe,  Federal 
and  State  Constitutions  (1909),  VI,  3475- 
3674.  Eugene  C.  Barker. 

TEXAS  vs.  WHITE.  After  the  close  of  the 
Civil  War  and  while  the  only  government  of 
the  state  of  Texas  was  that  organized  and 
existing  in  pursuance  of  the  reconstruction 
acts  of  Congress,  an  original  suit  was  institut- 
ed by  this  government  in  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States  in  the  name  of  the  state 
to  assert  its  right  to  certain  bonds  issued 
by  the  United  States  to  the  state  in  settlement 
of  a boundary  dispute,  which  bonds  had  been 
transferred  and  disposed  of  by  those  claiming 
to  act  for  the  state  as  a member  of  the  so- 
called  Confederacy  (1868,  7 Wallace  700). 
The  court  held:  (1)  that  the  union  of  the 
states  under  the  Constitution  is  indissoluble 
and  that  Texas  never  ceased  to  be  a state 
of  the  Union;  (2)  that  under  its  duty  to 
guarantee  to  each  state  a republican  form  of 
government  (Const.,  Art.  IV,  sec.  iv)  Con- 
gress could,  in  the  absence  of  any  duly  con- 
stituted government  of  the  state,  provide  for 
the  formation  of  a government  which,  when 
recognized  by  Congress,  was  also  entitled  to 
recognition  by  the  courts  as  the  lawful  gov- 
ernment; (3)  that  the  government  thus 
created  and  recognized  might  properly  insti- 
tute a suit  for  the  state  in  the  protection  of 
its  property  rights.  The  ground  taken  by  three 
dissenting  judges  was  that  the  reconstructed 


632 


TEXTBOOK,  CAMPAIGN— THIRD  PARTIES 


government  was  not  the  government  of  the 
state  and  that  the  state  was  not  for  the  time 
being  a member  of  the  Union.  See  RECON- 
STRUCTION; SECESSION  CONTROVERSY;  STATE 

Sovereignty.  E.  McC. 

TEXTBOOK,  CAMPAIGN.  See  Commit- 
tees, Party. 

TEXTBOOK  LAWS.  State  laws  relating  to 
textbooks  for  the  public  schools  provide  for 
adoption  and  uniformity  by  the  state,  the 
county,  or  the  city  or  district.  While  the 
laws  change  from  year  to  year,  about  22  states 
now  have  state  uniformity  for  the  common 
schools  and,  in  some  cases,  for  the  high  schools 
also.  About  20  states  have  district  adoption, 
and  a few  states  have  county  adoption.  Large 
cities  are  frequently  exempted  from  these 
state  and  county  laws,  and  are  permitted  to 
make  their  own  adoptions. 

Adoptions  are  made,  according  to  different 
laws,  by  the  local  or  state  boards  of  education 
or  by  state  textbook  commissions.  The  text- 
book commissions  are  created  by  law,  witli 
membership  varying  from  5 to  11  and  made 
up  of  certain  state  officers  ex  officio  and  other 
persons  appointed  by  the  governor.  Not  all 
the  laws  require  such  a commission  to  con- 
tain persons  expert  in  education.  The  period 
for  which  adoption  is  made  is  in  the  great 
majority  of  states  5 years;  variant  terms  are 
six,  four  and  three  years. 

The  duties  of  these  adopting  bodies  include 
selection  of  textbooks;  their  adoption  for  a 
fixed  period;  making  contracts  with  publish- 
ers, with  stipulations  as  to  prices,  distribu- 
tions and  sales,  and  penalties  for  violation  of 
contract.  California  prints  and  distributes 
free  its  own  textbooks  for  use  in  the  com- 
mon schools.  It  ordered  textbooks  prepared 
at  first,  but  now  pays  regular  publishers  a 
royalty  for  use  of  the  plates  of  their  books. 
Illinois,  by  the  law  of  1909,  licenses  publish- 
ers to  sell  their  books  for  use  of  the  public 
schools  of  the  state,  and  fixes  maximum  prices. 

The  system  of  free  textbooks,  by  which 
pupils  are  furnished  their  textbooks  free  of 
charge,  has  been  adopted  in  about  12  states  for 
all  or  nearly  all  communities;  in  about  15 
other  states  districts  are  permitted  to  adopt 
the  system. 

See  School  Finance;  School  Property. 

References:  Dutton  and  Snedden.  Adminis- 
tration of  Public  Education  in  the  United 
States  (1908),  ch.  xiii ; Pa.  School  Jour.,  LVI 
(May,  1908),  480-483;  E.  C.  Elliott,  “State 
School  Systems;  Legislation  and  Judicial  De- 
cisions” in  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Educ.,  Bulletin, 
1908,  No.  7,  1910,  No.  2. 

K.  C.  Babcock. 

THEOCRACY.  Theocracy  is  a term  applied 
to  a state  in  which  the  supreme  power  rests 
with  God  or  some  other  superhuman  being 


and  in  which  those  who  exercise  authority  are 
regarded  as  merely  the  agents  or  vicegerents 
executing  the  sovereign  will.  A government 
merely  in  accordance  with  God’s  will  does  not 
in  the  strict  sense  of  the  term,  constitute 
theocracy,  for  any  human  form  of  polity  might 
conform  to  this  principle;  nor  is  it  a govern- 
ment in  which  the  sovereign  regards  himself 
as  the  incarnation  of  God  and  is  worshipped  as 
such,  though  the  term  theocratic  or  religious 
monarchy  may  properly  be  applied  to  such  a 
polity.  The  first  distinguishing  mark  is  that, 
whereas  in  monarchy,  aristocracy  and  demo- 
cracy the  supreme  power  belongs  to  men,  in  a 
theocracy  it  belongs  to  a superhuman  being. 
The  second  idea  is  that  the  civil  and  political 
as  well  as  religious  and  moral  institutions  are 
given  by  the  divine  being  through  a legate, 
prophet  or  priest  and  are  not  subject  to  human 
alteration. 

The  theocratic  state  belongs  to  the  infancy 
of  the  human  race,  its  earliest  development 
taking  place  in  Asia  and  northern  Africa.  The 
king  of  Iran,  about  1000  years  B.  C.,  at  the 
time  of  Zoroaster,  the  prophet,  called  himself 
a priest-king,  and  the  ancient  Ethiopians  in 
Meroe  had  a pure  priest-state.  The  govern- 
ments of  ancient  Egypt  and  India  were  also 
mainly  theocratic.  But  the  most  notable  of 
the  ancient  theocracies  was  that  of  the  Jews 
prior  to  the  kingship.  See  States,  Classifi- 
cation of.  References:  J.  K.  Bluntschli,  The 
Theory  of  the  State  (6th  ed.,  trans.,  1885), 
322-334;  T.  S.  Woolsey,  Political  Science 
(1878),  I,  495-500;  J.  W.  Garner,  Intro,  to 
Pol.  Sci.  (1910),  128-131. 

Karl  F.  Geiser. 

THIRD  HOUSE.  The  lobby  (see)  composed 
of  persons  who  frequent  the  legislative  ante- 
chambers for  the  purpose  of  influencing  legis- 
lators. O.  C.  H. 

THIRD  PARTIES.  From  the  beginning  the 
dual  party  system  has  ruled  in  America, 
though  minor  parties  have  frequently  appeared. 
Twice  in  our  history  has  the  disappearance  of 
a leading  party  resulted  in  a period  of  polit- 
ical confusion,  until  the  normal  balance  had 
been  restored  by  the  rise  of  a second  strong 
party.  In  1868  only  two  national  parties 
existed ; but  four  years  later  three  minor  par- 
ties held  conventions  and  nominated  presiden- 
tial candidates.  Since  that  date  from  four  to 
seven  minor  parties  have  participated  in  each 
national  election.  In  all,  more  than  twenty 
such  parties  have  been  organized.  After 
conducting  one  campaign  most  of  them  have 
vanished;  but  some  have  lasted  for  three  or 
more  terms.  One  only,  the  Prohibition  party, 
has  remained  constantly  in  the  field  since  1872. 

Three  main  motives  give  rise  to  third  par- 
ties. Many  are  organized  to  promote  some  one 
reform  or  to  maintain  the  rights  and  interests 
of  a particular  class,  or  group,  of  citizens. 


533 


THIRD  PARTIES 


Others  are  pledged  to  the  correction  of  alleged 
abuses  or  errors,  that  have  perverted  a major 
party.  They  seek  to  restore  the  party  to  its 
traditional  position.  The  third  group  aims 
more  or  less  directly  at  the  destruction  of 
both  the  major  parties. 

Parties  of  Reform.— The  Prohibition  party 
(see),  the  most  successful  of  the  parties  of 
reform,  maintains  its  organization  in  nearly 
every  state.  Its  public  speakers  emphasize 
the  evil  effects  of  the  liquor  traffic,  and  point 
out  methods  for  its  abolition.  Prohibitionist 
candidates  appear  on  state  as  well  as  national 
tickets,  but  the  vote  of  the  party  is  relatively 
small,  since  it  does  not  receive  the  support 
of  a majority  of  the  citizens  who  believe  in  its 
aims.  Its  influence  upon  the  leading  parties, 
however,  is  often  considerable  and  it  wins 
favor  for  its  measures  from  one  or  the  other. 
It  is  the  only  party  that  can  work  on  Sunday 
without  shocking  the  ordinary  citizen.  The 
Greenback  party  (see)  opposed  the  contraction 
of  the  currency.  Although  it  elected  some  gov- 
ernors, members  of  state  legislatures  and  of 
Congress,  it  failed  to  prevent  a return  to  specie 
payments  in  1879.  To  its  influence,  however, 
was  largely  due  the  reissue  of  greenbacks 
after  their  redemption. 

The  Granger  (see),  Farmers’  Alliance  (see), 
Antimonopoly  and  People’s,  or  Populist  (see) 
parties,  contending  for  the  rights  of  the 
producer  as  against  the  middleman  and  organ- 
ized wealth,  have  carried  state  elections  and 
enacted  important  state  laws.  Their  repre- 
sentatives in  Congress  have  been  influential 
also  in  carrying  laws  for  the  regulation  of 
railways  and  other  forms  of  monopoly.  In 
1892,  under  the  leadership  of  General  Weaver 
the  Populists  secured  twenty-two  electoral 
votes  from  six  states.  This  is  the  only  instance 
since  the  Civil  War  of  the  representation  of 
a third  party  in  the  electoral  college.  When 
the  Democratic  party,  in  1896,  adopted  nearly 
all  the  policies  advocated  by  the  Populists,  the 
latter  were  absorbed  by  the  old  party.  Had 
the  Democrats  not  accepted  populistic  doc- 
trines these  two  parties  might  have  changed 
places  instead  of  uniting.  Later,  under  Roose- 
velt’s leadership,  the  Republican  party  also 
adopted  much  of  the  Populist  program.  The 
history  of  this  group  of  parties  admirably  il- 
lustrates the  third  party  method  of  forcing  a 
policy  upon  the  chief  parties,  and  the  avidity 
with  which  these  latter  seek  to  absorb  a large 
minor  group.  Less  conspicuous  has  been  the 
success  of  the  labor  parties  (see)  ; nevertheless 
their  organizations,  platforms  and  candidates 
have  had  no  small  share  in  securing  city,  state 
and  national  legislation  favorable  to  wage- 
earners. 

Parties  of  Protest. — A smaller  number  of 
parties  aim  directly  at  the  immediate  correc- 
tion of  a policy  by  one  of  the  ruling  parties. 
In  1864,  the  Radical  Republicans,  objecting  to 
the  conservative  policy  of  the  administration, 


held  a Radical  Republican  convention  and  nom- 
inated John  C.  Fremont  for  the  presidency. 
He,  however,  withdrew  before  the  election. 
The  dissatisfaction  of  many  Republicans,  in 
1872,  with  the  prolonged  military  rule  in  the 
South  and  the  disfranchisement  of  former  Con- 
federates led  to  an  early  convention  which 
nominated  Horace  Greeley  for  President.  Lat- 
er, the  regular  Democratic  convention  accepted 
both  their  candidate  and  their  platform;  so 
that  Greeley  became  the  regular  Democratic 
nominee.  To  many  Democrats  this  seemed 
like  wiping  their  party  out  of  existence;  hence, 
late  in  the  campaign  a “Straight-out”  (see) 
Democratic  convention  was  held  and  nominat- 
ed candidates.  A similar  convention  was  held 
by  Democrats  in  1896  as  a protest  against  the 
fusion  of  Democrats  and  Populists  under 
Bryan’s  leadership.  Third  parties  such  as  these 
are,  in  their  nature,  temporary.  They  conduct 
only  one  campaign  and  then  their  members  are 
reabsorbed  into  the  regular  parties  or  pass 
from  public  notice. 

The  Socialist  party  (see)  has  all  the  ex- 
ternal characteristics  of  a reform  propaganda; 
but  their  program  is  such  as  involves  radical 
changes  in  government  and  industrial  organ- 
ization which  would  eliminate  the  party  sys- 
tem. To  the  socialist  that  system  is  simply  an 
agency  for  advancing  their  cause  and  gaining 
control  of  the  state.  A few  other  third  parties 
in  recent  years  have  aimed  directly  at  the 
destruction  of  the  leading  parties  by  appeal- 
ing to  all  honest  voters.  Delegates  from 
forty-four  states  and  two  territories  met  in 
1908  and  resolved  themselves  into  an  “Inde- 
pendent” party  (see).  “Our  action,”  they  said, 
“is  based  on  a determination  to  wrest  the  con- 
duct of  public  affairs  from  the  hands  of  selfish 
interests,  political  tricksters  and  corrupt 
bosses.”  Responsibility  for  existing  evils  was 
laid  at  the  door  of  the  two  parties  and  appeal 
for  support  was  made  to  all  patriots  “irrespec- 
tive of  party.”  At  the  ensuing  election  eighty- 
three  thousand  “patriots”  cast  their  vote  for 
the  “Independent”  nominee,  while  more  than 
fourteen  million  expressed  preference  for  the 
ruling  parties. 

The  most  successful  third  party  of  this  class 
was  the  Progressive  party  (see)  formed  in 
1912,  in  protest  against  the  methods  of  the 
Republican  national  committee,  representing 
the  regular  and  “stand-pat  ’ wing  of  the  party, 
in  deciding  contests  between  rival  delegations 
pledged  to  President  Taft  and  Theodore  Roose- 
velt. The  Taft  delegations  were  seated  in  al- 
most every  case  and  in  the  national  convention 
President  Taft  was  nominated  for  a second 
term  on  the  first  ballot.  The  Roosevelt  faction, 
which  represented  the  progressive  wing  of  the 
party,  claimed  that  the  nomination  of  Presi- 
dent Taft  had  been  secured  by  fraud;  and  im- 
mediately after  the  close  of  the  Republican  na- 
tional convention  they  nominated  Roosevelt 
for  the  presidency  and  later  perfected  a corn- 


534 


THIRD  TERM 


plete  party  organization.  In  tne  presidential 
election  of  1912,  the  Progressive  party  carried 
six  states  and  secured  a popular  vote  of 
4,126,020,  while  the  Republican  candidate  car- 
ried only  two  states  and  secured  less  than 
3,500,000  votes.  In  the  congressional  elections 
of  the  same  year  the  Progressive  party  elected 
13  Representatives,  who  acted  throughout  the 
Sixty-third  Congress  as  a third  party  under 
the  leadership  of  Victor  Murdock.  In  1913, 
however,  the  Republican  party  effected  a re- 
form in  its  convention  representation  and  pro- 
cedure and  many  Progressives  returned  to  their 
original  party  allegiance. 

Until  the  spectacular  rise  of  the  Progressive 
party  in  1912  few  indeed  have  been  the  voters 
who  have  even  been  reached  by  the  direct  appeal 
of  a new  party  designed  to  displace  the  estab- 
lished ones.  Probably  not  one  voter  in  a hun- 
dred was  conscious  of  the  existence  of  the 
Independent  party  on  election  day  1908.  The 
regular  parties  have  the  support  of  history, 
tradition  and  habit,  and  it  would  seem  im- 
possible that  a third  should  gain  the  ascendency 
so  long  as  the  major  parties  give  expression  to 
the  dominant  issues  of  the  day. 

See  Anti-Masonic  Party;  Independent 
Movements  in  Politics;  Parties,  State  and 
Local;  Party,  Place  and  Significance  of; 
Progressive  Party;  Prohibition  Party;  Re- 
form Movements,  Political;  Socialist  Par- 
ty; Voting,  Independent. 

References:  J.  A.  Woodburn,  Pol.  Parties 
and  Party  Problems  (1913),  chs.  viii,  ix;  C.  A. 
Beard,  Am.  Government  and  Pol.  (1910),  119— 
125;  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Commomvealth  (4th  ed., 
1910),  II,  ch.  Ivi;  T.  H.  McKee,  National  Con- 
ventions and  Platforms  (5th  ed.,  1904)  ; Am. 
Year  Book,  1912,  and  year  by  year. 

Jesse  Macy. 

THIRD  TERM.  The  Federal  Convention 
(see)  of  1787  devoted  some  attention  to  the 
qualifications  of  the  President,  and  at  one 
time  voted  for  a term  of  seven  years,  with 
exclusion  from  reflection;  but  Gouverneur 
Morris  insisted  that  unless  a President  could 
be  reelected  he  would  infallibly  be  controlled 
by  Congress.  Later  the  convention  came  within 
one  vote  of  providing  that  no  person  should 
serve  as  President  more  than  six  years  in 
twelve  years.  Nevertheless,  almost  at  the 
last  moment,  the  convention  adopted  the  four 
year  term,  and  explicitly  withdrew  the  re- 
striction on  reelection.  Very  likely  in  this 
respect  as  in  many  matters  relating  to  the 
powers  of  the  President,  the  convention  was 
influenced  by  the  confidence  that  the  first 
President  would  be  George  Washington,  a man 
who  could  be  trusted. 

Washington  accepted  a second  election  with 
hesitancy,  urged  thereto  by  personal  letters 
from  both  Jefferson  and  Hamilton;  but  he 
was  very  restive  under  the  attacks  upon  him 
in  the  opposition  press.  In  July,  1796,  it  was 


rumored  that  Washington  would  not  stand 
again,  and  in  September  he  issued  his  farewell 
address  in  which  the  chief  motive  for  retire- 
ment is  stated  to  be  “the  increasing  weight  of 
years.”  In  1799,  however,  Washington  was 
active  in  the  Federalist  party  in  Virginia  and 
at  the  time  of  his  death  Hamilton’s  friends 
were  preparing  an  appeal  to  him  to  stand  for 
a third  term. 

Jefferson  without  protest  accepted  a reelec- 
tion in  1804;  but  grew  very  tired  of  the  diffi- 
culties of  the  presidency,  and  withdrew  in 
1808.  He  put  on  record  his  conviction  that 
the  principle  of  rotation  in  office  and  the  dan- 
ger that  a President  might  be  elected  every 
four  years  for  life,  were  sufficient  reasons  for 
retiring,  but  he  was  ready  to  run  again  if  in 
no  other  way  the  choice  of  a Federalist  could 
be  avoided.  From  that  time  for  many  years 
it  was  an  accepted  principle  that  the  normal 
service  was  two  terms.  Jackson  began  by  pro- 
testing against  a second  term,  but  swallowed 
his  scruples.  Van  Buren,  like  John  Quincy 
Adams,  stood  for  the  second  term  and  was  de- 
feated. Tyler  is  said  to  have  expected  to 
serve  out  his  term  inherited  from  Harrison  and 
then  to  receive  the  regular  two  terms  in  addi- 
tion; but  from  1836  to  1861  there  was  a suc- 
cession of  single  terms,  though  Fillmore  and 
Pierce  both  worked  hard  for  a renomination 
which  they  did  not  get.  Lincoln  and  Grant 
were  both  reelected,  and  Grant’s  friends  pushed 
him  hard  for  a second  renomination;  but  pub- 
lic sentiment  was  too  strong.  After  a four 
years  interval  Grant  was  strongly  supported 
in  the  Republican  convention  of  1880,  and  nar- 
rowly failed  of  the  nomination.  Grover  Cleve- 
land was  the  only  President  to  serve  two 
terms  with  an  interval  between;  he  was 
therefore,  three  times  a candidate.  President 
Roosevelt  served  for  nearly  four  full  years  as 
sucessor  of  President  McKinley,  and  then 
when  the  returns  showed  that  he  was  reelected, 
he  made  a public  statement,  in  New  York,  that 
he  would  not  accept  another  term.  Although 
it  was  generally  believed  that  he  might  have 
had  a second  nomination  if  he  had  wished  it, 
he  stood  by  this  declaration  in  1908,  but  on 
Feb.  24,  1912,  he  announced  his  willingness  to 
accept  a renomination.  Inasmuch  as  his  dis- 
claimer had  been  intended  to  apply  only  to  a 
consecutive  third  term,  his  friends  were  con- 
vinced that  a majority  of  the  Republican  voters 
and  a majority  of  the  delegates  properly  elect- 
ed to  the  convention  favored  his  nomination 
for  a third  term,  but  a majority  of  delegates 
for  President  Taft  was  seated.  Failing  to  re- 
ceive the  nomination  of  the  national  Repub- 
lican convention,  he  was  nominated  by  the 
convention  of  the  new  Progressive  party  (see). 
In  the  election  he  polled  4,126,020  votes  and 
received  88  electoral  votes. 

There  are  thus  nine  cases  of  double  term 
presidencies,  and  a tenth  case  (Cleveland)  of 
two  terms  in  office  not  continuous.  It  is  diffi- 


535 


THIRTEENTH  AMENDMENT— THREE-MILE  LIMIT 


cult  to  say  how  far  the  objection  to  a third 
term,  particularly  if  an  interval  has  elapsed, 
is  still  felt  by  the  American  people. 

The  Democratic  platform  of  1912  favored  the 
single  presidential  term  and  a constitutional 
amendment  therefor.  Such  an  amendment 
would  doubtless  provide  for  a six-year  term. 

See  Grant,  U.  S.;  Nomination  of  Presi- 
dent; Presidential  Elections;  presidents  by 
name;  Roosevelt,  Theodore. 

References:  E.  Stan  wood.  Hist,  of  the  Presi- 
dency (1898),  passim;  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Com- 
monwealth (4th  ed.  1910),  I,  45;  A.  B.  Hart, 
“The  Third  Term  Ghost”  in  Sat.  Eve.  Post, 
May  18,  1912.  A.  B.  H. 

THIRTEENTH  AMENDMENT.  This  amend- 
ment w'as  submitted  to  the  states  by  resolution 
of  Congress  in  1805  and  by  proclamation  of 
the  President  of  December  18  of  that  year  was 
declared  to  have  received  the  approval  of  the 
requisite  number  of  states.  It  provides  that: 

Section  1.  Neither  slavery  nor  involuntary  servi- 
tude, except  as  a punishment  for  crime  whereof  the 
party  shall  have  been  duly  convicted,  shall  exist 
within  the  United  States,  or  any  place  subject  to 
their  jurisdiction. 

Section  2.  Congress  shall  have  power  to  enforce 
this  article  by  appropriate  legislation. 

So  far  as  the  abolition  of  slavery  is  in- 
volved there  has  been  no  question  as  to  the 
effect  of  the  amendment,  but  as  to  what  con- 
stitutes involuntary  servitude  important  ques- 
tions have  arisen.  It  is  conceded  that  while 
the  primary  object  of  the  adoption  of  the 
amendment  may  have  been  to  free  the  colored 
race  from  a condition  of  servitude  the  general 
purpose  was  to  render  impossible  the  existence 
within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States  of 
any  legal  or  social  institutions  imposing  in- 
voluntary servitude  on  any  class  of  persons. 
The  peonage  system  prevalent  in  Mexico,  the 
coolie  system  of  China,  the  padrone  system  of 
Italy,  fall  within  the  prohibition  ( see  Invol- 
untary Servitude). 

The  express  exception  of  punishment  for 
crime  covers  not  only  imprisonment  but  also 
the  imposition  of  labor  as  a punishment  and 
of  involuntary  service  as  a penalty  for  failure 
to  pay  a fine  imposed  as  a punishment.  More- 
over, the  services  of  persons  imprisoned  for 
crime  belong  to  the  state  and  may  be  leased, 
subject,  of  course,  to  humanitarian  regulations 
as  to  the  method  in  which  such  services  may 
be  employed. 

Under  the  enforcement  clause  Congress  has 
legislated  against  peonage,  that  is,  a condition 
of  enforced  servitude  by  which  the  servitor  is 
restrained  of  his  liberty  and  compelled  to 
labor  in  liquidation  of  some  contract  debt  or 
obligation.  But  without  such  legislation  state 
statutes  imposing  imprisonment  or  servitude 
for  non-performance  of  contractual  obligations 
are  invalid  as  in  conflict  with  the  provisions 
of  the  amendment.  Criminal  punishment  may 
be  imposed  for  the  fraud  involved  in  entering 


into  a contract  to  pay  money  or  render  services 
with  the  intention  of  not  performing  it;  but 
it  is  not  competent  by  statute  to  make  the 
mere  fact  of  non-performance  prima  facie  evi- 
dence of  fraud. 

See  Emancipation  Proclamation;  Recon- 
struction ; Secession  ; Slavery  Controver- 
sy. 

References:  As  to  the  general  scope  and  pur- 
pose of  the  amendment,  see  H.  C.  Black,  Con- 
stitutional Law  (3d  ed.,  1910),  535-542;  W. 
W.  Willoughby,  Constitutional  Law  (1910),  II, 
§§  455-459;  Slaughter-house  Cases  (1872),  1G 
Wallace,  36;  Civil  Rights  Cases  (1883),  109 
U.  S.  3 ; as  to  involuntary  servitude,  peonage, 
and  imprisonment  for  debt,  see  Robertson  vs. 
Baldwin  (1897),  165  V.  S.  275;  Peonage  Cases 
(1903),  123  Federal  Reporter,  671;  Cylatt  vs. 
United  States  (1905),  197  U.  S.  207;  Bailey 
vs.  Alabama  (1911),  219  U.  S.  219;  In  re  Mil- 
ecke  (1909),  52  Wash.  312;  Ex  parte  Hollman, 
(1908),  79  S.  Car.  9.  Emlin  McClain. 

THREE  HUNDRED  AND  SIX.  The  number 
of  delegates  who  remained  firm  in  their  sup- 
port of  General  Grant  (see)  for  President  in 
the  Republican  nominating  convention  of  1880. 
See  Republican  Party.  O.  C.  H. 

THREE-MILE  LIMIT.  This  is  a phrase 
used  to  denote  the  extent  of  a state’s  jurisdic- 
tion over  tiie  open  sea.  The  marginal  sea  with 
the  shore-bottom  under  it  for  a distance  of 
at  least  three  marine  miles  beyond  low-water 
mark  is  recognized  as  a part  of  the  territory 
of  the  adjacent  state  ( see  Territory  in  Inter- 
national Law). 

The  right  of  such  state  jurisdiction  was  gen- 
erally accepted  in  the  eighteenth  century  by 
the  practice  of  nations,  as  a fair  compromise 
between  the  former  extravagant  jurisdictional 
claims,  which  states  made  to  all  surrounding 
seas,  and  the  denial  of  all  rights  to  any  part 
of  the  tidal  waters.  Bynkershoek,  in  1702,  as- 
serted that  the  sovereignty  of  a state  should 
extend  beyond  its  shores  as  far  as  it  could 
control  the  coastal  waters  by  means  of  cannon 
placed  on  the  land.  At  that  time  the  maximum 
cannon-range  was  about  one  marine  league. 
Although  this  measure  of  jurisdiction  has  come 
to  be  generally  adopted,  the  vast  increase  in 
the  range  of  projectiles  has  caused  attempts  to 
extend  the  strip  beyond  three  miles.  The  bet- 
ter opinion  seems  to  be,  and  this  is  in  general 
accord  with  the  present  policy  of  the  United 
States  and  Great  Britain,  that  it  would  be 
unwise  to  change  a principle  so  widely  rec- 
ognized and  to  which  international  practice 
has  adapted  itself ; and  that  the  attempt  to 
make  the  marginal  sea  conform  to  the  varying 
lengths  of  cannon-shots  would  result  in  con- 
fusion and  discord. 

The  exercise  of  jurisdiction  over  the  mar- 
ginal sea  is  justified  on  tlje  ground  of  security 
to  the  state,  as  a necessary  and  proper  means 


THURMAN  ACT— TILLMAN,  BENJAMIN  RYAN 


to  the  use  and  enjoyment  of  the  land  to  which 
it  is  appurtenant,  and  as  furnishing  a wise 
basis  for  property  rights  over  the  wealth  which 
the  costal  waters  produce.  While  the  author- 
ity of  the  state  is  complete  as  to  questions 
which  arise  from  these  considerations,  it  is 
limited  by  the  needs  of  ocean  navigation.  The 
rights  of  a state’s  vessels,  merchant  and  war, 
to  pass  through  the  marginal  sea  adjoining 
another  state  is  a sort  of  international  ease- 
ment necessary  for  the  convenient  use  of  the 
open  sea.  As  such,  the  doctrine  of  innocent 
use  and  passage  within  the  three-mile  limit 
is  now  universally  recognized. 

See  Bays  and  Gulfs  ; Mare  Clausum  ; 
Water  Boundaries  and  Jurisdiction. 

References:  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law 
(1906),  I,  535-698;  T.  J.  Lawrence,  Principles 
of  Int.  Law  (4th  ed.,  1910),  192-196;  C.  Calvo, 
Droit  Int.  (5th  ed.,  1896),  I,  478-480;  E.  Nys, 
Droit  Int.  (1904),  I,  497-522;  L.  Oppenlieim, 
Int.  Law  (1905),  I,  239-245;  J.  Westlake,  Int. 
Law  (1906),  I,  116-118,  183-198. 

J.  S.  Reeves. 

THURMAN  ACT.  See  Thurman,  Allen  G. 

THURMAN,  ALLEN  G.  Allen  G.  Thurman 

(1813-1895),  often  called  “the  old  Roman,”  was 
a native  of  Virginia  but  a lifelong  resident  of 
Ohio.  In  1845-1847  he  served  one  term  as  a 
Democratic  representative  in  Congress.  From 
1851  to  1856  he  was  a justice  of  the  supreme 
court  of  Ohio,  and  in  1868,  after  being  defeated 
narrowly  for  the  governorship  by  Rutherford 
B.  Hayes,  he  was  elected  by  a democratic  leg- 
islature to  succeed  Benjamin  F.  Wade  in  the 
United  States  Senate.  During  his  service  in 
the  upper  house  (1869-1881)  he  was  the 
recognized  leader  of  the  minority.  He  opposed 
the  Civil  Rights  Bill  and  the  resumption  of 
specie  payments  and  was  an  advocate  of  the 
Bland-Allison  Act.  His  principal  achievement 
consisted  in  securing  the  passage,  in  May, 
1878,  of  the  “Thurman  Act,”  by  which  the 
bond-aided  Pacific  railroad  corporations  were 
compelled  to  fulfill  their  obligations  to  the 
government.  In  1880  and  1884  Thurman  was 
an  unsuccessful  candidate  for  the  Democratic 
presidential  nomination.  At  the  St.  Louis 
convention  of  1888  he  was  nominated  by  ac- 
clamation for  the  vice-presidency;  but  the 
Cleveland-Thurman  ticket  was  defeated.  See 
Democratic  Party;  Sherman  Silver  Act. 

F.  A.  0. 

TIDAL  WAVE.  A term  indicating  the 
overwhelming  majority  of  the  winning  party 
at  an  election,  resulting  from  a great  “wave” 
of  public  opinion,  which  has  a tendency  to  sub- 
side as  rapidly  as  it  arose.  The  term  was  ap- 
plied particularly  to  the  unprecedented  suc- 
cess of  the  Democratic  party  in  the  state  and 
Congressional  elections  of  1874,  during  Grant’s 
second  term. 


TILDEN,  SAMUEL  JONES.  Samuel  J.  Til- 
den  (1814-1886)  was  born  at  New  Lebanon, 
N.  Y.,  February  9,  1814.  In  1841  he  was  ad- 
mitted to  the  bar.  In  1845-46  lie  was  a mem- 
ber of  the  assembly,  and  in  the  latter  year  a 
delegate  to  the  state  constitutional  convention. 
He  was  one  of  the  free-soil  delegates  to  the 
Democratic  national  convention  in  1848.  In 
1855  he  was  the  Democratic  candidate  for 
attorney  general  of  New  York,  but  was  unsuc- 
cessful. By  this  time  he  was  coming  rapidly 
to  prominence  as  a party  leader,  occupying 
also  a leading  position  at  the  bar;  and  in 
1866  was  made  chairman  of  the  Democratic 
state  committee.  While  holding  this  office  he 
took  a leading  part  in  the  overthrow  of  the 
Tweed  ring  (see).  He  was  a member  of  the 
state  constitutional  convention  of  1867,  and 
in  1874  was  elected  governor  of  New  York. 
The  most  notable  event  of  his  administration 
was  the  exposure  of  the  canal  ring  (see), 
which  had  been  defrauding  the  state  by  means 
of  contracts  for  work  not  done.  A proposed 
scheme  of  municipal  government,  framed  by  a 
commission  on  his  recommendation,  failed  of 
approval  by  the  legislature  through  the  in- 
fluence, it  was  said,  of  Roscoe  Conkling.  In 
1876  he  was  nominated  for  the  presidency  by 
the  Democrats,  notwithstanding  the  opposition 
of  Tammany.  Under  the  decisions  of  the  com- 
mission, he  was  awarded  184  votes  against 
185  for  Hayes,  but  his  popular  vote  was  slight- 
ly in  excess  of  that  of  Hayes.  In  the  Demo- 
cratic national  convention  of  1880  he  had  con- 
siderable support,  but  declined  to  be  a candi- 
date. He  died  near  Yonkers,  N.  Y.,  August  4, 
1886.  See  Democratic  Party;  Electoral 
Commission.  References:  Samuel  J.  Tilden, 
Writings  and.  Speeches  (1888);  J.  Bigelow, 
Life  of  Samuel  J.  Tilden  (1895);  De  A.  S. 
Alexander,  Pol.  Hist,  of  the  State  of  N.  Y. 
(1906),  ch.  iii;  J.  K.  McGuire,  Democratic 
Party  of  the  State  of  N.  Y.  (1905), 
iii;  P.  L.  Haworth,  Hayes-Tilden  Disputed 
Presidential  Election  (1906). 

W.  MacD. 

TILLMAN,  BENJAMIN  RYAN.  Benjamin 
R.  Tillman  ( 1847—  ) was  born  in  Edge- 

field  county,  S.  C.,  August  11,  1847.  He  be- 
came a farmer,  and  entered  state  politics  by 
inaugurating  at  Columbia,  in  1886,  a “farmers’ 
movement”  for  agricultural  education  and  im- 
proved agricultural  conditions.  In  1887  he 
prepared  the  way  for  the  establishment  of  the 
Clemson  Agricultural  College.  Becoming  the 
head  of  the  Farmers’  Alliance  (see),  he  began 
a bitter  struggle  against  the  state  Democratic 
organization,  and  in  1890  was  elected  gover- 
nor. He  was  reelected  in  1892.  The  principle 
events  of  his  administrations  were  the  passage 
of  the  dispensary  law,  under  which  the  state 
assumed  control  of  the  liquor  traffic;  and  the 
establishment  of  the  Winthrop  Normal  and  In- 
dustrial College  for  Women.  In  the  state  con- 


O.  C.  H. 

537 


TIMBER  LANDS— TOBACCO  LEGISLATION 


stitutional  convention  of  1895  he  was  chair- 
man of  the  committee  on  suffrage,  and  through 
an  educational  and  property  qualification  near- 
ly eliminated  the  negro  vote.  In  1895  he  was 
elected  United  States  Senator,  and  was  reelect- 
ed in  1901,  1907  and  1913.  His  first  speech 
in  the  Senate  was  a severe  attack  on 
President  Cleveland.  In  the  silver  contro- 
versy he  sided  with  the  free-silver  wing  of  the 
Democrats.  His  extreme  views,  dominating 
personality,  and  violent  temper  have  involved 
him  in  numerous  controversies.  See  Demo- 
cratic Party  ; Negro  Problem.  Reference: 
Appleton’s  Annual  Cyclopedia  (1890-1901). 

W.  MacD. 

TIMBER  LANDS.  The  present  method  of 
acquiring  timber  lands  in  the  public  domain 
dates  from  the  Timber  and  Stone  Act  of  June 
3,  1878.  As  amended  the  act  provides  that 
all  unreserved,  unappropriated,  non-mineral, 
surveyed,  public  lands  within  the  public-land 
states,  which  are  valuable  chiefly  for  the  tim- 
ber or  stone  thereon  and  unfit  for  cultivation 
at  the  date  of  sale,  may  be  sold  at  their  ap- 
praised value,  but  in  no  case  for  less  than  $2.50 
per  acre.  The  provisions  of  the  act  are  con- 
fined to  citizens  or  persons  who  have  declared 
their  intentions  to  become  such ; no  person  or 
corporation  can  legally  acquire  more  than 
1G0  acres;  proof  must  be  made  of  the  non- 
mineral and  non-agricultural  character  of  the 
land;  and  a sworn  statement  that  the  land 
is  not  sought  for  speculation  but  in  good 
faith  for  the  exclusive  use  and  benefit  of  the 
applicant  must  be  presented.  From  the  time 
of  its  earliest  operation  this  law  has  been 
subjected  to  severe  criticism.  Great  tracts 
of  valuable  timber  lands  have  been  secured 
by  large  corporations  through  systematic 
collusion  with  the  individual  applicants. 
Proof  of  such  agreements,  however,  is  difficult 
to  secure.  The  repeal  of  the  law  has  been 
urged  for  many  years.  In  its  place  a law  pro- 
viding for  the  sale  of  the  timber  at  its  market 
price,  with  a retention  of  the  land  for  future 
disposal,  has  been  urged.  Since  1908  an  effort 
has  been  made  to  appraise  timber  lands,  but 
before  that  time  the  sale  was  always  made  at 
the  minimum  price.  Large  areas  of  timber 
lands  have  also  been  taken  up  under  the  home- 
stead laws,  and  then  commuted  at  $1.25  an 
acre.  The  protection  of  timber  lands  from 
depredation  is  one  feature  of  the  work  of  the 
field  service  of  the  General  Land  Office.  From 
1878  to  1912  there  were  99,535  timber  and 
stone  entries,  for  13,059,658  acres  and  $32,- 
839,932  received.  See  Conservation;  Forest 
Service;  Public  Lands,  Reservation  of. 
References:  General  Land  Office,  Regulations 
under  Timber  and  Stone  Act  of  June  3,  1878, 
and  Acts  Amendatory  (1908)  ; National  Con- 
servation Commission,  Report  (1909),  II,  192- 
5,  III,  387-390;  Public  Lands  Commission,  Re- 
port (1905),  62-65.  P.  J.  Treat. 


TIPPECANOE  AND  TYLER  TOO.  The  re- 
frain of  a campaign  song  of  the  Whigs  dur- 
ing the  presidential  campaign  of  1840  (see 
Hard  Cider  Campaign;  Log  Cabin  Cam- 
paign), composed  by  A.  C.  Ross  of  Zanesville, 
Ohio,  and  referring  to  “Tippecanoe”  Harrison 
and  John  Tyler,  the  Whig  candidates.  See 
Harrison,  W.  H.;  Tyler,  John;  Whig  Party. 

0.  C.  H. 

TISSUE  BALLOTS.  Election  ballots  printed 
on  thin  tissue  paper  so  that  a number  of  them 
can  be  deposited  by  a voter  without  detection, 
used  extensively  in  certain  southern  states 
about  1876  to  nullify  the  negro  vote.  See 
Ballot  Box  Stuffing;  Negro  Suffrage. 

O.  C.  H. 

TOBACCO  CASE.  See  Reasonableness  in 
Restraint  of  Trade;  Sherman  Anti-Trust 
Act. 

TOBACCO  LEGISLATION.  The  agitation 
for  laws  restricting  the  sale  of  tobacco  began 
more  than  fifty  years  ago,  but  did  not  result 
in  much  legislation,  except  local  ordinances 
against  smoking  in  public  places,  until  1891, 
when  no  less  than  15  states  enacted  statutes 
forbidding  the  sale  of  tobacco  or  cigarettes  to 
minors.  Since  that  year  all  the  states,  with 
two  or  thrfee  exceptions,  have  passed  anti- 
tobacco laws.  They  usually  prohibit  the  sale 
of  tobacco  in  any  form,  or  only  that  of  cigar- 
ettes and- cigarette  paper  to  minors  under  16 
or  18  years  of  age.  In  several  states  violation 
of  the  anti-tobacco  law  is  a misdemeanor;  in 
others,  special  penalties  are  prescribed,  ranging 
as  high  as  a maximum  of  $500  for  a first  of- 
fense or  imprisonment  for  three  months.  In 
some  states  minors  may  be  fined  for  smoking. 
Thus  in  Connecticut,  any  person  under  16 
years  of  age  who  smokes  or  uses  tobacco  in 
any  form  in  any  public  street,  or  place,  shall 
be  fined  seven  dollars  for  each  offense.  In 
Illinois,  any  minor  under  18  and  over  7 years 
of  age  who  smokes  cigarettes  in  any  public 
place  is  subject  to  a fine  of  not  more  than  ten 
dollars.  In  a few  instances,  it  has  been  sought 
to  strengthen  the  law  by  making  dealers  swear 
not  to  sell  tobacco  to  minors,  by  fixing  a high 
license  fee  for  selling  cigarettes,  taxing  the 
sale  of  cigarette  paper,  etc.  The  frequent  re- 
enactment of  anti-tobacco  laws  testifies  to  the 
difficulty  of  their  enforcement.  The  states  of 
Florida,  Iowa,  Indiana,  Kansas,  North  Dakota 
and  Washington  forbid  absolutely  the  manu- 
facture and  sale  of  cigarettes  as  well  as  of 
cigarette  paper,  under  a maximum  fine  of 
$500  upon  a second  offense  or  imprisonment  for 
not  more  than  6 months.  Under  the  leader- 
ship of  the  Anti-Cigarette  League  similar  legis- 
lation is  constantly  being  advocated  in  other 
states.  See  Drugs,  Public  Regulation  of; 
Health,  Public  Regulation  of;  Public  Mor- 
als, Care  for.  J.  K. 


538 


TOCQUEVILLE,  ALEXIS,  COMTE  DE— TOOMBS,  ROBERT  AUGUSTUS 


TOCQUEVILLE,  ALEXIS,  COMTE  de.  The 

Corate  de  Tocqueville  (1805-1859)  was  born 
at  Yerneuil,  France,  July  29,  1805.  He  was 
educated  for  the  bar,  and  in  1830  became  an 
assistant  magistrate.  In  1831  he  visited  Amer- 
ica, in  company  with  his  friend  Gustave  de 
Beaumont,  on  a government  commission  to  in- 
vestigate prisons  and  penitentiaries.  His  re- 
port, Du  systeme  penitentiare  aux  Etats-Unis, 
was  published  in  1832  (English  translation, 
1833).  The  most  notable  fruit  of  his  visit, 
however,  was  his  De  la  Democratic  en  Ameri- 
que,  first  published  in  1835  and  again  in  1850, 
and  translated  as  Democracy  in  America 
(1835-40).  This  was  the  first  philosophical  and 
impartial  examination  of  American  life  and  in- 
stitutions, and  remains  of  prime  value.  In 
1841  De  Tocqueville  was  elected  a member  of 
the  French  Academy.  He  entered  political  life 
in  1839,  but  remained  in  opposition  until  the 
revolution  of  1848,  when  he  became  a member 
of  the  committee  which  drafted  the  consti- 
tution of  the  Second  Republic.  In  1849  he  was 
president  of  the  assembly,  and  for  a few 
months  foreign  minister.  He  was  arrested  in 
the  coup  d’etat  of  1851,  and  thereafter  re- 
mained in  private  life  until  his  death,  April 
16,  1859,  at  Cannes.  See  Popular  Govern- 
ment. References:  H.  Reeves,  Trans.,  Democ- 
racy in  America  (2d  ed.,  1898)  ; G.  de  Beau- 
mont, Ed.,  CEuvres  et  Correspondence  Inedites 
D’ Alexis  de  Tocqueville  (1861),  translated  as 
Memoirs  and  Letters  (1861).  \V.  MacD. 

TOKEN  COINAGE.  Token  coins  are  coins 
made  of  copper  or  other  base  metals.  Accord- 
ing to  American  terminology  these  are  known 
as  minor  coins.  Sometimes  this  term  is  given 
a wider  meaning  to  include  all  coins  on  which 
there  is  a large  seigniorage  (see),  and  also 
to  private  issues,  as  in  1861.  See  Coinage, 
Subsidiary.  Reference:  Monetary  Commission, 
Report  (1898),  113-130.  D.  R.  D. 

TOLL-ROADS.  Corporations,  commonly 
called  “turnpike  companies,”  chartered  by  the 
national  or  state  governments,  have  built  by 
private  capital,  and  maintained  by  tolls  col- 
lected from  travellers,  many  important  roads 
in  the  United  States.  The  rates  of  toll  are 
made  by  legislative  or  county  officers  or  by 
the  companies,  and  vary  not  only  according 
to  the  kind  of  traffic,  but  also  differ  greatly 
among  the  states;  for  example,  for  a two-horse 
wagon  from  about  one  to  five  cents  a mile. 
The  toll-roads  system  began  about  the  time  of 
the  Revolutionary  War,  and  for  more  than  a 
century  was  one  of  the  chief  (frequently  the 
only)  instrumentality  through  which  the  longer 
roads  between  communities  could  be  built  or 
improved;  thus  these  corporations  performed 
an  important  service  in  developing  the  country. 
Some  toll-roads  have  been  very  lucrative;  and 
at  certain  periods  turnpike  companies  were 
a favorite  field  for  speculation.  In  1811  about 
132  5 


5000  miles  had  been  built  in  New  England  and 
New  York.  From  the  beginning  many  toll- 
roads  were  unprofitable  on  account  of  poor  con- 
struction or  location,  or  insufficient  revenue, 
and  eventually,  owing  to  railroad  and  public 
road  competition  others  became  unprofitable, 
and  many  were  voluntarily  abandoned  by  the 
stockholders;  some  franchises  expired,  others 
were  forfeited.  One  or  two  states  had  toll- 
roads  managed  by  public  authority.  Ten  states 
never  had  toll-roads.  In  later  years,  especially 
in  prosperous  communities,  strong  public  opin- 
ion has  developed  against  toll-roads,  as  badly 
maintained,  unduly  used  to  promote  private 
interests,  or  in  short,  an  unjust  monopoly,  and 
has  led  to  the  purchase  or  condemnation  of 
many  toll-roads.  In  spite  of  public  feeling, 
however,  defective  laws  have  enabled  stock- 
holders of  profitable  turnpikes  to  maintain 
their  ownerships,  and  some  communities  are  as 
yet  unable  or  unwilling  to  take  the  responsi- 
bility for  all  their  roads.  The  actual  mileage 
of  toll-roads  though  unknown  is  still  consid- 
erable, especially  in'  the  South,  but  is  a very 
small  proportion  of  the  total  road  mileage  of 
the  country. 

See  Bridges,  Public;  Roads. 

References:  J.  W.  J^nks,  “Road  Legislation 
for  the  American  State”  in  Am.  Econ.  Assoc., 
Publications,  IV  (1889),  170-171,  and  Appen- 
dix II;  U.  S.  Dept.  Agriculture,  Year  Book, 
1899,  370-372;  Office  of  Road  Inquiry,  Bulle- 
tin 17  (1895)  ; Office  of  Public  Roads,  Bulle- 
tin 32  (1907);  N.  S.  Shaler,  American  High- 
ways (1896),  19-23,  93-95. 

Hector  J.  Hughes. 

TONNAGE  TAX.  See  Tax,  Tonnage. 

TOOMBS,  ROBERT  AUGUSTUS.  Robert  A. 
Toombs  (1810-1885)  was  born  in  Wilkes 
County,  Ga.,  July  2,  1810.  He  was  admitted  to 
the  bar  in  1830,  and  served  in  the  Creek  War 
of  1836.  From  1837  to  1840,  and  in  1842-43, 
he  was  a member  of  the  Georgia  legislature, 
becoming  tbe  recognized  leader  of  the  state 
rights  Whigs.  In  1844  he  was  a delegate  to  the 
Democratic  national  convention,  and  the  next 
year  was  elected  to  Congress,  retaining  his 
seat  in  the  House  until  1853,  when  he  was 
elected  to  the  Senate.  He  was  a member  of 
the  committee  to  whom  was  referred  the  Crit- 
tenden compromise,  in  December,  1860 ; but 
he  had  already,  in  an  able  speech,  advocated 
disunion,  and  on  January  5,  1861,  joined  the 
southern  Senators  in  recommending  immediate 
secession  and  the  formation  of  a southern  Con- 
federacy. He  had  strong  support  for  the 
presidency,  but  his  name,  apparently  through 
some  misunderstanding,  was  not  presented  in 
the  Montgomery  convention.  On  the  organ- 
ization of  the  Confederate  Government  he  was 
appointed  Secretary  of  State,  but  resigned  in 
September,  1861,  to  become  a brigadier  gen- 
eral. At  the  close  of  the  war  he  went  abroad, 


TOPEKA  CONSTITUTION— TORT 


but  returned  in  1871  and  resumed  his  law 
practice.  In  1877  he  sat  in  the  Georgia  con- 
stitutional convention.  He  died  at  Washington, 
Ga.,  December  15,  1885.  See  Confederate 
States  of  America;  Pro- Slavery.  Refer- 
ences: P.  A.  Stovall,  Robert  Toombs  (1892); 
T.  C.  Smith,  Parties  and  Slavery  (1906);  J. 
F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (1893-1905), 
I-V ; J.  Davis,  Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Confeder- 
ate Government  (1881).  W.  MacD. 

TOPEKA  CONSTITUTION.  See  Kansas; 

Kansas  Struggle. 

TORIES.  The  term  was  applied  to  the 
American  Loyalists  because  they  were  held 
to  be  supporting  the  cause  of  the  king  as 
against  the  cause  of  the  American  people.  In 
English  politics  it  was  the  Tory  party  which 
had  long  upheld  the  prerogatives  of  the  King 
as  against  the  Whigs  who  upheld  the  rights 
of  the  Parliament.  See  Loyalists;  Revolu- 
tion, American,  Causes  of. 

C.  H.  Van  T. 

TORIES,  BRITISH.  Men  of  the  Conserva- 
tive party  still  occasionally  speak  of  them- 
selves colloquially  as  Tories.  More  frequent- 
ly Radical  and  Socialist  speakers  use  the  term 
in  disparagement.  In  official  documents  of 
Conservative  organizations,  in  Conservative 
newspapers,  and  in  the  printed  addresses  of 
Conservative  candidates  the  term  is  never  used. 
At  the  suggestion  of  John  Wilson  Croker,  the 
term  Conservative  was  substituted  soon  after 
the  Reform  Act  of  1832,  and  the  word  Tory 
gradually  disappeared  from  electioneering  lit- 
erature and  the  poll  books.  The  change 
marked  the  passing  of  the  toryism  that  can  be 
traced  back  to  the  reign  of  James  I,  that 
reached  its  zenith  between  Pitt’s  Administra- 
tion of  1784  and  the  downfall  of  the  Welling- 
ton Ministry  of  1830.  Toryism  existed  before 
party  lines  were  definitely  drawn  in  Parlia- 
ment. Throughout  the  seventeenth  and  eigh- 
teenth centuries  it  was  an  attitude  towards 
the  sovereign  and  the  church.  The  Tories  op- 
posed the  Revolution  of  1688,  their  sympathies 
were  with  the  exiled  Stuarts  until  the  Jacobite 
rising  of  1745,  and  they  were  the  consistent 
upholders  of  the  claims  of  the  high  church- 
men and  zealous  for  the  established  church. 
After  the  accession  of  George  III  “they  changed 
their  idol  but  preserved  their  idolatry,”  and 
thereafter  the  Tories  were  wont  to  claim  a 
monopoly  of  loyalty  to  the  throne.  They  op- 
posed the  repeal  of  the  Test  Act  until  1828, 
and  the  removal  of  the  Roman  Catholic  dis- 
abilities until  1829.  It  cannot  be  said  that 
the  Tories  of  1760-1830 — except  during  Pitt’s 
first  term  as  premier — had  any  constructive 
policies.  They  were  the  “stand-patters”  of  this 
somber  period  of  English  history  The  repres- 
sive laws  of  1793-99  and  of  1819 — part  of  the 
countermovement  to  the  agitation  for  parlia- 


mentary reform — were  enacted  by  the  Tories. 
For  half  a century  the  Tories  continuously  op- 
posed parliamentary  reform,  and  the  fullest 
statement  of  Tory  doctrine  is  in  the  arguments 
advanced  in  Parliament  against  the  Reform 
Act  of  1832.  Tories  then  contended  that  gov- 
ernment by  King,  Lords  and  Commons,  as  it 
then  existed,  was  a beautiful  mosaic  not  to  be 
disturbed;  that  reform  was  a death  blow  to 
monarchy,  the  established  church  and  the 
House  of  Lords;  and  that  democratic  govern- 
ment meant  no  taxes,  no  king,  no  aristocracy, 
no  tithes,  no  rent,  and  repudiation  of  the  na- 
tional debt.  By  1832  the  old  Toryism  had  ex- 
hausted itself ; and  next  time  the  Tories  came 
into  power — 1841-46 — the  party  of  opposition 
to  Liberalism  had  become  known  as  Conserva- 
tives, and  was  adapting  itself  to  the  England 
of  the  Reform  Act.  See  Conservative  Party 
in  England;  Liberal  Unionists;  Liberals; 
Party  Government  in  Great  Britain.  Refer- 
ences: T.  E.  Kebbel,  Hist,  of  Toryism  (1886)  ; 
G.  W.  Cooke,  Hist,  of  Party  (1836)  ; C.  B.  R. 
Kent,  Early  History  of  the  Tories  (1908);  F. 
E.  Smith,  Toryism  (1903). 

Edward  Porritt. 

TORRENS  SYSTEM.  A method  for  the  offi- 
cial determination  and  registration  of  titles 
to  land,  recently  introduced  in  a number  of 
American  states.  In  parts  of  continental 
Europe  registration  of  land  titles  has  been  es- 
tablished for  centuries,  but  the  system  adopted 
in  this  country  has  been  adapted  from  that 
devised  by  Robert  Torrens  from  the  official 
registry  of  ship  owners  and  adopted  in  Aus- 
tralia, and  later  in  England  and  Canada.  The 
laws  for  this  registration  of  land  titles  pro- 
vide for  an  official  examination  of  the  docu- 
ments affecting  land  titles  in  the  public 
records,  an  investigation  of  conflicting  claims, 
and  the  issuance  of  certificates  of  title  by  a 
court;  while  subsequent  transactions  affecting 
land  so  certified  must  be  entered  on  the  regis- 
try of  titles.  Some  difficulty  has  been  experi- 
enced in  framing  statutes  which  would  be  con- 
sidered valid  under  the  provisions  of  the  state 
constitutions.  This  system  of  title  registra- 
tion has  now  been  authorized  in  Massachusetts, 
New  York,  Illinois,  Minnesota,  Colorado,  Ore- 
gon, Washington  and  California;  but  it  will 
take  many  years  before  it  covers  most  of  the 
land  even  in  these  states. 

See  Land  Records;  Recorder  of  Deeds. 

References:  J.  H.  Brewster,  Conveyancing 
(1904),  ch.  xxix;  Am.  Law  Review,  XXXVI, 
(1902) ; Am.  Year  Book,  1911,  167. 

J.  A.  F. 

TORT.  A civil  injury  to  person  or  property, 
as  distinguished  from  a crime  or  public  wrong, 
for  which  an  action  for  damages  may  be 
brought  by  the  injured  party.  Injuries  aris- 
ing out  of  breaches  of  contract  as  such  are 
excluded.  H.  M.  B. 


540 


TOWN  CLERK— TOWN-COUNTY  SYSTEM 


TOWN  CLERK.  The  town  or  township  clerk 
is  a local  officer  holding  in  New  England  a 
place  next  in  importance  to  the  selectmen. 
Elsewhere  he  is  the  township  officer  having  the 
greatest  number  and  variety  of  duties.  He  is 
usually  an  elective  officer  and  is  responsible  di- 
rectly to  the  people.  Among  his  numerous 
duties  as  prescribed  by  the  statutes  of  the  var- 
ious states  are:  calling  of  the  town  meeting 
and  recording  of  its  proceedings;  care  of  the 
records  of  the  township;  in  some  instances,  re- 
cording of  deeds  and  mortgages,  issuing  of  mar- 
riage licenses;  registering  of  brands  or  marks 
of  cattle;  issuing  of  licenses  to  peddlers  and 
auctioneers;  taking  of  the  township  census;  re- 
cording of  public  improvements;  approving  of 
liquor  licenses. 

In  some  jurisdictions  this  officer  may  per- 
form the  official  duties  of  a clerk  to  the  town- 
ship school  board,  or  act  as  the  township  treas- 
urer. By  virtue  of  his  office  he  may  become 
the  secretary  of  the  township  board  of  health, 
or  custodian  of  the  town  hall — and  thereby  be 
vested  with  police  power.  Acting  as  treasurer, 
he  may  be  required  to  post  public  statements 
of  receipts  and  expenditures  at  the  time  of  the 
township  election.  Bonds  of  other  township 
officers  may  be  subject  to  approval  by  him. 
Road  funds  and  road  equipment  for  the  town- 
ship are  sometimes  placed  in  his  hands,  as  well 
as  other  duties  connected  with  road  adminis- 
tration. Finally,  in  states  where  the  compos- 
ite board  exists  the  township  clerk  may  become 
a member  ex  officio  of  the  township  board.  In 
the  New  England  states  the  legislatures  are 
fond  of  assigning  petty  duties  and  responsi- 
bilities to  the  town  clerk. 

See  Local  Government  and  the  States; 
Town  Meetings;  Towns  and  Townships. 

References:  J.  Fiske,  Civil  Government 
(1890),  20,  24,  32,  79;  J.  A.  Fairlie,  Local 
Government  (1906),  158,  177;  G.  E.  Howard, 
Local  Constitutional  Hist.  (1889),  I,  89,  163, 
173;  E.  Channing,  “ Town  and  County  Govern- 
ment” in  Johns  Hopkins  University,  Studies, 
II  (1884),  ch.  x;  statute  laws  of  the  several 
states.  B.  F.  Shambaugh. 

TOWN-COUNTY  SYSTEM.  A term  ap- 
plied to  the  local  government  in  the  middle 
Atlantic  and  north  central  states,  in  which 
both  towns  (or  townships)  and  counties  are 
of  importance.  It  represents  a middle  ground 
between  the  New  England  system,  in  which  the 
town  predominates,  and  the  county-precinct 
system  of  the  southern  and  far  western  states. 
The  states  where  the  town-county  system  is  in 
force  have  more  than  half  the  population  of 
the  United  States;  but  the  total  area  under 
the  county-precinct  system  is  larger  than  that 
under  the  town-county  system. 

Local  government  under  the  town-county 
system  is  not,  however,  identical  in  all  respects 
in  the  several  states;  but  there  are  consider- 
able differences  both  in  the  relative  importance 


of  towns  and  counties,  and  also  in  the  forms 
of  organization.  In  New  Y"ork  and  New  Jer- 
sey, towns  were  established  in  the  early  colonial 
days  before  counties  were  organized;  and  in 
these  states  and  also  in  Michigan,  Illinois,  Wis- 
consin and  Minnesota,  the  towns  and  townships 
appear  to  be  somewhat  more  important  than 
in  the  other  states  under  the  town-county  sys- 
tem. Town-meetings  are  provided  for  by  stat- 
ute; and  in  some  localities  are  active  insti- 
tutions. But  even  in  these  states,  the  functions 
of  town  government  are  of  less  significance 
than  in  New  England;  and  for  the  most  part 
the  town-meetings  are  little  more  than  public 
elections,  the  business  affairs  being  decided  by 
a small  number  of  citizens  or  often  by  the 
town  officers.  In  the  more  southerly  states 
where  the  town-county  system  prevails — Penn- 
sylvania, Ohio,  Indiana,  Iowa,  Kansas  and  Ne- 
braska— county  government  is  older  than 
township  government;  and  the  latter  is  less 
important.  There  are  no  township  meetings 
for  business  purposes;  and  the  town  affairs 
are  decided  by  officials. 

In  the  whole  group  of  states  under  the  town- 
county  system,  county  government  tends  to 
become  stronger  and  town  government  weaker. 
Poor  relief  is  mainly  a county  function;  in 
some  states  there  are  important  county  roads 
and  bridges;  there  is  regularly  county  super- 
vision over  local  school  officials;  and  in  a num- 
ber of  these  states  the  assessment  of  property 
for  taxation  and  sometimes  even  town  finances 
are  subject  to  the  supervision  of  county  offi- 
cials. This  tendency  appears  to  be  due  in  part 
to  the  fact  that  the  townships  in  the  middle 
west  are  purely  artificial  areas,  and  do  not 
correspond  to  the  economic  and  social  needs; 
in  part,  to  the  separate  organization  of  villages, 
which  attend  to  a good  share  of  the  problems 
of  local  government.  Another  factor  is  the  in- 
creasing realization  of  the  need  for  more  effi- 
cient public  service,  which  is  often  better  se- 
cured by  a few  salaried  county  officers  then 
through  a large  number  of  unpaid  town  officials. 

The  organization  of  town  and  county  govern- 
ment in  states  under  the  town-county  system 
also  shows  a good  many  variations.  In  those 
states  where  town  meetings  are  provided,  there 
is  a well-defined  chief  officer  of  the  town,  gener- 
ally called  the  supervisor,  who  is  usually  also 
a member  of  the  county  board.  In  Indiana  and 
Kansas  the  township  trustee  is  the  chief  offi- 
cer of  the  town.  In  Pennsylvania,  Ohio,  Iowa, 
Minnesota  and  the  Dakotas,  the  principal  town 
authority  is  a small  board  or  committee,  some- 
what similar  to  the  selectmen  of  New  England, 
although  that  term  is  not  used  in  any  of  these 
states.  In  most  of  the  states  with  town  meet- 
ings, the  county  board  is  composed  of  town 
supervisors;  while  in  the  larger  number  of 
states  under  the  town-county  system  the  county 
board  has  a small  number  of  members,  usually 
called  commissioners.  Other  county  officers  are 
more  numerous  than  in  New  England,  and  are 


541 


TOWN  MEETINGS 


about  the  same  as  in  the  southern  and  far 
western  states,  with  the  exception  of  county 
assessors. 

See  County  Government;  County-Precinct 
System. 

References:  J.  A.  Fairlie,  Local  Government 
in  Counties,  Toicns  and  Villages  (1906),  ch.  x; 
G.  E.  Howard,  Local  Constitutional  History 
(1889).  John  A.  Fairlie. 

TOWN  MEETINGS.  Genesis.— Probably 
the  primal  form  of  government  is  the  assem- 
blage of  the  people,  or  that  part  of  the  people 
which  is  considered  capable  of  political  action, 
for  the  transaction  of  public  business.  It  sur- 
vives in  village  meetings  in  China  and  in 
Russia;  appears  in  the  scanty  accounts  which 
we  possess  of  Germanic  institutions,  and  is 
still  regularly  practiced  in  those  cantons  of 
Switzerland  which  possess  the  landesgemeinde. 
Its  rivals  are  the  system  of  a local  council, 
and  the  system  of  arbitrary  chieftainship, 
both  of  which  are  frequently  combined  with  the 
regular  meeting  of  the  freemen. 

This  institution  can  dimly  be  traced  in  Eng- 
land in  the  “wapentake”  and  “shire  moots,” 
but  now  exists  only  in  the  form  of  parish  meet- 
ings, for  which  have  recently  been  substituted 
parish  councils  (see). 

Early  Colonial  Town  Meetings. — Such  parish 
meetings  and  the  courts  leet  and  baron  held 
by  the  tenants  of  certain  estates  seem  to  be  the 
model  for  the  town  meetings  which  sprang  up 
in  every  New  England  colony  immediately  on 
their  foundation.  This  part  of  the  colonies 
was  settled  by  communities  of  people,  partly 
organized  before  they  landed.  The  Mayflower 
compact  (see)  was  an  agreement  for  the  gov- 
ernment of  such  a community,  and  till  the 
settlement  of  additional  towns  in  Plymouth 
(see)  the  town  meeting  and  the  colony  meet- 
ing were  the  same  thing.  In  Massachusetts 
the  different  settlements  were  made  by  bodies 
of  people  with  a minister,  who  began  at  once 
to  take  care  of  their  local  affairs  in  meetings 
of  the  church,  and  rather  ungraciously  ad- 
mitted the  superior  power  of  the  colonial  gov- 
ernment when  it  was  formed. 

From  the  beginning  only  a part  of  the  adult 
men  could  vote  in  the  town  meeting.  Dis- 
tinctions were  made  between  the  church  mem- 
bers acting  in  church  affairs,  the  landholders, 
acting  in  territorial  matters,  and  the  body 
of  citizens  acting  in  public  affairs.  The  gen- 
eral rule  was,  after  the  system  was  established, 
that  nobody  could  vote  in  a town  meeting  who 
was  not  a voter  in  colonial  affairs.  This  was 
the  more  important  because  all  the  colonial 
elections  were  conducted  after  the  first  few 
years  in  the  town  meetings.  To  the  present 
day,  however,  there  are  still  in  some  com- 
munities, as  in  Providence  and  New  Haven,  a 
select  body  of  people  who  can  vote  in  special 
proprietors’  or  town  meetings  membership  in 
which  is  not  open  to  most  of  the  citizens. 


In  the  southern  and  the  middle  colonies,  also, 
there  were  assemblies  of  voters;  but  nowhere 
outside  of  the  New  England  group  was  there  a 
mass  meeting  of  voters  who  could  not  only 
elect  officers,  but  could  legislate  for  their  com- 
munity. The  town  meeting  has  never  been 
representative;  it  is  the  prime  legislature  for 
town  affairs,  undertakes  or  supervises  many 
executive  matters,  and  in  early  days  acted  as 
a local  court. 

Legal  Basis. — Like  all  other  functions  and 
privileges  of  the  towns,  the  town  meeting  is  in 
every  state  where  it  exists,  dependent  upon  the 
will  of  the  state  legislature,  or  of  the  makers 
of  the  state  constitution.  Whenever  the  com- 
munity is  brought  by  law  under  a different 
form  of  organization  as  a city,  the  town  meet- 
ing ceases  to  be,  except  in  the  occasional  cases 
mentioned  above.  In  Massachusetts,  any  com- 
munity which  has  come  to  have  15,000  people, 
may  on  its  expressed  wish,  receive  a municipal 
government  under  general  laws,  which  super- 
sedes the  town  meeting.  The  duties  of  town 
officers,  the  form  and  powers  of  the  town  meet- 
ing, are  alike  subject  to  the  will  of  the  legis- 
lature within  its  constitutional  limitations. 

In  the  town  meeting  states,  it  is  the  habit 
of  the  state  legislatures  to  assign  to  town 
and  town  officers  a variety  of  public  services 
which  in  other  states  are  performed  by  coun- 
ty governments  or  by  state  officers. 

Extent. — The  town  system  appears  in  Penn- 
sylvania, New  York  and  a number  of  the  middle 
western  states;  but  the  town  meeting,  except 
for  the  choice  of  town  officers,  is  found  only  in 
New  England  and  in  Michigan;  though  au- 
thorized in  a part  of  the  Illinois  towns;  it  is 
there  inactive.  In  colonial  times  there  were 
also  town  meetings  in  eastern  Long  Island  (in 
towns  at  that  time  associated  with  New 
Haven)  ; and  Thomas  Jefferson  urged  the  adop- 
tion of  the  system  in  Virginia.  Probably  a 
majority  of  the  people  in  New  England  live 
under  city  government;  but  the  town  meeting 
is  still  a practical,  and  on  the  whole  an  effi- 
cient, government  in  the  rural  parts  of  all  the 
six  New  England  states. 

Procedure. — With  minor  variations,  the 
methods  and  forms  of  the  town  meeting  are  as 
follows.  An  annual  meeting  is  held  at  a time 
fixed  by  a statute  or  constitution,  and  may  be 
adjourned  or  continued  from  time  to  time  till 
the  business  is  completed.  In  addition,  special 
town  meetings  must  be  called  on  the  petition 
of  a fixed  number  or  proportion  of  voters. 
The  business  to  be  considered  is  stated  in  a 
warrant,  which  is  posted  in  a public  place, 
or  mailed  to  the  voters  before  the  meeting; 
and  no  business  can  be  transacted  which  is 
not  mentioned  in  the  warrant,  though  there 
is  no  obligation  to  dispose  of  any  matter  men- 
tioned in  the  warrant. 

For  each  town  meeting  is  chosen  a moderat- 
or, who  often  serves  by  successive  elections  at 
every  town  meeting  for  many  years.  Parlia- 


542 


TOWNS  AND  TOWNSHIPS 


mentary  law  is  simple,  and  the  debate,  especial- 
ly in  the  farming  communities,  is  lively  and  to 
the  point.  In  most  cases  the  business  is  com- 
pleted in  one  day,  though  sometimes  it  takes 
two  or  more  sessions. 

Functions. — Though  state  elections  are  no 
longer  held  in  the  town  meetings,  one  of  the 
principal  purposes  is  to  choose  the  town  offi- 
cers, whose  term  is  almost  invariably  one  year. 
The  principal  officers  are:  the  selectmen  (see) 
who  are  the  standing  town  executive;  the  town 
clerk  (see)  ; the  school  committee  (see)  ; the 
highway  superintendent  or  superintendent  of 
roads  (see  Roads)  ; the  town  treasurer  (see 
Finance,  Local  Systems  of)  ; and  in  recent 
times  the  board  of  health  (see  Health,  Pub- 
lic Regulation  of  ) . Reports  from  the  select- 
men, school  committee  and  the  town  treasurer, 
are  expected  at  the  annual  town  meeting. 

The  second  function  of  town  meeting  is  local 
legislation  on  a great  variety  of  matters,  such 
as  the  town  cemetery,  town  hall,  town  library, 
town  water  works,  roads,  local  police  ordin- 
ances and  the  like.  Particularly  important  is 
the  financial  legislation,  which  involves  tax- 
ation, appropriations,  and  the  contracting  of 
loans.  The  careful  discussion  of  items  in  the 
budget  is  one  of  the  educative  influences  of 
the  town  meeting.  In  local  option  (see)  states, 
the  question  of  license  or  no  license  for  the 
sale  of  liquor  the  next  year,  is  settled  by  vote 
of  the  town  meeting. 

A broader  function  of  the  town  meeting  is 
the  interest  which  it  develops  in  public  affairs, 
women,  children  and  non-voters  often  visit  the 


town  meeting;  and  the  items  of  town  business 
are  known  to  all  the  voters  and  discussed  by 
any  who  are  interested.  The  most  serious 
trouble  with  the  town  meeting  is  that  it  does 
not  act  well  where  there  are  several  elements  in 
the  community  such  as  all-the-year-round  resi- 
dents and  summer  visitors ; or  farmers  and  a 
mill  population.  Some  town  meetings  are 
regularly  managed  by  a boss. 

See  County  Precinct  System;  Democracy 
and  Social  Ethics;  Local  Government  and 
the  States;  Local  Self-Government;  Over- 
seers of  the  Poor;  Parish;  Parliamentary 
Law;  Party  Organization  in  Massachu- 
setts; Police  Power;  Popular  Government; 
Public  Opinion  and  Popular  Control; 
Selectmen  ; Town-County  System  ; Towns 
and  Townships;  Villages,  Incorporated. 

References:  G.  E.  Howard,  Local  Constitu- 
tional Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (1889)  ; “Monographs 
on  Local  Government”  in  Johns  Hopkins  Uni- 
versity, Studies,  I (1883),  Nos.  4,  10,  II 
(1884),  Nos.  2-3,  5-7,  III  (1885),  Nos.  1-4, 
10,  IV  (1886),  Nos.  7-9,  VII  (1889),  No.  3, 
VIII  (1890)  ; A.  B.  Hart,  Practical  Essays  on 
Am.  Government  (1893),  No.  6;  “Town  Gov- 
ernment on  Cape  Cod,”  in  Nation,  XVI  (1893), 
343-345;  E.  Channing,  Town  and  County  Gov- 
ernment in  the  English  Colonies  of  North  Am. 
(1884);  Jas.  Bryce,  Am.  Commonwealth  (4th 
ed.,  1910),  I,  chs.  xlviii,  xlix;  J.  A.  Fairlie, 
Local  Government  in  Counties,  Towns  and  Vil- 
lages (1906);  C.  A.  Beard,  Readings  in  Am. 
Government  and  Politics  (1900),  649-653. 

Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 


TOWNS  AND  TOWNSHIPS 


Origin  of  Towns. — The  town  or  township 
is  an  area  or  unit  in  local  government  and  ad- 
ministration. It  had  its  origin  in  the  New 
England  colonies  where  communities  were  free 
to  adopt  rules  and  regulations  for  the  con- 
duct of  their  local  affairs.  The  chief  feature 
of  this  early  town  was  a primary  assembly 
known  as  the  town  meeting  (see)  in  which 
matters  of  local  concern  were  discussed,  pub- 
lic policies  determined,  and  town  officers  chosen. 
Under  the  earliest  forms  the  entire  body  of 
electors  constituted  the  government  and  ad- 
ministration of  the  town;  but  very  early  in 
their  history  the  towns  set  up  committees  or 
“townsmen,”  eventually  called  “selectmen,” 
chosen  to  represent  and  to  act  for  the  whole 
body  of  electors  during  the  interim  between 
town  meetings. 

The  historical  nucleus  of  the  early  town  was 
a settlement  of  associates  united  from  the  first 
as  a congregation  in  their  church.  Indeed,  it 
is  rather  difficult  to  distinguish  between  the 
early  town  as  a body  politic  and  the  same  com- 
munity as  an  ecclesiastical  unit,  since  the 


same  area  might  be  regarded  as  a town  for 
civil  purposes  and  as  a parish  for  religious  pur- 
poses. The  meeting  place  of  both  town  and 
church  was  usually  the  church  or  “meeting 
house.”  In  New  England  the  town,  with  its 
town  meeting  and  selectmen,  has  persisted  as 
the  vital  unit  of  local  government.  It  is  per- 
haps the  nearest  approach  to  a purely  demo- 
cratic polity  in  the  United  States. 

The  term  “town”  appears  first  to  have  been 
used  in  1630  to  designate  more  or  less  com- 
pact settlements  of  limited  area  but  with 
boundaries  irregular  and  somewhat  indefinite. 
Tims  the  early  New  England  town  was  in 
marked  contrast  to  the  later  western  township 
which  had  regular  boundaries  and  a scattered 
population.  From  a very  early  date  the  terms 
“town”  and  “township”  appear  to  have  been 
used  synonymously.  It  is  said  that  township 
at  first  meant  “merely  a tract  of  land  granted 
to  persons  who  intended  there  to  settle  a town 
and  gather  a church.”  When  on  account  of 
the  distance  church  attendance  became  difficult 
for  the  people  of  an  outlying  community,  the 


543 


TOWNS  AND  TOWNSHIPS 


settlement  was  formed  into  a “district,  pre- 
cinct, or  parish.”  And  “when  a district  or  pre- 
cinct attained  sufficient  strength  it  was  in- 
corporated as  a town.”  It  is  also  clear  that 
the  towns  exercised  parochial  power,  the  people 
of  the  commonwealth  being  for  the  most  part 
of  one  religious  persuasion.  Thus  the  terms 
“town,”  “township,”  “district,”  “precinct,”  and 
“parish”  were  used  more  or  less  indiscriminate- 
ly for  both  civil  and  ecclesiastical  purposes  in 
the  early  laws. 

Functions.— The  New  England  town  at  once 
became  the  unit  of  representation,  sending  one 
or  more  delegates  to  the  general  court  or  as- 
sembly. It  was  incorporated,  possessed  the  right 
to  organize  its  own  militia,  and  was  privileged 
to  hold  a court  to  try  petty  cases.  The  right  of 
suffrage  was  limited  by  a property  qualifi- 
cation, and  in  some  colonies  also  by  a religious 
qualification.  Officers  of  the  town  usually  in- 
cluded the  selectmen,  a town  clerk,  constables, 
surveyors  of  highways,  tithing  men,  fence  view- 
ers, clerks  of  the  market,  overseers  of  the 
poor,  and  other  minor  functionaries,  varying 
with  the  jurisdiction.  The  selectmen  had  au- 
thority to  decide  questions  touching  the  qualifi- 
cations of  voters  at  the  town  or  parish  meetings 
previous  to  the  selection  of  a moderator  or 
chairman.  In  the  smaller  towns  they  per- 
formed duties  which  elsewhere  belonged  to 
other  officers,  such  as  the  town  treasurer,  the 
overseer  of  the  poor,  health  officers,  the  assess- 
or, and  probably  the  school  committee. 

At  present  the  functions  of  the  town  or 
township  as  a unit  or  area  of  local  govern- 
ment and  administration  are  those  of  the  his- 
toric town  as  modified  by  local  and  general 
laws  in  the  several  states.  Hence  the  town  or 
township  now  exists  in  many  different  forms 
and  with  varying  functions.  In  the  beginning, 
the  activities  of  the  New  England  town  were 
similar  to  those  of  the  old  English  manor 
(see)  and  “the  civil  functions  of  the  parish.” 
But  as  time  went  on  the  original  functions 
were  modified  and  additional  activities  under- 
taken in  response  to  new  and  changed  condi- 
tions. The  maintenance  of  highways,  care  of 
the  poor,  provision  for  public  schools,  public 
regulation  of  many  private  affairs,  control  of 
land  records  in  some  instances,  all  became  a 
part  of  the  privileges  or  duties  of  the  town. 
Moreover,  the  town  was  not  only  used  as  a 
basis  of  representation,  but  also  for  the  organi- 
zation of  the  militia  and  the  assessment  and 
collection  of  taxes.  An  early  manual  of  town 
laws  contains  an  enumeration  of  about  fifty 
general  subjects  upon  which  the  town  might 
act  as  it  desired. 

Outside  of  New  England  the  town  or  town- 
ship has  been  the  subject  of  much  litigation, 
but  in  these  other  jurisdictions  it  does  not 
hold  the  same  relative  position  in  local  govern- 
ment and  administration.  In  New  York  the 
town  or  parish  established  under  the  “Duke’s 
Eaws”  (see)  became  a form  of  local  govern- 


ment similar  to  the  New  England  township — 
although  the  governing  body  in  this  instance 
consisted  of  a constable  and  eight  overseers. 
The  town  meeting  existed  in  New  York;  but 
it  existed  only  for  the  election  of  officers — a 
custom  which  spread  westward  into  and  be- 
yond the  central  states.  Of  the  constable  and 
overseers  the  former  was  the  most  important 
official,  occupying  the  first  place  both  in  the 
town  and  in  the  parish.  In  the  later  laws  of 
the  province,  while  the  manor,  the  precinct,  the 
district,  and  the  town  are  treated  as  of  equal 
power  generally,  the  town  alone  is  specifically 
mentioned.  Probably  the  precinct  preceded 
the  township  as  in  other  jurisdictions;  or  the 
township  may  have  been  subdivided  into  pre- 
cincts previous  to  the  division  into  separate 
townships. 

The  principle  of  representative  township- 
county  government  was  first  developed  in  New 
York;  and  from  that  source  may  be  traced  the 
system  as  established  in  states  formed  from 
western  territory.  Among  the  officers  of  the 
New  York  town  or  township  are  the  super- 
visors, the  assessor,  the  collector,  the  surveyor 
of  highways,  the  fence  viewers,  the  clerk,  the 
constables,  the  overseers  of  the  poor,  and  the 
pound  masters.  Moreover,  the  township  wher- 
ever it  appears  in  the  later  states  as  a pre- 
dominating influence  in  local  government,  has 
been  based  upon  the  New  York  model.  On  the 
other  hand,  when  the  township  is  subordinate 
to  the  county  in  local  government  it  is  based 
upon  the  Pennsylvania  model — in  which  plan 
it  had  little  authority  beyond  selecting  its  own 
officers.  In  Pennsylvania  the  township  is  not 
represented  on  the  county  board  as  in  New 
York.  The  New  England  feature  of  the  town 
meeting  is  found  in  some  states  without  the 
representative  element  in  the  county  authority. 
Thus  there  are  three  forms  of  township  organi- 
zation to  be  found  in  the  western  states, 
namely:  (1)  the  New  York  plan;  (2)  the 
Pennsylvania  plan;  and  (3)  a modified  form 
of  the  New  England  plan. 

Western. — The  movement  in  the  establish- 
ment and  organization  of  townships  beyond  New 
York  and  Pennsylvania  began  with  the  adop- 
tion of  the  land  ordinance  of  1785;  for  when 
the  public  domain  was  surveyed  into  tracts 
six  miles  square  and  the  name  “township” 
given  to  these  divisions  either  through  custom 
or  design,  the  future  units  of  local  political 
organization  were  more  or  less  predetermined. 
Moreover,  this  limited  and  fixed  area  is  prop- 
erly described  as  an  “original  surveyed  town- 
ship” or  “congressional  township,”  and  should 
be  distinguished  from  both  the  “civil  town- 
ship” and  the  “school  township”  which  may 
or  may  not  coincide  with  the  thirty-six  square 
mile  tracts.  The  name  “geographical  town- 
ship” may  also  yery  properly  be  applied  to  the 
original  surveyed  township. 

The  congressional  township  is  employed 
chiefly  as  the  basis  of  land  records;  and  the 


544 


TOWNS  AND  TOWNSHIPS 


numbers  of  townships  and  ranges  as  shown 
upon  a township  map  of  a western  state  refer 
in  every  instance  to  the  congressional  town- 
ship— the  range  numbers  appearing  upon  some 
parallel  and  the  township  numbers  on  some 
meridian.  Accordingly,  all  townships  lying 
within  two  lines  six  miles  apart  drawn  par- 
allel east  and  west  or  at  right  angles  to  the 
meridian  are  known  by  the  same  number;  and 
all  townships  arranged  in  the  same  manner 
in  lines  parallel  to  the  meridian  are  in  the 
same  range  number.  All  land  descriptions 
and  records,  therefore,  mention  both  the  town- 
ship number  and  the  township  range.  The 
congressional  township,  it  may  be  remarked 
in  passing,  has  no  government  beyond  that 
which  is  common  to  all  naked  territory. 

Throughout  the  western  country  the  existence 
of  the  original  surveyed  township — that  is, 
the  congressional  township — encouraged  the 
establishment  and  organization  of  the  civil 
township,  since  it  provided  a unit  of  territory 
of  convenient  size  upon  which  to  engraft  local 
government  or  school  government  as  soon  as 
a few  settlers  had  arrived;  but  the  town 
meeting  played  no  part  in  the  preliminary 
organization  in  many  states.  On  the  contrary 
the  establishment  of  local  government  was,  as 
a matter  of  fact,  provided  for  by  the  central 
authority  of  the  state — by  which  whole 
counties  and  in  some  instances  large  areas  not 
yet  formed  into  counties  were  declared  to  be 
civil  townships.  Where  the  precinct  system 
preceded  township  organization,  settlers  were 
permitted  under  the  law  to  petition  the  county 
commissioners  or  supervisors  for  the  establish- 
ment of  township  government.  In  some  in- 
stances the  statute  commanded  the  formation 
of  civil  townships  in  all  counties.  Further- 
more, some  states  have  set  up  a local-option 
method  of  establishing  township  government, 
whereby  the  electors  of  a county  may  deter- 
mine by  ballot  whether  or  not  they  will  adopt 
or  retain  the  township  plan  of  government. 
The  right  of  the  inhabitants  to  have  a voice 
in  determining  the  boundaries  and  in  fixing  the 
name  of  the  township  is  recognized  to  some  ex- 
tent. 

In  the  early  history  of  the  Northwest  Ter- 
ritory (see)  the  township  officers  were  ap- 
pointed by  the  county  court  of  general  quarter 
sessions.  Later  the  state  of  Ohio  placed  the 
government'  and  administration  of  the  town- 
ship in  the  hands  of  officers  chosen  by  the 
electors.  Other  modifications  were  introduced 
by  subsequent  states  and  territories. 

As  bodies  corporate  and  politic  the  organ- 
ized township  may  sue  and  be  sued,  may  pur- 
chase land  for  corporate  purposes  and  make 
contracts  within  the  exercise  of  its  legal  pow- 
ers. The  township  is,  however,  described  as  a 
quasi-corporate  body  since  it  possesses  only  a 
limited  corporate  capacity  or  power. 

South. — The  township  as  described  above 
is  not  found  in  the  South.  An  attempt  was 


made  to  introduce  it  during  the  period  of 
reconstruction,  but  without  success.  If  it  ex- 
ists in  any  form  it  is  only  as  a geographical 
division.  The  name  township  may  be  retained 
in  some  instances,  and  in  some  places  the  con- 
gressional township  is  the  area  of  the  civil 
district;  but  such  townships  are  not  bodies 
corporate  and  politic  as  in  the  northern 
states — except  in  a few  countries  of  Missouri, 
In  the  South  the  districts  into  which  the 
counties  are  divided  are  not  so  numerous  as 
are  the  townships  in  the  northern  county  and 
consequently  they  are  somewhat  larger. 

School  Townships. — Previous  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  civil  townships  in  the  early  history 
of  the  Northwest  Territory,  provision  was 
made  in  some  instances  for  the  care  of  school 
lands  which  had  been  set  apart  by  the  govern- 
ment in  the  original  surveyed  townships. 
Three  trustees  and  a treasurer  were  to  be 
chosen  in  each  township  as  soon  as  twenty 
freeholders  became  resident  therein.  This 
appears  to  be  the  earliest  school  township; 
and  as  such  it  coincided  with  the  original 
surveyed  township.  Usually,  however,  the 
school  township  as  found  in  the  several  states 
coincides  with  the  civil  township,  regardless 
of  the  boundries  of  the  original  surveyed  town- 
ship. 

The  name  “school  township”  refers  to  a dis- 
tinct organization  separate  from  the  civil 
township  authorities.  Usually  corresponding 
in  boundries,  the  civil  township  may  have 
followed  in  some  instances  the  organization  of 
the  school  township ; that  is,  the  congressional 
township  may  have  been  formed  into  a district 
for  educational  purposes  before  the  civil  gov- 
ernment was  provided  for.  As  suggested 
above,  the  election  of  trustees  and  a treasurer 
for  the  care  of  school  lands  and  the  appropria- 
tion of  the  funds  arising  from  such  lands  with- 
in the  congressional  township  of  thirty-six 
square  miles,  may  have  led  to  the  establish- 
ment of  a civil  organization. 

Subdivisions. — Along  with  the  great  variety 
of  forms  which  appear  in  the  states  where 
the  township  is  the  unit  of  local  government, 
there  is  seen  a tendency  to  create  subdivisions 
following  a preliminary  division  of  the  county 
into  precincts  or  election  districts.  Moreover, 
the  duties  of  officers  have  been,  in  some  in- 
stances, assigned  to  other  functionaries  and 
the  office  abolished — resulting  in  a reduction 
of  the  number  of  elective  officers  in  the  town- 
ship. Indeed,  the  chief  modifications  in  town- 
ship government  in  some  states  consist  of 
this  consolidation  of  duties  and  functions 
formerly  performed  by  numerous  petty  officers. 
The  central  states  furnish,  perhaps,  the  most 
interesting  phases  of  the  growth  and  develop- 
ment of  the  township  as  portions  of  territory 
set  apart  under  general  or  special  acts  for 
purposes  of  local  constitutional  government. 

See  Constable;  County  Precinct  System; 
Local  Government  and  the  States;  Local 


TOWNS  AND  TOWNSHIPS,  BY-LAWS  OF— TOWNSHIP  BOARD 


Option  in  Local  Government;  Selectmen; 
Town  Meeting;  Township. 

References:  J.  Fiske,  Civil  Government 
(1890),  83-94,  102-104;  G.  E.  Howard,  Local 
Constitutional  History  (1889),  I,  index,  523; 
H.  B.  Adams,  Germanic  Origin  of  New  Eng- 
land Towns  (1883);  A.  Shaw,  Local  Govern- 
ment in  Illinois  (1883);  E.  R.  L.  Gould, 
Local  Government  in  Pennsylvania  (1883)  ; E. 
Ingle,  Parish  Institutions  in  Maryland  (1883)  ; 
B.  J.  Ramage,  Local  Government  and  Free 
Schools  in  South  Carolina  (1883);  E.  Chan- 
ning,  Town  and  County  Government  (1884), 
all  in  Johns  Hopkins  University,  Studies,  I, 
Nos.  ii,  iii,  vi,  xii,  II,  x ( 1883-4 ) ; J.  A.  Fairlie, 
Local  Government  (1906),  Pt.  Ill,  eh.  xlviii; 
J.  A.  Wilgus,  “Evolution  of  Township  Gov- 
ernment in  Ohio”  in  Am.  Hist.  Assoc.,  Annual 
Report  (1894),  403;  statute  laws  of  Ohio, 
Michigan,  Wisconsin,  and  Iowa;  A.  B.  Hart, 
Actual  Government  (rev.  ed.,  1908),  82,  “Colo- 
nial Town  Meeting”  in  Practical  Essays  on 
Am.  Government  (1894),  ch.  v;  J.  Bryce,  Am. 
Commonwealth  (4th  ed.,  1901),  I,  ch.  xlviii; 
Am.  Year  Book,  1911,  226-228. 

Benjamin  F.  Siiambaugh. 

TOWNS  AND  TOWNSHIPS,  BY-LAWS  OF. 

New  England  towns  have  power  to  enact  or- 
ders, by-laws  and  regulations,  not  repugnant 
to  law,  for  purposes  specified  in  the  statutes. 
These  include  orders  for  managing  their  pru- 
dential affairs,  for  preserving  peace  and  good 
order  and  a great  variety  of  other  subjects. 
Connecticut  towns  have  the  largest  authority, 
only  matters  of  a criminal  nature  being  ex- 
cluded. In  Massachusetts,  town  by-laws  must 
be  approved  by  the  attorney  general  of  the 
commonwealth ; and  in  Maine  by  the  county 
commissioners  or  a judge  of  the  supreme  ju- 
dicial court. 

Such  by-laws  are  adopted  by  the  voters  in 
town  meeting,  except  in  Rhode  Island,  where 
this  power  is  vested  in  the  town  councils. 

Towns  and  townships  in  the  middle  Atlantic 
and  north  central  states  have  also  more  lim- 
ited and  less  important  powers  of  adopting 
local  by-laws. 

County  authorities  are  also  given  some  au- 
thority to  adopt  by-laws  and  local  regulations 
for  strictly  limited  purposes.  In  some  states, 
county  boards  may  regulate  fishing  in  public 
waters,  and  in  some,  they  may  offer  bounties 
for  the  destruction  of  wild  beasts  or  noxious 
insects.  County  boards  of  health,  in  some 
states  may  issue  sanitary  regulations. 

All  such  by-laws  are  subject  to  judicial  re- 
view, if  found  to  exceed  the  powers  or  trans- 
gress the  forms  established  by  law,  or  to  be 
incompatible  with  the  state  or  national  con- 
stitution. 

References:  J.  S.  Garland,  New  England 
Town  Law  (1906),  J.  A.  Fairlie,  Local  Govern- 
ment in  Counties,  Towns  and  Villages  (1906), 
ch.  v. 


TOWNSHEND  ACTS.  In  1767,  Charles 
Townshend  introduced  into  Parliament  three 
bills  which  were  enacted  into  laws.  By  one 
there  was  established  in  America  a board  of 
commissioners  of  the  customs  with  power  to 
administer  the  Acts  of  Trade.  A second  laid 
a duty  on  importations  into  America  of  paper, 
glass,  red  and  white  lead  and  tea.  The  third 
suspended  the  New  Y'ork  assembly  until  it 
should  obey  the  Mutiny  Act.  The  income  of 
the  tax  on  importations  was  to  provide  sal- 
aries for  royal  governors  and  judges  in  Amer- 
ica. Writs  of  Assistance  (see)  were  formally 
legalized.  See  Revolution,  American,  Causes 
of.  References:  G.  E.  Howard,  Preliminaries 
of  the  Revolution  (1905),  174-205;  texts  in 
W.  MacDonald,  Select  Charters  (1899),  320- 
329.  C.  H.  Van  T. 

TOWNSHIP.  As  the  unit  of  the  land  sur- 
vey in  the  United  States  since  the  Ordinance 
of  1785,  the  township  is  formed  from  lines 
drawn  at  right  angles  six  miles  apart.  A 
base  line  is  established  drawn  at  right  angles 
to  a chosen  meridian;  and  then  lines  parallel 
to  this  base  and  others  parallel  to  the  meridian 
are  drawn.  The  rectangular  areas  thus 
formed,  containing  thirty-six  sections  of  640 
acres  each,  are  known  as  the  “geographical,” 
“original-surveyed,”  or  “congressional”  town- 
ship. See  Land  Grants;  Public  Lands  and 
Public  Land  Policy;  Surveys  of  Land; 
Towns  and  Townships.  Reference:  T.  Don- 
aldson, Public  Domain  (1880),  178. 

B.  F.  S. 

TOWNSHIP  BOARD.  The  township  board 
in  some  jurisdictions  constitutes  the  chief 
authority  in  the  government  of  the  township. 
It  should  not  be  confused  with  the  board  of 
trustees  or  supervisors  found  in  several  of 
the  states.  In  the  central  states  the  township 
board  may  consist  of  three  officers  of  the  same 
rank,  having  no  duties  in  addition  to  those 
exercised  by  the  group  collectively.  Again  it 
may  be  composed  of  three  township  officers, 
such  as  the  supervisor,  the  clerk,  and  the 
treasurer;  or  it  may  be  made  up  of  the  trus- 
tees and  two  elected  members;  or  it  may  con- 
sist of  three  elected  freeholders. 

In  the  main  the  duty  of  the  township  board 
is  the  auditing  of  accounts.  In  some  states 
its  function  is  expressed  in  the  name  “Board 
of  Auditors”;  while  in  others,  where  no  head 
officer  exists  and  all  are  of  equal  rank,  its 
duties  are  more  extended,  including  the  licens- 
ing of  peddlers,  the  making  of  sanitary  im- 
provements, and  the  care  of  the  public  health. 
This  board  may  also  be  authorized  to  levy 
township  taxes,  or  at  least  fix  rates,  borrow 
money,  and  act  as  a board  of  equalization.  In 
some  cases  it  performs  the  duties  of  fence 
viewers,  and  overseers  of  the  poor,  provides 
for  township  roads,  and  has  general  oversight 
of  the  township  elections. 


J.  A.  F. 

546 


TOWNSHIP  HIGH  SCHOOLS— TRADE  RELATIONS,  BUREAU  OF 


See  County  Precinct  System  ; Town- 
County  System;  Towns  and  Townships. 

References:  J.  A.  Fairlie,  Local  Government 
(1906),  176;  G.  E.  Howard,  Local  Constitu- 
tional History  (1889),  172;  statute  laws  of 
the  central  and  western  states.  B.  F.  S. 

TOWNSHIP  HIGH  SCHOOLS.  See  Schools, 
High,  Township. 

TRACTION  LINES.  In  certain  cities  street 
railways  are  referred  to  as  “traction  lines”  and 
the  corporations  which  operate  them  use  the 
word  “traction”  as  a part  of  their  title.  The 
word  has  no  longer  any  distinctive  meaning. 
See  Railroads,  Street.  T.  C.,  Jr. 

TRADE  DOLLARS.  When  the  standard  sil- 
ver dollar  of  412£  grains  was  dropped  from 
the  list  of  coins  authorized  by  the  coinage  law 
of  February  12,  1873  (see  Silver  Coinage 
Controversy),  provision  was  made  for  the 
issue  of  a trade  dollar  of  silver,  420  grains  in 
weight.  This  coin  was  designed  for  trade  in 
the  Orient,  where  the  Mexican  dollar  of  simi- 
lar weight  was  in  common  use.  Not  being  in- 
tended for  circulation  in  the  United  States,  its 
legal  tender  quality  was  limited  in  accordance 
with  the  general  provisions  of  the  act  to  five 
dollars.  As  these  new  coins  were  diverted 
from  their  intended  use  and  circulated  in  the 
United  States,  coinage  was  discontinued  in 
1878.  By  the  act  of  March  3,  1887,  they  were 
made  redeemable  for  a period  of  six  months 
in  standard  silver  dollars,  to  the  considerable 
profit  of  sharp  speculators,  with  notice  that 
after  this  period  they  would  be  accepted  at 
only  their  bullion  value.  In  all,  $36,000,000 
were  coined,  while  approximately  four-fifths 
were  exported  and  were  not  redeemed.  See 
Crime  of  ’73;  Silver  Coinage  Controversy. 

D.  R.  D. 

TRADE,  ECONOMIC  DISCUSSION  OF.  See 

Exchange,  Principles  of. 

TRADE  FOLLOWS  THE  FLAG.  The  phrase 
“trade  follows  the  flag”  has  been  so  often  used 
that  many  have  thought  it  the  statement  of 
an  economic  law  or  a political  principle. 
Trade  is  an  economic  phenomenon;  the  flag 
is  an  emblem  of  political  jurisdiction;  in  the 
relation  of  the  two  there  is  no  necessary 
sequence. 

During  the  period  of  colonial  development 
the  extension  of  political  dominion  was  na- 
turally followed  by  a corresponding  extension 
of  trade.  The  extension  of  trade  ventures  was 
also  usually  followed  by  the  assertion  of 
political  control  over  unoccupied  regions  with 
which  trade  had  been  opened.  The  expression 
“the  flag  follows  trade”  would  be  descriptive 
of  this  period.  In  recent  years  the  flag  has 
often  followed  trade  in  Asia,  Africa  and  the 
islands  of  the  Pacific  Ocean. 


Trade  may  follow  the  flag  when  constrained 
to  do  so  by  navigation  laws,  tariff  or  other 
legislation,  and  in  this  sense,  in  earlier  times 
and  at  present,  the  phrase  “trade  follows  the 
flag”  has  been  properly  used.  Differences  in 
laws,  administration,  and  institutions  in  dif- 
ferent states  are  in  some  degree  barriers  to 
the  freedom  of  trade  and  the  general  uniform- 
ity in  these  respects  under  the  same  flag  would 
facilitate  trade  where  conditions  were  in  other 
respects  similar,  making  possible  the  state- 
ment which  is  in  many  instances  all  that  is 
implied,  vis.,  under  like  economic  conditions, 
trade  tends  to  follow  the  flag. 

See  Commerce,  International;  Commerce, 
American,  Movement  of;  Exchange,  Prin- 
ciples of;  Subsides  to  Shipping. 

References:  C.  F.  Bastable,  Theory  of  Trade 
(1903);  C.  C.  Chisholm,  Commercial  Geogra- 
phy (1907);  Clive  Day,  Hist,  of  Commerce 
(1907);  J.  A.  Hobson,  Int.  Trade  (1904); 
bibliography  in  G.  M.  Fisk,  Commercial  Poli- 
cies (1907),  259-272.  George  G.  Wilson. 

TRADE-MARK.  A symbol,  emblem  or  mark 
put  upon  articles  offered  for  sale  so  as  to 
distinguish  them  from  similar  articles  offered 
by  others,  and  so  as  to  identify  them  as  having 
been  produced  or  put  upon  the  market  by  some 
one  manufacturer  or  dealer.  A trade-mark 
is  a valuable  right  protected  under  common 
law  and  by  statute.  The  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  does  not  confer  upon  Congress 
power  to  legislate  for  the  protection  of  trade- 
marks, and  federal  legislation  upon  this  mat- 
ter is  confined  to  the  protection  of  trade-marks 
in  interstate  and  foreign  commerce,  and  to 
the  registration  of  trade-marks  at  the  federal 
patent  office  in  order  to  obtain  such  protec- 
tion. State  statutes  in  a number  of  states 
provide  for  the  protection  of  trade-marks  in 
domestic  commerce  within  the  states,  usually 
requiring  registration  in  order  to  obtain  such 
statutory  protection.  In  the  absence  of  state 
statutes,  and  in  addition  to  them  where  they 
exist,  the  owner  of  a trade-mark  has  under 
common  law  an  action  for  damages  against 
any  other  person  placing  goods  upon  the  mar- 
ket under  such  trade-mark,  and  has  also  an 
equitable  remedy  by  injunction  to  prevent  an- 
other from  continuing  to  use  such  trade-mark. 
See  Copyright;  Monopolies;  Patents. 

W.  F.  D. 

TRADE  RELATIONS,  BUREAU  OF.  The 

Bureau  of  Trade  Relations,  one  of  the  bur- 
eaus of  the  Department  of  State  (see),  is 
charged  with  the  publication  of  consular  and 
diplomatic  reports  of  interest  to  Americans 
trading  with  foreign  countries,  and  with  the 
collection  and  dissemination  of  other  available 
information  concerning  trade  opportunities  in 
foreign  countries.  See  Consular  Reports; 
Diplomatic  Correspondence.  References: 
Secretary  of  State,  Annual  Report;  C.  H.  Van 


547 


TRADE  SCHOOLS— TRAILS  AND  PORTAGES 


Tyne  and  N.  G.  Leland,  Guide  to  the  Archives 
(2d  ed„  1907),  55-56.  A.  N.  H. 

TRADE  SCHOOLS.  See  Schools,  Trade. 

TRADE  UNIONS.  Popularly  the  term 
“trade  union”  or  “trades  union”  is  applied  to 
any  organization  of  laboring  men  which  makes 
it  its  primary  function  to  institute  collective 
action  by  wage-earners  in  the  settlement  of 
the  terms  of  employment.  Some  economists 
use  the  term  “trade  union”  only  in  reference 
to  labor  organizations  composed  exclusively  of 
men  working  in  similar  trades.  See  Labor 
Organizations.  J.  R.  C. 

TRADES  IN  POLITICS.  The  “dickering”  or 
bargaining  between  the  leaders  of  different 
factions  of  a political  party  by  which  a list 
of  nominees  for  office  is  agreed  upon  and  har- 
mony secured  within  the  party.  The  phrase 
is  also  applied  to  the  exchange  of  votes  be- 
tween candidates  of  opposing  parties'  in  which 
a candidate  and  his  friends  agree  to  “knife” 
(see  Knifing)  a candidate  on  their  own  ticket 
in  favor  of  the  opposing  candidate,  in  return 
for  a like  favor.  0.  C.  H. 

TRAFFIC  AGREEMENTS.  Agreements  us- 
ually between  competitive  railroads  for  the 
regulation  of  rates,  fares  and  services.  Traffic 
associations  arose  when  railroads  began  to 
compete  with  each  other  during  the  decade 
3850-1860,  but  they  did  not  become  of  signi- 
ficance until  about  1870  when  the  trunk  lines 
had  been  extended  into  the  Middle  West. 
Agreements  at  the  beginning  largely  took  the 
form  of  pools  (see  Pooling  in  Railroads.) 
When  pools  were  declared  illegal  by  the  Inter- 
state Commerce  Act  in  1887,  traffic  associa- 
fions  were  reorganized.  The  pooling  feature 
was  eliminated  and  in  its  place  was  introduced 
the  traffic  agreement  which  provided  for  joint 
control  and  regulation  of  competitive  traffic 
and  the  maintenance  of  definite  schedules  of 
rates.  Penalties  were  provided  for  violation 
of  contract. 

These  agreements  eventually  brought  the 
railroads  under  condemnation  of  law.  In 
1897  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States 
held  (166  U.  8.  290)  that  the  Anti-Trust  Act 
of  1890  applied  to  railroads  and  that  the 
Trans-Missouri  Freight  Association  was  in  vio- 
lation of  that  act  as  being  a contract  between 
railroads  to  maintain  rates  in  restraint  of 
interstate  commerce.  In  1898  the  court,  on 
substantially  the  same  grounds  (171  U.  S. 
505)  dissolved  the  Joint  Traffic  Association, 
consisting  of  thirty-two  railroad  companies  in 
eastern  and  central  territory. 

Again  a reorganization  of  the  traffic  associa- 
tions was  necessary  to  bring  them  within  the 
limits  of  the  statute.  While  the  decision  of 
the  court  prevented  rate  agreements,  it  did 
not  prevent  the  continuance  of  the  associa- 


tions for  the  purpose  of  forming  continuous 
through  lines,  determining  the  division  of 
through  rates,  and  discussing  methods  of  pro- 
cedure in  various  matters  pertaining  to  traffic. 

Moreover,  the  last  decade  has  witnessed  a 
rapid  consolidation  and  integration  of  railroad 
lines,  and  with  this  has  gone  an  increasing 
realization  on  the  part  of  railroad  managers 
of  the  futility  of  cut-throat  competition,  and 
the  reality  and  extent  of  their  common  in- 
terests. Associated  action  has  in  consequence 
developed  rapidly. 

At  the  present  time  there  are  large  numbers 
of  traffic  associations,  some  covering  a wide 
extent  of  territory,  others  operating  in  local 
areas,  separate  organizations  having  to  do 
with  passenger  and  freight  traffic.  They  are 
virtually  conference  committees  representing 
the  railroads  interested.  They  confer,  advise, 
agree,  and  cooperate  in  matters  relating  to 
divisions  of  through  rates,  classification  of 
goods,  regulations  concerning  joint  tickets  and 
their  redemption,  excursion  tickets  and  methods 
to  prevent  fraud,  rules  and  regulations  con- 
cerning inspection  and  handling,  promulgation 
of  statistics,  and  a multitude  of  other  details. 
Moreover,  they  exchange  information  in  re- 
gard to  traffic,  tariffs  and  rates,  and  although 
their  proceedings  are  not  public,  it  is  well 
known  that  after  discussion  as  to  what  rates 
should  apply  in  a particular  case,  each  of  the 
traffic  officers  states  to  the  conference  what 
rate  his  company  will  file,  publish  and  apply. 

From  the  fact  that  these  associations  have 
been  left  undisturbed,  it  may  be  concluded 
that  their  present  agreements  are  not  con- 
sidered to  be  in  violation  of  the  Anti-Trust 
Act. 

See  Gentlemen’s  Agreements;  Interstate 
Commerce  Decisions;  Pooling  in  Rail- 
roads; Sherman  Anti-Trust  Act. 

References:  Johnson  and  Huebner,  Railroad 
Traffic  and  Rates  (1911),  I,  cli.  xv,  II,  ch. 
xxxii;  L.  G.  McPherson,  Railroad  Freight 
Rates  (1909),  171,  263-4.  F.  H.  Dixon. 

TRAILS  AND  PORTAGES.  Portage  is  the 
French  word  meaning  pathway  or  carrying- 
place  about  the  falls  or  rapids  of  a river — 
“aux  chutes  cFeau  en  Amerique.”  In  modern 
days  these  ancient  paths  are  still  used  by 
canoists,  hunters  and  lumbermen  of  the  same 
northland;  some  of  the  pathways  are  worn  a 
foot  and  more  into  the  rock. 

The  commonest  portage  was  that  around  the 
rapids  of  a river,  as  on  the  St.  Lawrence  and 
Ottawa  at  each  important  saut,  as  on  the 
Niagara,  on  the  Ohio  at  Louisville,  on  the 
Mohawk  at  Little  Falls. 

Of  more  importance  historically  and  econ- 
omically, however,  were  the  portage  paths 
from  one  river  system  or  valley  over  the  water- 
shed to  another.  Such  was  the  important 
portage  between  the  Ottawa  and  French  Rivers 
(the  Lake  Nipissing  route  to  Georgian  Bay). 


TRAINING  SCHOOLS  FOR  TEACHERS— TRANSIT  IN  CITIES,  PROBLEMS  OF 


Strategic  portages  joined  the  heads  of  the 
southern  tributaries  of  the  St.  Lawrence  and 
Great  Lakes  with  the  streams  flowing  into  the 
Atlantic  Ocean  or  the  Mississippi  Basin,  such 
as  those  between  the  Kennebec  and  Chaudiere, 
the  Mohawk  and  Onondaga  or  Oswego,  the 
Tuscarawas  and  Cuyahoga,  the  Maumee  and 
Wabash,  the  St.  Joseph  and  Kankakee,  the 
Chicago  and  Illinois,  the  Fox  and  Wisconsin, 
from  Lake  George  to  the  Hudson  (Fort  Ed- 
ward), from  Lake  Erie  to  Lake  Chautauqua, 
and  to  French  Creek.  Another  group  joined 
the  Great  Lakes  with  Hudson  Bay  by  way  of 
Pigeon  River  and  the  Lake  of  the  Woods,  early 
known  as  the  “Grand  Portage”  and  later  as 
the  “General  Rendezvous”  of  the  northern 
traders. 

In  the  nature  of  the  case  portages  were 
difficult  roads  of  travel;  sometimes  it  was 
possible  to  pass  directly  by  canoe  from  Lake 
Michigan  to  the  Illinois  River.  Some  of  the 
St.  Lawrence  Basin  portages  were  two  and 
three  leagues  in  length. 

The  strategic  importance  of  the  portage  in 
war  and  peace,  has  led  to  the  crossing  net- 
work of  road,  canal,  railway  and  trolley  lines 
at  such  points  as  Utica,  N.  Y.,  Akron,  Ohio, 
Fort  Wayne,  Ind.,  and  South  Bend,  Ind. 

See  Frontier  in  American  Development; 
Physiography  of  North  America;  Roads. 

References;  A.  B.  Hulbert,  Historic  High- 
ways (1902-05),  VII,  ch.  i;  W.  G.  Ganong, 
“Monograph  of  Historic  Sites  in  the  Province 
of  New  Brunswick”  in  Royal  Society  of  Canada, 
Transactions,  V,  sec.  iii,  213-357 ; E.  T.  Ben- 
ton “The  Wabash  Trade  Route  in  the  Develop- 
ment of  the  Old  Northwest”  in  Johns  Hopkins 
University,  Studies,  XXI  (1903),  Nos.  1-2;  J. 
H.  Smith,  Arnold’s  March  from  Cambridge  to 
Quebec  (1903)  ; G.  A.  Baker,  “The  St.  Joseph— 
Kankakee  Portage”  in  North.  Ind.  Hist.  Publi- 
cations (1899),  No.  1.  A.  B.  Hulbert. 

TRAINING  SCHOOLS  FOR  TEACHERS. 

See  Schools,  Public,  Normal. 

TRAINING  SHIPS.  The  Navy  Register 
names  four  “sailing  ships  for  training  pur- 
poses” as  belonging  to  the  service,  but  such 
vessels  no  longer  cruise  for  the  training  of 
midshipmen  or  naval  apprentices.  The  for- 
mer are  sent  to  sea  from  Annapolis  in  a 
squadron  or  distributed  among  battleships  of 


the  Atlantic  fleet;  and  the  latter  are  briefly 
instructed  at  shore  stations  before  embark- 
ing in  vessels  of  the  fleet.  Not  more  than 
three  months  is  allowed  for  preliminary  in- 
struction at  the  training  stations  at  Newport, 
Norfolk,  Chicago,  and  San  Francisco.  The 
Navy  Department  lends  armed  vessels  of  vari- 
ous types  to  the  naval  militia  of  the  states; 
and  the  managers  of  public  nautical  schools 
at  Boston,  New  York,  and  Philadelphia  are 
allowed  to  use  three  cruising  vessels  for  in- 
struction under  the  command  of  retired  of- 
ficers of  the  Navy,  though  they  do  not  train 
recruits  for  the  service.  See  Education, 
Military  and  Naval;  Enlistment,  Naval 
and  Military;  Militia;  Training  Stations. 
References:  Navy  Department,  Annual  Re- 
ports (1910),  418,  446,  468-472  (1912),  133. 

C.  G.  C. 

TRAINING  STATIONS.  Four  naval  train- 
ing stations  in  the  United  States  are  main- 
tained for  the  purpose  of  fitting  apprentice 
seamen  for  service  in  the  fleet.  The  station 
at  Newport,  Rhode  Island,  established  in  1869, 
had  been  improved  at  an  expense  up  to  June 
30,  1910,  of  $7,226,307 ; and  the  average  cost 
for  maintenance  was  over  $5,000.  For  the 
Yerba  Buena  station  in  San  Francisco  Bay, 
founded  in  1898,  the  corresponding  figures  are 
$1,065,625  and  $10,000  respectively.  The 
Great  Lakes  training  station  at  North  Chica- 
go, Illinois,  had  cost  $2,904,853  for  improve- 
ments between  1905  and  1910,  since  its  occu- 
pation in  1911.  The  annual  appropriation  has 
averaged  over  $100,000.  The  station  at  St. 
Helena  near  Norfolk,  Virginia,  is  allowed 
$25,000  a year.  A force  of  2500  men  for 
training  is  authorized;  and  the  duration 
of  the  course  is  subject  to  the  demands 
of  the  fleet.  All  training  stations  are 
controlled  by  the  Bureau  of  Navigation  of  the 
Navy  Department,  which  carries  on  recruiting 
in  all  parts  of  the  country.  See  Education, 
Military  and  Naval;  Enlistment,  Naval 
and  Military;  Training  Ships.  References: 
U.  S.  Navy  Department,  Annual  Reports 
(1910),  31,  318,  697;  (1911),  138,  190,  443; 
Regulations  for  the  Government  of  the  Navy 
(1909),  197  (1912),  60,  109,  127.  C.  G.  C. 

TRAMPS.  See  Poverty  and  Poor  Re- 
lief; Vagrancy. 


TRANSIT  IN  CITIES,  PROBLEMS  OF 


Magnitude  and  Variety  of  Interests  Involved. 

— In  1907  the  street  and  electric  railways  of 
the  United  States  carried  7,441  millions  of  fare 
passengers.  This  was  equivalent  to  250  paid 
rides  for  every  man,  woman  and  child  living 
in  urban  communities  of  more  than  8,000  pop- 


ulation, an  increase  of  average  rides  in  five 
years  from  181  to  250.  In  1910  the  urban 
population  in  cities  of  25,000  and  over,  total- 
ling 28,500,000,  had  increased  35  per  cent  in 
ten  years  as  against  an  increase  of  only  15£ 
per  cent  outside  of  these  cities.  In  New  York 


549 


TRANSIT  IN  CITIES,  PROBLEMS  OF 


City  the  number  of  paid  street  car  rides  per  in- 
habitant increased  from  246  in  1900  to  321 
in  1910.  These  figures  show  a rapidly  rising 
urban  population  with  a still  more  rapid 
increase  in  the  use  of  street  cars,  and  estab- 
lish the  fact  that  transit  facilities  lie  at  the 
very  basis  of  our  modern  city  civilization  and 
are  becoming  more  important  every  year. 
Hence  the  public  interest  in  transit  as  a util- 
ity, as  a fundamental  necessity  of  city  life 
under  modern  conditions. 

In  the  first  place,  everybody  who  lives  in 
a city  is  interested  in  having  adequate  street 
railway  service  at  reasonable  rates.  While 
the  travelling  public  in  1907  paid  382  millions 
of  dollars  in  fares,  the  plant  required  for 
rendering  the  service  paid  for  was  capitalized 
at  3,775  millions  of  dollars  or  practically 
double  the  entire  bonded  debt  of  the  158  larg- 
est cities  of  the  country,  and  represents  with 
more  or  less  accuracy  the  private  investments 
in  transit  plants  and  equipment. 

Inasmuch  as  the  plants  are  located  in  large 
part  in  the  public  streets,  vast  private  financial 
interests  are  entangled  with  the  public  interest 
in  transit  problems. 

A third  interest  of  great  magnitude  inti- 
mately concerned  with  the  problems  of  tran- 
sit is  held  by  the  owners  of  real  estate.  Tran- 
sit facilities  have  such  a tremendous  influence 
upon  the  value  of  land  served  by  them  that 
this  factor  often  dominates  the  entire  transit 
situation,  particularly  with  relation  to  exten- 
sions and  new  developments. 

A fourth  factor  of  great  importance  is  the 
body  of  men  engaged  as  employees  in  operating 
the  street  railways.  There  were  221,000  of 
them  in  1907,  forming  a distinct  industrial 
group  whose  efficiency  was  of  direct  interest 
through  personal  contact  probably  to  more 
people  than  was  the  efficiency  of  any  other 
one  group  of  employees  in  public  or  semi- 
public work.  In  proportion  as  transit  facili- 
ties have  become  a constant  necessity,  so  has 
the  public  importance  of  the  street  railway  em- 
ployees as  a class  increased. 

Here  are  four  distinct  and,  in  some  respects, 
conflicting  interests  involved  in  the  transit 
problem.  The  fifth  interest,  required  to  harmon- 
ize the  four  and  dominate  the  entire  complex 
of  problems,  is  the  political  or  public  interest. 
This  interest  gets  into  the  field:  first,  because 
the  municipality  furnishes  the  right  of  way 
on  which  street  cars  are  operated;  second, 
because  with  the  growth  of  cities  transit  has 
become  so  universal  a necessity  as  to  consti- 
tute a logical  municipal  function;  and,  third, 
because  the  uses  of  the  streets  for  other  pur- 
poses have  become  so  complex  and  imperative 
as  to  necessitate  the  constant  control  of  the 
city  over  street  railway  operations.  There 
are  no  adequate  statistics  to  show  just  how 
great  the  public’s  interest  as  capitalist  is, 
compared  with  the  interest  of  private  inves- 
tors. It  is  clear,  however,  that  the  streets, 


which  the  city  furnishes,  represent  a portion 
of  the  capital  investment  that  could  not  be 
duplicated. 

The  Time  Problem. — The  requisites  of  good 
street  car  service  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
riding  public  are  speed,  safety,  comfort,  unity 
in  operation,  ubiquity  and  reasonable,  uniform 
rates. 

The  cost  of  a street  railway  ride  is 
largely  in  the  time  it  takes.  An  hour  a day 
for  each  individual  is  an  addition  of  at  least 
10  per  cent  to  his  occupation;  when  two 
hours  or  more  is  wasted  in  going  to  and  from 
work,  the  loss  of  time  becomes  almost  prohibi- 
tive. 

The  first  way  of  attacking  this  problem  is 
by  an  increase  of  speed.  This  is  a difficult 
matter  in  public  streets,  especially  in  the 
down-town  districts  of  great  cities.  Consider- 
able increase  of  speed  was  secured  when  elec- 
tricity was  substituted  for  horses  and  mules 
as  motive  power.  But  the  big  cities  quickly 
outgrew  this  improvement  and  the  demand  for 
more  rapid  transit  became  imperative.  This 
condition  has  led  to  a rather  widespread  move- 
ment for  elevated  roads  and  subways,  by  which 
the  advantages  of  an  undisturbed  private 
right  of  way  are  combined  with  location  in 
the  public  highways.  Moreover,  the  steam 
railroads  have  been  impressed  into  service  for 
handling  suburban  passenger  traffic.  Still  the 
speed  problem  persists,  and  on  the  New  York 
City  subway  and  elevated  lines  it  has  been 
found  necessary  to  provide  enough  tracks  to 
permit  of  the  operation  of  both  express  and 
local  trains. 

The  problem  of  waste  of  time  can  be  partial- 
ly solved  in  another  way.  If  the  conveniences 
and  comforts  of  transit  are  so  increased  that 
the  time  spent  in  travel  can  be  profitably  used 
for  reading,  thinking  or  relaxation,  it  is  not 
wholly  lost,  and  consequently  the  limit  of 
time  that  can  be  spent  on  the  cars  without 
economic  disaster  is  raised. 

Still  another  way  of  meeting  the  time  prob- 
lem is  by  a systematic  development  of  all  avail- 
able residence  areas  in  every  direction  from 
the  business  center,  making  the  city  grow 
round  and  symmetrical,  instead  of  long  or  ir- 
regular. Sometimes  very  expensive  public 
improvements,  such  as  the  construction  of 
bridges  and  viaducts  and  the  drainage  or  fill- 
ing in  of  large  areas  of  swamp  lands,  are  re- 
quired for  this  purpose. 

Congestion  of  population  also  meets  the  dif- 
ficulty temporarily.  Though  real  congestion 
is  always  to  be  deprecated,  it  is  clearly  true 
that  scientific  housing  and  city  planning  can 
provide  comfortably  for  a much  denser  popu- 
lation than  is  ordinarily  accommodated  in 
cities.  But  after  all  is  said  and  done  the 
problem  of  the  costs  of  transit  in  waste  of 
time  presses  upon  us  insistently  with  grim 
assurance  that  sooner  or  later  it  will  stop  the 
growth  of  cities  as  we  now  have  them,  namely. 


550 


TRANSIT  IN  CITIES,  PROBLEMS  OF 


as  great  aggregations  of  population  surround- 
ing and  dependent  upon  in  each  case  one  cen- 
tral business  district. 

The  Safety  Problem. — The  necessity  of  safe- 
ty in  transit  is  obvious  and  has  led  to  the 
elimination  of  many  railroad  grade  crossings  in 
cities.  The  problem  is  complicated  by  the  fact 
that  street  railway  operation  is  usually  more 
dangerous  to  other  users  of  the  streets  than  to 
the  passengers  on  street  cars.  This  makes  the 
problem  of  fenders  and  wheel  guards  and  of 
the  constant  regulation  of  traffic  at  crowded 
crossings  especially  important. 

The  Comfort  Problem. — The  advantages  of 
comfort  in  travel  as  a time-saver  have  already 
been  referred  to.  It  is  only  necessary  to  add 
that  under  transit  conditions  which  often  pre- 
vail during  rush  hours,  the  time  spent  on  the 
cars  is  much  worse  than  wasted;  it  is  so 
exhausting  that  so  far  as  fatigue  goes,  people 
would  be  better  off  to  be  at  work,  adding  so 
much  to  the  hours  of  hard  daily  toil.  This 
is  the  problem  of  rush-hour  traffic.  Speed 
helps  here,  as  it  enables  the  movement  of  more 
cars  over  a given  number  of  tracks;  and  a 
great  gain  can  be  had  by  a judicious  arrange- 
ment of  terminals  so  that  the  cars  can  keep 
moving  up  to  the  full  capacity  of  the  tracks. 
Thus  far  the  principal  difficulty  in  the  rush 
hour  problem  is  the  financial  one — the  old  dif- 
ficulty of  handling  the  “peak  load,”  further 
accentuated,  in  the  case  of  transit,  by  the 
profitableness  to  the  operating  company  of 
overcrowded  service.  It  requires  much  less 
power  and  much  fewer  cars  and  men  just  to 
carry  the  crowds  and  get  their  nickels  than  it 
does  to  carry  them  well. 

Problem  of  Unity  in  Operation. — Unity  in 
operation  has  great  advantages  to  the  travel- 
ing public.  While  a large  percentage  of  urban 
travellers  go  regularly  back  and  forth  between 
the  same  points,  there  are  many  whose  busi- 
ness or  pleasure  takes  them  constantly  to  dif- 
ferent parts  of  the  city;  while  practically 
everybody  needs  to  vary  his  route  or  his  des- 
tination once  in  a while.  The  obvious  ad- 
vantages of  through-routing,  convenient  trans- 
fers and  good  connections  give  a large  under- 
lying current  of  popular  support  to  street 
railway  consolidations,  in  spite  of  popular  an- 
tipathy to  monopoly  and  ever-recurring  con- 
fidence in  competition. 

Ubiquity  Problem, — Unity  of  service  is  not 
sufficient,  however,  unless  the  service  extends 
to  all  points  where  it  is  needed.  The  principal 
use  of  competition  in  the  street  railway  busi- 
ness has  been  in  securing  a widely-extended 
service.  With  the  consolidation  of  lines,  which 
has  come  to  be  considered  as  generally  both 
inevitable  and  desirable,  the  problem  of  ubi- 
quity of  service  has  become  much  more  diffi- 
cult. It  remains  for  the  public  authorities 
through  franchise  grants  or  by  the  use  of  the 
police  power  to  put  themselves  in  a position 
to  take  the  place  of  competition  as  an  incen- 


tive to  extensions  of  service.  Monopoly  in  a 
given  territory  without  the  corresponding 
obligation  fully  to  serve  that  territory  is  both 
practically  and  theoretically  intolerable. 

Unity  and  ubiquity  of  service  require  the 
coordination  of  street  surface  and  rapid  tran- 
sit lines  such  as  we  find  in  Boston  and  Phila- 
delphia. In  an  enormous,  sprawling  area  like 
that  of  Greater  New  York  grave  difficulties  are 
in  the  way  of  complete  unification,  especially 
of  the  street  surface  systems.  Under  such 
conditions,  the  desideratum  of  city-wide  transit 
for  a single  fare  should  undoubtedly  be  the  car- 
ing for  the  daily  work-ward  and  home-ward 
movement,  even  if  the  convenience  of  pleasure- 
riding  is  neglected.  If  local  conditions  make 
competition  in  transit  necessary,  it  should 
not  take  the  form  of  parallel  lines,  but  each 
transit  agency  should  have  its  own  residence 
territory  to  serve,  and  the  cars  of  all  compa- 
nies should  be  admitted  to  the  business  dis- 
trict on  equal  terms. 

Rate  Problem. — The  final  interest  of  the 
street  car  patrons  is  in  the  matter  of  rates. 
There  has  been  a great  deal  of  confused  think- 
ing on  this  subject.  Any  rate  that  enables 
promoters  and  investors  to  get  rich  by  the 
manipulation  of  public  property  is  too  high. 
Any  rate  that  prevents  the  street  railways  un- 
der intelligent  management  from  earning  a 
fair  return  upon  the  private  capital  invested, 
gradually  paying  off  such  capital  and  at  the 
same  time  maintaining  the  plant  at  a high 
standard  of  efficiency  and  constantly  render- 
ing first-class  service,  is  too  low.  So  far  as 
the  city’s  interest  is  concerned,  the  city  may 
well  forego  any  large  compensation  from  the 
street  railways,  either  in  the  form  of  rent- 
als or  in  the  form  of  taxation.  The  rates 
should  be  sufficient  to  meet  the  reasonable  re- 
quirements of  the  investors  and  to  give  the 
public  good  service.  The  rates  should  be  uni- 
form in  order  to  bring  about  a symmetrical 
development  of  the  city,  but  in  the  long  run 
even  the  poorest  wage-earners  will  find  a 
profitable  readjustment  in  their  wages  or  in 
the  general  conditions  of  their  economic  life 
for  any  increase  in  fare  that  is  actually  used 
in  giving  uniformly  good  service. 

Investment,  Financial  Return  and  Amortiza- 
tion.— Street  railway  investments  have  here- 
tofore been  highly  speculative.  Vast  fortunes 
have  been  made  out  of  the  manipulation  of 
street  railway  securities.  Millions  of  hard- 
earned  dollars  have  been  lost  in  street  rail- 
ways through  mismanagement,  speculation, 
thievery  and,  in  some  cases,  premature  invest- 
ment. The  investor,  representing  the  money 
that  goes  into  the  plant,  has  an  especial  in- 
terest in  the  complete  elimination  of  stock- 
jobbing from  the  street  railway  business.  A 
small  but  certain  return  upon  the  money 
actually  put  into  the  property,  and  a sinking 
fund  accumulating  out  of  earnings  that  will 
make  possible  the  gradual  withdrawal  of  the 


551 


TRANSIT  IN  CITIES,  PROBLEMS  OF 


capital  invested,  are  the  things  that  will  bring 
the  interests  of  the  public  and  of  the  investor 
into  harmony.  Just  what  rate  of  return 
should  be  allowed  on  private  capital  invested 
in  street  railways  cannot  be  stated  dogmati- 
cally, but  in  general  the  rate  should  approxi- 
mate the  rate  of  interest  paid  on  city  bonds, 
as  the  safety  of  the  investment  approximates 
the  safety  of  investments  in  such  bonds.  No 
more  can  it  be  stated  dogmatically  how  many 
years  should  be  allowed  for  the  retirement  of 
the  capital,  but  under  ordinary  conditions 
there  is  good  reason  for  amortizing  public 
utility  investments  as  rapidly  as  municipal 
debts  are  amortized. 

Relation  of  Transit  to  Real  Estate.— The 
obvious  disadvantages  to  property  of  having 
noisy,  dust-raising  and  dangerous  cars  operat- 
ing in  front  of  one’s  door  has  led  to  a require- 
ment in  some  states  that  before  a street  rail- 
way can  be  built  the  consent  of  a majority 
in  number  or  interest  of  the  property  owners 
on  each  street  to  be  occupied  shall  be  secured. 
In  some  cases,  this  requirement  has  led  to 
scandalous  trafficking  in  consents.  Unless  the 
right  of  appeal  to  the  courts  or  to  a competent 
public  commission  is  given  to  the  promoters 
of  a street  railway  project  in  case  of  the  ab- 
solute refusal  of  the  property-owners  to  con- 
sent, an  important  public  utility  may  be 
stopped  or  its  development  may  be  forced  into 
uneconomical  directions,  by  the  stubborness  of 
private  interests.  In  New  York  state  an  ap- 
peal is  permitted  to  the  courts,  while  on  the 
other  hand  the  abutting  property-owner  is 
entitled  to  recover  damages  on  account  of  the 
operation  of  street  cars  in  front  of  his  door 
where  he  owns  the  fee  in  the  street.  That 
under  certain  circumstances  the  construction 
and  operation  of  a street  railway  affects  ad- 
versely the  values  of  abutting  land,  is  well 
known.  On  the  other  hand,  in  probably  a 
large  majority  of  cases,  land  values  are  direct- 
ly enhanced  by  the  provision  of  additional 
transit  facilities  in  the  vicinity.  Justice  would 
seem  to  require  that,  while  private  ownership 
in  city  sites  is  maintained,  a street  railway 
should  be  treated  as  a public  improvement  to 
the  extent  of  awarding  damages  and  levying 
assessments  for  benefits,  the  net  cost  that 
remains  after  this  adjustment  being  regarded 
as  the  measure  of  the  capital  to  be  invested 
by  the  promoters  of  the  enterprise. 

Public  Problems  Relating  to  Street  Railway 
Employees. — A street  car  strike  in  a city  is  a 
great  industrial,  social  and  moral  disaster.  A 
transit  system  is  designed  for  going.  Every- 
thing depends  on  it.  Strikes  should  be  made 
impossible,  if  it  can  be  done.  The  employees 
of  a.  street  railway  are  engaged  in  a responsi- 
ble, liigh-grade  work.  They  are  entitled  to 
ample  remuneration  and  first-class  treatment. 
The  public’s  interest  in  the  continuity  of  serv- 
ice as  well  as  in  efficient  and  courteous  street 
car  operation  justifies  the  city  or  the  state 


in  compelling  the  arbitration  of  all  disputes 
between  the  company  and  its  men.  It  might 
even  be  desirable  to  insist  on  a division  of 
profits  with  the  employees  according  to  some 
scheme  of  rewards  for  merit  that  would  en- 
courage regular,  faithful  and  intelligent  serv- 
ice. Having  provided  in  the  fullest  manner 
for  the  just  treatment  of  the  employees,  the 
city  should  not  then  hesitate  for  a moment  in 
case  of  strike  and  disorder  to  put  its  whole 
police  organization  behind  the  operator  of  the 
transit  system  so  as  to  make  the  cars  go,  and 
go  in  safety. 

Public  Control  of  Transit. — It  is  now  uni- 
versally recognized  that  the  logic  of  civic  needs 
drives  to  public  control  as  the  inevitable  con- 
clusion of  a rational  consideration  of  transit 
problems.  The  only  question  still  open  is  as 
to  the  form  of  this  control : shall  it  be  by 
public  regulation  or  by  public  ownership  and 
operation  ? Regulation  by  means  of  state  and 
local  utility  commissions  and  departments  is 
one  of  the  great  political  movements  of  the 
immediate  present.  It  is  likely  to  eliminate 
the  speculative  element  from  street  railway 
securities,  to  cause  improvements  in  equipment 
and  service,  to  promote  honest  and  intelligent 
accounting  and  possibly  to  reduce  rates  to  a 
slight  extent.  Thus  far  this  movement  has 
made  little  progress  in  the  direction  of  actual 
municipal  ownership  except  in  the  emphasis 
now  being  laid  on  the  indeterminate  fran- 
chise. Not  until  the  rule  ,-s  established  that 
a street  railway  should  be  paying  for  itself 
even  while  in  private  hands  will  municipal 
ownership  become  a natural  and  easy  develop- 
ment. Meanwhile  the  machinery  of  control 
which  is  being  built  up  by  the  city  and  the 
state  will  be  training  a body  of  experts  who 
look  at  transit  problems  from  a public  point 
of  view  and  whose  services  can  be  had,  when 
needed,  to  make  municipal  operation  a suc- 
cess. In  all  probability  public  regulation  is 
driving  toward  municipal  ownership  more  rap- 
idly than  appears  on  the  surface.  As  the 
stock-jobbers  are  driven  out  of  the  field,  the 
most  powerful1  argument  against  municipal 
ownership,  namely,  the  get-rich-quick  value  of 
privately  controlled  franchises,  will  disappear. 
In  fact  it  would  not  be  surprising  to  see  be- 
fore long  many  street  railway  men  climbing 
into  the  municipal  ownership  wagon,  having 
got  their  properties  appraised  at  a liberal 
figure  and  realizing  that  municipal  ownership 
has  many  advantages  in  the  operation  of  a 
business  run  primarily  for  service  rather  than 
for  profit. 

See  Bridges,  Public;  City  Planning;  Con- 
gestion in  Cities;  Docks  and  Wharves,  Pub- 
lic ; Harbor  Systems  ; Railroad  Commis- 
sions, State;  Railroads,  Elevated;  Rail- 
roads, Street;  Sidewalks;  Street  Commis- 
sions and  Commissioners;  Streets;  Subways 
and  Tunnels  for  City  Transit;  Transporta- 
tion, Regulation  of. 


552 


TRANSPORTATION  BY  GOVERNMENT— TRANSPORTATION,  PRINCIPLES  OF 


References:  Symposium,  “Electric  Railway 
Transportation”  in  Am.  Acad,  of  Pol.  Sci.,  An- 
nals , XXXVII  (1911),  No.  1;  B.  J.  Arnold, 
Report  on  the  Pittsburgh  Transportation  Prob- 
lem (1911)  ; Bureau  of  the  Census,  Street  and 
Electric  Railways  (1902,  1907)  ; D.  F.  Wilcox, 
Municipal  Franchises  (1911),  II. 

D.  F.  Wilcox. 

TRANSPORTATION  BY  GOVERNMENT. 
Army  Transport  Service. — With  the  opening 
of  the  war  with  Spain,  it  became  necessary  for 
the  government,  through  the  War  Department 
to  operate  a regular  transport  service  between 
New  York,  San  Juan,  Ponce  and  Santiago; 
and  during  the  years  1898-99,  forty-seven 
chartered  vessels  were  operated  in  the  tem- 
porary Philippine  transport  service.  This 
service  has  been  reduced,  but  also  been  made 
permanent.  Through  the  Quartermaster  Gen- 
eral’s Department  of  the  War  Department,  the 
government  now  conducts  its  oversea  transpor- 
tation in  two  ways : ( 1 ) in  commercial  ves- 

sels under  special  contract  or  on  ordinary  pub- 
lic tariffs;  (2)  in  vessels  owned  or  chartered 
by  the  government,  under  the  supervision  of 
the  Quartermaster  General.  The  home  ports 
are  New  York  with  business  of  slight  impor- 
tance, and  San  Francisco,  whence  the  service 
operates  a regular  line  of  steamers  to  the  Phil- 
ippines. Through  the  Quartermaster  General’s 
Department,  supplies,  war  munitions,  etc.,  are 
also  transported  by  rail,  under  regular  railroad 
tariffs,  and  by  wagon,  train,  stage  and  express. 
Till  the  railroads  reached  the  plains  the  Gov- 
ernment maintained  a monthly  wagon  service 
to  the  posts,  by  contract  with  private  vehicles. 

Collier  Service. — The  Navy  Department,  in 
1910,  purchased  651,241  tons  of  coal  which 


requires  transportation  to  the  ports  and  out- 
lying posts.  A portion  is  shipped  in  merchant 
vessels  under  contracts  entered  into  by  the 
Bureau  of  Supplies  and  Accounts.  The  Navy 
Department,  however,  operates  a fleet  of  col- 
liers, which  in  1910  numbered  20  with  135,417 
tons  displacement.  In  that  year  the  Depart- 
ment also  operated  eight  transports  and  supply 
ships. 

Panama  Railroad  Company. — In  connection 
with  the  Panama  Canal,  the  Government  oper- 
ates the  Panama  Railroad  Company,  which  in 
1910  carried  a total  of  1,272,217  tons  of  freight 
and  2,227,569  passengers.  Through  its  com- 
missary department,  it  operates  bakeries  and 
other  food  preparation  plants,  and  wholesale 
and  retail  selling  departments  for  the  feeding 
of  the  government  construction  forces  in  the 
Canal  Zone. 

One  branch  of  its  service  includes  a steam- 
ship line  which  operates  a line  of  six  steamers 
between  New  Y7ork  and  Colon,  and  in  1910, 
carried  425,559  tons  of  freight  and  16,615 
passengers. 

See  Cost  of  Government  in  the  United 
States;  Military  and  Naval  Expenditures; 
Panama  Canal;  Panama  Railroad;  Philip- 
pine Islands;  Public  Property. 

References:  U.  S.  Secretary  of  War,  Letter 
on  the  Transport  Service  to  the  Philippines, 
House  Doc.,  57  Cong.,  1 Sess.,  No.  537  (1902)  ; 
Quartermaster  General,  Report  (Annual)  ; 
Bureau  of  Supplies  and  Accounts,  Annual  Re- 
ports; U.  S.  Navy  Department,  Annual  Re- 
port; Panama  Railroad  Company,  Twenty- 
sixth  Annual  Report  (1910);  C.  B.  Baker, 
Transportation  of  Troops  and  Materials 
(1905);  H.  W.  Daly,  Manual  of  Pack  Trans- 
portation (1910).  Grover  G.  Huebner. 


TRANSPORTATION,  ECONOMIC  PRINCIPLES  OF 


Economic  Significance. — The  dictum  of  one 
of  our  great  essayists  and  historians  that,  with 
the  exception  of  the  alphabet  and  the  printing 
press,  the  inventions  which  have  abridged  dis- 
tance have  done  more  for  civilization  than  all 
others,  is  not  too  extravagant  praise  of  mod- 
ern transportation  and  communication,  which 
go  far  to  fashion  our  whole  industrial  system. 
The  primitive  and  simple  industrial  life  of  the 
ancients  was  conditioned  by  inadequate  means 
of  communication.  When  communication  im- 
proved about  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  markets  were  widened,  and  special- 
ization (division  of  labor)  with  its  resultant 
great  increase  in  productive  capacity  was  made 
possible.  The  outcome  was  modern,  large-scale 
production  and  capitalistic  industry.  Concur- 
rently came  a financial  organization  of  in- 
dustry in  which  individual  enterprise  yielded 
to  the  partnership;  the  partnership  gave  way 


to  the  corporation  with  its  limited  liability,  its 
continuity  of  life  and  its  power  of  collecting 
large  resources;  and  as  the  final  development 
came  the  “corporation  of  corporations,”  the 
modern  trust. 

Transportation  and  Distribution  — In  the 
realm  of  distribution,  or  sharing,  of  wealth, 
our  transportation  development  has  played  an 
equally  significant  part.  Increased  productiv- 
ity has  given  us  a larger  total  to  be  shared; 
and  the  forces  governing  the  actual  sharing 
are,  to  no  small  extent,  the  result  of  the  de- 
velopment of  transportation.  The  rents  of 
today  are  largely  location  rents,  and  the  align- 
ments of  laborers  and  capitalists  and  the  rela- 
tive powers  of  each  class  in  the  competitive 
struggle,  are  so  far  conditioned  by  transporta- 
tion forces  as  almost  to  account  for  the  form 
of  the  present  industrial  organization.  Then, 
too,  the  principles  of  distribution  have  become 


553 


TRANSPORTATION,  ECONOMIC  PRINCIPLES  OF 


more  complex.  In  the  “sun-dried  brick”  stage 
of  industry  there  is  little  complexity,  and 
value  determinants  are  easily  arrived  at.  In 
the  specialized  and  large-scale  industry  of 
today  the  principles  of  distribution  are  not 
easy  to  ascertain.  We  are  far  from  being  in 
agreement  concerning  either  what  is  or  what 
ought  to  be. 

Social  and  Political  Consequences. — By  open- 
ing up  new  sources  of  supply  and  by  making 
possible  the  territorial  division  of  labor  the 
possibility  of  great  famines  has  been  reduced 
and  the  means  of  subsistence  for  all  classes 
have  been  greatly  cheapened.  The  social  sig- 
nificance of  greater  ease  of  communication  of 
ideas  requires  no  comment,  nor  does  the  signif- 
icance of  migrations  of  people  from  one  coun- 
try to  another,  from  state  to  state,  or  from 
rural  district  to  city.  The  importance  of 
machine  industry  in  the  shaping  of  the 
thought-processes  and  in  determining  the  whole 
mental  horizon  of  modern  man  is  now  recog- 
nized. 

Roads  and  Waterways. — We  have  not  ar- 
rived at  our  present  position  at  a bound.  In 
internal  transportation  most  nations  have 
passed  through  the  dirt-road,  the  turnpike,  the 
canal,  and  the  railroad  (steam  and  electric) 
stages.  An  equal  or  greater  number  of  stages, 
each  marking  the  introduction  of  some  mechan- 
ical device  could  be  enumerated  for  deep-water 
transportation,  both  ocean  and  lake.  Man 
ceaselessly  opens  up  new  markets  and  expands 
the  old  ones,  makes  accessible  new  stores  of  raw 
materials,  establishes  new  seats  of  manufac- 
ture, renders  more  and  more  highly  specialized 
and  complex  and  more  and  more  efficient  his 
whole  industrial  organization. 

Aside  from  deep-water  transportation,  from 
canals  connecting  two  bodies  of  deep  water, 
from  natural  shallow  waterways  requiring  lit- 
tle expense  for  maintenance,  it  is  clear  that 
the  future  agent  of  transportation  will  be 
the  railroad,  steam  or  electric.  The  arti- 
ficial shallow  waterway  has  serious  disadvan- 
tages. Generally  it  must  bear  prohibitive  costs 
of  transshipment  since  it  can  reach  only  level 
districts  and  even  there  cannot  throw  out  sat- 
isfactory sidelines,  switches,  and  feeders.  Ex- 
penses of  construction  and  maintenance  are 
so  great  that  the  cost  of  transportation  is 
much  greater  than  by  rail,  even  if  no  al- 
lowances be  made  for  insurance  charges  and 
slower  haul.  Generally,  the  waterway  can  be 
utilized  only  a part  of  the  year  because  of  ice 
in  canals  and  ice  and  floods  in  rivers.  Final- 
ly, in  the  United  States  at  least,  industry  has 
located  itself  according  to  rail  transportation 
and  the  cost  of  shifting  the  industries  or  of 
developing  suitable  water  terminals  would 
seem  prohibitive. 

Economic  Characteristics  of  Rail  Transpor- 
tation.— The  railway  industry  considered  from 
the  point  of  view  of  economics  has  four  main 
characteristics:  (1)  The  first  of  these  is  the 


fact  that  the  railway  business  is  preeminently 
an  industry  of  much  fixed,  specialized  capital. 
Tracks,  locomotives,  cars,  etc.,  require  tremend- 
ous outlay  and  when  these  instruments  have 
been  called  into  being  they  can  be  used  only 
for  the  one  purpose  of  transportation  by  rail. 
For  better  or  for  worse,  social  capital  has 
been  committed  to  the  enterprise,  in  a way 
that  is  irrevocable.  (2)  Once  the  railway  is 
in  existence,  a large  part  of  the  costs  of  opera- 
tion are  without  any  very  definite  relation  to 
the  volume  of  the  traffic.  The  wear  and  tear 
of  natural  forces,  the  interest  on  construction, 
the  obsolescence  of  machinery,  and  many  other 
costs  go  on  much  the  same  whether  trains  be 
many  or  few.  As  Arthur  M.  Wellington  puts  it 
in  his  Economic  Theory  of  Railway  Locations 
(2d  ed.,  1887)  : 

Assume  that  with  given  traffic  the  total  cost  per 
unit  is  100 ; extra  freight  in  small  lots  will  cost 
per  unit  0 ; extra  freight  in  car  loads  will  cost  per 
unit,  5 to  20 ; extra  freight  in  train  loads  will  cost 
per  unit  not  over  60. 

(3)  The  costs  in  railroading  are  largely 
“joint  costs,”  which  are  incurred  for  the  traffic 
as  a whole.  It  follows  that  until  cost  account- 
ing has  progressed  far  beyond  its  present  stage 
it  will  be  impossible  to  find  the  “cost  of  service” 
for  each  particular  unit  of  traffic.  Even  with 
perfect  cost  accounting  the  assignments  of  over- 
head charges  would  be  more  or  less  arbitrary 
approximations.  (4)  The  industry  has  developed 
so  rapidly  that  a “normal”  has  never  been  at- 
tained. The  railway  of  today  differs  from 
that  of  1830  as  much  as  the  early  railway 
differed  from  the  turnpike.  On  both  the  me- 
chanical and  the  business  sides,  the  industry 
has  undergone  through  constant  development 
what  has  amounted  to  almost  a revolution 
every  few  decades. 

Principles  of  Additional  Traffic. — From  these 
characteristics  flow  significant  consequences. 
( 1 ) Tremendous  pressure  exists  to  secure  added 
traffic.  Since  cost  does  not  vary  proportionally 
to  changes  in  volume  of  business,  conditions 
may  easily  arise  where  an  increase  in  business 
will  cause  more  than  a proportional  increase  in 
profits.  A 10  per  cent  increase  in  business, 
with  rates  unchanged,  may  increase  the  sur- 
plus available  for  dividends  over  100  per  cent. 
If  this  traffic  is  “back  haul”  traffic,  i.  e.,  traffic 
which  is  to  be  moved  in  the  direction  in  which 
empty  cars  are  going,  the  case  is  even  stronger. 
The  “empties”  must  be  returned;  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  system  is  already  in  existence,  per- 
haps even  to  the  point  of  having  sufficient 
freight  handlers  to  care  for  the  new  freight. 
In  such  a case  the  added  cost  may  be  well  nigh 
negligible.  It  is  not  difficult  to  understand 
why  the  manager  who  will  develop  even  a lit- 
tle new  business  is  eagerly  sought  after;  nor 
is  it  difficult  to  see  the  justification  of  build- 
ing branch  lines  which  are  not  in  themselves 
profitable,  but  which  bring  in  a little  more 
traffic  for  a long  haul  on  the  parent  line. 


554 


TRANSPORTATION,  ECONOMIC  PRINCIPLES  OF 


From  the  manager’s  point  of  view,  that  he 
should  give  low  rates  on  cheap  and  bulky  com- 
modities in  order  to  induce  them  to  move  and 
thus  increase  the  volume  of  his  business  is 
clear.  It  is  also  clear  why  the  manager  will 
feel  justified  in  charging  less  for  a “long  haul” 
than  for  a “short  haul”  over  the  same  line  pro- 
vided he  can  get  the  long  haul  traffic  on  no  oth- 
er terms;  nor  will  he  feel  that  by  so  doing  he 
places  any  burden  on  the  “short  haul”  traffic. 
Thus  the  significance  of  the  principle  of 
“charging  what  the  traffic  will  bear”  is  appar- 
ent, as  is  also  the  interest  of  the  public  in  re- 
duced rates  as  business  develops. 

(2)  Competition  is  not  a satisfactory  “law  of 
trade”  in  transportation  and  the  incentives  to 
combination  are  exceedingly  strong.  (a)  If 
once  a rate  war  breaks  out  there  seems  to  be 
no  stopping-place.  The  field  cannot  be  aban- 
doned, for  the  instrument  can  produce  nothing 
but  transportation  and  a large  part  of  the 
charges  (e.  g.,  interest  on  bonds)  would  ac- 
cumulate even  if  not  a train  moved.  If  traffic 
falls  off,  costs  will  not  fall  proportionately. 
It  follows,  then,  that  a manager  may  go  on  for 
long  periods  “producing  transportation”  and 
collecting  a rate  which  does  not  cover  his  total 
cost  per  unit,  provided  the  rate  covers  added 
cost  per  unit  or  more.  He  may  even  produce 
at  less  than  added  cost  per  unit  in  the  hope 
of  increasing  his  traffic.  If  the  traffic  does  so 
increase,  the  new  added  cost  per  unit  will  be 
lower — it  may  be  lower  than  the  rate  originally 
charged  and  if  so  it  is  “good  business”  from 
his  point  of  view.  In  addition,  since  the 
costs  are  largely  joint  costs,  it  may  be  impos- 
sible to  know  definitely  until  after  it  is  all 
over  just  where  the  line  between  “paying”  and 
“losing”  buisness  is  (a  situation  particularly 
true  in  the  earlier  days  of  our  railroads),  and 
the  bitterness  with  which  rate  wars  are  car- 
ried on  becomes  comprehensible,  (b)  Compe- 
tition does  not  necessarily  mean  the  “survival 
of  the  fittest”  in  this  industry.  A bankrupt 
road  which  has  been  repudiating  some  of  its 
fixed  charges  and  which  is  willing  to  skimp  its 
maintenance  for  years;  or  a roundabout  road, 
subsisting  largely  on  local  traffic  and  hauling 
the  added  through  traffic  at  a ridiculously  low 
rate  may  be  more  than  a match  for  the  solvent, 
direct  route — as  witness  the  differentials,  many 
of  which  are  allowed  “weaker”  roads  to  induce 
them  to  stop  fighting  the  “stronger”  ones. 
The  ancient  assumption  that  competition  was 
a proper  “law  of  trade,”  whatever  that  may 
mean,  was  based  upon  the  assumption  of  a 
“normal,”  in  which  competitive  forces  had 
worked  themselves  into  a state  of  equilibrium. 
In  the  railway  industry  no  normal  has  ex- 
isted; it  does  not  seem  likely  ever  to  exist. 
As  a consequence,  the  competitive  equilibrium 
has  been  and  seems  likely  to  be  of  little  signifi- 
cance in  this  industry. 

In  the  early  stages  of  development  of  rail- 
ways, the  ide£L  of  a cost  of  production  theory 
133  5[ 


of  value  based  upon  a competitive  norm  per- 
meated the  public  so  thoroughly  that  when  rail- 
ways began  to  check  competition  by  traffic 
pools  and  money  pools,  the  law  of  1887  for- 
bade pooling.  The  result  has  been  the  accel- 
eration of  more  definite  and  permanent  forms 
of  consolidation,  by  purchase,  by  lease,  by 
holding  company,  by  division  of  the  field,  by 
reciprocal  representation  on  directorates,  etc., 
some  of  which  in  their  turn  are  now  the  ob- 
ject of  attack. 

(3)  It  is  therefore  exceedingly  difficult  to 
settle  upon  any  satisfactory  theory  of  rate 
making,  and  the  various  rate  structures  in 
our  country  are  to  a considerable  extent  a his- 
torical development  out  of  “rate  guessing,” 
much  influenced,  of  course,  by  the  ever  present 
wish  to  make  a profit,  and  by  the  pressure 
exerted  in  later  years  on  behalf  of  the  interests 
of  the  public.  Without  any  satisfactory  theory, 
the  attempt  to  regulate  railways  through  regu- 
lation of  rates  has  been  attended  with  great 
difficulties.  Some  contend  that  mere  regulation 
of  rates  will  never  suffice;  that  the  regulation 
of  individual  rates  must  be  coupled  with  regu- 
lation of  net  profits,  thus  securing  justice  to 
individual  shippers  and  at  the  same  time  safe- 
guarding the  interests  of  the  public  as  a whole 
by  providing  that  the  railways  may  not  secure 
more  than  a reasonable  return  upon  a reason- 
able and  proper  capitalization. 

See  Accidents,  Railroad  and  Steamship; 
Commerce,  American,  Movement  of;  Long 
and  Short  Haul;  Merger  of  Railroads;  Nav- 
igation, Regulation  of;  Pooling  in  Rail- 
roads; Pullman  Cars,  Regulation  of;  Rail- 
road Capitalization  ; Railroad  Commissions, 
State;  Railroad  Management;  Railroads, 
Electric;  Railroads,  Public  Aid  to;  Rail- 
roads, Public  Ownership  of;  Rebates  in 
Transportation;  Ship  Building,  Regulation 
and  Public  Aid  to;  Shipping,  Regulation  of; 
Subsides  to  Shipping;  Telegraph  Regula- 
tion; Telephones,  Regulation  of;  Traffic 
Agreements  ; Transportation,  Regulation 
of. 

References:  A.  T.  Hadley,  Railroad  Trans- 
portation (1885)  ; A.  M.  Wellington,  Economic 
Theory  of  the  Location  of  Railways  (1891)  ; 
B.  H.  Meyer,  Railway  Legislation  in  the  V . S. 
(1903);  W.  C.  Noyes,  Am.  Railroad  Rates 
( 1905 ) ; H.  R.  Meyer,  Gov.  Regulation  of 
Railway  Rates  ( 1905 ) ; W.  L.  Webb,  Econom- 
ics of  Railroad  Construction  (1912);  J.  R. 
Smith,  Ocean  Carrier  (1908)  ; J.  M.  Clark, 
Standards  of  Reasonableness  in  Local  Freight 
Discriminations  (1910);  F.  W.  Taussig,  Prin- 
ciples of  Economics  (1911),  chs.  60-65;  M.  B. 
Hammond,  Railway  Rate  Theories  of  the  In- 
terstate Commerce  Commission  (1911);  H.  G. 
Moulton,  Railivays  vs.  Waterways  (1912);  J. 
F.  Strombeck,  Freight  Classification  (1912); 
E.  R.  Johnson  and  G.  G.  Huebner,  Railioay 
Traffic  cund  Rates  (1911). 

L.  C.  Marshall. 


TRANSPORTATION,  REGULATION  OF 


TRANSPORTATION,  REGULATION  OF 


Rates  and  Services. — The  problem  of  regu- 
lation is  the  problem  of  adjudicating  those 
differences  between  citizens  and  public  car- 
riers which  arise  out  of  questions  of  railway 
service  and  rates.  Differences  between  citizens 
and  carriers  which  do  not  arise  out  of  the 
public  service  of  railways  or  the  rate  charged 
for  such  service,  such  as  controversies  regard- 
ing private  property  rights,  are  not  generally 
adjusted  through  the  agency  of  the  “regulat- 
ing” authority  for  the  reason  that  these  are 
judicial  and  not  administrative  questions,  mat- 
ters for  the  courts  and  not  for  commissions 
to  pass  upon.  The  boundary  line  between  the 
field  of  administration  and  the  judiciary  is 
not  always  clearly  discernible  and  numerous 
important  questions  of  regulation  will  remain 
in  doubt  in  this  respect  until  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  shall  have  declared 
whether  they  are  administrative  or  judicial. 

Common  Carriers. — All  railway  regulation  is 
based  upon  the  public  character  of  common 
carriers.  This  principle  of  regulation  found 
practical  application  in  the  regulation  of  fares 
for  vehicular  and  other  conveyances  centuries 
before  the  modern  railway  came  upon  the 
scene.  Although  incorporated  in  the  English 
common  law  and  transplanted  to  this  country, 
this  principle  was  not  recognized  by  American 
railways  until  after  the  well  known  decision 
of  Munn  vs.  Illinois  (94  U.  S.  113),  in  which 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  among 
other  things,  reiterated  the  time  honored  doc- 
trine that  property  devoted  to  a public  use 
must  submit  to  public  regulation  to  the  extent 
of  that  use.  Many  subsequent  decisions  have 
reaffirmed  and  defined  that  same  doctrine,  but 
not  until  quite  recently  have  railways  and 
other  public  utilities  generally  acknowledged 
their  subordination  to  this  principle. 

Reasons  for  Public  Regulation. — However, 
even  before  the  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court 
in  the  Granger  cases  (see),  of  which  Munn  vs. 
Illinois  (see)  was  one,  attempts  at  regulation 
of  railways  had  been  made.  A statutory  pro- 
vision creating  a commission  to  have  jurisdic- 
tion over  railways  is  found  in  a general  law 
of  Rhode  Island  of  1836.  Administrative  au- 
thorities were  created  by  general  laws  in  a 
number  of  other  states  during  the  period  be- 
fore 1873;  and  in  the  year  1911,  no  less  than 
forty-two  states  had  commissions,  with  vary- 
ing jurisdictions  and  widely  different  powers. 
Complaints  regarding  excessive  and  discrimin- 
atory charges  and  inadequate  service  resulted 
in  public  agitation  which  reached  its  climax 
in  the  Granger  movement  during  the  period 
1868  to  1873.  While  the  Granger  movement 
extended  into  a much  later  period,  and  the 
Granger  organization  is  still  active,  it  was 


during  these  early  years  of  its  existence 
especially,  that  the  organization  became  a 
political  power,  with  the  avowed  purpose  of 
subjugating  the  railways  in  the  United  States 
to  what  they  considered  to  be  the  public  in- 
terest. The  management  of  the  railways  had 
in  many  cases  been  arbitrary;  their  charges 
had  frequently  been  exorbitant,  the  grossest 
discriminations  were  openly  practiced;  and 
the  service  had  oftentimes  been  most  unsatis- 
factory. If  Granger  activities  led  to  extremes, 
if  Granger  laws  were  radical,  the  explanation 
of  whatever  extreme  radicalism  may  have 
cropped  out  is  found  primarily  in  the  counter 
radicalism  of  the  railway  management  which 
had  brought  it  forth.  The  railway  officials  of 
those  days  as  a class  denied  the  right  of  the 
public  to  interfere  with  whatever  management 
they  saw  fit  to  give  it,  maintaining  that 
like  other  classes  of  business  the  railway  busi- 
ness was  a private  business.  The  Granger 
agitation  resulted  in  the  establishment  of  the 
principle  that  the  railway  business  is  largely 
a public  business. 

Private  Elements  of  Railroad  Business. — The 
extent  to  which  the  railway  business  is  public 
and  private  respectively,  has  been  under  con- 
troversy ever  since,  with  a consistent  widening 
of  public  influence,  both  compulsory  by  statute 
and  voluntary  by  company  action,  in  the  con- 
duct of  the  railways.  The  exact  limits  of  these 
two  activities,  public  and  private,  will  not  be 
established  for  many  years  to  come,  if  indeed 
a final  adjustment  can  ever  be  reached.  There 
is  here  a field  for  controversy  which  is  inherent 
in  the  railway  business  largely  independent  of 
the  question  of  ownership.  Government  own- 
ership cannot  dispose  of  the  railway  problem. 
It  may  solve  some  phases  of  what  we  now 
know  as  the  railway  problem ; it  will  probably 
create  others.  Government  railways  have  their 
private  aspect  just  like  railways  owned  and 
managed  by  corporations ; and  the  conflict  be- 
tween the  public  and  the  railways  in  this  re- 
spect will  continue  as  long  as  railways  are 
used,  independently  of  whether  they  are  owned 
by  private  companies  or  by  the  Government. 

The  issue  in  this  respect  relates  both  to 
initial  and  to  final  authority.  In  matters 
which  are  purely  private  to  the  railway  cor- 
poration, the  company  has  both  the  initial 
and  final  power,  provided  the  safety  of  em- 
ployees and  travellers  is  not  endangered.  A 
railway  company  can  determine  the  type  of 
its  locomotives,  the  kind  of  cross  ties,  the 
plan  of  its  bridges,  the  arrangement  of  its 
station  facilities,  the  character  of  its  trains 
and  a multitude  of  analagous  matters.  These 
things  may  be  called  private  to  the  corpora- 
tion. 


556 


TRANSPORTATION,  REGULATION  OF 


According  to  the  best  present  thought  on  the 
subject,  under  present  conditions,  railway  com- 
panies should  be  protected  in  their  right  of 
initiative  in  all  company  matters,  public  and 
private.  This  has  been  the  underlying  theory 
of  federal  legislation  up  to  the  present  time, 
as  it  has  been  the  theory  of  the  best  of  our 
state  laws.  According  to  these  laws  the  initial 
responsibility  rests  upon  the  railway  com- 
panies to  furnish  reasonably  adequate  service 
at  reasonable  rates  and  it  is  only  when  service 
is  alleged  to  be  inadequate,  or  rates  unjust, 
that  the  right  of  a state  to  interfere  begins. 
Hence  in  a very  true  sense  it  may  be  said  that 
the  railway  companies  run  their  own  business. 
Public  authority  interferes  under  statute  only 
when  the  conduct  of  this  business,  as  initially 
determined  by  the  railway  companies,  is  al- 
leged to  be  at  variance  with  the  public  interest. 
The  resolution  of  the  railway  company  is  al- 
ways tentative  regarding  the  public  aspects  of 
its  business  and  subject  to  modification  or  null- 
ification by  public  authority  in  accordance  with 
law.  The  resolution  of  the  railway  company 
may  always  be  final  regarding  its  private  cor- 
porate affairs. 

Public  Elements  of  Railroad  Business. — 

What  is  ultimately  private  and  what  is  public 
is  not  always  easy  of  decision.  A railway 
company,  it  has  already  been  stated,  may  de- 
termine the  type  of  its  locomotives.  So  it  may 
be;  but  suppose  that  a certain  type  of  loco- 
motive should  develop  a tendency  to  jump  the 
track,  could  not  public  authority  step  in  and 
prohibit  its  use  in  the  future?  A railway  com- 
pany may  determine  the  plan  of  its  bridges. 
If  a certain  kind  of  bridge  construction  is  ex- 
cessively wasteful  of  revenues,  or  unduly  pre- 
judicial to  public  safety,  cannot  the  state  in- 
terfere with  a view  to  checking  waste  and 
promoting  safety?  A railway  company  may 
persist  in  using  antiquated  wooden  cars  after 
the  economy  and  safety  of  steel  cars  has  been 
demonstrated.  Can  not  the  government  inter- 
fere and  prohibit  the  further  use  of  wooden 
cars?  After  all,  how  many  purely  private 
matters  are  there  in  the  conduct  of  the  rail- 
way business?  May  not  what  seems  private 
today  be  public  tomorrow  to  an  extent  which 
may  necessitate  interference  on  behalf  of  the 
public  ? 

It  may  be  said,  as  it  has  been  said  for  dec- 
ades past,  that  self-interest  will  dictate  the 
abandonment  of  the  poor  locomotive,  the  im- 
proper bridge,  the  dangerous  passenger  car. 
Has  self-interest  in  fact  done  so?  Hid  self-in- 
terest cause  the  abandonment  of  destructive 
couplers?  Has  self-interest  established  the 
most  approved  safety  devices,  the  safest  sys- 
tems of  operation  and  other  similar  protective 
measures  on  behalf  of  the  public,  and  on  behalf 
of  railway  operators?  Self-interest  has  not 
generally  done  so  in  the  past  and  it  cannot 
be  generally  relied  upon  to  do  so  in  the  future. 
Unfortunately  enlightened  self-interest  has  not 


been,  and  perhaps  never  will  be,  the  universal 
rule. 

Nor  should  the  actual  history  of  railway 
management  in  this  respect  be  attributed  to  a 
peculiar  character  of  the  men  engaged  in  that 
management.  Railway  men  as  a class  are  like 
all  other  men.  They  are. just  as  good  and  no 
better.  They  are  just  as  bad  and  no  worse. 
Nothing  can  be  gained  by  calling  railway  peo- 
ple names.  Regulation  is  impersonal,  although 
extremely  human.  The  railway  business  must 
be  viewed  in  a strictly  objective  manner  in  its 
relation  to  all  other  human  activities  with 
which  it  comes  in  contact,  and  the  points  of 
contact  analyzed  in  greatest  detail  and  ac- 
curacy with  a view  to  establishing  the  most 
correct  and  just  basis  for  regulation. 

Progress  of  Federal  Regulation. — The  first 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  act  of  1887 
was  preceded  by  almost  20  years  of  continuous 
agitation,  debate,  resolutions  and  reports  in 
and  out  of  Congress.  After  the  statute  went 
into  effect  it  was  ten  years  more  before  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  was  held  by 
the  courts  to  have  authority  to  fix  a rate  for 
the  future.  Not  until  1903  did  the  published 
rate  become  the  only  lawful  rate.  It  was 
1906  before  the  power  to  fix  a reasonable 
maximum  rate  for  the  future  was  conferred 
upon  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission. 
In  1910  the  power  to  suspend  proposed  ad- 
vances in  rates  was  conferred. 

The  statute  requiring  carriers  to  equip  their 
cars  with  automatic  couplers  and  other  safety 
appliances  was  enacted  in  1893  and  was  amend- 
ed and  supplemented  by  the  acts  of  1896,  1903 
and  1910.  In  1907  the  act  limiting  the  hours 
of  service  of  railway  employees  became  law; 
and  in  February,  1911,  was  enacted  the  stat- 
ute compelling  carriers  to  equip  their  locomo- 
tives with  safe  and  suitable  boilers,  and  pro- 
viding for  the  inspection  of  such  boilers  under 
rules  approved  by  the  Commission. 

Since  1900  the  field  of  federal  regulation  has 
been  repeatedly  expanded,  and  the  indications 
are  that  legislation  will  follow  in  the  future 
which  will  make  the  statutory  code  govern- 
ing railways  as  broad  as  the  business;  and 
that  is  the  test.  The  regulating  statute  must 
be  coextensive  with  the  railway  business.  That 
it  has  not  been  so  has  been  the  greatest  weak- 
ness in  regulating  statutes  of  the  past,  state 
and  federal.  The  interstate  commerce  law  as 
amended  up  to  the  present  time  is  capable  of 
correcting  by  far  the  larger  number  of  possi- 
ble abuses  in  railway  management.  However, 
in  1914,  it  does  not  cover  issues  of  securities 
by  railway  corporations;  it  does  not  cover 
all  branches  of  railway  service;  it  is 
inadequate  in  its  treatment  of  safety  in  rail- 
way travel;  it  does  not  provide  adequate  ma- 
chinery to  deal  with  disputes  between  railway 
employees  and  railway  companies,  which  may 
affect  the  whole  country  and  always  affects 
relatively  many  people  and  large  territories. 


557 


TRANSPORTATION,  REGULATION  OF 


Regulation  by  States. — The  general  problem 
of  regulation  in  the  states  is  essentially  the 
same  as  in  the  nation,  but  specific  state  prob- 
lems are  fewer,  frequently  local  and  generally 
less  important.  Such  matters  as  side  tracks, 
station  buildings,  and  even  in  many  respects 
train  service,  are  primarily  local  and  can  be 
best  considered  by  people  who  know  the  local- 
ities affected  and  who  are  upon  the  ground ; 
hence  these  are  peculiarly  within  the  province 
of  state  control.  States,  however,  from  the 
first,  long  before  the  interstate  commerce  law 
was  enacted,  extended  the  scope  of  their  regu- 
latory activity  far  beyond  these  matters,  into 
matters  of  rates  and  classifications.  Indeed, 
it  was  the  rate  above  everything  else  that  the 
states  were  determined  to  control.  A natural 
historic  explanation  is  thus  found  for  the  dif- 
ferences and  the  antagonism  between  the  laws 
of  different  states  that  apply  to  the  same  sys- 
tem of  railways.  The  reference  to  forty  and 
eight  masters  is  well  understood.  These  many 
masters  frequently,  although  unintentionally, 
stand  in  the  way  of  progress  in  classifications 
and  rates,  which  are  national  and  not  state 
questions.  There  is  no  such  thing  as  a real 
segregation  of  state  rates  and  interstate  rates. 
It  has  been  stated  many  times  that  commer- 
cially this  country  is  a unit;  and  it  also  is 
clear  that  every  railway  system  is,  or  should 
strive  to  be,  a unit.  Both  statements  are 
equally  true.  This  unity  extends  to  rates  and 
classifications.  Several  states  cannot  con- 
temporaneously act  in  regard  to  the  same 
rate  or  classification  of  the  same  railway  com- 
pany in  exactly  opposite  or  different  ways,  as 
they  frequently  do,  without  doing  injustice, 
causing  unnecessary  embarrassment,  or  retard- 
ing the  desirable  development  of  unity  in  rates 
and  classifications.  Entirely  aside  from  con- 
siderations of  local  as  against  central  control, 
or  state  as  opposed  to  federal  control,  various 
states  have  properly  and  justly  discounten- 
anced suggestions  looking  toward  the  sur- 
render on  their  part  of  the  whole  or  a part  of 
their  authority  over  railroads.  Very  natural- 
ly they  have  been  unwilling  to  consider  any 
such  suggestion  until  after  they  have  had  the 
assurance  of  a federal  statute  at  least  as  ef- 
fective as  their  own. 

In  state  laws  regulating  railways  there  has 
been  marked  progress  during  recent  years. 
Wisconsin,  in  1905,  and  New  York  in  1907 
enacted  comprehensive  and  in  general  more 
satisfactory  laws  than  any  preceding  ones  and 
they  have  been  followed  in  a number  of  other 
states  in  different  sections  of  the  country. 
Until  the  federal  interstate  commerce  law 
reaches  the  completeness  of  these  laws,  sug- 
gestions looking  toward  the  extension  of  the 
federal  authority  in  rate  matters  cannot  hope 
to  make  much  progress  without  encountering 
the  opposition  of  such  states.  How  rapidly 
progress  can  he  made  in  this  direction  after 
our  federal  statutes  reach  this  stage  is  a 


matter  of  conjecture.  The  problem  is  in  the 
horizon  and  it  will  stay  there  till  it  rises  to 
full  view;  it  cannot  be  circumvented.  The 
proper  adjustment  of  state  and  interstate  rates 
and  classifications  is  in  many  respects  the 
greatest  problem  of  regulation  with  which  the 
future  of  this  country  has  to  deal.  One  of  the 
suggestions  in  this  respect  is  the  creation  of  a 
system  of  central,  intermediate  and  local  com- 
missions, all  working  under  one  law  covering 
the  entire  field  of  transportation  and  communi- 
cation. 

Government  Ownership. — For  some  years 
past,  the  thought  has  been  expressed  by  prac- 
tically all  students  of  regulation,  from  Presi- 
dents of  the  United  States  down,  that  the  only 
alternative  of  regulation  is  government  owner- 
ship. Relatively  few  are  prepared  to  advocate 
that  alternative  at  the  present  time.  Regu- 
lation is  still  in  its  infancy;  its  progress  has 
been  steady  and  generally  satisfactory;  regu- 
latory statutes  are  gradually  catching  up  to 
the  railway  business;  administration  is  get- 
ting to  be  as  firm  as  management.  Whether 
administrative  supervision  and  private  man- 
agement shall  continue  to  exist  side  by  side 
depends  much  upon  the  character  of  both,  and 
much  more  upon  the  constitutional  interpre- 
tations which  courts  may  place  upon  regula- 
tory acts  as  administered  by  commissions. 
Constitutional  nullification  of  practical  ad- 
ministrative applications  of  law,  more  than 
any  other  single  factor,  more  than  all  other 
factors  combined,  may  precipitate  an  irresist- 
ible demand  for  government  ownership  at  al- 
most any  time.  As  suggested  above,  govern- 
ment ownership  cannot  solve  what  this  gen- 
eration understands  by  the  term  railway  prob- 
lem. It  can,  however,  prevent  constitutional 
and  metaphysical  refinements,  no  matter  how 
brilliantly  conceived  and  logically  elaborated, 
from  nullifying  practical  administrative  acts 
performed  of  necessity  to  meet  a practical  sit- 
uation. The  law  is  not  yet  as  big  as  the 
business  and  courts  have  generally  been  in- 
clined to  restrict  rather  than  extend  the  scope 
of  regulatory  statutes  where  it  was  possible 
to  do  either  by  judicial  interpretation.  There 
are  noteworthy  exceptions  to  this  general  state- 
ment, but  its  correctness  as  applied  to  the 
interstate  commerce  act  can  scarcely  be  ques- 
tioned. 

See  Accidents,  Railroad  and  Steamship: 
Aerial  Navigation,  Regulation  of;  Canals 
and  Other  Artificial  Water  Ways;  Differ- 
entials in  Railroad  Traffic;  Discrimina- 
tion in  Railroad  Rates;  Express  Service, 
Regulation  of;  Franchises,  Corporation,  Le- 
gal Aspects  of;  Immigration;  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  ; Interstate  Commerce 
Decisions;  Interstate  Cojimerce  Legisla- 
tion ; Long  and  Short  Haul  ; Merger  of  Rail- 
roads; Municipal  Ownership;  Navigation, 
Regulation  of;  Parcel  Post-.  Pooling  in 
Railroads;  Pcblic  Service  Corporations; 


558 


TRANSYLVANIA— TREASON 


Pullman  Cars,  Regulation  of;  Rebates  in 
Transportation;  Rural  Free  Delivery; 
Sherman  Anti-Trust  Act;  Telegraph  Regu- 
lation; Telephones,  Regulation  of;  Traffic 
Agreements  ; Transportation  by  Govern- 
ment; Transportation,  Economic  Principles 
of;  Waterways,  National  Regulation  of; 
and  under  Railroad. 

References:  F.  Adams,  Railroads-.  Their  Ori- 
gin and  Problems  (1878)  ; F.  C.  Clark,  “State 
Railroad  Commissions,  and  how  They  May  Be 
Made  Effective”  in  Am.  Econ.  Assoc.,  Publica- 
tions (1891),  VI,  No.  6;  F.  H.  Dixon,  State 
Railroad  Control,  ivith  a History  of  its  De- 
velopment in  Ioioa  (1896)  ; A.  T.  Hadley,  Rail- 
road Transpoi'tation:  Its  History  and  Its  Laws 
(1885);  H.  S.  Haines,  Restrictive  Railway 
Legislation  (1905);  J.  Hole,  National  Rail- 
ivays : an  Argument  for  State  Purchase  (2d 
ed.,  1895)  ; E.  R.  Johnson,  American  Railway 
Transportation  (1903)  ; William  Larrabee,  The 
Railroad  Question:  a Historical  and  Practical 
Treatise  on  Railroads,  and  Remedies  for  Their 
Abuses  (10th  ed.,  1898)  ; L.  G.  McPherson, 
Working  of  the  Railroads  (1907)  ; B.  H.  Meyer, 
(1903);  W.  C.  Noyes,  American  Railroad 
Railway  Legislation  in  the  United  States 
Rates  (1905);  W.  Z.  Ripley,  “Railway  Prob- 
lems” in  Selections  and  Documents  in  Econ- 
omics (1907);  Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  and  year 
by  year.  B.  H.  Meyer. 

TRANSYLVANIA.  Transylvania  was  the 
middle  section  of  what  is  now  Kentucky,  em- 
bracing a little  more  than  one  half  of  the  pres- 
ent area  of  the  state  and  extending  southward 
into  Tennessee.  It  was  carved  out  of  the  “dark 
and  bloody  ground”  of  the  Cherokee  country  in 
1775  by  Richard  Henderson,  of  North  Carolina, 
who  sought  to  build  a proprietary  government 
west  of  the  Alleghanies  like  that  of  William 
Penn  on  the  Susquehanna.  Henderson  asso- 
ciated with  himself  eight  others  as  proprietors, 
bought  the  title  from  the  Indians  in  March, 
1775,  and  immediately  led  some  two  hundred 
settlers  into  the  region.  A constitution  was 
given  to  the  community,  May,  1775,  which 
guaranteed  annual  legislatures  elected  by  the 
people,  courts  holding  authority  from  the  pro- 
prietors and  the  other  institutions  common 
to  Anglo-Saxon  peoples.  Many  claims  al- 
ready filed  with  Virginia  for  the  same  lands 
led  to  sharp  disputes  which  were  finally  car- 
ried to  the  second  Continental  Congress  where 
the  matter  was  in  turn  referred  to  the  Vir- 
ginia convention  of  1776,  which  asserted  juris- 
diction over  the  whole  region.  Henderson’s 
independent  colony  came  to  an  end,  though  the 
proprietor  was  granted  two  hundred  thousand 
acres  of  land  as  compensation.  See  Ken- 
tucky. References:  R.  M.  McElroy,  Kentucky 
in  the  Nation’s  Hist.  (1909)  ; F.  J.  Turner, 
“Western  State  Making  in  the  Revolutionary 
Era”  in  Am.  Hist.  Review,  I (1894),  70-87; 
251-269.  W.  E.  D. 


TREASON.  The  crime  of  high  treason  was 
specifically  defined  in  England  by  a statute 
passed  in  the  reign  of  Edward  III  (1352)  for 
the  purpose  of  excluding  constructive  treasons, 
which  had  been  made  the  basis  of  conviction 
involving  capital  punishment  and  also  of 
attainder  involving  forfeiture  of  property  (see 
Attainder,  Bill  of)  although  the  act  com- 
plained of  as  constituting  treason  may  have 
been  no  more  than  to  intend,  threaten,  or 
attempt  personal  injury  to  the  king  or  mem- 
bers of  the  royal  family  or  to  cast  contempt 
upon  the  government.  A portion  of  the  defi- 
nition of  that  act  has  been  preserved  in  our 
state  constitutions  and  in  the  Federal  Consti- 
tution (Art.  Ill,  Sec.  iii,  If  1),  which  re- 
stricts the  statutory  power  to  define  crimes 
in  this  respect  by  providing  the  following  defi- 
nition which  cannot  be  enlarged  by  legisla- 
tive enactment: 

Treason  against  the  United  States  shall  consist 
only  in  levying  war  against  them,  or  in  adhering 
to  their  enemies,  giving  them  aid  and  comfort.  No 
person  shall  be  convicted  of  treason  unless  on  the 
testimony  of  two  witnesses  to  the  same  overt  act, 
or  on  confession  in  open  court.  The  Congress  shall 
have  power  to  declare  the  punishment  of  treason, 
but  no  attainder  of  treason  shall  work  corruption 
of  blood,  or  forfeiture,  except  during  the  life  of 
the  person  attainted. 

The  whole  spirit  of  our  constitutional  system 
necessitates  a conception  of  treason  as  an  of- 
fense against  the  United  States  or  state  and 
not  against  the  individuals  who  are  intrusted 
with  the  powers  of  government.  Murderers  of 
Presidents  have  been  prosecuted  for  murder 
but  not  for  treason. 

There  can  be  no  treason  within  the  consti- 
tutional definition  unless  war  has  actually  been 
levied,  but  if  a state  of  war  exists  then  the 
crime  may  be  committed  by  giving  aid  and 
comfort  to  the  enemy  although  the  person 
charged  has  not  himself  actually  engaged  in 
military  operations.  The  purpose  of  specifying 
the  kind  and  amount  of  evidence  necessary  is 
to  prevent  a conviction  by  the  testimony  of 
one  prejudiced  or  perjured  witness  or  by  proof 
of  uncertain  admissions  or  confessions.  The 
punishment  is  prescribed  so  as  to  exclude  the 
forfeitures  which  were  by  the  English  law  in- 
cident to  an  attainder.  It  is  assumed  that 
there  may  be  treason  against  a state  punish- 
able under  the  constitution  and  laws  of  that 
state,  but  treason  against  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment is  punishable  only  on  conviction  in  a 
federal  court.  Other  offenses  against  govern- 
ment, such  as  conspiring  for  its  overthrow  or 
inciting  to  rebellion  or  insurrection  may  be 
punishable  as  crimes  under  statutory  defini- 
tion but  cannot  be  made  to  constitute  the 
crime  of  treason. 

See  Attainder;  Bill  of  Attainder. 

References:  Ex  parte  Bollman,  4 Cranch  75; 
Marshall’s  opinion  in  United  States  vs.  Burr, 
found  in  J.  P.  Cotton,  Constitutional  Decisions 
of  John  Marshall  (1905),  I,  96-203. 

E.  McC. 


559 


TREASURER  IN  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT— TREASURY  DEPARTMENT 


TREASURER  IN  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT. 
County  Treasurer. — This  officer  is  charged  with 
the  care  and  custody  of  county  revenues.  For- 
merly the  office  was  appointive,  but  at  present 
the  treasurer  is  elected.  He  is,  perhaps,  the 
most  important  of  the  county  officers,  his  posi- 
tion being  usually  the  most  lucrative.  As  a 
rule  all  local  revenues  pass  through  his  hands; 
and  all  payments  of  county  moneys  are  made 
by  him  upon  orders  drawn  by  the  clerk, 
auditor,  or  other  person  authorized  by  the 
county  board  to  act  as  their  secretary.  Where 
he  serves  as  collector  of  taxes,  the  distribution 
of  all  local  funds  derived  from  taxation  is  made 
through  his  office. 

Township  Treasurer. — Where  this  officer 
exists  he  is  charged  with  the  care  and  the 
custody  of  township  funds.  In  some  jurisdic- 
tions, however,  the  functions  of  treasurer  are 
performed  by  the  township  clerk,  supervisor, 
trustee,  or  other  officer.  The  township  treas- 
urer may  be  charged  with  the  care  of  any  funds 
belonging  to  the  township  and  with  the  taxes 
collected  for  state  and  local  purposes.  Where 
the  taxes  are  collected  by  the  county  the  town- 
ship treasurer  simply  receives  from  the  county 
collector  or  treasurer  the  revenues  raised  for 
township  expenditures. 

See  County  and  City  Government;  Debt, 
Public  Administration  of;  Finance,  Local 
Systems  of;  Taxation,  Subjects  of. 

References:  G.  E.  Howard,  Local  Constitu- 
tional History  (1889),  I,  174,  453,  463;  J.  A. 
Fairlie,  Local  Government  (1906),  178;  stat- 
ute laws  of  the  several  states.  B.  F.  S. 

TREASURER  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

The  Treasurer  of  the  United  States  principally 
has  charge  of  the  moneys  of  the  government, 
and  makes  payments  only  on  warrants  issued 


by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  counter- 
signed by  the  Comptroller.  He  also  has  super- 
vision of  the  issue  and  redemption  of  govern- 
ment paper  money,  of  the  redemption  of  na- 
tional banknotes,  of  keeping  the  Indian  and 
other  trust  funds.  As  the  custodian  of  all 
funds,  his  office  is  one  of  great  responsibility. 
Whenever  the  official  is  changed,  all  the  moneys 
and  securities  in  his  charge  are  examined  and 
counted,  the  operation  requiring  several  weeks. 
In  1909  such  evidences  of  value  amounted  to 
$1,261,000,000,  the  maximum  sum  so  trans- 
ferred in  the  history  of  the  government.  See 
Treasury,  Federal.  D.  R.  D. 

TREASURER,  STATE.  A state  fiscal  offi- 
cer, usually  elective,  charged  with  the  im- 
mediate receipt  and  disbursement  of  state 
funds.  Though  state  depositories  have  actual 
custody  of  these  funds,  the  treasurer  receives 
notice  of  deposits  made  by  state  comptrollers 
(see),  sheriffs,  other  state  or  local  officials  who 
collect  state  revenues.  Subject  to  warrant 
from  the  state  comptroller,  he  effects  payments 
from  state  funds,  either  directly  or  by  check 
on  state  depositories.  His  records  of  treasury 
receipts  and  disbursements  must  tally  with 
those  of  the  comptroller.  He  must  periodically 
report  in  detail.  Additional  duties,  varying 
among  states,  include  service  on  boards  of 
equalization,  assessment,  and  other  state  com- 
missions. See  Auditor,  State;  Finance, 
State  Systems  of;  State  'Departments, 
Heads  of.  References:  Constitution  and  laws 
of  the  several  states,  which  define  powers  and 
duties  of  State  Treasurer;  W.  Wilson,  The 
State  (1898),  505;  J.  Bryce,  American  Com- 
monwealth (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  497-499;  R.  L. 
Ashley,  American  Federal  State  (1903),  § 432. 

E.  H.  V. 


TREASURY  DEPARTMENT 


General  Organization. — The  Treasury  De- 
partment is  primarily  concerned  with  the  col- 
lection of  the  government’s  revenues,  the  cus- 
tody and  disbursement  of  the  government’s 
funds,  and  the  issue  and  redemption  of  the 
currency.  As  incidental  to  these  functions  it 
has  assumed  the  duties  of  coinage  of  metallic 
money,  manufacture  of  paper  money,  super- 
vision of  national  banks,  and  transactions  in 
the  public  debt.  In  close  relation  stand  the 
functions  of  preventing  counterfeiting,  for 
which  purpose  the  Secret  Service  is  conducted, 
and  the  protection  of  customs  revenue,  for 
which,  among  other  purposes,  the  Revenue  Cut- 
ter Service  exists.  There  have  been  injected 
from  time  to  time  into  the  work  of  the  depart- 
ment, however,  a few  really  extraneous  func- 
tions, including  the  supervision  of  the  construc- 
tion of  public  buildings  and  their  maintenance ; 


the  Life-Saving  Service,  and  the  conduct  of  the 
Public  Health  Service,  which  are  still  handled 
by  the  Treasury;  and  the  group  of  functions 
transferred  in  1903  from  the  Treasury  to  the 
Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  includ- 
ing the  conduct  of  the  Lighthouse  Establish- 
ment, Steamboat  Inspection,  the  Bureau  of 
Navigation,  the  United  States  Shipping  Com- 
missioners, the  Bureau  of  Standards,  the  Coast 
and  Geodetic  Survey,  the  Bureau  of  Statistics, 
and  the  Immigration  Service.  As  it  now  exists 
the  Treasury  Department  is  an  organization 
of  considerable  complexity,  with  7,350  em- 
ployees in  Washington,  and  an  outside  service 
employing  20,000. 

At  the  head  of  the  system  stands  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  appointed  by  the  Presi- 
dent, and  ranking  next  in  dignity  in  the  Cabi- 
net to  the  Secretary  of  State.  The  Secretary 


560 


TREASURY  DEPARTMENT 


has  three  assistants — A,  B,  and  C,  who  in 
theory  are  of  coordinate  rank. 

First  Group  of  Functions. — Assistant  Secre- 
tary A is  spoken  of  as  being  “in  charge  of  the 
Fiscal  Bureaus.”  Subject  to  his  authority  are: 
the  Treasurer  of  the  United  States,  an  import- 
ant bureau  head  responsible  for  millions  of 
cash,  charged  with  the  receipt  and  disbursement 
of  public  funds  deposited  in  the  treasury  at 
Washington,  in  the  subtreasuries,  in  the  na- 
tional bank  depositories,  and  elsewhere;  trustee 
of  the  bonds  held  to  secure  national  bank  circu- 
lation and  public  deposits  in  banks;  fiscal  agent 
for  the  payment  of  interest  on  the  public  debt; 
redemption  agent  for  national  bank  notes  and 
custodian  of  the  five  per  cent,  redemption  fund 
held  in  lawful  money  against  the  national 
bank  notes;  also  the  Comptroller  of  the  Cur- 
rency, a bureau  head  of  even  greater  import- 
ance, charged  with  the  supervision  of  the  seven 
thousand  national  banks,  which  report  to  him 
at  the  times  he  names,  which  his  examiners 
scrutinize  periodically  for  faults  of  manage- 
ment, and  whose  circulating  notes  he  issues,  and, 
later,  after  they  have  been  redeemed,  cancels; 
also,  the  Director  of  the  Mint,  who  supervises 
the  four  mints  and  eight  assay  offices  of  the 
United  States;  also,  the  Director  of  the  Bureau 
of  Engraving  and  Printing,  in  whose  great  fac- 
tory at  Washington  the  paper  money,  bonds, 
postage  stamps  and  internal  revenue  stamps 
of  the  government  are  manufactured ; also  the 
Comptroller  of  the  Treasury,  an  important 
legal  official,  who  passes  upon  questions  affect- 
ing appropriations  and  their  purposes,  and  who 
stands  at  the  head  of  the  accounting  system ; 
also,  the  auditors,  one  for  the  Treasury  Depart- 
ment, one  for  the  War  Department,  one  for 
the  Interior,  one  for  the  Navy,  one  for  the  Post 
Office  Department,  and  one  for  the  State  and 
other  Departments  not  elsewhere  audited,  six 
in  all,  in  whose  offices  payments  made  in  the 
business  of  the  respective  departments  are  sub- 
jected to  scrutiny;  also,  the  Register  of  the 
Treasury,  the  official  in  whose  bureau  the  bonds 
of  the  United  States  are  issued.  Certain 
smaller  divisions,  independent  of  any  bureau, 
are  spoken  of  as  belonging  to  the  Secretary’s 
Office.  Of  these  the  following  are  in  charge 
of  Assistant  Secretary  A,  namely,  the  Secret 
Service  Division,  charged  with  the  detective 
work  of  preventing  counterfeiting  and  bring- 
ing counterfeiters  to  justice;  the  Division  of 
Bookkeeping  and  Warrants,  which  performs  the 
bulk  of  the  treasury  bookkeeping,  dealing 
with  payments  by  warrants  and  the  covering 
of  government  receipts  into  the  Treasury,  the 
bookkeeping  of  receipts,  appropriations  and 
disbursements,  the  preparation  of  much  statis- 
tical data  on  these  subjects,  and  the  compilation 
in  the  various  estimates  and  the  Digest  of 
Appropriations  of  such  a phantom  of  a budget 
as  is  possible  under  present  fiscal  legislation; 
the  Loans  and  Currency  Division,  which  acts 
as  the  Secretary’s  eye  upon  various  bureau 


heads  in  bond  issues  and  matters  affecting  the 
currency;  the  Division  of  Printing  and  Station- 
ery, which  supervises  the  printing  and  binding 
for  the  entire  Treasury  service — dealing  with 
the  Government  Printing  Office,  and,  to  a less 
extent,  the  Bureau  of  Engraving  and  Printing, 
the  latter  preparing  the  finer  work,  checks, 
drafts,  customs  stamps,  etc.— supplies  the  ser- 
ice  with  stationery,  and  handles  the  treasury 
advertising;  the  Division  of  Public  Moneys, 
which  exercises  certain  supervision  over  the 
nine  subtreasuries,  designates  national  bank 
depositories  and  exacts  the  deposit  of  proper  se- 
curities from  them,  records  receipts  into  the 
Treasury,  issues  directions  to  public  officers 
with  respect  to  their  deposits,  and  to  deposi- 
tories with  respect  to  the  safekeeping  of  the 
funds,  and  performs  certain  other  duties  in 
connection  with  the  public  moneys;  the  de- 
partment disbursing  clerk,  an  official  to  whom 
public  moneys  from  the  Treasury  are  advanced, 
out  of  which  he  pays  the  bulk  of  the  salaries 
and  expenses  of  the  Department  in  the  District 
of  Columbia,  and  certain  salaries  and  expenses 
of  services  outside  of  Washington,  when  these 
payments  cannot  be  conveniently  made  by  a 
local  disbursing  officer;  and  the  Mail  and  Files 
Division,  in  which  are  kept  the  records  of  in- 
coming and  outgoing  mail,  and  with  whom  ob- 
solete files  are  stored.  The  distribution  of 
work  among  the  assistant  secretaries  is,  as  ap- 
pears from  the  above,  a matter  of  casual 
growth  and  not  justified  by  any  logical  an- 
alysis of  functions. 

Second  Group  of  Functions. — The  work  of 
Assistant  Secretary  B further  demonstrates 
this  lack  of  classification;  he  is  in  charge  of 
bureaus  and  subdivisions  carrying  on  entirely 
miscellaneous  functions.  In  his  jurisdiction 
are  the  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue,  a 
powerful  bureau  chief,  with  a widely  scattered 
force,  who  through  his  67  collectors  collects  the 
government  taxes  upon  spirits,  tobacco  and  the 
like,  and  the  important  corporation  tax;  the 
Supervising  Architect,  under  whose  direction 
government  buildings  all  over  the  country  are 
constructed  and  maintained;  the  Life-Saving 
Service,  with  over  275  stations  and  a force 
of  2,311  men;  the  Public  Health  Service, 
charged  with  supervision  of  marine  hospitals 
and  the  care  of  sick  and  disabled  seamen,  the 
conduct  of  the  quarantine  service  and  the  pre- 
vention of  the  introduction  and  spread  of  con- 
tagious diseases;  the  Revenue  Cutter  Service, 
with  45  craft,  including  cutters  and  launches, 
which  render  assistance  to  vessels  in  distress, 
enforce  the  navigation  laws,  protect  the  cus- 
toms revenues  and  cooperate  with  the  Navy 
when  so  directed  by  the  President;  and 
an  important  phase  of  the  work  of  the  Ap- 
pointments Division,  namely,  that  of  super- 
vising the  bonding  of  those  treasury  employees 
from  whom  bonds  are  required. 

Third  Group  of  Functions. — The  work  of  As- 
sistant Secretary  C differs  from  that  of  ^rth"er 


561 


TREASURY  DEPARTMENT 


562 


TREASURY  DEPARTMENT 


of  his  two  associates  in  being  a perfect  unit. 
He  is  concerned  only  with  customs,  and  in  his 
jurisdiction  are  two  divisions  of  the  Secre- 
tary’s office — the  Division  of  Customs  and  the 
Division  of  Special  Agents.  The  Customs  Serv- 
ice, of  course,  includes  an  organization  widely 
scattered,  like  the  Internal  Revenue.  Assistant 
Secretary  C controls  the  collecting  officers  at 
all  the  ports,  and  the  special  agents,  who,  in 
their  various  districts,  check  the  work  of  the 
collectors  and  performs  particular  services 
with  respect  to  customs  questions  which  may 
arise.  There  are  124  collectors,  located  in 
districts  touching  the  borders  of  the  country ; 
and  there  are  39  surveyors,  located  in  interior 
districts,  to  whom  importations  are  shipped  in 
bond  under  the  Immediate  Transportation  Act. 
Assistant  Secretary  C and  his  Customs  Divi- 
sion pass  upon  a great  multitude  of  questions 
of  customs  business,  the  interpretation  of  the 
tariff  law,  and  the  administration  of  the  serv- 
ice. He  comes  in  closer  connection  with  the 
Appointments  Division,  alluded  to  below,  than 
do  either  A or  B,  because  not  only  does  that 
division  supervise  the  personnel  of  the  Customs 
Service,  but  it  also  controls,  subject  to  C,  dis- 
bursements out  of  the  customs  appropriation. 

Appointments  Division. — The  Appointments 
Division  of  the  Secretary’s  Office  cannot  be  said 
to  be  assigned  wholly  to  any  one  of  the  three 
assistants,  but  comes  in  contact  with  each,  in 
so  far  as  it  does  work  connected  with  the  per- 
sonnel of  the  branches  of  the  service  attached 
to  the  desk  of  that  particular  assistant  secre- 
tary. With  respect  to  Assistant  Secretary  C 
is  the  connection  closer,  because,  as  stated 
above,  the  Appointments  Division  controls  the 
appropriation  “for  collecting  the  revenue  from 
customs.”  This  division  keeps  the  records  of 
Treasury  Department  employees,  their  admis- 
sion to  the  service,  their  promotions,  de- 
motions, dismissals  and  resignations.  To  it 
also  is  assigned,  subject  to  the  control  of 
Assistant  Secretary  B,  the  work  arising  in 
connection  with  the  bonding  of  employees — a 
job  of  no  little  magnitude  when  the  extent  of 
the  “Field  Service”  is  considered,  that  is,  the 
service  outside  of  Washington. 

Chief  Clerk. — The  Chief  Clerk  of  the  depart- 
ment, like  the  Appointments  Division,  is  not 
subject  to  any  particular  Assistant  Secretary, 
but  is  an  administrative  official  for  the  Treas- 
ury Department  as  a whole,  an  executive  head 
who  sees  that  the  work  of  the  whole  depart- 
ment is  prosecuted  with  vigor  and  dispatch. 
He  enforces  departmental  regulations,  superin- 
tends the  treasury  building  and  other  build- 
ings in  Washington  where  treasury  work  is 
transacted,  has  charge  of  the  department  ve- 
hicles, controls  the  engineers,  watchmen,  la- 
borers and  other  employees  who  maintain  and 
protect  the  treasury  building  and  its  annexes, 
expends  appropriations  for  contingent  expenses, 
disburses  appropriations  for  government  ex- 
hibits at  expositions,  and  performs  various  odds 


and  ends  of  the  business  of  the  Secretary’s  office 
which  cannot  be  assigned  to  other  bureaus 
and  divisions. 

Founding  of  the  Department. — The  history 
of  the  Treasury  Department  is  divisible  into 
epochs  which  are  defined  by  important  events 
in  the  financial  history  of  the  Republic.  There 
was  no  stable  or  continuous  organization  dur- 
ing the  Revolution.  The  genesis  of  the  depart- 
ment was  the  appointment  of  a standing  com- 
mittee of  five  by  a resolution  of  Congress  in 
1776.  Two  years  later,  minor  treasury  offices— 
a comptroller,  an  auditor,  a treasurer,  etc. — - 
were  established,  and,  in  1779,  there  was  creat- 
ed the  office  of  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  which 
endured  only  a few  months.  In  1781,  Congress 
by  resolution  provided  for  a “Superintendent 
of  Finance,”  the  position  in  which  Robert 
Morris  rendered  distinguished  service.  The 
last  effort  to  organize  the  Treasury  Depart- 
ment before  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution 
was  in  1784,  when  the  Superintendent  of  Fi- 
nance was  superseded  by  a board  of  three  com- 
missioners. 

The  requirements  of  section  8 are  significant; 
the  first  session  of  Congress  under,  the  Con- 
stitution, established  the  Treasury  Department, 
with  a Secretary,  a Comptroller,  an  Auditor, 
a Treasurer,  a Register,  and  an  Assistant  to 
the  Secretary.  The  duties  connected  with  the 
offices  created  by  this  act  are,  excepting  those 
of  the  Register,  not  different  from  the  duties 
performed  by  these  officials  at  the  present  time. 
It  is  of  interest  that  the  Treasury’s  bond 
stands  now  at  the  same  figure  provided  in  the 
act — $150,000. 

The  requirements  of  Section  8 are  significant; 
they  forbid  any  person  appointed  to  any  office 
instituted  by  the  act  to  be  interested  in  trade 
or  commerce,  to  be  the  owner  of  any  sea  vessel, 
to  purchase  any  public  lands  or  to  be  con- 
cerned in  the  purchase  of  the  securities  of  any 
state  or  of  the  United  States. 

Depositary  of  Funds— Under  this  organiza- 
tion of  the  Treasury  it  was  essential  to  find  a 
depository  for  the  public  moneys.  During  the 
Confederation  these  had  been  deposited  in  the 
Bank  of  North  America,  a corporation  chart- 
ered both  by  Congress  and  by  the  Pennsyl- 
vania legislature.  Hamilton,  as  first  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  reported  in  1790  in  favor 
of  organizing  a corporation,  which  was  chart- 
ered the  following  year  by  Congress  and  existed 
until  1811  as  the  first  Bank  of  the  United 
States  (see.)  Although  Albert  Gallatin  recom- 
mended the  renewal  of  the  charter  of  the  bank, 
when  it  expired  Congress  failed  to  act.  In 
the  interregnum  that  followed,  during  which 
the  public  moneys  were  deposited  in  state 
banks,  general  distress  prevailed.  As  a result 
the  plan  proposed  by  Secretary  Dallas  for  the 
incorporation  of  a federal  bank  on  the  same 
lines  as  Hamilton’s  bank  was  approved  by  Con- 
gress, with  a twenty-year  charter,  beginning 
1816  (see  Bank  of  U.  S.,  Second).  Having 


TREASURY,  FEDERAL 


passed  through  grave  difficulties  the  bank  was 
apparently  in  stable  condition  when  President 
Jackson,  in  1829,  suddenly  instituted  his  at- 
tack upon  it.  In  1833,  he  began  the  removal 
of  public  deposits  from  the  bank,  which,  upon 
the  expiration  of  its  charter,  ceased  altogether 
to  have  connection  with  the  government,  and 
reincorporated  under  Pennsylvania  laws.  An- 
other decade  of  disastrous  employment  of  the 
state  banks  followed. 

The  device,  adopted  in  1846,  for  the  custody 
of  the  public  moneys  was  what  is  known  as  the 
Independent  Treasury  system  (see).  The  act, 
approved  August  6 of  that  year,  defined  “The 
Treasury  of  the  United  States”  as  the  rooms 
prepared  for  the  use  of  the  Treasurer  and  his 
assistants,  the  vaults  and  safes  for  the  keep- 
ing of  the  public  moneys  in  his  possession  and 
control,  and  such  other  apartments  as  were  pro- 
vided by  the  act  as  places  of  deposit.  Under 
this  act  the  Treasurer,  certain  assistant  treas- 
urers, certain  treasurers  of  mints,  and  others 
acted  as  custodians  of  the  public  funds,  from 
which  heterogeneous  system  grew  the  indepen- 
dent Treasury  as  it  now  exists — the  cash  room 
and  vaults  of  the  Treasurer  at  Washington, 
and  the  nine  subtreasuries,  each  in  charge  of 
an  Assistant  Treasurer,  located  at  Baltimore, 
Boston,  Chicago,  Cincinnati,  New  Orleans,  New 
York,  Philadelphia,  St.  Louis  and  San  Fran- 
cisco. The  provision  that  national  banks 
might  be  made  depositories  of  public  moneys 
marked  the  first  curtailment  of  the  independent 
treasury  system,  the  principle  of  which  was 
the  sequestration  of  all  government  funds  in 
government  offices  in  actual  money.  The  de- 
posits in  national  banks  nominally  reached  a 
maximum  of  $405,240,785,  on  April  23,  1879, 
but  this  figure  is  a fictitious  one,  swollen  by 
the  vast  credits  given  the  Treasurer  of  the 
United  States  for  sale  of  bonds,  at  the  very 
height  of  the  refunding  operations.  Down  to 
1897,  the  genuine  deposits  had  rarely  exceeded 
twenty-five  millions;  they  reached  their  high 
point  on  December  27,  1907,  when  the  figures 
were  $259,994,271.72.  During  September,  1913, 
the  deposits  were  in  the  neighborhood  of  sixty 
millions. 

Relation  to  Banks. — Under  stress  of  the 
Civil  War  the  system  of  national  banks  (see) 
was  inaugurated.  These  banks,  which  were  al- 
lowed to  issue  circulating  notes  on  deposits  of 
United  States  bonds  as  security,  were  organ- 
ized largely  to  furnish  a market  for  govern- 
ment securities.  This  they  have  unquestion- 
ably done.  They  have,  too,  provided  the  coun- 
try with  circulating  notes,  of  which  about  740 
millions  were  outstanding  in  September,  1913. 
They  have  had  far-reaching  effects  on  the  or- 
ganization and  powers  of  the  Treasury  Depart- 
ment, for  the  Comptroller  of  the  Currency  not 
only  receives,  today,  the  reports  of  the  7,300 
national  banks  but  also  examines  them  through 
his  force  of  examiners,  and  issues  to  them 
their  notes,  which  he  receives  back  for  destruc- 


tion when  they  have  been  redeemed  by  the 
Treasurer  of  the  United  States,  out  of  the  5 
per  cent  redemption  fund  which  the  banks  are 
required  to  maintain  with  the  Treasurer  in 
lawful  money.  The  Treasurer  is  the  custodian 
of  the  United  States  securities  which  the  banks 
deposit  to  secure  their  circulation,  custodian 
also  of  the  bonds  which  they  are  required  to 
| pledge  to  secure  deposits  of  public  funds;  a 
I division  of  his  office,  called  the  Division  of  Na- 
tional Banks,  holds  in  its  vaults  all  these  se- 
curities, amounting  on  September  8,  1913,  to 
$813,139,593. 

Relation  to  General  Finances. — The  history 
of  the  Treasury  Department  since  the  Civil 
War  has  been  marked  by  the  refunding  of  the 
government  war  debt  in  the  seventies;  by  the 
resumption  of  specie  payments  effected  in  1879, 
under  Secretary  John  Sherman;  by  a remark- 
able reduction  in  the  public  debt  from  $1,723,- 
993,100  in  1880,  to  $585,029,330  in  1892;  by 
the  successful  struggle  to  maintain  the  gold  re- 
serves, under  Secretary  Carlisle;  and  by  the 
extension  of  the  policy  of  depositing  public 
money  in  national  banks,  and  the  intervention 
of  the  Treasury  in  the  money  market  through 
such  means,  under  Secretaries  Gage  and  Shaw. 
The  disturbing  interference  of  the  Treasury 
with  the  amount  of  money  in  circulation  and 
in  bank  reserves,  which  has  resulted  from  alter- 
nating surpluses  and  deficits,  has  led  to  a 
wide  discussion  of  other  means  of  keeping  and 
disbursing  the  public  moneys,  more  consonant 
with  modern  business  practice. 

See  Bank,  Central;  Budgets,  Federal; 
Cabinet  of  the  President;  Elasticity  of 
the  Currency;  Estimates,  Treasury;  Ex- 
ecutive and  Congress;  Executive  De- 
partments; Financial  Policy;  Financial 
Powers,  Constitutional  Basis  of;  Financial 
Statistics;  Reserve  Act,  Federal;  Revenue, 
Public,  Collection  of. 

References:  J.  A.  Fairlie,  National  Adminis- 
tration (1905),  chs.  vii,  viii;  Benjamin  Harri- 
son, This  Country  of  Ours  (1897),  ch.  xii;  F. 
A.  Vanderlip,  “The  Treasury”  in  Scribner’s, 
XXXIII  (1903),  400-410;  H.  C.  Gauss,  Am. 
Government  (1908),  ch.  ix;  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  Annual  Reports;  R.  Mayo,  Treasury 
Department  (1847)  ; C.  H.  Van  Tyne  and  W.  G. 
Leland,  Guide  to  the  Archives  of  the  Govern- 
ment (1904),  31-72;  D.  R.  Dewey,  Financial 
Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (1903)  ; A.  P.  Andrew,  “The 
Treasury  and  the  Banks”  in  Quart.  Joum.  of 
Econom.,  XXI  (1907),  519-568. 

A.  Piatt  Andrew. 

TREASURY,  FEDERAL.  The  Treasury  De- 
partment was  established  by  act  of  September 
2,  1789.  The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  its 
head,  and  other  officers  are  assistant  secre- 
taries, comptroller,  auditors,  treasurer  and 
register.  Careful  provision  was  made  in  the 
original  act  for  protecting  government  funds 
(see  Public  Accounts).  By  the  act  of  May 


564 


TREASURY  NOTES— TREASURY,  SECRETARIES  OF 


10,  1800,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  was  au- 
thorized to  lay  before  Congress  at  each  session 
not  only  a report  on  the  state  of  the  public 
finance,  but  also  to  submit  plans  for  improv- 
ing or  increasing  the  revenues. 

In  the  physical  care  of  public  moneys,  the 
government  has  followed  a varying  policy  (see 
Subtreasuby  System  ) . At  present  public 
funds  may  be  kept  in  national  banks  at  the 
discretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
which  makes  the  treasury  an  important  factor 
in  the  money  market.  Between  1899  and  1903 
the  Treasury  on  three  occasions  came  to  the 
relief  of  the  money  market  by  making  large 
deposits  with  banks;  and  the  direction  of  in- 
fluence was  made  the  more  marked  by  select- 
ing as  depositories  those  institutions  which 
would  agree  to  take  out  new  circulation. 

A further  responsibility  is  imposed  upon  the 
Treasury  in  the  maintenance  of  the  gold  stan- 
dard. The  Government  has  issued  a large 
amount  of  paper  money  and  coined  silver  of 
depreciated  value.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  Treas- 
ury to  see  that  these  forms  of  money  are  kept 
at  a parity  with  gold.  For  this  it  has,  since 
the  resumption  of  specie  payments  in  1879, 
kept  a reserve  stock  of  gold;  and  by  the  act 
of  1900  is  now  empowered  to  sell  bonds.  The 
accumulation  of  gold  is  the  withdrawal  of  so 
much  metal  otherwise  accessible  for  commer- 
cial and  banking  use;  and  the  selling  of  bonds 
necessitates  a diversion  of  capital  which  would 
otherwise  be  employed  in  industry.  Thus 
again  the  Treasury  is  involved  in  most  inti- 
mate relationships  with  the  operations  of  busi- 
ness. 

See  Auditor  of  the  Treasury;  Comptrol- 
ler of  the  Treasury;  Public  Accounts; 
Treasurer  of  the  United  States. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TREASURY  NOTES.  First  Issues  (1812- 
1816). — Influenced  by  the  disastrous  experience 
in  the  issue  of  bills  of  credit  during  the  Revo- 
lution, the  framers  of  the  Constitution  de- 
liberately voted  to  omit  from  the  expressed 
powers  of  Congress  the  right  to  “emit  bills  of 
credit  of  the  United  States.”  Many  at  the 
time  believed  that  the  omission  of  this  power 
was  equivalent  to  a prohibition,  but  when  fi- 
nancial necessities  arose  in  the  war  with  Eng- 
land in  1812,  there  was  little  dissent,  on  con- 
stitutional grounds,  to  a proposal  for  the  is- 
sue of  treasury  notes.  During  this  war  period 
five  issues  were  made,  in  all  amounting  to 
$36,680,794.  The  earlier  issues  were  in  large 
denominations,  not  intended  to  pass  into  gen- 
eral circulation.  All  save  the  last  were  made 
payable  in  one  year;  and  all  except  notes  of 
small  denominations  bore  interest  at  the  rate 
of  five  and  two-fifths  per  cent.  They  were  all 
fundable  into  stock  or  bonds.  None  had  the 
legal  tender  quality,  and  they  passed  at  par 
until  the  banks  suspended  specie  payments  in 
August,  1814.  At  the  close  of  the  war  these 


treasury  notes  were  rapidly  funded  into  long 
term  securities. 

Second  Issues  (1837-1847). — Similar  issues 
were  made  under  eight  different  acts  during 
the  years  1837  to  1843,  owing  to  the  em- 
barrassments caused  by  the  panic  of  1837. 
They  were  again  resorted  to  in  the  war  with 
Mexico  in  1846,  and  after  the  panic  of  1857. 
The  more  conservative  restrictions  of  the  first 
issues  were  retained,  as  to  speedy  retirement, 
omission  of  legal  tender  quality,  the  bearing 
of  interest,  and  their  issue  in  denominations 
of  not  less  than  $50. 

Civil  War  Issues. — During  the  Civil  War 
many  kinds  of  treasury  notes  were  issued. 
They  varied  as  to  time  of  payment;  there  were 
one  year,  two  year,  and  three  year  notes,  and 
notes  with  no  definite  date  of  retirement,  as, 
for  example,  the  demand  notes  of  1861,  the 
greenbacks,  and  the  fractional  currency.  These 
three  latter  issues  carried  no  interest,  while 
the  others  bore  interest  of  five,  six,  six  com- 
pound, and  seven  and  three-tenths  per  cent 
(2  cents  per  day  on  each  $100).  To  the  green- 
backs, compound  interest  notes,  and  a small 
issue  of  five  per  cent  notes  was  given  the 
quality  of  legal  tender.  In  all,  $1,830,000,000 
were  issued,  of  which,  however,  $482,000,000 
were  redeemed  during  the  war  years,  1861-1865. 

Remaining  Issues. — At  the  close  of  the  war 
all  save  the  greenbacks  and  fractional  cur- 
rency were  converted  into  bonds,  and  in  1876 
the  fractional  notes  were  retired.  Opposition 
to  further  contraction  led  to  the  permanent 
retention  of  the  legal  tender  greenbacks,  of 
which  $346,000,000  are  still  carried  on  the 
treasury  books  as  an  outstanding  liability.  In 
1890  a new  issue  of  treasury  notes  redeemable 
“in  coin”  was  authorized  by  the  Sherman 
Silver  Act,  and  under  this  provision  $153,- 
000,000  were  issued.  By  subsequent  legisla- 
tion they  were  retired,  and  in  1912  the  volume 
still  outstanding  was  but  $2,929,000. 

Since  the  resumption  of  specie  payments  in 
1879  treasury  notes  have  been  redeemed  on 
presentation;  and  under  the  Gold  Standard 
Act  of  1900  provision  is  made  for  their  more 
complete  protection  through  the  purchase  of 
gold  by  the  sale  of  bonds  if  the  gold  reserve 
is  endangered. 

United  States  notes  are  issued  in  denomina- 
tions of  five,  ten,  twenty,  fifty,  one  hundred, 
five  hundred,  and  one  thousand  dollars,  one 
half  being  in  denominations  of  ten  dollars. 

See  Gold  Reserve;  Legal  Tender  Contro- 
versy; Paper  Money  in  the  U.  S. ; Resump- 
tion of  Specie  Payments. 

References:  J.  J.  Knox,  U.  S.  Notes  (1884)  ; 
D.  R.  Dewey,  Financial  Hist,  of  the  U.  8. 
(1903),  136-138,  232-234,  284-297,  312-313, 
469-471;  H.  White,  Money  and  Banking  (4th 
ed.,  1911),  79-139.  Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TREASURY,  SECRETARIES  OF.  From 
Feb.  20,  1781  to  Nov.  1,  1784,  Robert  Morris 


TREATIES  AS  THE  LAW  OF  THE  LAND 


served,  under  the  Articles  of  Confederation, 
as  Superintendent  of  Finance.  Following  is 
a list  of  Secretaries  of  the  Treasury,  since 
the  establishment  of  the  department: 


1789  (Sept.  11) -1795  (Jan.  31),  Alexander  namilton. 
1795  (Feb.  2 ) -1800  (Dec.  31),  Oliver  Wolcott,  Jr. 
1801  (.Jan.  1 ) -1801  (May  6),  Samuel  Dexter. 

1801  (May  14) -1814  (Feb.  9),  Albert  Gallatin  (re- 

commissioned Jan.  26,  1802). 

1813  (Apr.  21),  William  Jones  (Sec.  of  Navy)  act- 
ed as  Sec.  of  State  during  Gallatin’s  stay  in  Eu- 
rope in  1813. 

1814  (Feb.  9) -1814  (Sept.  26),  Geo.  W.  Campbell. 

1814  (Oct.  6) -1816  (Oct.  21)  Alexander  J.  Dallas. 

1816  (Oct.  22) -1825  (Mar.  3)  William  H.  Crawford 

(recommissioned  Mar.  5,  1817). 

1825  (Mar.  7),  Samuel  L.  Southard  (Sec.  of  Navy; 
ad  int.). 

1825  (Mar.  71-1829  (Mar.  3),  Richard  Rush. 

1829  (Mar.  61-1831  (June  20),  Samuel  D.  Ingham. 
1831  (June  21),  Ashbury  Dickens  (Chief  Clerk; 
ad  int.). 

1831  (Aug.  8) -1833  (May  29),  Louis  McLane  (re- 
commissioned Jan.  13,  1832). 

1833  (May  29 > -1833  (Sept.  23)  Win.  J.  Duane. 

1833  (Sept.  23) -1834  (June  25),  Roger  B.  Taney. 

1834  (June  25),  McClintock  Young  (Chief  Clerk; 
ad  int.). 

1834  (June  27) -1841  (Mar.  3),  Levi  Woodbury. 

1841  (Mar.  4),  McClintock  Young  (Chief  Clerk; 
ad  int.). 

1841  (Mar.  5) -1841  (Sept.  11),  Thomas  Ewing. 

1841  (Sept.  13),  McClintock  Young  (Chief  Clerk; 
ad  int.). 

1841  (Sept.  13) -1843  (Feb.  28),  Walter  Forward. 
1843  (Mar.  1),  McClintock  Young  (Chief  Clerk; 
ad  int.). 

1843  (Mar.  3) -1844  (May  2),  John  C.  Spencer. 

1844  (May  2),  McClintock  Young  (Chief  Clerk; 
ad.  int.). 

1S44  (June  15) -1845  (Mar.  6),  George  M.  Bibb. 

1845  (Mar.  6) -1849  (Mar.  5),  Robert  J.  Walker. 
1849  (Mar.  6),  McClintock  Young  (Chief  Clerk; 

ad.  int.). 

1849  (Mar.  8) -1850  (July  22),  William  M.  Meredith. 

1850  (July  23) -1853  (Mar.  7),  Thomas  Corwin. 

1853  (Mar.  7) -1857  (Mar.  6),  James  Guthrie. 

1857  (Mar.  6) -1860  (Dec.  8),  Ilowell  Cobb. 

I860  (Dec.  10),  Isaac  Toucey  (Sec.  Navy;  ad  int.). 

1860  (Dec.  12) -1861  (.Tan.  11),  Philip  F.  Thomas. 
1S61  (Jan.  11) -1861  (Mar.  5),  John  A.  Dix. 

1861  (Mar.  5) -1864  (June  30),  Salmon  P.  Chase. 
1864  (July  1),  G.  Harrington  (Asst.  Sec.;  ad  int.). 

1864  (July  1 ) —1865  (Mar.  3),  William  P.  Fessenden. 

1865  (Mar.  4),  G.  Harrington  (Asst.  Sec.  ; ad  int.). 
1865  (Mar.  7) -1869  (Mar.  4),  Hugh  McCulloch. 
1869  (Mar.  5),  John  F.  Hartley  (Asst.  Sec.;  ad 

mim  (Mar.  11) -1873  (Mar.  17),  George  S.  Boutwell. 

1873  (Mar.  17) -1874  (June  2),  Wm.  A.  Richardson. 

1874  (June  2) -1876  (June  20),  Benj.  H.  Bristow. 
1S76  (June  21),  Charles  F.  Conant  (Asst.  Sec.; 

ad  int.). 

1876  (June  21) -1877  (Mar.  8),  Lot  M.  Morrill. 

1877  (Mar.  8) -1881  (Mar.  3),  John  Sherman. 

1851  (Mar.  4),  Henry  F.  French  (Asst.  Sec.;  ad 
int.). 

1881  (Mar.  5) -1881  (Oct.  27),  William  Windom. 
1881  (Oct.  27 ) -1884  (Sept.  4),  Charles  J.  Folger. 
1884  Sept.  4),  Chas.  E.  Coon  (Asst.  Sec.  ; ad  int.). 
1884  (Sept.  8),  Henry  F.  French  (Asst.  Sec.;  ad 

i,llS84  (Sept.  15)  C.  E.  Coon  (Asst.  Sec.;  ad.  int.). 
1884  (Sept.  24 ) -1S84  (Oct.  28),  Walter  Q.  Gresham. 
1SS4  (Oct.  281-1885  (Mar.  6),  Hugh  McCulloch  (re- 
commissioned Dec.  18,  1884) . 

1884  (Oct.  29),  Henry  F.  French  (Asst..  Sec.;  ad 


1,1 1885  (Mar.  6) -1887  (Mar.  31),  Daniel  Manning. 

1887  (Apr.  1)-1889  (Mar.  5),  Charles  S.  Fairchild 
(recommissioned  Dec.  15,  1887.) 

1889  (Mar.  5) -1891  (Jan.  29),  William  Windom. 
1891  (Jan.  30),  Allured  B.  Nettleton  (Asst.  Sec. 


ad  int.).  _ . 

1891  (Feb.  24 ) -1893  (Mar.  6),  Charles  Foster. 

1893  (Mar.  6) -1897  (Mar.  5),  John  G.  Carlisle. 
1897  (Mar.  5) -1902  (Jan.  9),  Lyman  J.  Gage  (re- 
commissioned March  5,  1901). 

1902  (Jan.  91-1907  (Mar.  4)  Leslie  M.  Shaw  (re- 
commissioned March  6,  1905). 

1907  (Mar.  4) -1909  (Mar.  5),  George  B.  Cortelyou. 
1909  (Mar.  5)-1913  (Mar.  5),  Franklin  MacVeagh. 
1913  (Mar.  5)  William  G.  McAdoo. 

Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 


TREATIES  AS  THE  LAW  OF  THE  LAND. 
Treaties  as  Compacts. — By  international  law 
a treaty  is  a compact  between  independent 
sovereign  states  or  sovereign  powers  determ- 
ining their  respective  rights  or  obligations  as 
between  themselves  or  between  each  and  the 
subjects  of  the  other,  and  they  are  not  usually 
regarded  as  a part  of  the  internal  or  munici- 
pal law  of  either  of  the  contracting  parties. 
They  differ  from  statutes  in  that  they  relate  to 
the  rights  and  obligations  of  the  sovereign 
powers,  while  statutes  relate  to  the  rights  and 
obligations  of  citizens  or  subjects,  recognized, 
protected  and  enforced  by  a sovereign  power 
in  the  regulation  of  its  internal  affairs. 

Under  the  Federal  Constitution. — But  by 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  which 
denies  the  treaty  making  power  to  the  states 
(Art.  I,  Sec.  x,  1 1)  and  vests  it  in  the  Presi- 
dent and  Senate  (Art.  II,  Sec.  ii,  H 2)  it  is 
expressly  declared  that  treaties,  as  well  as  the 
Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States 
shall  be  the  supreme  law  of  the  land  (Art.  VI, 
If  2)  ; and  it  is  provided  that  the  judicial 
power  of  the  United  States  shall  extend  to  all 
cases  arising  under  the  Constitution,  the  laws 
and  the  treaties  of  the  United  States  (Art.  Ill, 
Sec.  ii,  If  1 ) . It  is  evident,  therefore,  that 
under  our  constitutional  system  treaties  as  a 
part  of  the  law  of  the  land  are  coordinate  in 
effect  with  statutes,  although  they  are  subordi- 
nate, of  course,  to  constitutional  provisions,  for 
the  treaty-making  power,  being  derived  from 
the  Constitution,  must  necessarily  be  limited 
by  it.  As  no  express  limitations  are  imposed 
on  the  power  to  make  treaties  other  than  those 
relating  to  the  method  in  which  such  power 
may  be  exercised,  limitations  on  the  scope  of 
the  treaty  power  are  only  those  implied,  and 
no  occasion  has  arisen  for  specifically  deter- 
mining such  limitations;  but  it  is  well  settled 
that  as  between  the  provisions  of  a treaty 
which  is  within  the  general  scope  of  the  power 
to  make  it  and  a state  statute,  the  provisions 
of  the  treaty  are  paramount  and  those  of  the 
state  statute  must  yield  although  the  statute 
may  be  within  the  general  scope  of  the  legis- 
lative power  in  the  state,  just  as  state  statutes 
must  yield  to  acts  of  Congress  relating  to 
proper  matter  of  federal  legislation. 

Treaties  and  Federal  Statutes. — With  refer- 
ence to  their  authority,  treaties  and  statutes 
of  the  United  States  are  of  the  same  grade,  and 
in  case  of  conflict  the  provision  of  later  date, 
whether  it  be  that  of  the  treaty  or  of  the 
statute,  must  prevail  as  it  is  the  later  expres- 
sion of  the  sovereign  will.  In  construing 
either  a statute  or  a treaty  the  courts  will, 
in  the  absence  of  an  express  repeal,  endeavor 
so  to  interpret  them  as  that  they  shall  not  be 
inconsistent  ( see  Construction  and  Inter- 
pretation) ; but  it  is  always  to  be  borne  in 
mind  that  a statute  which  is  inconsistent  with 
the  Constitution  or  in  excess  of  the  legislative 
power  is  invalid,  and  likewise  that  a treaty 


566 


TREATIES  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


•which  is  in  excess  of  the  treaty  making  power 
(if  so  determined)  would *be  invalid.  While 
the  obligations  of  the  United  States  to  a for- 
eign government  entered  into  under  the  treaty 
making  power  cannot  be,  abrogated  by  statute, 
nevertheless,  so  far  as  a treaty  is  declared  to 
be  the  supreme  law  of  the  land  it  must  yield 
to  subsequent  valid  legislation. 


References:  C.  H.  Butler,  Treaty-Making 
Power  (1902);  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Constitu- 
tional Law  (1910),  7,  450-518. 

Emlin  McClain. 

TREATIES,  NEGOTIATION  OF,  BY  THE 
UNITED  STATES.  See  Negotiation  of 
Tbeaties  by  the  United  States. 


TREATIES  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


Number. — Since  1778  the  government  of  the 
United  States  has  entered  into  more  than  600 
agreements  (treaties,  conventions,  and  less 
formal  arrangements)  with  over  80  foreign 
states.  The  greatest  number  among  these  has 
been  with  Great  Britain  (about  80).  There 
have  been  approximately  50  with  Mexico  and 
those  with  Spain,  France,  and  Japan  follow 
numerically  according  to  the  order  given. 
More  than  100  arrangements  have  been  com- 
mercial agreements  with  over  60  countries;  80 
conventions  have  provided  for  the  settlement 
of  claims.  Of  this  class  11  have  been  with 
Mexico  and  8 with  Great  Britain.  Of  the  ten 
most  important  treaties  to  which  the  United 
States  has  been  a party,  five  have  been  with 
Great  Britain,  two  with  France,  two  with 
Spain  and  one  with  Mexico. 

Early  Principles. — Upon  the  same  day,  June 
11,  1776,  when  committees  were  appointed  by 
the  Continental  Congress  to  draw  up  articles 
of  independence  and  of  union,  a third  commit- 
tee was  selected  to  draft  treaties  to  be  pro- 
posed to  foreign  powers.  In  September,  1776, 
the  Congress  adopted  with  but  few  alterations 
the  draft  of  a proposed  commercial  treaty. 
The  treaty  as  signed  in  1778  follows  to  a re- 
markable degree  the  provisions  of  the  draft 
and  contains  “the  germ  (often  expressed  in 
the  identical  language)  of  many  subsequent 
treaties  of  the  United  States.” 

Early  Method. — The  machinery  for  the  con- 
duct of  foreign  affairs  during  the  Confedera- 
tion was  so  clumsy  that  the  efforts  of  its  dip- 
lomatic agents  at  home  and  abroad  were  seri- 
ously interfered  with.  Congress  as  the  ratify- 
ing power  undertook  close  supervision  of  all 
instructions.  This  interference  was  sometimes 
so  great  as  to  balk  the  negotiation,  as  in 
the  Jav-Gardoqui  negotiation  of  1785,  when 
Congress  requested  that  Jay  submit  to  it  ail 
propositions  received  or  made  by  him.  The 
office  of  Secretary  of  Foreign  Affairs,  created 
in  1781,  never  became  more  than  a dignified 
clerkship.  Fortunately,  perhaps,  few  negotia- 
tions were  attempted,  and  no  treaty  was 
signed,  under  the  eye  of  Congress.  Indeed, 
the  Florida  treaty  of  1819  signed  at  Washing- 
ton by  John  Quincy  Adams  was  the  first  to 
be  executed  at  home.  While  under  the  Fed- 
eral Constitution  the  Senate  shared  in  the 


treaty-making  power,  the  executive  branch 
assumed  the  direction  of  foreign  affairs,  and 
the  first  executive  department  to  be  created 
by  Congress  was  the  Department  of  Foreign 
Affairs,  the  name  of  which  was  soon  changed 
to  Department  of  State. 

Subjects. — During  the  administrations  of 
Washington,  Adams,  and  Jefferson  the  nego- 
tiation of  treaties  was  infrequent.  The  Jay 
Treaty  (1794),  that  with  Spain  (1795),  and 
the  Louisiana  Treaty  (1803),  were  the  only 
ones  of  importance  in  this  period,  and  from 
1805  to  1814  few  treaties  were  signed  and  but 
one  was  ratified.  During  the  Napoleonic  wars 
diplomatic  controversy  centered  about  the  in- 
terpretation of  old  treaties  and  the  rights  of 
states  arising  independently  of  treaty. 

Many  of  the  earliest  agreements  were  treat- 
ies of  “amity  and  commerce,”  and  covered  a 
group  of  subjects  germane  to  the  title.  As  the 
social  and  commercial  relations  of  the  United 
States  increased  in  importance  and  complexity, 
treaties  or  conventions  were  negotiated  upon 
specific  subjects.  Thus,  separate  consular  con- 
ventions have  been  executed  with  15  countries, 
and  the  United  States  has  had  more  than  100 
consular  arrangements  with  over  50  countries. 

The  territorial  growth  of  the  United  States 
has  resulted  in  more  than  40  ratified  arrange- 
ments as  to  boundaries.  Four  of  these  were 
treaties  of  peace,  four  were  purchase-treaties, 
and  the  rest  aimed  at  a settlement  of  boundary 
controversies. 

Commercial. — After  the  ratification  of  the 
Florida  Treaty  the  United  States  turned  its 
attention  to  the  formation  of  commercial  re- 
lations with  the  new  Spanish-American  states 
and  a series  of  commercial  treaties,  beginning 
with  that  with  Columbia  (1824),  was  the  re- 
sult. During  the  middle  decades  of  the  last 
century  the  commercial  treaties  with  European 
countries  were  largely  rewritten.  Diplomatic 
relations  with  Turkey  resulted  in  the  treaty 
of  1830,  which  contains  provisions  for  extra- 
territoriality, the  interpretation  of  which  has 
led  to  long  and  fruitless  controversy.  Atten- 
tion to  the  Far  East  led  to  the  negotiation  by 
Edmund  Roberts  of  treaties  with  Muscat  and 
Siam  (1833).  The  United  States  availed  it- 
self of  the  opening  of  China  by  Great  Britain 
by  negotiating  through  Caleb  Cushing  the 


567 


TREATIES  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


treaty  of  1844.  The  treaty  with  Japan,  signed 
by  Commodore  Perry  in  1854,  was  followed  by 
the  important  treaties  of  1857  and  1858  negoti- 
ated by  Townsend  Harris.  Contact  with 
states  of  alien  civilization  has  resulted  in 
eighteen  treaties  conceding  extraterritorial 
rights  to  American  citizens. 

Changing  theories  of  relationship  between 
state  and  nation  are  to  be  found  in  the  agree- 
ments for  the  abolition  of  droit  d’aubaine,  the 
first  of  which  appears  in  the  commercial  treaty 
of  1778  with  France,  and  later  in  the  series 
of  treaties  signed  in  1844-46  by  Henry  Whea- 
ton with  the  smaller  German  states.  The 
negotiation  by  George  Bancroft  of  naturaliza- 
tion treaties  with  several  German  states  in 
1868  and  1869  witnesses  to  the  practical  aban- 
donment of  the  old  doctrines  of  indelible  alle- 
giance. 

Extradition. — Better  facilities  of  ocean  nav- 
igation after  the  introduction  of  steam,  and 
the  consequent  increase  of  intercommunication 
demanded  a system  for  the  apprehension  of 
fugitives  from  justice.  Extradition,  which 
was  temporarily  applied  to  two  offenses  by  the 
Jay  treaty,  was  made  permanent  and  the  num- 
ber of  offenses  vastly  increased  under  the  Web- 
ster-Ashburt.on  treaty  of  1842.  Special  ex- 
tradition treaties  have  been  made  with  more 
than  40  countries. 

Arbitration. — The  history  of  modern  inter- 
national arbitration  begins  with  the  Jay 
Treaty  (see),  since  which  time  the  United 
States  has  agreed  to  the  settlement  of  more 
than  50  disputes  by  arbitration.  These  form  a 
valuable  foundation  for  the  group  of  general 
arbitration  treaties  the  first  of  which  was  the 
Olney-Pauncefote  treaty  of  1897,  rejected  by 
the  Senate.  The  fresh  impetus  given  to  arbi- 
tration by  the  Hague  Conferences  has  pro- 
duced the  rapidly  increasing  group  of  general 
arbitration  treaties  now  numbering  about 
thirty. 

International  Unions. — Increasing  inter- 
dependence of  states  has  demanded  some  sort 
of  international  administration.  This  has  been 
accomplished  in  part  by  a series  of  interna- 
tional acts  to  which  the  United  States  is  a 
party  either  originally  or  by  adhesion  or  ac- 
cession. Among  them  are:  the  convention  of 
Paris,  1875,  establishing  an  international 
bureau  of  weights  and  measures ; of  1884,  for 
the  protection  of  submarine  cables;  of  1886, 
for  the  interchange  of  official  documents ; of 
1890,  for  the  formation  of  an  international 
union  for  the  publication  of  customs-tariffs; 
of  1897,  in  reference  to  the  Universal  Postal 
Union;  of  1905,  for  an  international  institute 
of  agriculture;  and  of  1907,  for  the  establish- 
ment of  an  international  bureau  of  public 
health.  The  United  States  is  also  a party  to 
the  conventions  on  international  copyright 
(1902),  for  sanitation  (1903  and  1905),  and 
to  the  Geneva  (Red  Cross)  convention  of  1906. 
It  lias  become  a party  by  adhesion  or  accession 


to  the  following:  conventions  for  the  protec- 
tion of  industrial  property  (1883,  1891,  and 
1900),  the  Brussels  conventions  of  1899  and 
1906  regulating  the  liquor-traffic  in  certain 
parts  of  Africa;  and  the  Paris  convention  of 
1904  relative  to  the  white-slave  traffic. 

Multipartite  treaties  of  a more  general  char- 
acter to  which  the  United  States  has  been  a 
party  are:  the  Brussels  Anti-Slavery  Conven- 
tion of  1890,  the  general  acts  and  conventions 
of  the  Hague  Conferences  of  1899  and  1907, 
the  general  act  of  the  Algeciras  (Morocco) 
Conference  of  1906,  and  the  declaration  con- 
cerning the  laws  of  naval  war  of  1909  (the 
Declaration  of  London ) . 

Ratification  and  Rejection. — Although  the 
ratification  of  treaties  by  the  Continental  Con- 
gress was  necessary,  it  withheld  this  action 
but  once,  in  rejecting  the  French  consular 
convention  negotiated  in  1784  by  Franklin. 
Under  the  Constitution  (Art.  II,  Sec.  ii,  If  2), 
the  Senate  inaugurated  a policy  of  amending 
treaties  in  the  exercise  of  its  ratifying  power. 
Indeed  no  outright  rejection  of  a treaty  sub- 
mitted to  the  Senate  occurred  until  1824,  when 
that  body  so  acted  in  reference  to  the  treaties 
for  the  suppression  of  the  slave  trade  signed 
with  Colombia.  Other  treaties  so  defeated 
have  been:  that  with  Mexico  (commerce, 
1828),  with  the  Swiss  Confederation  (1835), 
with  Texas  (annexation,  1844),  with  the  Ger- 
man Zollverein  (1844),  with  Hawaii  (1855), 
with  Mexico  (transit  and  commerce,  1859), 
with  Spain  (claims,  1860),  with  Hawaii  (re- 
ciprocity, 1867),  with  Denmark  (cession  of 
Danish  West  Indies,  1867),  and  with  Santo 
Domingo  (annexation,  1869).  The  Senate  re- 
jected the  following  treaties  with  Great  Brit- 
ain: the  Johnson-Clarendon  treaty  of  1869; 
the  fisheries  treaty  of  1888;  and  the  Olney- 
Pauncefote  arbitration  treaty  of  1897.  Several 
reciprocity  treaties,  including  that  with 
France  (1899),  were  also  rejected. 

Amendment. — The  Senate  amended  the  Jay 
Treaty  by  the  excision  of  article  12,  to  which 
Great  Britain  assented.  Not  infrequently  the 
Senate’s  amendments  have  been  so  radical  as 
to  make  the  treaty  unacceptable  to  the  other 
contracting  power.  This  was  the  case  with 
the  King-Hawkesbury  convention  with  Great 
Britain  (northwestern  boundary,  1803) . Other 
treaties  with  Great  Britain  thus  made  objec- 
tionable were  the  Dallas-Clarendon  convention 
(canal  question,  1854),  the  extradition  conven- 
tion of  1886,  and  the  first  Hay-Pauncefote 
treaty,  1900.  Other  instances  where  the  Sen- 
ate’s amendments  contributed  to  the  defeat  of 
the  treaty  are:  Persia  (commerce,  1851), 
Nicaragua  (extradition,  1855),  Salvador  (ex- 
tradition, 1862),  Prussia  (naturalization, 
1868),  Guatemala  (extradition,  1870),  and 
Mexico  (boundaries,  1888). 

Treaties  have  sometimes  failed  because  not 
ratified  by  the  other  contracting  power.  In- 
stances of  this  are  the  Chinese  treaty  of  1888 


568 


TREATIES  IN  INTERNATIONAL  LAW 


and  the  Hay-Herran  treaty  of  1903  with 
Colombia.  On  the  other  hand  about  70  treaties 
have  been  amended  by  the  Senate  and  after- 
wards ratified  as  amended. 

President’s  Authority. — The  convention 
signed  at  London  in  1803  by  Monroe  and 
Pinckney  was  not  submitted  to  the  Senate  by 
Jefferson.  This  precedent  lias  been  followed 
not  infrequently  and  the  following  are  among 
the  treaties  withheld  by  the  President:  Mexico 
(transit  over  Tehuantepec,  1853),  Colombia 
(extradition,  1870),  Switzerland  (trade-marks, 
1885),  the  general  act  of  the  Berlin  Congo 
Conference  (1885),  and  the  arbitration  conven- 
tion of  the  Pan-American  Conference  of  1890. 
Moreover  the  President  may  refuse  to  ex- 
change ratifications  if  the  Senate’s  amend- 
ments are  unsatisfactory  to  him.  Polk  so 
acted  in  1845  with  the  extradition  treaty  with 
Prussia.  Again,  a pending  treaty  may  be 
withdrawn  from  the  Senate  by  the  President. 
This  was  done  by  Arthur  (Belgium,  1884),  by 
Cleveland  in  a number  of  instances  (reci- 
procity treaty  with  Spain,  1884,  canal  treaty 
with  Nicaragua,  1884,  annexation  treaty  with 
Hawaii,  1893);  and  by  Roosevelt  (commercial 
convention  with  Santo  Domingo,  1900,  and 
Alaskan  boundary  convention  with  Great  Brit- 
ain, 1897).  Withdrawals  of  treaties  by  the 
President  in  order  to  insert  minor  changes 
have  frequently  occurred. 

Delays. — Delays  in  the  ratification  of  treat- 
ies have  often  resulted  through  the  inaction  of 
the  Senate,  or  of  the  ratifying  agencies  of 
other  powers.  The  Algiers  treaty  of  1810  lay 
forgotten  in  the  Department  of  State  nearly 
five  years  before  it  was  transmitted  to  the 
Senate.  The  Spanish  Convention  of  1802  was 
not  ratified  till  the  session  of  1818-19.  The 
boundary  treaty  of  1828  with  Mexico  was  not 
ratified  until  1832,  those  of  1833  with  Mus- 
cat and  Siam  not  until  1837,  and  that  of  1850 
with  Switzerland  in  1855. 

The  Florida  treaty  of  1819  provided  for  the 
exchange  of  ratifications  within  six  months. 
The  Senate  acted  promptly  while  Spain  de- 
layed two  years.  Upon  the  receipt  of  the 
latter’s  ratification  the  Senate  again  acted  as 
if  de  novo  and  the  treaty  was  then  pro- 
claimed by  the  President.  Since  that  time 
when  a treaty  contains  a time-limit  for  rati- 
fication and  this  period  has  lapsed,  it  has 
become  customary  to  add  an  additional  article 
providing  for  a new  interval  and  this  is  pre- 
sented to  the  Senate  for  approval.  Recent 
treaties  usually  provide  that  ratifications  are 
to  be  exchanged  as  soon  as  possible  and  not 
within  a specified  time. 

Abrogation. — Treaties  have  been  abrogated 
by  several  methods  : ( 1 ) by  Act  of  Congress 

( e . g.,  the  French  treaty  of  alliance,  1778); 

(2)  by  expiration  of  time  set  forth  inthetreaty 
(e.  g.,  the  Jay  treaty,  in  part,  1794-1807,  Prus- 
sia, 1785-1796;  Central  America,  1824-1838); 

(3)  by  notice  given  as  permitted  by  the  treaty 


e.  g.,  the  joint-occupation  convention  of  1827 
with  Great  Britain,  notice  given  in  1846; 
parts  of  the  treaty  of  Washington,  1871,  de- 
nounced by  Great  Britain  in  1885)  ; (4)  by 
the  absorption  of  the  contracting  power  into 
another  nationality  (e.  g.,  Algiers  absorbed  by 
France,  1830;  Hanover  by  Prussia,  1866,  the 
South  African  Republic  by  Great  Britain, 
1900,  and  Corea  by  Japan,  1910)  ; (5)  by  the 
dissolution  of  federations  or  unions  (e.  g., 
Peru-Bolivia,  1839,  and  to  a certain  extent, 
Norway  and  Sweden  in  1905);  on  the  other 
hand  the  annexation  of  Texas  (1845)  and  of 
Hawaii  (1898)  by  the  United  States  operated 
to  abrogate  the  treaties  made  by  them  while 
independent;  (6)  by  the  substitution  of 
other  agreements  by  act  of  the  parties  ( e.  g., 
the  Japanese  treaty  of  1911  for  that  of  1894)  ; 
(7)  by  war  (e.  g.,  parts  of  the  treaties  of 
1783,  1794  and  1802  with  Great  Britain  by 
the  War  of  1812;  of  that  of  1831  with  Mexico, 
by  the  Mexican  War).  By  a decree  of  the 
Spanish  Government  during  the  Spanish-Am- 
erican  War  all  treaties  between  the  two 
countries  were  declared  terminated.  Never- 
theless, after  the  war  Spain  finally  agreed  to 
make  payments  upon  claims  arising  under  the 
treaty  of  1834. 

See  Annexations  to  the  United  States; 
Arbitrations,  American  ; Commerce,  Inter- 
national; Diplomatic  Agent;  Fisheries, 
International;  International  Law,  Influ- 
ence of  the  U.  S.  on;  International 
Unions;  Negotiation  of  Treaties  by  the 
United  States;  Peace,  Conclusion  of;  Rati- 
fication of  Treaties  by  the  United  States; 
Treaties  in  International  Law. 

References:  Treaties  and  Conventions  Con- 
chided  between  the  U.  8.  and  other  Powers, 
(1873,  1889),  contains  the  valuable  notes  upon 
treaties  by  J.  C.  B.  Davis;  W.  M.  Malloy, 
Treaties,  Conventions  and  Agreements  between 
V.  8.  and  other  Powers,  1776-1009  (1910),  Sen. 
Docs.,  61  Cong.,  2 Sess.  (1913),  357;  J.  B. 
Moore,  Digest  of  lnt.  Law  (1906),  V,  155-387, 
Am.  Diplomacy  (1905);  S.  B.  Crandall, 
“Treaties  and  Executive  Agreements”  in  Pol. 
8ci.  Quart.,  XX  (Sept.,  1905),  385-420,  Mak- 
ing and  Enforcing  of  Treaties  (1904);  C. 
H.  Butler,  Treaty-Making  Power  (1902); 
J.  W.  Foster,  Century  of  Am.  Diplomacy 
(1900),  Practice  of  Diplomacy  (1906),  Di- 
plomacy in  the  Orient  (1904);  A.  B.  Hart, 
Foundations  of  Am.  Foreign  Policy  (1901). 

J.  S.  Reeves. 

TREATIES  IN  INTERNATIONAL  LAW. 
Definition. — “A  treaty  is  an  agreement  between 
two  or  more  states  in  conformity  to  law.  In  a 
broad  sense  the  term  treaty  is  used  to  include 
all  international  agreements;  in  a strict  sense 
the  term  treaty  applies  to  an  international 
agreement  of  a general  character,  or  covering 
several  subjects — as  a treaty  of  peace,  or 
amity,  commerce  and  navigation.” 


569 


TREATIES  IN  INTERNATIONAL  LAW 


Agreements  less  than  Treaties.  — Interna- 
tional agreements  relating  to  a single  subject 
or  to  matters  of  minor  importance  are  usually 
entitled  conventions — such  as  conventions  in  re- 
gard to  naturalization,  extradition,  claims,  etc. 
There  are  many  international  compacts  which 
bind  a large  number  of  states,  postal  con- 
ventions, the  Hague  Conventions,  etc.  The 
body  of  written  international  agreement  is 
very  large  and  forms  a basis  from  which  many 
of  the  principles  of  international  law  can  be 
adduced.  The  international  agreements  to 
which  the  United  States  is  a party  number 
more  than  three  hundred. 

A protocol,  the  official  minutes  of  a confer- 
ence, may  be  signed  by  the  plenipotentiaries 
and  have  binding  force.  Notes  are  usually 
unsigned  resumes  of  diplomatic  conversations. 
Memoranda  are  sometimes  handed  by  one  dip- 
lomat to  another  as  showing  points  which  they 
wish  to  make  in  a manner  somewhat  more  defi- 
nite than  might  be  the  case  from  an  ordinary 
interview.  Declarations  are  usually  formal 
and  signed  statements  of  principles  which 
states  intend  to  observe  in  their  relations  with 
one  another,  as  in  the  first  article  of  the  Dec- 
laration of  Paris  of  1856,  “privateering  is  and 
remains  abolished.”  This  differs  from  such  a 
document  as  a declaration  of  war  which  is  a 
formal  statement  of  the  purpose  of  one  state 
to  resort  to  force  to  attain  certain  ends,  usu- 
ally also  giving  reasons  in  justification  of  its 
action. 

The  making  of  a treaty  is  a solemn  interna- 
tional act;  and  when  concluded  the  treaty  is 
according  to  its  terms  binding  upon  the  signa- 
tories. The  less  formal  documents,  notes, 
memoranda,  etc.,  vary  in  force  according  as 
they  receive  subsequent  assent  from  the  treaty 
making  authority  within  the  state  or  are  gen- 
erally observed. 

Making  Treaties. — According  to  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  the  President 
“Shall  have  power,  by  and  with  the  advice  and 
consent  of  the  Senate,  to  make  treaties,  pro- 
vided two-thirds  of  the  Senators  present  con- 
cur” (Art.  II,  sec.  ii,  If  2).  Treaties  thus 
made  “shall  be  the  supreme  law  of  the  land” 
(Art.  VI,  If  2).  The  word  “treaty”  as  here 
used  refers  to  the  various  forms  of  interna- 
tional agreements  which  require  ratification  by 
the  Senate.  It  is  not  yet  determined  what 
may  be  the  force  of  “identic  notes”  such  as 
were  exchanged  by  Ambassador  Takahira  on 
behalf  of  the  Japanese  Government  and  Secre- 
tary Root  on  behalf  of  the  United  States  Gov- 
ernment on  November  30,  1908  (see  Japan, 
Diplomatic  Relations  with).  These  notes 
define  the  policy  of  the  two  Governments  in 
the  Pacific  Ocean  in  regard  to  the  development 
of  commerce,  the  maintenance  of  the  status 
quo  and  the  defense  of  the  principle  of  equal 
commercial  opportunity  in  China,  the  recipro- 
cal respect  for  one  another’s  possessions,  and 
the  support  “by  all  pacific  means  at  their  dis- 


posal” of  the  independence  and  integrity  of 
China.  It  is  certain  that  there  would  be  a 
strong  moral  obligation  upon  the  United 
States  and  Japan  to  observe  the  principles 
thus  formally  published. 

Limitations. — In  the  case  of  Geofrey  vs. 
Riggs  (133  U.  S.  258,  1890),  the  court  said: 

The  treaty  power,  as  expressed  in  the  Constitu- 
tion. is  in  terms  unlimited  except  by  those  re- 
straints which  are  found  in  that  instrument 
against  the  action  of  the  government  or  of  its 
departments,  and  those  from  the  nature  of  the 
government  and  of  that  of  the  states. 

The  treaty  power  on  this  theory  would  not 
extend,  for  example,  to  the  cession  of  any  por- 
tion of  the  territory  of  one  of  the  states  of 
the  United  States  without  the  consent  of  the 
state. 

Senate. — While  in  some  states  the  act  of 
the  duly  authorized  agent  in  negotiating  a 
treaty  may  be  considered  as  binding  upon 
the  state,  this  is  not  the  case  as  regards  the 
United  States,  which  can  enter  into  no  treaty 
without  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate; 
and  the  Senate  may  reject,  fail  to  act  upon 
or  may  amend  a draft  of  a treaty  which  has 
been  submitted  to  it  for  ratification.  Crandall 
says:  “Not  usually  consulted  as  to  the  con- 
duct of  negotiations,  the  Senate  has  freely  ex- 
ercised its  coordinate  authority  in  treaty  mak- 
ing by  means  of  amendments.” 

Preliminary  Agreements. — Many  internation- 
al agreements  are  made  by  the  executive,  pend- 
ing the  settlement  of  a difficulty  by  a more 
formal  method.  Such  agreements  may  be  pre- 
liminary to  peace  in  time  of  war,  like  the  peace 
protocol  between  the  United  States  and  Spain, 
August  12,  1898,  the  modi  vivendi  concerning 
the  Newfoundland  fisheries  between  the  United 
States  and  Great  Britain. 

Taking  Effect. — Unless  otherwise  provided  in 
a treaty,  it  is  generally  held  that  a treaty 
when  ratified  becomes  operative  as  between 
the  sovereigns  from  the  date  of  signature,  but 
so  far  as  individual  rights  are  concerned  from 
the  date  of  exchange  of  ratification  and  proc- 
lamation (Dooley  vs.  United  States,  182  U. 
8.  222,  1901). 

Interpretation. — Treaties  should  receive  rea- 
sonable interpretation.  In  case  of  doubt  the 
following  rules  have  been  generally  accepted: 

(1)  When  there  is  doubt  as  to  the  interpretation 
of  the  words  of  a treaty:  (a)  the  words  are  to  he 
interpreted  in  their  usual  sense,  unless  this  in- 
volves an  absurdity  or  is  incompatible  with  the 
general  principles  of  the  treaty:  (b)  words  having 
more  than  one  meaning  are  interpreted  in  the 
more  general  sense,  rather  than  the  technical 
sense,  unless  clearly  used  in  the  technical  sense ; 
(c)  words  are  to  be  interpreted  as  understood  at 
the  time  of  the  negotiation  of  the  treaty  and 
favorably  to  the  party  assuming  an  obligation. 

(2)  When  there  is  doubt  as  to  the  interpretation 
of  the  provisions  of  a treaty;  (a)  that  which  is 
specifically  stated  prevails  agrainst  the  more  gen- 
eral : (bl  provisions  operating  unequally  may  be 
strictly  construed  by  the  party  suffering  the  great- 
er burden  ; (3)  single  provisions  should  be  inter- 
preted with  reference  to  the  whole  treaty. 

(3)  In  case  of  conflict  between  different 


570 


TREE  CLAIMS  TO  PUBLIC  LANDS— TRENT  AFFAIR 


treaties : (a)  if  between  treaties  to  which  the 

same  states  are  parties,  the  later  treaty  is  bind- 
ing; (b)  if  between  earlier  and  later  treaties  to 
which  the  same  states  are  not  parties,  the  earlier 
treaty  is  binding. 

Most  Favored  Nation. — Reciprocity  treaties 
are  such  as  involve  an  exchange  of  privileges 
as  in  mutual  reduction  of  customs  duties. 
Such  treaties  are  in  the  nature  of  a bargain 
formally  entered  into  by  states.  The  United 
States  has  maintained  that  reciprocity  treaties 
imply  equivalent  compensation  satisfactory  to 
the  states  concerned;  and  that  other  states 
having  in  their  treaties  with  the  United 
States  the  “most  favored  nation”  clause,  have 
no  right  to  claim  the  privileges  granted  under 
reciprocity  treaties  except  “on  their  ability  to 
offer  an  equivalent  compensation.”  As  was 
said  by  the  United  States  Supreme  Court: 

Our  construction  is  that  the  most  favored  na- 
tion clause  of  the  treaty  with  Denmark  does  not 
bind  the  United  States  to  extend  to  that  country, 
without  compensation,  privileges  which  they  have 
conceded  to  the  Hawaiian  Islands  in  exchange  for 
valuable  concessions  (Bertram  et  al.  vs.  Robert- 
son, 122  U.  S.  116). 

The  “most  favored  nation  clause”  which  oc- 
curs in  many  treaties  does  not,  as  a treaty  of 
reciprocity,  aim  to  establish  a specific  relation- 
ship between  two  states,  but  aims  to  gain,  so 
far  as  possible  for  the  state  having  such  a 
clause  in  a treaty,  advantages  conferred  upon 
other  states.  The  first  treaty  concluded  by 
the  United  States,  that  with  France  of  Feb- 
ruary 6,  1778,  in  Articles  III  and  IV  contains 
corresponding  provisions  granting  each  to  the 
other  the  “most  favored  nation”  treatment  as 
follows : 

The  subjects,  people  and  inhabitants  of  the  said 
United  States,  and  each  of  them,  shall  not  pay  in 
the  ports,  havens,  roads,  the  dominion  of  His 
Most  Christian  Majesty,  in  Europe,  any  other  or 
greater  duties  or  imports,  or  what  nature  soever 
they  may  be,  or  by  what  name  soever  called,  than 
those  which  the  most  favored  nations  are,  or  shall 
be,  obliged  to  pay. 

“Most  favored  nation”  clauses  in  United 
States  treaties  vary  in  form  but  it  has  been 
announced  by  Dr.  Moore  that: 

The  object  sought  in  all  the  varying  forms  of 
expression  is  equality  of  international  treatment, 
protection  against  the  wilful  preference  of  the 
commercial  interests  of  one  nation  over  another. 
Rut  the  allowance  of  the  same  privileges,  and  the 
same  sacrifice  of  revenue  duties,  to  a nation 
which  makes  no  compensation,  that  had  been  con- 
ceded to  another  nation  for  an  adequate  compen- 
sation, instead  of  maintaining,  destroys  that  equal- 
ity of  market  privileges  which  the  ‘most  favored 
nation’  clause  was  intended  to  secure.  It  concedes 
for  nothing  to  one  friendly  nation  what  the  other 
gets  only  for  a price.  It  would  thus  become  the 
source  of  international  inequality  and  provoke  in 
ternational  hostility. 

See  Annexation,  Diplomatic  Principles 
of;  Arbitration  and  Peace;  Boundaries  of 
the  U.  S.,  Exterior;  Capitulations,  Turk- 
ish; Commercial  Policy  and  Relations  of 
the  United  States;  Diplomatic  Correspond- 
ence; Hague  Conferences;  International 
Conferences  ; International  Law,  Private  ; 
Modus  Vivendi;  Negotiations  of  Treaties  by 
134 


the  United  States  ; Pan  American  Con- 
gresses; Peace,  Conclusion  of;  Ratifica- 
tion of  Treaties  by  the  United  States; 
Sovereignty,  Theory  of;  Territory  in  Inter- 
national Law;  diplomatic  relations  with  coun- 
tries by  name. 

References:  C.  H.  Butler,  Treaty  Making 
Power  of  the  U.  8.  (1902);  R.  T.  Devlin, 
Treaty  Power  (1908)  ; J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of 
Int.  Law  (1906),  V,  278;  S.  B.  Crandall, 
Treaties,  Their  Making  and  Enforcement, 
(1904);  bibliography  in  A.  B.  Hart,  Manual 
(1908),  § 184.  G.  G.  Wilson. 

TREE  CLAIMS  TO  PUBLIC  LANDS.  In 

order  to  encourage  the  afforestation  of  the 
western  plains  Congress  offered  land  to  persons 
who  would  cultivate  it  in  timber.  The  act 
of  Mar.  3,  1873,  as  amended,  provided  that 
from  40  to  160  acres  might  be  granted  to  per- 
sons who  would  devote  from  2i  to  10  acres  to 
timber  for  eight  years.  The  terms  of  culti- 
vation were  strictly  defined.  Final  proof  at 
the  end  of  eight  years  should  show  at  least 
2700  trees  planted  to  each  of  the  ten  acres,  and 
at  least  675  living  trees  to  the  acre.  As 
residence  was  not  required,  land  could  be  taken 
up  under  this  law  as  well  as  by  homestead 
entry.  Lack  of  water  caused  the  failure  of  the 
measure,  but  it  was  early  found  to  be  subject 
to  great  abuse.  Compliance  with  the  condi- 
tions was  rare,  and  the  law  was  commonly 
used  as  a means  of  holding  up  a tract  of  land 
for  eight  years,  during  which  time  a relinquish- 
ment might  be  sold  to  a bona  fide  settler.  The 
law  was  repealed  Mar.  3,  1891,  but  the  terms 
for  existing  entries  were  lightened,  and  a cash 
commutation  allowed  after  four  years.  There 
were  290,278  original  entries  under  this  act, 
covering  43,606,344  acres.  The  65,263  final 
entries  to  June  30,  1912,  covered  9,855,944 
acres;  the  7,105  commuted  covered  1,010,305 
acres.  See  Homesteads  on  Public  Lands; 
Land  Grants;  Public  Lands  and  Public 
Land  Policy.  References:  T.  Donaldson,  Pub- 
lic Domain  (1884),  360-62,  1047-88,  1285- 
89.  P.  J.  T. 

TRENT  AFFAIR.  During  the  American 
Civil  War  on  November  8,  1861,  Captain 
Wilkes  in  an  American  man-of-war  overtook 
the  British  mail  steamer  Trent  sailing  between 
two  neutral  ports.  Captain  Wilkes  took  from 
the  Trent  two  Confederate  commissioners, 
Mason  and  Slidell,  and  their  secretaries,  and 
then  allowed  the  Trent  to  proceed  to  England. 
The  British  authorities  demanded  the  release 
of  the  Confederate  agents  and  an  apology. 
The  case  aroused  much  feeling  and  discus- 
sion. Mr.  Seward  in  his  letter  announcing  the 
release  of  the  Confederates  said,  “The  belli- 
gerent captor  has  a right  to  prevent  the  con- 
traband officer,  soldier,  sailor,  minister,  mes- 
senger or  courier  from  proceeding  in  his  un- 
lawful voyage  and  reaching  the  destined  scene 


571 


TREVETT  vs.  WEEDEN— TRIALS 


of  his  injurious  service;”  and  maintained  that 
Captain  Wilkes  erred  in  not  bringing  the 
Trent  to  port  instead  of  taking  the  Confeder- 
ates from  the  vessel.  It  must  be  borne  in 
mind  that  Seward  was  acting  under  great 
pressure  upon  both  sides,  and  while  his  argu- 
ment may  have  been  serviceable  from  a diplo- 
matic point  of  view,  it  has  not  been  regarded 
as  in  all  respects  in  accord  with  international 
law.  See  Confederate  States  of  America; 
Contraband;  Great  Britain,  Diplomatic  Re- 
lation With;  Neutral  Trade,  Principles  of. 
References:  T.  LeG.  Harris,  Trent  Affair 
( 1896 ) ; J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law 
(1906),  VII,  768-779;  W.  E.  Hall,  Int.  Law 
(1909),  682.  G.  G.  W. 

TREVETT  vs.  WEEDEN.  This  case  arose 
in  Rhode  Island  in  1786,  out  of  certain  acts 
of  the  commonwealth  legislature,  emitting 
paper  currency  and  denouncing  penalties 
against  anyone  refusing  the  same  at  face  value 
in  exchange  for  commodities.  Defendant  fell 
under  condemnation  of  the  acts  for  refusing 
a tender  of  said  issue  for  some  meat.  The  case 
came  on  for  trial  in  accordance  with  the  pro- 
visions of  the  last  of  these  acts,  which  provided 
that  the  court  should  “proceed  . . . without 
any  jury,  by  a majority  of  the  judges  present, 
according  to  the  laws  of  the  land.”  Defendant’s 
attorney,  Varnum,  relied  upon  showing  that 
this  provision  was  void  as  transgressing  the  co- 
lonial charter,  which  accorded  the  inhabitants 
of  Rhode  Island  all  “liberties  ...  of  free 
and  natural  subjects  . . . as  if  they  were 

born  within  the  realm  of  England.”  This  pro- 
vision, Varnum  contended,  established  trial  by 
jury  in  Rhode  Island  upon  an  indefeasible  basis, 
inasmuch  as  the  colonial  charter  was  now  the 
constitution  of  the  state  which,  in  the  language 
of  Vattel,  the  legislature  could  not  alter  “with- 
out destroying  the  basis  of  their  existence.” 
But  Varnum  also  argued  that  the  statute  was 
“repugnant,”  ordaining  trial  without  jury  and 
yet  “according  to  the  laws  of  the  land,”  which, 
he  contended,  made  the  jurors  judges  of  the 
facts  and  the  court  judges  of  the  law.  “This 
act  therefore,”  he  deduced,  “is  impossible  to 
be  executed,”  ‘wherefore  the  common  law  con- 
trols it  and  adjudges  it  to  be  void.’  The  judg- 
ment of  the  court  was  “that  the  information 
was  not  cognizable  before  them,”  and  undoubt- 
edly, as  Coxe  remarks,  it  “plainly  repudiated 
and  repelled  the  challenged  statute,”  but  exact- 
ly upon  which  of  the  two  grounds  urged  by  de- 
fendant’s attorney  is  not  entirely  clear.  Ac- 
cording to  the  contemporaneous  account  in  the 
Providence  Gazette,  Judge  Howell  thought 
that  the  statute  was  “repugnant  and  unconsti- 
tutional,” Judge  Devol  was  like-minded,  Judge 
Tillinghast  dwelt  upon  “the  striking  repug- 
nancy of  the  expressions  of  the  act,”  Judge 
Hazard  and  the  Chief-Justice  voted  against 
taking  cognizance  without  indicating  any  opin- 
ion. Shortly  afterward  the  judges,  having 


been  cited  before  the  Assembly  to  assign  the 
reasons  for  their  judgment  the  tendency  of 
which,  it  was  declared,  was  “to  abolish  legis- 
lative authority,”  again  expressed  themselves 
ambiguously.  Subsequently,  three  of  them 
failed  of  reappointment.  Trevett  vs.  Weeden 
was  popularly  regarded  as  a true  constitu- 
tional decision  and  was  so  treated  in  the  Fed- 
eral Convention  where  it  had  manifest  influence 
in  several  directions.  See  Courts  and  Un- 
constitutional Legislation.  References:  J. 
B.  Thayer,  Cases  on  Constitutional  Law  (1894— 
5),  I,  73-78;  B.  Coxe,  Judicial  Power  and  ZJn- 
B.  McMaster,  Hist,  of  the  People  of  the  U.  S. 
constitutional  Legislation  (1893),  234-248;  J. 
(1883),  I,  337-339.  E.  S.  Corwin. 

TRIAL  BY  JURY.  See  Jury,  Petit; 

Trials. 

TRIALS.  A trial  in  a legal  sense  is  the 
hearing  and  determination  by  a judicial  tribu- 
nal of  the  questions  of  law  and  fact  submitted 
to  it  in  a case  instituted  before  it,  which  hear- 
ing and  determination  are  in  accordance  with 
authorized  procedure  and  the  law  of  the  land. 
The  tribunal  must  be  one  constituted  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  law  and  vested  with  judicial 
authority,  proceeding  at  an  authorized  place 
and  time  to  exercise  its  functions.  The  case 
must  be  one  of  which  the  tribunal  has  jurisdic- 
tion both  as  to  the  subject  matter  and  the  par- 
ties ( see  Jurisdiction).  The  usual  incidents 
of  a trial  are  that  it  be  public,  that  the  parties 
have  the  opportunity  to  be  represented  by  coun- 
sel and  to  be  heard  on  every  question  submitted 
for  determination,  that  they  have  the  oppor- 
tunity to  introduce  evidence  on  issues  of  fact, 
that  if  the  trial  be  to  a jury  the  judge  or 
judges  shall  decide  questions  of  law  relating  to 
the  admissibility  of  evidence  and  instruct  the 
jury  as  to  the  rules  of  law  applicable  to  the 
determination  of  the  issues  of  fact  under  the 
evidence,  and  that  the  jury  return  a verdict 
on  the  issues  of  fact  (see  Jury,  Petit),  and, 
finally,  in  any  case,  that  the  judge  or  judges 
shall  render  a decision  determining  the  case  as 
submitted,  subject  to  any  review  on  appeal 
which  may  be  provided  for  by  law.  A court 
of  original  jurisdiction  for  the  hearing  and 
determination  of  cases  first  instituted  in  such 
court  is  usually  composed  of  only  one  judge, 
who,  with  the  assistance  of  other  necessary  offi- 
cers, and  a jury  when  necessary,  proceeds  to 
hear  and  determine  the  case.  A court  of  ap- 
pellate jurisdiction  is  usually  composed  of 
three  or  more  judges  authorized  to  review  a 
case  on  an  appeal  or  writ  of  error  from  the 
decision  of  a court  of  original  jurisdiction. 
Under  the  judicial  systems  of  some  of  the 
states,  as  under  the  system  of  the  United  States 
(see  Courts,  Federal)  there  are  intermediate 
courts  of  appeal  from  -which  further  appeals 
may  be  taken  under  some  circumstances  to  the 
highest  appellate  court. 


572 


TRIBUTARY  STATES— TRUANCY 


There  are  specific  constitutional  provisions 
as  to  the  method  of  trial  in  criminal  prosecu- 
tions such  as  that  the  trial  must  be  public 
and  speedy  and  as  to  issues  of  fact  by  a jury; 
and  that  the  accused  be  confronted  with  the 
witnesses  against  him,  have  compulsory  process 
for  obtaining  witnesses  in  his  favor  and  have 
the  assistance  of  counsel  for  his  defense  (Const., 
Sixth  Amendment).  A speedy  trial  is,  it  ap- 
pears, one  that  is  brought  on  without  unreason- 
able delay  for  preparation;  and  a public  trial 
is  not  necessarily  one  to  which  every  person 
may  obtain  admission  but  one  sufficiently  free 
and  open  to  allow  the  friends  of  the  accused 
and  others  to  watch  the  proceedings. 

See  Counsel,  Right  to;  Jury,  Grand; 
Jury,  Petit;  Law,  Criminal;  Witnesses. 

References:  People  vs  Kerrigan,  73  Cal.  222; 
Ex  parte  Stanley,  4 Nev.  113;  T.  M.  Cooley, 
Constitutional  Limitations  (7th  ed.,  1903). 

Emlin  McClain. 

TRIBUTARY  STATES.  Although  strictly 
speaking,  a state  must  have  sovereignty  and 
must  be  independent  to  have  status  in  inter- 
national law,  some  political  unities  which  are 
dependent  on  other  unities  are  called  states. 
The  old  idea  of  a tributary  state  was  that  it 
should  pay  tribute  to  the  over  state.  The  pay- 
ment of  tribute  is  still  a condition  in  the  re- 
lations of  some  of  the  so-called  states  of  the 
Turkish  Empire.  The  term,  “tributary  states,” 
is,  however,  used  in  a loose  sense  to  indicate 
any  political  community  which  may  have  been 
a state  in  the  full  sense  at  some  time  and 
which  without  losing  its  identity  in  the  con- 
trol of  internal  affairs  is  brought  under  the 
jurisdiction  of  another  state  as  regards  for- 
eign affairs.  The  term  “tributary  state”  is 
also  used  to  describe  political  unities  which 
have  been  granted  a considerable  degree  of  in- 
dependence by  the  state  within  which  they  may 
be.  Such  states  are  sometimes  called  semi- 
sovereign. See  Barbary  Powers,  Diplomatic 
Relations  with  ; Dependent  States  ; Sov- 
ereignty, Theory  of;  Suzerainty.  References: 
W.  E.  Hall,  Foreign  Powers  of  the  British 
Crcncn  (1895)  ; J.  B.  Moore,  Int.  Arbitrations 
(1898),  V,  5046.  G.  G.  W. 

TROLLEY  LINES.  Surface  railway  lines 
operated  by  electricity  are  frequently  referred 
to  in  ordinary  conversation  as  “trolley  lines.” 
The  phrase  originated  from  one  of  the  strik- 
ing phenomena  of  electric  car  operation  with  an 
overhead  power  distribution  system.  The  trol- 
ley pole  running  on  the  wire,  suspended  over- 
head in  the  middle  of  the  track,  caught  the  at- 
tention of  the  people  and  became  the  distin- 
guishing characteristic  by  which  cars  operated 
by  electricity  were  known.  The  name  “trolley”, 
which  technically  refers  to  the  pole  and  the 
small  wheel  on  the  end  of  it  running  upon  the 
trolley  wire,  become  the  popular  phrase  to 
indicate  a surface  car  propelled  by  electricity 


and  securing  its  power  from  an  overhead  wire. 
See  Interurban  Lines;  Railroads,  Street. 

T.  C.,  Jr. 

TRUANCY.  Definition. — A truant  is  defined 
as  “a  child  who  stays  away  from  school  with- 
out leave.”  With  the  enactment  of  compulsory 
education  laws,  requiring  usually  that  all 
normal  children  between  the  ages  of  7 and  14 
shall  attend  school  regularly  during  the  school 
year,  the  definition  of  truancy  has  been  en- 
larged to  include  not  only  children  who  absent 
themselves  from  school  of  their  own  volition, 
but  also  those  who  are  kept  out  of  school  by 
their  parents.  Truancy  now  means  absence 
from  school  of  all  who  are  legally  required  to 
be  sent  to  school. 

In  some  communities  the  efficacy  of  compul- 
sory school  laws  is  impaired  by  lack  of  suffi- 
cient school  facilities — as  in  New  York  City 
where  many  children  can  be  accommodated  only 
half  time,  and  in  many  rural  districts  where 
the  school  term  attendance  is  only  three  or 
four  months  during  the  year. 

Compulsory  Attendance. — In  1870  compul- 
sory education  laws  applied  to  the  children 
of  three  states  included  three  per  cent  of  the 
existing  child  population  of  the  United  States; 
in  1905  compulsory  education  laws  applied  to 
the  children  of  35  states  included  73  per  cent 
of  the  child  population. 

In  1906  the  Commissioner  of  Education  re- 
ported compulsory  school  laws  in  35  states  as 
follows : 


State 

Age 

Annual  Period 

Arizona  

8 to  14 

24  weeks 

California  ..  

8 to  14 

Full  term 

Colorado  

8 to  16 

Full  term 

Connecticut  

7 to  16 

Full  term 

Delaware  — - 

7 to  14 

20  weeks 

District  of  Colum- 

bia  

8 to  12 

Full  term 

Idaho  - 

8 to  16 

Full  term 

Illinois  — 

7 to  16 

At  least  110  days 

Indiana  

7 to  14 

Full  term 

Iowa  

7 to  14 

16  weeks 

Kansas  

8 to  15 

Full  term 

Maryland  

7 to  14 

8 weeks 

Massachusetts  

7 to  14 

Full  term 

Michigan  

7 to  15 

Full  term 

Minnesota  

8 to  16 

Full  term 

Missouri  ... 

8 to  14 

At  least  i term 

Montana  

8 to  14 

At  least  16  weeks 

Nebraska  

7 to  15 

At  least  12  weeks 

Nevada  

8 to  14 

16  weeks 

New  Hampshire  — 

8 to  14 

Full  term 

New  Jersey  

7 to  14 

Full  term 

New  Mexico  --  — - 

7 to  14 

3 months 

New  York  

8 to  16 

Full  term 

North  Carolina  --- 

8 to  14 

16  weeks 

North  Dakota 

8 to  14 

Full  term 

Ohio  

8 to  14 

Full  term 

Oklahoma  

8 to  16 

3 months 

Oregon  

9 to  14 

Full  term 

Pennsylvania 

8 to  16 

Full  term 

Rhode  Island 

7 to  15 

Full  term 

South  Dakota  

8 to  14 

Full  term 

Utah  

8 to  16 

20  weeks 

Vermont  

8 to  15 

Full  term 

Washington  _ 

8 to  15 

Full  term 

West  Virginia  

8 to  14 

20  weeks 

Wisconsin  

7 to  14 

Full  term 

Wyoming  

7 to  14 

6 months 

(a)  In  Delaware,  Pennsylvania  and  South  Da- 
kota the  time  of  attendance  may  be  reduced  by  the 
school  board. 


573 


TRUANCY 


No  compulsory  education  laws  existed  in 
1905  in  eleven  states,  viz.:  Maryland,  Virginia, 
South  Carolina,  Georgia,  Florida,  Mississippi, 
Alabama,  Tennessee,  Arkansas,  Louisiana  and 
Texas. 

Relation  to  Child  Labor. — When  the  first 
compulsory  education  law  was  enacted  and 
when  the  truant  officer  started  out  to  find  the 
children  who  were  missing  from  the  school- 
room he  discovered  many  of  them  in  the  fac- 
tories, and  was  impressed  with  the  necessity 
for  keeping  the  children  out  of  factories.  An 
active  propaganda  for  child  labor  (see)  legis- 
lation has  been  in  operation  since  1904.  A 
leading  object  of  child  labor  legislation  is  to 
secure  educational  privileges  for  the  children. 
When  the  factory  inspector  began  to  compel 
the  removal  of  children  from  workshops  he  was 
immediately  impressed  with  the  necessity  for 
getting  them  into  school. 

When  the  Illinois  state  legislature  sought  to 
determine  the  condition  under  which  children 
should  be  allowed  to  labor  they  were  logically 
driven  to  require  a “school  and  age  certificate,” 
to  determine  on  the  one  hand  whether  the  child 
had  reached  the  prescribed  age  at  which  he 
might  be  properly  set  to  work,  and  on  the  other 
hand  whether  he  had  secured  the  rudiments  of 
school  instruction  which  would  make  the  min- 
imum requirements  for  ordinary  life. 

Causes. — The  causes  of  truancy  are  to  be 
sought:  (1)  in  the  child,  sometimes  because 
he  is  incorrigible  and  rebels  against  the  work 
and  discipline  of  school,  more  often  because  of 
mental  or  physical  defects  which  result  in  dis- 
couragement and  dislike  of  school;  (2)  in  the 
parent,  who  through  ignorance,  cupidity,  in- 
difference, or  poverty  fails  to  realize  the  ne- 
cessity for  keeping  the  child  in  school;  (3)  in 
the  employer,  who  desires  the  cheapness,  the 
deftness  and  the  helplessness  of  the  child  as  a 
means  of  minimizing  the  cost  of  production; 
(4)  in  the  community,  which  fails  to  safe- 
guard the  interests  of  the  child  by  proper 
legislation,  efficient  truant  officers,  suitable 
clothing  and  proper  parental  schools. 

Prevention. — The  prevention  of  truancy  is 
undertaken  by  various  means.  ( 1 ) By  a 
medical  and  physiological  examination  which 
discovers  mental  and  physical  handicaps  and 


tries  by  remedial  treatment  to  remove  such 
disabilities;  many  children  become  truants  be- 
cause of  deafness,  visual  defects,  adenoid 
growths,  or  other  physical  infirmities  which 
may  readily  be  corrected.  (2)  By  placing  incor- 
rigible truants  in  parental  schools,  or  special 
public  schools  for  special  training.  (3)  By 
increasing  the  adaptation  of  the  school  to 
the  needs  and  interest  of  the  child;  this  is 
accomplished  by  introducing  improved  methods 
of  instruction,  manual  training,  vacation 
schools,  wholesome  recreation,  etc.  “The  child 
will  do  right  if  it  has  right  conditions.  Right 
conditions  demand  that  there  shall  be  sym- 
pathy and  thorough  understanding  of  the  child 
and  its  home  surroundings;  faith,  firmness 
which  expects  and  tolerates  nothing  more  than 
the  child’s  best,  plenty  of  good  work  and  good 
play  which  means  a workshop  and  a play- 
ground. . . . The  immediate  accomplish- 

ment of  the  teacher  is  to  create  a school-life 
so  wholesome  and  joyous  in  spirit  that  every 
child  will  necessarily  respond  to  its  influence. 
. . . Where  such  an  environment  exists  it  is 

impossible  for  truancy  to  exist.”  (4)  Increas- 
ing the  sense  of  responsibility  on  the  parts  of 
the  parents  is  accomplished  on  one  hand  by 
admonitions,  fines,  etc.,  and,  on  the  other  by 
the  sympathetic  influence  of  friendly  probation 
officers,  or  other  social  workers.  (5)  Extend- 
ing to  needy  widows,  or  other  impoverished 
parents  such  assistance  as  will  enable  them 
to  furnish  suitable  care,  food  and  clothing  to 
enable  the  children  to  do  their  school  work 
efficiently  (see  Poverty  and  Poor  Relief). 

Statistics. — The  statistics  of  truancy  are  un- 
reliable for  lack  of  standardization.  They  are 
sometimes  based  on  the  enrollment  of  pupils, 
and  sometimes  upon  the  attendance.  The  ap- 
parent ratio  of  truancy  is  reduced  by  dropping 
from  the  rolls  every  child  who  is  absent  for 
three  or  more  days. 

This  table  shows  that  in  only  one  of  the  10 
cities  named  does  the  attendance  during  three 
fourths  of  the  year  reach  75  per  cent  of  the 
children.  These  facts  indicate  the  necessity 
for  vigorous  efforts  to  secure  a more  constant 
attendance  on  the  part  of  the  children. 

See  Children,  Dependent,  Public  Care  of; 
Detention  Homes;  Education,  Compulsory; 


SCHOOL  ATTENDANCE  BY  FOURTHS  OF  THE  YEAR 


Percentage 

Less  than 
One-fourth 

Less  than 
One-half 

Less  than 
Three-fourths 

More  than 
Three-fourths 

Porto  Rico  

2.0 

9.2 

21.6 

78.4 

Dayton,  Ohio  — 

4.7 

12.1 

23.6 

76.4 

(Hand  Rapids  --  - 

6.7 

14.8 

27.5 

72.5 

Cleveland  - 

8.6 

18.3 

28.0 

72.0 

Springfield,  Ohio - 

6.5 

13.7 

28.2 

71.8 

Syracuse 

6.2 

16.0 

29.7 

70.3 

St.  Louis  - - 

10.1 

20.0 

32.9 

67.1 

Kansas  City,  Mo.  

10.6 

20.8 

35.1 

64.9 

New  Orleans  

7.7 

21.3 

37.4 

62.6 

Columbus,  Ohio  

6.9 

18.1 

38.6 

61.4 

Average  ... 

7.0 

16.4 

30.3 

69.7 

574 


TRUST  COMPANIES— TRUSTEES  AND  REGENTS  OF  EDUCATIONAL  INSTITUTIONS 


schools.  Industrial;  Schools,  Public,  Sys- 
tem and  Problems. 

References:  J.  D.  Sullivan,  Summary  of 
Compulsory  Attendance  and  Child  Labor  Laws 
(1907);  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Education, 
“Compulsory  Attendance  Laws  of  the  U.  S.” 
in  Annual  Report,  1888-1889,  I,  470-531, 
“Compulsory  School  Attendance”  in  ibid, 
1894-1895,  I,  1118-1121,  “Summary  of  Laws 
Relating  to  Compulsory  Education  and  Child 
Labor”  in  ibid,  1899-1900,  I,  85-220,  II,  2596- 
2602,  “Compulsory  Attendance  and  Child  La- 
bor Laws”  in  ibid,  1904,  2269-2276  (1905), 
185-192,  “Compulsory  School  Attendance”  in 
ibid,  1906,  1263-1290;  J.  P.  Haney,  “Manual 
Training  as  a Preventive  of  Truancy”  in  Edu- 
cation, XXVII  (June,  1907),  634-641;  E.  P. 
Seaver,  “Care  of  Truants  and  Ineorrigi- 
bles”  in  Educational  Review,  VII  (May,  1894), 
423-438;  G.  R.  Taylor,  “Chicago  Conference  of 
Truancy,  Causes  and  Prevention”  in  Charities, 
XVII  (Dec.  22,  1906),  536-542;  L.  P.  Ayres, 
“Irregular  Attendance:  a Cause  of  Retarda- 
tion” in  Psychological  Clinic,  III  (Mar.  15, 
1909),  1-8;  B.  Hall,  “Truancy,  a Few  Causes 
and  a Few  Cures”  in  National  Education  Asso., 
Proceedings,  1909,  217-233 ; W.  L.  Bodine, 
“Prosecution  of  Parents  of  Truant  Children” 
in  Juvenile  Court  Record  (Aug.,  1904),  10, 
“Compulsory  Education  Department  of  the 
Chicago  Public  Schools”  in  ibid  (Oct.,  1906), 
24-26.  Hastings  H.  Hart. 

TRUST  COMPANIES.  The  trust  company 
had  its  origin  in  the  establishment  of  com- 
panies to  execute  individual  and  corporate 
trusts;  in  other  words  to  act  as  a chartered 
trustee.  The  first  corporaton  chartered  to 
exercise  fiduciary  powers  was  recognized  in 
New  York  in  1822.  For  many  years  trust 
companies  confined  themselves  to  the  limited 
responsibilities  referred  to,  but  in  the  sixties 
and  seventies  they  began  to  enlarge  their  func- 
tions, particularly  in  the  field  of  banking.  In 
some  states  indeed  trust  companies  are  little 
else  than  banking  institutions.  In  the  execu- 
tion of  indivdual  trusts  the  trust  company 
acts  as  executor  and  administrator  of  estates 
of  decedents,  cares  for  property  of  wards  and 
minors,  may  act  as  receiver  for  an  insolvent 
business,  and  often  is  made  a depository  for 
funds  under  court  adjudication;  in  fact  it 
performs  any  of  the  varied  duties  imposed 
upon  an  individual  trustee. 

In  the  execution  of  corporate  trusts  its  oper- 
ations extend  over  a wider  scope.  It  holds  cor- 
porate mortgages;  acts  as  a representative  of 
bondholders,  taking  charge  of  sinking  funds, 
if  such  are  required  in  the  issue  of  bonds; 
serves  as  a registration  agent  of  corporations 
in  authenticating  certificates  of  stocks  or 
bonds;  pays  out  dividend  and  interest  pay- 
ments on  securities ; acts  as  transfer  agent  of 
certificates  of  securities;  often  manages  under- 
writing plans;  and,  in  case  of  reorganization 


of  a corporation,  appears  as  representative  of 
the  various  classes  of  security  holders.  The 
exercise  of  these  functions  has  introduced  much 
stability  into  corporate  enterprise.  Not  only 
do  these  institutions  furnish  an  agency  for 
providing  capital,  but  they  give  confidence  in 
the  genuineness  of  certificates  of  securities 
which  play  so  large  a part  in  modern  invest- 
ment, and  offer  the  holders  protection  and  rep- 
resentation which  a single  individual  often 
could  not  exercise  effectively  save  at  great  ex- 
pense. 

In  the  evolution  of  the  trust  company  into 
its  present  form  an  early  step  was  the  accept- 
ance of  individual  time  deposits,  on  which  in- 
terest was  paid.  This  practice  was  a public 
convenience,  inasmuch  as  national  banks  did 
not  seek  for  time  and  interest-bearing  deposits. 
The  range  of  investment,  not  being  restricted 
as  in  the  case  of  a national  bank,  made  it 
possible  for  trust  companies  to  enlarge  their 
operations  over  fields  in  which  banking  insti- 
tutions incorporated  under  federal  charters 
could  not  compete.  The  business  became  most 
profitable,  and  as  a consequence  many  national 
banks  during  the  past  ten  years  have  been  con- 
verted into  trust  companies. 

See  Banking  Methods;  Banks  and  Bank- 
ing, State;  Safe  Deposit  Companies. 

References:  F.  B.  Kirkbride  and  J.  E.  Ster- 
rett,  Modern  Trust  Company  (1905)  ; G.  Cator, 
Trust  Companies  in  the  U.  S.  ( 1902 ) ; U.  S. 
Mortgage  and  Trust  Company  of  New  York, 
“Trust  Companies  of  the  U.  S.”  in  Annual  of 
Statistics.  Davis  R.  Dewey. 

TRUSTEES  AND  REGENTS  OF  STATE 
EDUCATIONAL  INSTITUTIONS.  The  gov- 
erning body  of  state  educational  institutions 
is  usually  called  a board  of  trustees  or  a board 
of  regents.  The  former  term  is  used  for  boards 
of  31  state  colleges  and  universities  and  the 
latter  for  21.  Other  names  used  are  board  of 
control  in  2 states,  state  board  of  education 
for  9 institutions,  board  of  supervisors  (La.), 
board  of  curators  (Mo.),  regents  of  education 
(3  institutions  in  S.  D.),  board  of  visitors 
(Va. ),  and  state  board  of  agriculture  for  2 
institutions.  The  normal  schools  and  special 
schools  are  commonly  governed  by  boards  of 
trustees. 

The  number  of  members  composing  these 
boards  vary  from  5 in  7 states,  to  23  in  Cali- 
fornia, 32  in  Delaware  and  Pennsylvania,  and 
82  for  the  University  of  North  Carolina.  In 
many  states  certain  state  officers  are  members 
ex  officio.  The  majority  are  appointed  by  the 
governor  with  the  consent  of  the  state  senate; 
5 states  elect  the  boards  of  regents  at  general 
election,  and  4 elect  by  the  legislatures.  Cer- 
tain boards  in  Maryland,  Delaware,  Pennsyl- 
vania, New  York,  and  Connecticut  have  com- 
plex membership. 

In  South  Dakota,  Montana,  Iowa,  Mississ- 
ippi, Oklahoma,  Florida,  Kansas,  and  West 


575 


TRUSTEES,  TOWNSHIP— TRUSTS 


Virginia  (one  for  finance  and  one  for  educa- 
tional policy),  one  central  board  has  general 
supervision  and  control  of  all  state  higher  edu- 
cational institutions,  and  in  several  cases 
special  and  charitable  schools  also. 

As  a rule  the  members  of  these  boards  receive 
no  salary  other  than  a small  per  diem  pay- 
ment and  travelling  expenses,  the  office  being 
looked  upon  as  one  of  distinction  and  oppor- 
tunity for  public  service  and  for  this  reason 
attractive. 

The  boards  are  generally  corporate  bodies 
with  full  corporate  powers,  and  with  authority 
to  manage  all  properties  and  financial  busi- 
ness of  their  institutions,  to  make  appoint- 
ments and  removals  of  instructional  and  ad- 
ministrative officers,  and  to  prescribe  rules  and 
regulations  regarding  curricula,  degrees, 
schools,  departments,  discipline,  and  special 
activities  or  trusts. 

See  Education  as  a Function  of  Govern- 
ment; Educational  Administration;  State 
Universities.  K.  C.  Babcock. 


TRUSTEES,  TOWNSHIP.  The  trustee  is  an 
officer  acting  in  connection  with  other  town- 
ship officers  as  a local  board.  Three 
trustees  may  be  named  when  they  are  required 
to  perform  the  duties  of  a township  board. 
Again  there  may  be  trustees  for  the  school 
district,  chosen  at  the  same  time  as  other 
township  officers.  Trustees  or  managers  as  a 
board  have  a different  legal  meaning  from  that 
of  the  single  trustee  as  representing  the  lead- 
ing officer  in  the  township.  The  latter  may  per- 
form the  duties  described  under  the  title  of 
supervisor  as  well  as  form  part  of  the  township 
board.  He  may  be  ex  officio  trustee,  clerk,  and 
treasurer  of  the  school  township.  He  may 
also  provide  for  and  act  as  inspector  of  elec- 
tions and  perform  the  duties  of  a township 
treasurer.  See  Selectmen  ; Town-County 
System;  Towns  and  Townships.  References: 
G.  E.  Howard,  Local  Constitutional  History 
(1889),  I,  169,  171;  J.  A.  Fairlie,  Local  Gov- 
ernment (1906),  175,  176;  statute  laws  of  the 
central  western  states.  B.  F.  S. 


TRUSTS 


Definition. — The  trust  may  be  defined  as 
follows:  a company  organized  for  the  purpose 
of  owning  the  stocks  and  bonds  of  manufactur- 
ing, mining  and  trading  companies,  in  exchange 
for  which  its  own  stocks  and  bonds  are  issued, 
and  by  whose  acquisition  the  holding  company 
acquires  control  of  a sufficient  number  of  con- 
cerns in  its  particular  line  of  business  to  ex- 
ercise a dominating  influence  upon  prices  by 
its  power  to  regulate  supply.  This  definition 
takes  no  account  of  holding  companies  organ- 
ized to  effect  consolidations  of  so-called  common 
carriers,  such  as  railroads,  telegraph  and  tele- 
phone lines,  or  of  holding  companies  for  the 
consolidation  of  public  service  monopolies,  such 
as  street  railway  and  gas  companies.  By  com- 
mon usage,  the  term  “trusts”  has  been  limited 
to  apply  only  to  those  holding  companies  whose 
primary  object  was  to  restrict  and,  in  some 
cases,  largely  abolish,  competition  among  the 
companies  whose  securities  they  acquire  in 
the  field  of  manufacturing,  trading  and  min- 
ing. The  most  important  of  these  companies, 
the  amount  of  their  capitalization,  and  the 
amounts  distributed  by  them  in  interest  and 
dividends  during  the  last  fiscal  year,  appear  in 
the  table  on  the  following  pages. 

Economics. — The  financial  basis  of  the  trust 
was  the  capitalization  of  the  real  or  supposed 
profits  to  result  from  the  elimination  or  re- 
striction of  competition,  understanding  by 
this  term,  the  sale  of  commodities  by  two  or 
more  independent  producers  or  dealers  in  the 
same  market.  The  principal  “economies” 
claimed  for  the  combinations  are  as  follows: 

( 1 ) steadying  of  prices  by  restricting  supply ; 

(2)  greater  facility  in  dealing  with  labor  or- 


ganizations; (3)  lower  prices  on  materials 
purchased  in  large  quantities;  (4)  centraliza- 
tion of  offices  and  dismissal  of  unnecessary 
officials  and  employees;  (5)  saving  in  freight 
rates  by  shipping  from  the  plant  nearest  the 
consumer;  (6)  financial  advantages  in  provid- 
ing new  capital  by  the  sale  of  the  securities  of 
a large  company,  and  in  lower  rates  of  inter- 
est on  bank  loans;  (7)  improvements  in  ma- 
chines and  processes,  and  reduction  in  costs 
through  supervision  by  a central  organization. 

Each  of  these  “economies”  realized  by  uniting 
a large  number  of  plants  manufacturing,  for 
example,  locomotives  or  harvesting  machinery, 
would  represent  an  increase  in  the  total  profits 
of  all  the  plants  combined  into  the  trust.  The 
possibility  of  the  capitalization  of  these  profits 
of  combination  made  it  attractive  to  promoters 
and  bankers  to  buy  up  a large  number  of 
plants,  turn  them  over  to  a central  company, 
selling  the  securities  of  this  company  to  obtain 
the  money  required  to  finance  the  undertaking, 
or  purchasing  the  plants  with  securities  instead 
of  money,  and  leaving  a larger  or  smaller 
amount  of  these  securities  in  the  hands  of  those 
instrumental  in  effecting  the  combination. 

Suppose,  for  example,  that  a promoter  de- 
sired to  combine  thirty  iron  foundries  into  a 
trust.  The  average  value  of  the  plants,  when 
engaged  in  competing  with  each  other,  may  be 
$500,000.  This  figure  is  the  capitalization  of 
their  average  earnings — $50,000  on  a ten  per 
cent  basis.  By  combining  all  these  plants 
under  one  ownership,  competition  is  eliminat- 
ed, and  the  average  value  of  each  plant,  as  a 
result  of  the  economies  of  combination,  may  be 
increased  from  $500,000  to  $750,000.  The  com- 


576 


TRUSTS 


SECURITIES  OUTSTANDING  AND  DIVIDENDS  OF  PRINCIPAL  TRUSTS 


Company 

Allis-Chalmers  Manufacturing  Co... 

.Amalgamated  Copper  Co.  

American  Agricultural  Chemical  Co. 

American  Beet  Sugar  Co.  

American  Brake  Shoe  & Foundry  Co. 

American  Can  Co.  

American  Car  & Foundry  Co.  

American  Chicle  Co.  

American  Cotton  Oil  Co.  

American  Hide  & Leather  Co.  

American  Ice  Securities  Co.  

American  Linseed  Co.  

American  Locomotive  Co.  

American  Malt  Corporation  

American  Smelting  & Refining  Co.  — 

American  Sugar  Refining  Co.  

American  Thread  Co.  

American  Woolen  Co.  

American  Writing  Paper  Co.  

Associated  Merchants  Co.  

Bethlehem  Steel  Corporation  

Central  Leather  Co.. 

Consolidation  Coal  Co.  

Corn  Products  Refining  Co.  


Securities 
Outstanding 
February  22,  1913 

Amount 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Bonds 

$26,000,000 

16.050.000 

11.148.000 

Common  Stock 

2 Year  Notes 

153,887,900 

12,500,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Bonds 

18,330,900 

27,112,700 

10,332,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 

15,000,000 

5,000,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Bonds 

4,600,000 

5,000,000 

755,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Bonds 

41,233,300 

41,233,300 

14,000,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 

30,000,000 

30,000,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 

6,000,000 

3,000,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Bonds 

20,237,100 

10,198,600 

10,000,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Bonds 

12,548,300 

5,743,000 

Common  Stock 
Bonds 

19,057,000 

7,720,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 

16,750,000 

16,750,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Notes 

25,000,000 

25,000,000 

8,800,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Bonds 

5,745,872 

8,729,910 

2,834,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 

65.000. 000 

50.000. 000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 

45,000,000 

45,000,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Bonds 

6,000,000 

4,890,475 

6,000,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Notes 

20,000,000 

40,000,000 

4,000,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Notes 

9,500,000 

12.500.000 

13.620.000 

Common  Stock 

1st  Preferred  Stock 
2d  Preferred  Stock 

7.599.600 

4.525.600 
5,124,800 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Bonds 

14.862.000 

14.908.000 

30.700.000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Bonds 

39,701,030 

33,299,050 

39,444,150 

Common  Stock 
Bonds 

25,000,000 

31,057,000 

Common  Stock 
Preferred  Stock 
Bonds 

49,777,300 

29,826,900 

12,378,000 

Rate 

Per- 

cent 

Distribution  in 
Dividends  or 
Interest  in  Fiscal 
Year  Ending  in  1912 

None 

None 

— 

None 

2i 

3,847,198 

5 

625,000 

2 

353,220 

6 

1,209,362 

5 

516,600 

5 

750,000 

6 

300,000 

7 

252,000 

7 

280,000 

5 

38,271 

5 

None 

51 

2,370,915 

Not  Issued 

2 

600,000 

7 

2,100,000 

18 

1,180,000 

6 

180,000 

None 

6 

611,916 

4 1 and  5 

475,000 

None 

None 

6 

354,880 

None 

5 and  6 

332,414 

None 

— 

None 

None 

7 

1,750,000 

5 

430,000 

None 

__ 

349,196 

6 

171,969 

4 

2,600,000 

7 

3,500,000 

7 

6,299,958 

7 

6,299,958 

5.4 

324,000 

5 

244,524 

4 

240,000 

None 

7 

2,800,000 

4i 

180,000 

None 

2 

249,610 

5 

681,000 

9 

681,010 

6 

273,520 

7 

358,621 

None 

None 

5 and  6 

1,748,761 

None 

7 

2,330,930 

5 and  6 

2,009,467 

6 

1,358,865 

4J,5and6 

974,082 

None 

5 

1,500,000 

5 

356,013 

577 


TKUSTS 

SECURITIES  OUTSTANDING  AND  DIVIDENDS  OF  PRINCIPAL  TRUSTS — ( Continued) 


Company 

Securities 
Outstanding 
February  22,  1913 

Amount 

Rate 

Per 

Cent 

Distribution  in 
Dividends  or 
Interest  in  Fiscal 
Year  Ending  in  1912 

Crucible  Steel  Co.  

Common  Stock 

24,578,400 

None 

Preferred  Stock 

25,000,000 

7 

1,750,000 

Bonds 

9,500,000 

5 

173,368 

Distillers’  Securities  Corporation  ... 

Common  Stock 

$30,809,180 

2 

687,775 

Bonds 

15,568,270 

5 and  6 

793,046 

International  Mercantile  Marine  Co. 

Common  Stock 

49,931,735 

None 

Preferred  Stock 

51,730,971 

None 

Bonds 

77,586,155 

4|  and  5 

3,619,881  1 

International  Paper  Co.  

Common  Stock 

17,442,800 

None 

Preferred  Stock 

22,406,700 

2 

448,134 

Bonds 

13,900,000 

5 and  6 

909,066 

International  Salt  Co.  

Common  Stock 

18,228,000 

None 

Bonds 

6,329,900 

5 

351,745 

International  Steam  Pump  Co.  

Common  Stock 

17,762,500 

None 

Preferred  Stock 

11,350,000 

6 

681,000 

Bonds 

9,784,000 

5 

489,200 

National  Biscuit  Co.  

Common  Stock 

29,236,000 

7 

2,046,520 

Preferred  Stock 

24,804,500 

7 

1,736,315 

National  Enameling  and  Stamping  Co. 

Common  Stock  ' 

15,591,800 

None 

Preferred  Stock 

8,546,600 

7 

598,262 

Bonds 

3,159,000 

5 

178,167 

National  Lead  Co.  

Common  Stock 

20,655,400 

3 

619.662 

Preferred  Stock 

24,367,600 

7 

1,705,732 

Pittsburgh  Coal  Co.  

Common  Stock 

31,928,900 

None 

Preferred  Stock 

27,071,800 

5 

1,353,590 

Bonds 

22,605,120 

5 

876,024 

Republic  Iron  & Steel  Co.  

Common  Stock 

27,191,000 

None 

Preferred  Stock 

25,000,000 

7 

1,669,796 

Bonds  and  Notes 

17,576,000 

5 

467,295 

United  States  Rubber  Co.  

Common  Stock 

36,000,000 

3 

750,000 

First  I’fd.  Stock 

56,619,400 

8 

3,200,000 

Second  Pfd.  Stock 

1,641,200 

6 

600,000 

Bonds 

27,000,000 

\\  and  6 

1,485,000 

United  States  Steel  Corporation 

Common  Stock 

508.302,500 

5 

25,415,125 

Preferred  Stock 

360,281,100 

7 

25,219,677 

First  Collateral 

1 

Trust  Bonds 

266,238,000 

5 

Second  Collateral 

22,817,471 

Trust  Bonds 

188,102,000 

5 

J 

Virginia-Carolina  Chemical  Co.  

Common  Stock 

27,984,400 

3 

839,532 

Preferred  Stock 

20,000,000 

8 

1,560,000 

Bonds 

13,800,000 

5 

590,000 

1 Fiscal  year  ending  in  1911. 


pany  which  buys  these  plants  can  issue  $22,- 
500,000  of  stock,  which  may  be  expected  to  pay 
ten  per  cent  dividends  annually,  and  this  stock 
can  be  sold  for  sufficient  money  to  purchase 
the  plants,  and  start  the  company  as  a going 
concern,  leaving  a considerable  amount  of  stock, 
moreover,  in  the  bands  of  the  promoter  and  his 
associates,  as  their  profit.  Nearly  every  one  of 
the  trusts  were  organized  in  this  manner. 

Most  of  the  trusts  issued  two  kinds  of  stock, 
preferred  stock  usually  calling  for  seven  per 
cent  dividends,  supposed  to  represent  the  value 
of  the  constituent  concerns  before  they  entered 
the  combination,  and  common  stock,  supposed 
to  represent  the  stock  value  of  the  economies 
of  combination.  The  trusts  have,  for  the  most 
part,  regularly  paid  dividends  on  their  pre- 
ferred stocks.  The  common  stocks  have,  how- 
ever, proven  to  be  much  less  valuable. 


An  examination  of  this  table  shows  that 
most  of  the  trusts  have  been  organized  in  man- 
ufacturing industries,  and  as  between  manu- 
facturing industries,  mainly  in  the  iron  and 
steel  and  allied  industries,  industries  engaged 
in  producing  the  machinery  and  materials  of 
further  production  which  supply  the  wants  of 
the  individual  consumer. 

Voting  Trusts. — Nearly  all  these  trusts  have 
been  organized  since  1898  under  the  laws  of  the 
state  of  New  Jersey.  The  form  of  organization 
had,  however,  been  developed  before  that  time 
by  a transformation  of  the  voting  trust  into 
the  holding  company.  The  voting  trust,  as  a 
means  of  controlling  competition,  dates  back 
to  1882  when  a trust  agreement  was  entered 
into  among  the  controlling  interests  of  forty 
corporations  and  limited  partnerships  engaged 
in  the  various  branches  of  the  oil  industry,  and 


578 


TRUSTS 


largely  controlled  by  the  same  persons,  and 
nine  trustees.  This  agreement  provided  for  the 
organization  of  four  Standard  Oil  companies 
whose  stocks  were:  (1)  to  be  held  by  the 
trustees  who  were  further  authorized  to  create 
similar  corporations  under  the  laws  of  other 
states;  (2)  all  property  and  assets  of  corpora- 
tions and  limited  partnerships  in  which  the 
Standard  Oil  trustees  held  all  the  stock  were 
to  be  transferred  to  the  Standard  Oil  Company 
of  the  particular  state  where  such  property 
was  situated;  (3)  that  the  stockholders  of 
the  forty  corporations  should  assign  their  stock 
in  the  various  corporations  and  limited  part- 
nerships to  the  trustees  and  their  successors, 
and  the  trustees  were  to  issue  in  exchange 
therefor  trust  certificates  equal  to  the  ap- 
praised value  of  such  stocks  and  interests;  (4) 
the  trustees  were  to  be  elected  by  the  trust 
certificate  holders,  and  it  was  their  duty  to 
exercise  general  supervision  over  the  affairs 
of  the  various  companies,  and  to  elect,  as  stock- 
holders of  these  companies,  faithful  and  com- 
petent men  as  directors  and  officers;  (5)  it 
was  finally  provided  that  the  trust  should  con- 
tinue during  the  lives  of  the  survivors  and 
the  survivor  of  the  trustees  in  this  agreement, 
and  for  twenty-one  years  thereafter,  but  pro- 
vision was  made  for  dissolution  after  ten  years, 
if  desired. 

This  method  of  consolidation  was  imitated 
in  the  sugar  refining  industry,  the  lead  refining 
industry,  the  industry  of  cottonseed  oil  and 
various  others.  By  this  form  of  organization, 
agreement  between  manufacturers  as  to  prices 
and  output,  the  primary  object  of  the  organiza- 
tion, was  accomplished  by  placing  the  control 
of  the  stocks  of  the  several  corporations  in- 
cluded in  the  trust  in  the  hands  of  a board 
of  trustees  who  directed  the  management  of 
these  companies  and  secured  a uniform  policy. 
The  trust  certificates  were  listed  on  the  va- 
rious stock  exchanges,  and  were  dealt  in  as 
ordinary  shares  of  stock.  They  entitled  their 
holders  to  receive  proportionate  parts  of  any 
dividend  which  might  be  declared  by  the  com- 
panies whose  stocks  they  represented,  and  paid 
to  the  trustees  for  redistribution  to  the  holders 
of  the  trust  certificates. 

Attack  on  Voting  Trusts. — In  1890,  owing  to 
the  agitation  against  monopolies  which  had 
grown  up  in  all  parts  of  the  United  States, 
efforts  were  made  to  break  up  and  dissolve 
these  so-called  “permanent  pools.”  In  1890, 
the  attorney  general  of  New  York  brought 
suit  against  the  North  River  Sugar  Refining 
Company,  one  of  the  constituent  companies  of 
the  sugar  trust,  under  the  common  law  which 
prohibits  monopolies  and  restraint  of  trade. 
The  case  was  decided  against  the  company  on 
the  ground  that  the  North  River  Sugar  Refin- 
ing Company  was  a combination: 

The  tendency  of  which  is  to  prevent  competition 
in  its  broad  and  general  sense  and  to  control,  and 
thus,  at  will,  enhance  prices  to  the  detriment  of 


the  public.  . . . But  because  the  corporation, 
entering  the  trust,  had  exceeded  the  powers  of  its 
charter,  the  defendant  had  disabled  itself  from 
exercising  its  functions  and  employing  its  franchise 
as  it  was  intended  it  should  by  the  act  under  which 
it  was  incorporated,  and  had,  by  the  action  which 
was  taken,  placed  itself  in  complete  subordination 
to  another  and  different  organization  to  be  used  for 
an  unlawful  purpose,  detrimental  and  injurious  to 
the  public.  This  was  a subversion  of  the  object 
for  which  the  company  was  created,  and  it  au- 
thorized the  Attorney  General  to  maintain  and 
prosecute  this  action  to  vacate  and  annul  its  char- 
ter. 

The  Standard  Oil  Trust  was  also  declared 
illegal  on  similar  grounds  by  the  Supreme 
Court  of  Ohio  in  1892.  It  was  at  this  time 
clearly  perceived  that  the  legal  position  of 
the  trust  was  untenable,  and  that,  if  the  rec- 
ognized pecuniary  advantages  of  restricting 
competition  by  consolidation  were  to  be  con- 
tinued, some  other  form  of  organization  must 
be  devised. 

Holding  Company. — The  method  adopted  was 
the  holding  company.  The  corporation  law 
of  New  Jersey  had  been  amended  in  1889  to 
authorize  the  chartering  of  a corporation  for 
the  general  purpose  of  owning  the  stocks  or 
property  of  other  corporations.  In  view  of 
this  amendment,  it  was  seen  that  the  sub- 
stantive objects  of  the  trusts  could  be  at- 
tained if  a new  corporation  was  formed  with 
power  to  purchase  either  for  cash  or  with  its 
own  stock,  the  stocks  of  the  several  companies 
which  were  included  in  the  trust,  and  which 
it  was  desirable  to  keep  united  under  some 
form  of  permanent  control.  The  changes  which 
were  made  in  the  organization  of  the  combina- 
tion were  as  follows:  (1)  to  substitute  for 
the  certificates  of  the  old  trust  the  shares  of 
the  new  corporation;  (2)  to  change  the  rela- 
tion of  trustee  and  trust  into  the  relation 
of  owner  and  property;  and  (3)  to  substitute 
for  a board  of  trustees  a board  of  directors. 
The  result  was  a single  corporation  whose  as- 
sets were  securities  of  other  corporations,  each 
one  in  the  full  possession  of  its  corporate  fac- 
ulties and  exercising  all  of  its  lawful  corpo- 
rate activities;  but  the  affairs  of  all  placed 
under  the  permanent  direction  of  the  company 
owning  a controlling  interest  in  the  stock  of 
each.  Competition  among  these  companies 
would  thus  be  prevented. 

Difficulty  of  Contracting  Holding  Companies. 
— On  the  model  furnished  by  the  American 
Sugar  Refining  Company,  a large  number  of 
combinations  were  formed  during  the  period 
from  1898  to  1902,  when  financial  conditions 
were  extraordinarily  favorable  for  the  floating 
of  securities.  It  was  generally  believed  by 
those  interested  in  forming  these  combinations 
that  no  matter  what  the  laws  of  a particular 
state  might  be  in  reference  to  combinations  in 
restraint  of  trade,  that  state  could  not  pro- 
hibit a New  Jersey  corporation  from  owning, 
as  an  investor,  the  stocks  of  one  or  more  of  its 
domestic  corporations,  and  exercising  all  the 
rights  of  ownership.  It  is  true  that  the  deci- 
sion in  the  North  River  Sugar  Refining  case, 


579 


TRUSTS 


decided  in  1890,  which  held  that  a corporation 
which  places  itself  in  subordination  to  another 
and  different  organization  to  be  used  for  an 
unlawful  purpose  has  disabled  itself  from 
exercising  its  functions,  would  be  equally  appli- 
cable to  a company  whose  stock  was  owned  by 
a foreign  corporation  as  to  a company  whose 
stock  had  been  placed  in  the  control  of  trustees. 
If  the  individual  states  desired  to  do  so,  they 
could  undoubtedly  have  broken  up  these  large 
combinations  in  the  manner  indicated.  The 
success  of  Missouri  in  excluding  from  her 
boundaries  certain  oil  companies  on  grounds 
generally  similar  to  those  indicated,  shows 
that  this  method  could  have  been  widely  em- 
ployed. It  has  not,  however,  been  utilized  save 
in  a few  cases,  and,  broadly  speaking,  the  con- 
fidence of  those  who  originated  the  device  of 
the  foreign  holding  company  as  a means  of  re- 
stricting competition  has  been  justified,  so  far 
as  concerns  any  interference  from  the  individ- 
ual state. 

Sherman  Anti-Trust  Act. — As  for  the  Fed- 
eral law,  passed  in  1890,  forbidding  all  con- 
tracts in  restraint  of  trade  and  commerce,  it 
was  believed  that  this  did  not  apply  to  com- 
binations of  manufacturing  companies  and  that 
the  legal  position  of  the  holding  company  had 
been  finally  established  by  the  United  States 
Supreme  Court  in  the  E.  C.  Knight  case,  de- 
cided January  21,  1895  (156  V.  8.  1).  This 
case  arose  out  of  an  attempt  to  restrain  the 
purchase  by  the  American  Sugar  Refining  Com- 
pany of  four  refineries  in  Philadelphia  on  the 
ground  that  the  purchase  constituted  a re- 
straint of  trade  and  commerce  and  was  con- 
trary to  the  terms  of  the  Sherman  Act.  The 
court,  by  a majority  vote,  held  that  the  Sher- 
man Act  applied  only  to  interstate  commerce 
and  that  “the  fact  that  an  article  is  manufac- 
tured for  export  to  another  state  does  not  of 
itself  make  it  an  article  of  interstate  com- 
merce.” Were  the  act  to  be  more  liberally  con- 
strued, in  the  opinion  of  the  court,  the  effect 
would  be  to  give  the  Federal  Government  con- 
trol of  nearly  all  the  business  of  the  state,  a 
right  which  it  was  never  intended  that  it 
should  possess. 

Successful  Prosecutions. — Here  the  matter 
rested  until  1902,  when  an  attack  was  made 
upon  the  holding  company  principle  as  applied 
to  the  Northern  Securities  Company,  a New 
Jersey  corporation,  which  had  purchased,  with 
its  stocks,  a controlling  interest  in  the  stocks 
of  the  Great  Northern  and  Northern  Pacific 
Railroad  Companies  (Northern  Securities  Case 
vs.  U.  S.,  193  U.  8.  197  ) . The  sweeping  victory 
won  by  the  courts  in  this  case  emboldened  the 
Department  of  Justice  to  proceed  further 
against  the  combinations;  and  after  the  in- 
auguration of  President  Roosevelt  in  1905,  and 
the  institution  of  the  Bureau  of  Corporations, 
greater  activity  was  manifested  in  the  investi- 
gation and  prosecution  of  the  trusts.  Under 
the  Roosevelt  administration  proceedings  were 


begun  against  the  Standard  Oil  Company  of 
New  Jersey,  E.  I.  DuPont  de  Nemours  Powder 
Company  of  New  Jersey  (May  19,  1903),  the 
American  Sugar  Refining  Company  of  New 
Jersey  (incorporated  1891),  and  the  American 
Tobacco  Company  of  New  Jersey  (1904).  Of 
these  suits,  the  Standard  Oil  Company  and  the 
American  Tobacco  Company  cases  (see)  were, 
1912,  decided  by  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court  against  the  companies  which  were 
ordered  “to  submit  to  the  Circuit  Court  some 
plan  or  method  of  dissolving  the  combinations 
and  recreating  out  of  the  elements  now  com- 
posing it,  a new  condition  which  shall  be 
honestly  in  harmony  with,  and  not  repugnant 
to,  the  law.”  The  decision  in  the  Standard  Oil 
and  American  Tobacco  cases  took  for  granted 
that  companies  engaged  in  marketing  their 
products  in  all  parts  of  the  United  States  were 
engaged  in  interstate  commerce,  paying  no  at- 
tention to  the  technicality  upon  which  the  de- 
cision of  1895  was  founded. 

It  is  impossible  to  state  in  advance  of 
further  decisions  by  the  Supreme  Court  whether 
every  one  or  a large  number  of  the  combi- 
nations enumerated  above  are  prohibited  by  the 
Sherman  Anti-Trust  Act.  We  are,  however, 
safe  in  concluding  that  in  so  far  as  any  one 
of  these  combinations  was  organized  to  abolish 
or  restrain  competition,  the  success  of  which 
is  evidenced  by  the  dominating  position  it 
has  secured  in  the  trade,  and  its  ability  to 
maintain  prices,  and  to  impose  its  laws  upon 
its  competitors  and  upon  the  consumer,  it  will 
come  within  the  prohibition  of  the  act  as 
recently  construed  by  the  Supreme  Court. 
Whether  the  campaign  against  the  trusts  be 
continued  to  the  point  of  exterminating  a large 
number  of  them,  it  is  certain  that  these  de- 
cisions will  have  a marked  effect  in  checking 
the  growth  in  size  of  these  great  aggregations 
of  capital,  and  in  profoundly  modifying  their 
policy  in  the  direction  of  greater  liberality 
toward  competitors  and  consumers. 

See  Addystone  Pipe  Case;  Capital  and 
Capitalization;  Courts,  Federal  Jurisdic- 
tion over;  Corporation  Charters;  Directors 
of  Corporations,  Status  of;  Due  Process  of 
Law;  Fourteenth  Amendment;  Franchises, 
Corporation,  Financial  Aspects  of;  Fran- 
chises, Corporation,  Legal  Aspects  of; 
Holding  Corporations;  Law,  Common;  Loan 
Association  vs.  Topeka  ; Monopolies  ; North- 
ern Securities  Case;  Patents;  Publicity  of 
Corporate  Accounts;  Public  Service  Corpo- 
rations; Quasi-Public  Corporations;  Rea- 
sonableness in  Restraint  of  Trade;  Sher- 
man Anti -Trust  Act;  Vested  Rights,  Pro- 
tection of;  Wealth,  National. 

References:  J.  W.  Jenks,  Trust  Problem 
(1900);  E.  S.  Meade,  Trust  Finance  (1903); 
W.  Z.  Ripley,  Trusts,  Pools  and  Combinations 
(1905);  John  Moody,  Truth  about  the  Trusts 
(1904)  ; E.  L.  Von  Halle.  Trusts  or  Industrial 
Combinations  and  Coalitions  in  the  U.  8. 


580 


TUBERCULOSIS,  CARE  AND  REGULATION  OF 


( 1895 ) ; H.  C.  Adams,  “Trusts”  in  Am.  Econ. 
Assoc.  Quart.,  V (1904),  Ser.  3,  9;  R.  T.  Ely, 
Monopolies  & Trusts  (1900),  273;  G.  L.  Bolen, 
Plain  Facts  as  to  the  Trusts  and  the  Tariff 
(1903),  ehs.  i-ix;  W.  M.  Collier,  Trusts 
(1900);  G.  H.  Montague,  Trusts  of  Today 
(1904);  F.  Walker,  “Causes  of  Trusts  and 
Some  Remedies,”  in  Am.  Econ.  Assoc.  Quart., 
II  (1910),  Ser.  3,  290-320;  A.  M.  Law,  Am. 
Trusts  (1887),  472;  E.  W.  Bemis,  “Trust  Prob- 
lem: Its  Real  Nature”  in  Forum,  XXVIII 

(Dec.,  1899),  218;  Industrial  Commission,  Re- 
port on  Trusts  and  Combinations  (1900-1901)  ; 
J.  R.  Dos  Passos,  Commercial  Trusts  (2d  ed., 
1905 ) , Growth  and  Rights  of  Aggregated  Capi- 
tal (1901)  ; W.  W.  Cook,  Treatise  on  Stocks 
and  Stockholders,  Bonds,  Mortgages  and  Gen- 
eral Corporation  Law  (3d  ed.,  1894),  642- 
672;  F.  H.  Giddings,  Democracy  and  Empire 
(1900),  ch.  vii;  J.  B.  Clark,  Control  of  Trusts 
(1901);  A.  B.  Nettleton,  Trusts  or  Compe- 
tition (1900);  Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  36-39, 
ibid,  1911,  57-62,  ibid,  1912,  36-39;  bibliog- 
raphy in  A.  B.  Hart  Manual  (1908). 

Edward  S.  Meade. 

TUBERCULOSIS,  CARE  AND  REGULA- 
TION OF.  It  would  be  quite  impracticable 
for  our  government  to  care  for  the  enormous 
number  of  persons  afflicted  with  tuberculosis. 
The  deaths  alone  from  this  disease  number 
160,000  each  year  in  this  country.  Although 
it  manifestly  is  not  the  function  of  the  Federal 
Government  to  assume  the  direct  care  of  those 
suffering  with  the  disease  it  can  be  helpful  in 
this  problem  by  the  establishment  of  model  in- 
stitutions to  care  for  afflicted  employees,  and 
by  the  employment  of  model  methods  to  pre- 
vent the  spread  of  the  infection  among  its  em- 
ployees. The  government  can  furthermore  be 
helpful  by  stimulating  state  and  local  au- 
thorities to  action,  by  coordinating  efforts 
and  encouraging  uniformity,  by  conducting 
scientific  research  and  by  education.  If  tuber- 
culosis were  added  to  the  interstate  quaran- 
tine regulations  the  Government  could  then 
exercise  a sanitary  control  over  interstate 
railroads  and  promote  the  sanitation  of  steam- 
boat travel.  Amendments  to  the  interstate 
quarantine  regulations,  promulgated  by  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  October  30  and  De- 
cember 9,  1912,  prohibit  the  use  of  the  com- 
mon drinking  cup  and  the  roller  towel  upon 
common  carriers,  or  in  depots,  waiting  rooms, 
or  other  places  used  by  passengers  travelling 
from  one  state  or  territory  to  another.  This 
marks  a distinct  advance  of  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment in  improving  the  cleanliness  and  gen- 
eral sanitary  conditions  of  interstate  travel. 
Tuberculosis  is  a disease  in  which  education  of 
the  public  is  of  prime  importance  in  its  sup- 
pression. Along  these  lines  the  Government 
can  and  does  help  materially  by  publishing  nu- 
merous pamphlets  upon  the  subject,  through 
exhibits,  lectures,  and  other  means.  This 


phase  of  the  government  activity  in  tubercu- 
losis would  be  much  more  active  and  stimulat- 
ing if  Congress  would  appropriate  more  lib- 
eral sums  for  this  purpose.  The  American 
Association  for  the  Prevention  of  Tubercu- 
losis is  now  attempting,  in  an  admirable  but 
limited  way,  to  carry  on  a nation-wide  cam- 
paign which  should  more  properly  be  fostered 
and  financed  by  the  Federal  Government.  The 
American  Association  for  the  Prevention  of 
Tuberculosis  is  serving  as  a clearing  house 
for  information  in  regard  to  proper  measures 
for  the  control  of  the  disease,  with  special  ref- 
erence to  campaigns  and  the  kind  of  work  to 
be  carried  on  by  associations,  corporations,  mu- 
nicipalities, and  state  governments.  All  lines 
of  public  work,  including  tuberculosis,  require 
some  central  office  from  which  the  many  agen- 
cies interested  can  secure  advice  and  instruc- 
tion. The  question  of  tuberculosis  has  been 
studied  in  many  government  laboratories,  es- 
pecially in  the  various  laboratories  of  the  De- 
partment of  Agriculture  and  in  the  Hygienic 
Laboratory  of  the  Public  Health  Service. 
These  researches  are  a proper  function  of  the 
Government  in  relation  to  this  disease  and 
deserve  encouragement.  The  Government 
maintains  three  tuberculosis  sanatoriums  for 
some  of  its  afflicted  officers  and  employees.  In 
this  way  the  Government  is  demonstrating  the 
practical  value  of  segregation  which  is  an  es- 
sential feature  in  preventing  the  spread  of 
the  infection. 

Sanatoria  should  be  provided  by  the  Gov- 
ernment for  the  care  of  those  who  contract 
tuberculosis  while  in  its  employ.  This  would 
not  only  be  just  to  those  afflicted,  but  would 
serve  to  protect  others,  and  would  be  an  ad- 
mirable example  to  be  followed  by  states,  mu- 
nicipalities, large  corporations,  etc.  The  great- 
est usefulness  of  the  Federal  Government  in 
connection  with  this  disease,  and  perhaps  in 
most  other  lines  of  public  health  and  uplift 
work,  would  be  in  serving  as  an  efficient  bu- 
reau of  information  and  education;  a bureau 
of  information  to  which  those  engaged  in  this 
work  could  write  for  instructions  as  to  what 
to  do  and  how  to  do  it;  a bureau  of  educa- 
tion to  disseminate  information,  to  arouse  in- 
terest, and  give  facts  regarding  the  disease, 
to  those  who  would  not  acquire  the  same  of 
their  own  initiative. 

Tuberculosis  is  our  greatest  health  problem. 
Essentially  it  is  a local  problem,  that  is,  one 
for  the  states  and  cities  to  combat  directly. 
More  than  this,  its  ultimate  control  depends 
upon  home  sanitation  and  personal  hygiene. 
Something  can  be  done  by  the  Government  to 
diminish  the  amount  of  the  disease  and  to 
decrease  the  scattering  of  the  infection;  more 
can  be  done  by  the  individual  to  protect  him- 
self through  proper  food,  exercise,  rest,  sun- 
shine and  temperance  in  all  things,  and  through 
education  to  learn  how  to  avoid  the  dangers 
that  beset  him.  Tuberculosis  is  then  a dis- 


581 


TURKEY— TWEED,  WILLIAM  MARCY 


ease  that  calls  for  cooperation  of  all  agencies, 
local  and  governmental,  personal  and  public, 
social  and  economic;  it  is  the  function  of  the 
Federal  Government  to  encourage  uplift  in  all 
directions  that  will  improve  the  conditions 
and  protect  the  rights  of  the  poorer  people, 
thereby  helping  to  control  this  disease  of  de- 
fective civilization. 

See  Contagious  Diseases;  Health,  Public 
Regulation  of;  Hospitals,  Public. 

M.  J.  Rosenau. 

TURKEY.  See  Near  East,  Diplomatic  Re- 
lations with. 

TURNER  INSURRECTION.  August  21, 
1831,  a body  of  negroes  under  the  leadership 
of  a slave  preacher  named  Nat  Turner,  rose 
in  Southampton  county,  Virginia,  and  in  a few 
hours  killed  sixty  white  people.  This  most 
serious  of  all  slave  insurrections  on  the  conti- 
nent of  North  America,  was  put  down  by  mili- 
tia, aided  by  federal  troops.  Turner  was  put 
on  his  trial  and  legally  executed.  There  is  no 
evidence  that  Turner  had  any  knowledge  of 
the  northern  abolition  movement;  but  the  two 
things  came  close  together,  and  combined  to 
alarm  the  South  and  to  cause  the  passing  of 
severe  laws  against  plots  or  meetings  of 
colored  persons.  See  Insurrections,  Sup- 
pression of.  References:  T.  W.  Higginson, 
Travelers  and  Outlaws  (1889),  276—326;  J.  E. 
Cutler,  Lynch  Law  (1905);  “Federal  Aid  in 
Domestic  Disturbances”  in  Sen.  Doc.,  57  Cong., 
2 Sess.,  No.  209  (1903).  A.  B.  H. 

TUTUILA.  Tutuila,  Manua  and  four  islets, 
forming  the  southern  part  of  the  Samoan  group, 
were  ceded  to  the  United  States  by  the  Anglo- 
German-American  partition  treaty  of  Dec.  2, 
1899.  Germany  received  the  remaining  8 is- 
lands. The  group  is  of  volcanic  formation, 
surrounded  by  coral  reefs,  with  heavy  rainfall, 
luxuriant  tropical  vegetation,  and  subject  to 
typhoons  and  earthquakes.  Tutuila  has  an 
area  of  54  square  miles,  Manua  and  the  islets, 
about  25  square  miles;  while  the  entire  group 
has  a population  of  7251.  Tutuila  is  situ- 
ated 4,200  miles  southwest  from  San  Fran- 
cisco, on  the  direct  route  to  New  Zealand,  and 
possesses  the  only  good  harbor  in  the  South 
Pacific,  one  large  enough  to  hold  the  entire 
American  fleet,  yet  perfectly  protected  by  its 
winding  entrance  and  high  surrounding  cliffs. 
Here  the  United  States  has  a naval  and  coal- 
ing station,  Pago-Pago.  The  natives  are  Poly- 
nesians, tall  and  well-proportioned.  They  were 
early  converted  to  Christianity  by  the  agents 
of  the  London  Missionary  Society  and  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church.  The  administrative 
control  is  vested  by  the  President  in  the  Navy 
Department.  The  commandant  of  the  naval 
station  is  also  governor;  he  appoints  officials, 
makes  laws  and  has  practically  unlimited 
power.  For  the  most  part  the  natives  are  left 


under  the  immediate  authority  of  their  former 
chiefs;  their  customs  are  generally  undisturbed, 
except  by  their  own  consent;  and  they  are 
forbidden  to  alienate  their  land  to  whites. 
There  are  village  courts,  five  judicial  district 
courts,  and  a high  court.  Government  and 
denominational  schools  divide  the  task  of  edu- 
cation. The  imports  for  the  year  ending  June, 
1912,  were  $110,249,  only  $12,621  coming  from 
the  United  States;  exports,  $146,275,  mostly 
copra,  $21,885  going  to  the  United  States.  See 
Samoa,  Diplomatic  Relations  with;  Coal- 
ing Stations;  Dependencies  of  the  United 
States.  References:  D.  S.  Jordan  and  V.  L. 
Kellogg,  “Tutuila”  in  Atlantic,  XCIV,  Aug., 
1904,  207-217 ; J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law, 
I (1906),  536—554;  J.  B.  Henderson,  Am.  Dip- 
lomatic Questions  (1901),  205-286. 

George  H.  Blakeslee. 

TWEED  RING.  A notorious  political  ring 
which  held  absolute  control  over  the  govern- 
ment of  the  city  of  New  York  from  1868  to 
1871.  Its  chief  members  were  William  M. 
Tweed  (see),  the  first  boss  of  Tammany  Hall, 
Peter  B.  Sweeny,  the  city  chamberlain,  Richard 
Connolly,  the  comptroller  and  A.  Oakey  Hall, 
the  mayor  of  the  city.  Tweed  was  the  leader 
and  took  to  himself  the  largest  share  of  the 
profits  of  the  Ring’s  operations.  Tribute  was 
levied  upon  contracts  for  building  operations 
and  public  improvements,  the  granting  of 
franchises,  the  purchase  of  supplies,  the  pay- 
ment of  claims,  and  the  salaries  of  officers 
and  employees.  Offices  including  judicial  offices 
were  sold.  As  state  senator,  Tweed  controlled 
legislation  affecting  the  city.  The  fall  of  the 
Ring  began  with  the  disclosures  in  the  summer 
of  1871  of  the  waste  of  ten  million  dollars  in 
the  construction  of  the  county  court  house.  A 
committee  of  seventy  was  formed,  Tweed  and 
Hall  were  indicted  and  the  committee  candi- 
dates were  successful  in  the  fall  elections. 
Some  of  the  members  of  the  Ring  fled.  Tweed 
escaped  but  was  recaptured  and  died  in  prison 
in  1878.  The  stealings  of  the  Ring  have  been 
estimated  variously  at  from  45  to  200  millions. 
See  New  York  City;  Tammany;  Tweed,  W.  M. 
References:  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Commonwealth 
(1st  ed.,  1888),  II,  335—354;  M.  Ostrogorski, 
Democracy  and  the  Party  System  (1910),  77- 
80;  J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  U.  S.  (1906),  VI, 
392-411.  E.  H.  G. 

TWEED,  WILLIAM  MARCY.  William  M. 
Tweed  (1823-1878)  was  born  in  New  York 
City,  April  3,  1823.  He  entered  politics  through 
membership  in  a fire-engine  company.  In 
1852-53  he  was  a member  of  the  board  of 
aldermen;  then  from  1853  to  1855  a member  of 
Congress;  and  thence  advanced  through  the 
offices  of  supervisor,  school  commissioner,  and 
deputy  street  commissioner  to  the  position  of 
state  senator,  which  he  held  from  1867  to  1871. 
He  was  a member  of  Tammany  Hall,  and 


TWELFTH  AMENDMENT 


grand  sachem  from  1869  to  1871;  and  in  1870 
became  the  head  of  the  new  department  of 
public  works.  Through  the  control  of  this  and 
other  offices  the  “Tweed  Ring”  carried  on  a 
systematic  plundering  of  the  city  treasury. 
Exposures  of  the  operation  of  the  Ring,  due 
to  the  New  York  Times,  led  to  a civil  suit 
against  Tweed  in  1871,  and  he  was  released 
on  $1,000,000  bail.  Later  in  the  year  he  was 
arrested  on  a criminal  charge,  and  gave  bail. 
In  November,  1873,  after  a second  trial,  he  was 
found  guilty  of  fraud,  and  sentenced  to  twelve 
years’  imprisonment  and  a fine  of  $12,550. 
While  confined  at  Blackwell’s  Island  he  was 
sued  by  the  city  for  $6,000,000,  and  judgment 
rendered  against  him.  He  was  removed  to 
Ludlow  Street  jail,  escaped  in  December,  1875, 
and  fled  to  Spain,  was  extradited,  and  died  in 
jail  April  12,  1878.  See  Boss  System  of 
Party  Organization  ; Tammany  ; Tweed  Ring. 
References:  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Commonwealth 
(1st  ed.,  1888),  I,  ch.  lxxxviii;  J.  K.  McGuire, 
Democratic  Party  of  the  State  of  N.  Y.  (1905), 
III;  J.  Bigelow,  Life  of  Samuel  J.  Tilden 
(1895)  ; W.  L.  Stone,  Jr.,  Hist,  of  N.  Y.  City 
(1872);  G.  Myers,  Tammany  Hall  (1901). 

W.  MacD. 

TWELFTH  AMENDMENT.  The  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  as  adopted  in  1788 
provided  for  the  choice  of  a President  and  Vice- 
President  by  electors  elected  in  the  several 
states  (Art.  II,  Sec.  i,  jfjf  1-4).  Each  state 
was  to  have  as  many  electors  as  it  had  Repre- 
sentatives and  Senators  in  Congress.  The  elec- 
tors thus  chosen  were  to  meet  in  their  respec- 
tive states  and  vote  by  ballot  for  two  persons, 
one  of  whom  at  least  should  not  be  a member 
of  the  same  state  with  themselves.  There  was 
no  provision  for  distinction  between  ballots  for 
President  and  those  for  Vice-President;  the 
person  receiving  the  highest  number  of  votes 
was  to  be  President  in  case  he  received  a ma- 
jority of  all  the  electors  appointed.  If  more 
than  one  had  a majority  and  an  equal  num- 
ber of  votes,  the  House  of  Representatives 
was  to  choose  one  of  them  for  President, 
and  if  no  one  had  a majority  the  House  was 
to  choose  one  from  the  five  highest.  The  vote 
in  the  House  was  by  states,  and  a quorum  was 
to  consist  of  a member  or  members  from  two- 
thirds  of  the  states.  In  every  case,  after  the 
choice  of  President,  the  person  receiving  the 
greatest  number  of  votes  of  the  electors  was 
to  be  Vice-President;  but  if  two  or  more  re- 
ceived equal  votes,  then  the  Senate  was  to 
choose  from  them  the  Vice-President. 

The  framers  of  the  Constitution  chose  this 
method  of  electing  the  President  because  they 
believed  that  an  indirect  system  was  preferable 
to  a direct  system  and  they  did  not  believe 
that  the  main  body  of  the  people  was  capable 
of  selecting  a President.  They  appear  to  have 
supposed  that  the  electors  would  exercise  their 
free  and  independent  judgments  and  that  there 


would  be  so  much  difference  of  opinion  among 
the  electors  that  the  election  would  frequently, 
if  not  customarily,  devolve  upon  the  House. 
This  is  interesting  evidence  of  how  the  makers 
of  the  Constitution  failed  to  anticipate  either 
any  process  of  nomination  or  the  rise  of  polit- 
ical parties  which  would  assume  the  respon- 
sibility of  presenting  candidates  and  of  taking 
the  necessary  steps  for  their  election. 

Events  soon  proved  that  influence  and  manip- 
ulation were  possible,  and,  with  the  formation 
of  political  parties,  the  constitutional  plan 
proved  unsuitable.  Under  the  influence  of 
parties  the  independent  judgment  of  the  elec- 
tors had  almost  entirely  disappeared  by  1796; 
the  electors  were  expected  to  vote  for  the  party 
candidates.  Had  parties  been  as  thoroughly 
organized  and  as  fully  controlled  by  a central 
system  as  was  later  the  case,  electors  in 
1796  might  possibly  have  been  so  directed  that 
Adams  would  have  received  only  one  more  than 
Pinckney,  and  thus  Pinckney  would  have  be- 
come Vice-President.  As  it  was,  however,  Jef- 
ferson was  chosen  Vice-President,  though  he 
was  a candidate  for  President,  and  thus  the 
President  and  Vice-President  belonged  to  dif- 
ferent parties.  Plainly,  unless  electors  were 
thoroughly  dominated  by  a central  party  gov- 
ernment, the  system  in  vogue  was  ill  adapted 
to  the  party  regime. 

In  1800  the  results  disclosed  another  diffi- 
culty. Although  Burr  was  the  vice-presidential 
candidate,  Jefferson  and  Burr  received  the 
same  number  of  votes.  Here  again  a thorough- 
ly organized  party  machine  could  have  con- 
trolled the  electors  and  given  one  less  vote  to 
Burr  than  to  Jefferson;  but  without  such  cen- 
tral control  an  election  under  the  party  system 
was  likely  to  result  in  a tie  or  in  such  a di- 
vision of  the  offices  as  had  been  the  result  of 
the  previous  election.  If  electors  should  vote 
the  straight  party  ticket,  a tie  would  always 
occur.  The  election  of  1800  was  thrown  into 
the  House.  Here  the  intensity  of  partisan 
feeling  and  the  significance  of  the  existence  of 
parties  was  made  manifest  again.  The  Fed- 
eralists preferring  Burr  to  Jefferson  voted  for 
the  man  whom  his  party  had  selected  for  the 
vice-presidency.  Thirty-five  ballots  resulted  in 
no  election ; but  on  the  thirty-sixth  some 
Federalists  refrained  from  voting  to  allow  Jef- 
ferson’s election. 

Early  in  1802  resolutions  to  amend  the  Con- 
stitution were  introduced  into  Congress.  They 
passed  the  House  but  not  the  Senate.  In  1803, 
however,  resolutions  passed  both  houses  and 
the  proposed  amendment  was  submitted  to  the 
states.  September  25,  1804,  the  Secretary  of 
State  proclaimed  that  the  amendment  was 
adopted.  The  legislatures  of  Massachusetts, 
Connecticut  and  Delaware  rejected  the  amend- 
ment; the  governor  of  New  Hampshire  vetoed 
the  legislative  resolution  of  approval  (see 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  Amend- 
ments to). 


583 


TWENTY-SECOND  JOINT  RULE— TYLER,  JOHN 


The  Twelfth  Amendment  provides  that  elec- 
tors shall  cast  ballots  for  the  President  and 
distinct  ballots  for  Vice-President.  A majority 
of  votes  is  necessary  to  an  election;  if  no  one 
receives  a majority,  then  from  the  persons 
having  the  highest  numbers,  not  exceeding 
three,  on  the  list  of  those  voted  for  as  Presi- 
dent, the  House  of  Representatives  shall  choose 
immediately  by  ballot  the  President.  In  the 
House  each  state  has  one  vote.  If  no  one  re- 
ceives a majority  of  the  electoral  votes  for 
Vice-President  the  Senate  selects  one  from 
the  two  highest  numbers  on  the  list.  The  new 
method  of  election  made  the  party  system  more 
easily  manageable;  it  made,  in  conjunction 
with  party  control,  for  the  influence  of  the 
populous  state,  the  “large  state”  (see  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States,  Compromises 
of)  ; it  made  it  quite  certain  that  a person 
would  be  nominated  for  the  vice-presidency 
because  he  might  help  to  carry  his  own  state. 
Still,  all  this  was  rather  the  result  of  the  rise 
of  party  government  than  of  the  amendment. 
The  text  of  the  amendment  is  as  follows: 


The  Electors  shall  meet  in  their  respective  states, 
and  vote  by  ballot  for  President  and  Vice-President, 
one  of  whom,  at  least,  shall  not  be  an  inhabitant 
of  the  same  state  with  themselves  ; they  shall  name 
in  their  ballots  the  person  voted  for  as  President, 
and  in  distinct  ballots  the  person  voted  for  as  Vice- 
President;  and  they  shall  make  distinct  lists  of  all 
persons  voted  for  as  President,  and  of  all  persons 
voted  for  as  Vice-President,  and  of  the  number  of 
votes  for  each,  which  lists  they  shall  sign  and 
certify,  and  transmit  sealed  to  the  seat  of  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States,  directed  to  the  Pres- 
ident of  the  Senate; — The  President  of  the  Senate 
shall,  in  the  presence  of  the  Senate  and  House  of 
Representatives,  open  all  the  certificates  and  the 
votes  shall  then  be  counted  ; — The  person  having 
the  greatest  number  of  votes  for  President,  shall 
be  the  President,  if  such  number  be  a majority  of 
the  whole  number  of  Electors  appointed  ; and  if  no 
erson  have  such  majority,  then  from  the  persons 
aving  the  highest  numbers  not  exceeding  three  on 
the  list  of  those  voted  for  as  President,  the  House 
of  Representatives  shall  choose  immediately,  by  bal- 
lot, the  President.  Rut  in  choosing  the  President, 
the  votes  shall  be  taken  by  states,  the  Representa- 
tion from  each  state  having  one  vote  ; a quorum  for 
this  purpose  shall  consist  of  a member  or  members 
from  two-thirds  of  the  states,  and  a majority  of 
all  the  states  shall  be  necessary  to  a choice.  And 
if  the  House  of  Representatives  shall  not  choose  a 
President  whenever  the  right  of  choice  shall  de- 
volve upon  them,  before  the  fourth  day  of  March 
next  following,  then  the  Vice-President  shall  act 
as  President,  as  in  the  case  of  the  death  or  other 
constitutional  disability  of  the  President.  The  per- 
son having  the  greatest  number  of  votes  as  Vice- 
President.  shall  be  the  Vice-President,  if  such  num- 
ber be  a majority  of  the  whole  number  of  Electors 
appointed;  and  if  no  person  have  a majority,  then 
from  the  two  highest  numbers  on  the  list,  the 
Senate  shall  choose  the  Vice-President ; a quorum 
for  the  purpose  shall  consist  of  two-thirds  of  the 
whole  number  of  Senators,  and  a majority  of  the 
whole  number  shall  be  necessary  to  a choice.  Rut 
no  person  constitutionally  ineligible  to  the  office 
of  President  shall  be  eligible  to  that  of  Vice-Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States. 

See  Nomination  of  the  President;  Presi- 
dential Elections. 

References:  H.  V.  Ames,  “The  Proposed 
Amendments  to  the  Constitution  during  the 
First  Century  of  its  History”  in  Am.  Hist. 
Assoc.,  Annual  Report  (1896),  II,  75-80;  L. 
House,  A Study  of  the  Tioelfth  Amendment 
(1901)  ; J.  B.  McMaster,  Hist,  of  the  People 


of  the  U.  S.,  II  (1885),  509-526,  III  (1892), 
183-187.  Andrew  C.  McLaughlin. 

TWENTY-SECOND  JOINT  RULE.  A rule 

adopted  by  both  Houses  of  Congress  February 
6,  1865,  which  provided  that  no  electoral  vote 
to  which  objection  had  been  made  should  be 
counted  “except  by  the  concurrent  vote  of  the 
two  Houses.”  The  “rule”  continued  to  be  ap- 
plied in  the  counting  of  the  electoral  votes  in 
1869  and  1873  but  was  rescinded  by  the  Senate, 
January  20,  1876.  See  Electoral  Count  for 
President.  0.  C.  H. 

TWILIGHT  ZONE.  A phrase  used  apparent- 
ly for  the  first  time  by  Theodore  Roosevelt, 
applied  to  the  field  of  legislation  over  which 
neither  the  Federal  Government  nor  the  states 
have  a determined  jurisdiction;  such  as  lia- 
bility for  accidents  in  transportation;  use  of 
electric  power  derived  from  public  water  sites. 
See  Concurrent  Powers  ; Division  of 
Powers;  States  in  the  Union;  State  Sov- 
ereignty. A.  B.  H. 

TWO-THIRDS  RULE.  A rule  adopted  by 
the  Democratic  national  convention  in  1832, 
and  enforced  by  all  subsequent  Democratic 
conventions,  which  provided  “that  two-thirds 
of  the  whole  number  of  votes  in  the  convention 
shall  be  necessary  to  constitute  a choice.”  See 
Conventions,  Political;  Democratic  Party; 
Nomination  of  the  President.  O.  C.  H. 

TYLER,  JOHN.  John  Tyler  was  born  in 
Charles  City  county,  Virginia,  March  29,  1790, 
and  died  in  Richmond,  Virginia,  January  18, 
1862.  He  graduated  at  William  and  Mary 
College  in  1807,  studied  law  and  was  admitted 
to  the  bar  in  1809.  A member  of  the  legis- 
lature in  1812,  he  urged  war  with  England. 
He  was  a representative  in  Congress  from  1816 
to  1825  when  he  become  governor  of  Virginia. 
Two  years  later  he  was  elected  United  States 
Senator.  He  took  part  as  a conservative  in 
the  Virginia  constitutional  convention  of  1829- 
30,  and  alternately  favored  and  opposed  the 
measures  of  Jackson’s  administration.  In  1839 
he  was  nominated  for  Vice-President  and  in 
1841,  on  the  death  of  President  Harrison,  be- 
came President.  Within  a few  months  he  broke 
with  his  party,  the  Whigs,  persisting  in  a 
notable  policy  of  his  own  looking  toward  the 
annexation  of  Texas  and  the  seizure  of  Oregon 
and  California.  In  1845  he  signed  the  joint 
resolution  which  made  Texas  a state.  He  re- 
tired to  his  plantation  in  Virginia  in  1845  but 
came  again  into  public  life  as  president  of  th6 
Peace  Congress  in  February,  1861.  On  the 
adjournment  of  this  body  he  urged  the  prompt 
secession  of  Virginia.  He  was  a member  of 
the  Confederate  house  of  representatives  at  the 
time  of  his  death.  See  Texas;  Virginia; 
Whig  Party.  Reference:  L.  G.  Tyler,  Times 
of  the  Tylers,  (1884-1885).  W.  E.  D. 


584 


ULTRA  VIRES— UNDERWOOD  TARIFF  ACT 


U 


ULTRA  VIRES.  A term  used  to  indicate 
that  an  act  of  a corporation  public  or  private 
is  beyond  the  powers  conferred  upon  it  by  its 
charter  or  the  statute  under  which  it  was  or- 
ganized. Reference:  A.  W.  Machen,  Jr.,  Mod- 
ern Law  of  Corporations  (1908),  § 1012. 

H.  M.  B. 

UNCLE  SAM.  A sobriquet  of  the  United 
States  Government  which  probably  first  ap- 
peared in  the  Troy,  New  York,  Post  of  Sep- 
tember 7,  1813,  with  the  explanation  that  “The 
letters  U.  S.  on  the  government  waggons,  etc., 
are  supposed  to  have  given  rise  to  it.”  At 
first  the  nickname  appeared  only  in  the  anti- 
war newspapers  and  in  a derisive  sense.  The 
weight  of  evidence  seems  to  be  against  the 
authenticity  of  the  popular  story  of  the  origin 
of  the  sobriquet  which  appeared  in  John  Frost’s 
Book  of  the  Navy  in  1842,  and  was  adopted  by 
Bartlett  in  his  Dictionary  of  Americanisms  in 
1848,  ascribing  the  origin  to  “Uncle  Sam”  Wil- 
son, a government  inspector  in  the  War  of 
1812.  0.  C.  H. 

UNDERGROUND  RAILROAD.  A name 
given  in  general  to  the  system,  used  in  the 
days  before  the  Civil  War,  in  aiding  fugitive 
slaves  from  the  southern  states  to  find  places 
of  safety  in  the  North  or  to  escape  to  Canada. 
It  was  made  up  of  a chain  of  houses  or  other 
places  of  concealment  in  which  the  fugitive  was 
hidden,  and  from  which  he  was  carried  on  to 
the  next  “station”  by  friend  or  sympathizer. 
There  were  various  routes  through  the  north- 
ern states,  the  most  numerous,  running  through 
Ohio  and  Indiana.  See  Fugitive  Slaves; 
Slavery  Controversy.  References:  W.  H. 
Siebert,  Underground  Railroad  (1898),  with 
map;  M.  G.  McDougall,  Fugitive  Slaves 
(1891);  L.  Coffin,  Reminiscences  (1880). 

A.  C.  McL. 

UNDERVALUATIONS.  Inasmuch  as  a 
large  number  of  the  import  duties  are  levied 
ad  valorem,  it  is  always  to  the  interest  of  im- 
porters to  cheapen  the  foreign  cost  as  much 
as  possible;  and  to  minimize  the  cost  in  any 
case.  By  a system  of  shipping  from  manu- 
facturers only  to  their  agents  in  America,  in- 
stead of  to  the  ordinary  buyer,  it  is  often 
possible  to  get  a valuation  which  would  not 
be  furnished  to  the  trade.  Hence,  in  the 
McKinley  administrative  tariff  of  1890  and  in 
the  Dingley  Tariff  of  1897,  were  provisions  for 
ascertaining  cost  at  the  prevailing  market 


rate  in  the  foreign  country.  One  form  of 
undervaluation  is  to  enter  the  commodity 
in  a classification  which  bears  a lower 
duty  than  the  schedule  in  which  the  as- 
sessor would  naturally  place  it.  The  usual 
way  of  undervaluing  is  simply  to  falsify 
the  cost,  particularly  in  commodities  the  act- 
ual value  of  which  is  hard  to  estimate.  Wil- 
liam Loeb,  as  Collector  of  the  Port  of  New 
York  in  1909,  detected  many  schemes  of 
undervaluation,  particularly  on  sugar  and  on 
works  of  art  and  on  passengers’  baggage.  The 
value  of  an  importation  is  a question  of  fact, 
appealable  to  a board  of  general  appraisers 
(see)  ; and  their  decision  is  final.  See  Ap- 
praisal of  Imported  Goods  for  Duties; 
Duties,  Ad  Valorem;  Fines  as  Sources  of 
Revenue;  Frauds  on  the  Treasury;  Smug- 
gling; Sugar  Frauds.  References:  J.  O.  Goss, 
Tariff  Administration  (1890);  U.  S.  Sec.  of 
the  Treasury,  Annual  Reports.  A.  B.  H. 

UNDERWOOD,  OSCAR  W.  Oscar  W.  Un- 
derwood (1862 — ) was  born  at  Louisville, 
Kentucky,  May  6,  1862.  He  was  admitted  to 
the  bar  of  Alabama  in  1884  and  began  the 
practice  of  law  at  Birmingham.  After  several 
years  of  activity  in  state  politics  he  entered 
Congress  in  1895  as  representative  of  the  Ninth 
Alabama  District  and  served  continuously 
to  1914.  He  was  assigned  for  several  terms  to 
the  committee  on  ways  and  means  and  in  1911 
became  its  chairman  and  Democratic  floor 
leader  in  the  House.  Under  his  guidance  were 
prepared  the  tariff  bills  introduced  in  the  Sixty- 
second  Congress,  and  the  ability  and  tact  dis- 
played in  his  direction  of  legislation  in  the 
House  secured  him  considerable  support  for  the 
Democratic  nomination  for  President  in  1912. 
In  1913  he  drafted  and  guided  through  the 
House  the  Underwood  Tariff  Act  (see).  In 
April,  1914,  he  received  in  primary  elections 
the  Democratic  nomination  from  Alabama  for 
the  term  beginning  in  1915.  See  Tariff  Pol- 
icy of  the  United  States;  Tariff  Rates; 
Underwood  Tariff  Act.  Reference:  Am. 
Year  Book,  1911,  and  year  by  year. 

F.  G.  W. 

UNDERWOOD  TARIFF  ACT.  Enactment. 

The  enactment  of  the  Underwood-Simmons  Tar- 
iff Act  of  1913  marked  the  close  of  a campaign 
for  tariff  reduction  which  had  been  waged 
through  several  sessions  of  Congress.  During 
the  year  1912-1913,  in  the  administration  of 
President  Taft,  Oscar  W.  Underwood  (see), 


585 


UNDERWOOD  TARIFF  ACT 


as  chairman  of  the  committee  on  ways  and 
means,  supported  by  the  Democratic  majority 
in  the  House  of  Representatives,  pushed 
through  the  House  six  important  bills  designed 
to  effect  specific  or  general  reductions  in  tariff 
rates.  Of  these,  one  failed  through  disagree- 
ment with  the  Senate,  and  two  were  vetoed  by 
President  Taft. 

In  the  election  of  1912  a Democratic  admin- 
istration came  into  power.  President  Wilson 
called  a special  session  in  April,  1913,  and  Mr. 
Underwood  at  once  introduced  “A  bill  to  re- 
duce tariff  duties,  and  to  provide  revenue  for 
the  government,  and  for  other  purposes.”  It 
was  reported  by  the  committee  on  ways  and 
means  without  amendment  April  22,  and  re- 
ferred to  committee  of  the  whole  where  it  was 
debated  until  May  7,  when  it  was  reported 
back  to  the  House  and  finally  passed  upon  the 
following  day  by  a vote  of  281  to  139.  The 
bill  remained  in  the  Senate  until  September  10, 
when  it  was  passed  with  several  important 
amendments  including  alterations  in  the  ex- 
emptions under  the  income  tax  (see  Tax,  In- 
come). The  delegation  from  Louisiana  solidly 
opposed  the  sugar  schedule;  and  individual 
members  from  various  parts  of  the  country  de- 
clined to  be  bound  by  the  Democratic  caucus. 
Most  of  the  Republicans  opposed  the  act  in 
toto.  President  WTilson  took  the  leadership  in 
putting  the  measures  through  Congress.  A 
conference  committee  was  appointed  and  its 
report  agreed  upon  September  30.  October  3 
the  President  attached  his  signature.  The  act 
not  only  made  important  changes  in  the  tariff, 
but  included  the  first  income  tax  legislation 
under  the  Sixteenth  Amendment  (see)  to  the 
Constitution. 

Changes  in  Rates. — The  act  was  the  only 
general  revision  downward  of  the  protective 
duties,  except  for  the  Wilson-Gorman  Act  of 
1894  (see),  since  the  Civil  War.  However, 
the  protection  afforded  to  most  American  in- 
dustries remained  large;  but  when  compared 
with  the  rates  of  the  Dingley  Tariff  of  1897 
(see),  and  the  ^ayne- Aldrich  Tariff  of  1909 
(see),  large  increments  of  protection  disap- 
pear. In  numerous  paragraphs  the  reductions 
were  nor  inal,  since  the  quantities  of  goods 
on  which  the  duties  were  lowered  continued  to 
be  small  or  non-existent.  This  is  the  case  with 
many  items  of  the  cotton  schedule,  with  most 
grades  of  silks,  iron,  the  higher  grades  of  china 
and  porcelains,  and  in  some  classes  of  woolens. 
A far-reaching  administrative  feature  of  this 
tariff  is  the  almost  total  elimination  of  specific 
duties  and  of  compound  specific  and  ad  valorem 
duties,  and  the  substitution  of  simple  ad  valor- 
em duties,  a precaution  against  undervaluation 
(see  Valuation  of  Imported  Goods). 

In  some  schedules  little  or  no  change  was 
made  in  the  rates.  Schedule  F ( tobacco  and 
its  manufactures),  and  Schedule  H in  so  far 
as  it  applies  to  liquors,  remained  at  practically 
the  old  levels.  In  connection  with  chemicals 


51  of  the  86  increases  made  by  the  act  are  to 
be  found.  The  schedule  dealing  with  silks  in- 
cluded an  alteration  of  the  method  of  assess- 
ment, thus  eliminating  the  intricate  classifica- 
tion adopted  in  1897  and  continued  in  1909, 
which  covered  much  hidden  protection.  In 
rates  there  was  little  change  in  this  schedule; 
it  was  argued  that  silks  were  luxuries  and 
should  be  subject  to  higher  duties  than  neces- 
saries. 

By  far  the  most  important  and  significant 
change  was  in  connection  with  wool  and  wool- 
ens. The  duty  on  raw  wool  was  abolished,  and 
with  it  went  the  entire  compensating  system 
applying  to  woolens,  which,  in  many  instances, 
had  afforded  to  the  manufacturer  a greater 
amount  of  protection  than  was  received  from 
the  duty  of  50  per  cent  or  55  per  cent  on  im- 
ported manufactured  goods.  The  more  impor- 
ant  manufactures  of  wool  were  reduced  to  a 
35  per  cent  level,  the  rate  which  was  levied 
by  the  original  compensating  act  of  1867.  Un- 
der the  Payne-Aldrich  rates  the  total  protec- 
tion, direct  and  indirect,  on  many  classes  of 
goods,  was  100  per  cent,  and  in  some  cases  un- 
der the  compensating  system  the  compensat- 
ing duty  applied  not  only  to  cloths  made  en- 
tirely of  wool  but  to  cloths  made  “in  part  of 
wool.”  The  consequence  was  that  cloths  con- 
sisting almost  entirely  of  cotton  or  shoddy  re- 
ceived excessive  protection.  An  important 
change  in  the  phraseology  of  the  clause  substi- 
tuting “wholly  or  in  chief  value”  for  “wholly 
or  in  part”  will  make  compound  cloths  dutiable 
under  schedules  other  than  K.  On  one  point 
schedule  K seems  inconsistent  with  the  rest  of 
the  act.  Under  the  act  of  1909  wool  had  pro- 
tection and  also  mohair,  a product  of  Texas 
and  the  Southwest.  Instead  of  removing  both 
duties,  mohair  was  allowed  a rate  of  15  per 
cent  and  the  manufactures  based  upon  it  re- 
ceived compensating  duties  ranging  up  to 
45  per  cent  on  the  most  highly  finished  product. 

Next  in  significance  was  the  treatment  of 
the  cotton  schedule  which,  when  enacted  in 
1909,  drew  the  censure  of  President  Taft.  The 
act  wiped  out  the  indirect  protection  through 
complex  classifications  introduced  in  1909.  By 
substituting  ad  valorem  for  specific  duties  all 
incidental  protection  was  removed.  In  addi- 
tion, substantial  reductions  were  made  in  the 
the  actual  rates  imposed.  Thus,  as  compared 
with  the  legislation  of  1909,  the  rates  on  cot- 
ton cloth  ranged  from  74  per  cent  to  68  per 
cent;  on  yarn  from  5 per  cent  to  27  per  cent 
as  against  15  per  cent  to  54  per  cent;  on  knit 
underwear  and  knit  goods  in  general  30  per 
cent  as  against  50  per  cent  to  60  per  cent. 

These  reductions  are  serious,  but  the  Unit- 
ed States  produces  the  lower  grades  of  cottons 
at  least  as  cheaply  as  any  other  country;  and, 
excepting  in  the  case  of  specialties,  exports 
rather  than  imports  them.  Regarding  the  high- 
er grades  the  situation  is  different.  Even  un- 
der the  high  rates  of  the  tariff  of  1909  the 


5S6 


UNEARNED  INCREMENT 


imports  were  heavy.  It  is  reasonable  to  be- 
lieve that  with  the  decreased  rates  the  imports 
will  tend  to  increase. 

On  flax  and  hemp  the  indefensible  duties  im- 
posed by  earlier  legislation  were  entirely  re- 
moved, and  a large  reduction  was  made  in  lin- 
ens, which  were  made  dutiable  at  30  per  cent. 
On  jute  was  levied  a duty  of  15  per  cent,  a re- 
duction of  about  one-half;  and  jute  products 
were  made  subject  to  a rate  of  40  per  cent,  a 
reduction  of  about  one-third. 

The  duties  on  practically  all  of  the  agricul- 
tural products  were  either  reduced  or  abolished. 
Meats  of  all  kinds,  cattle,  sheep,  eggs,  milk  and 
cream,  and  fish  were  placed  on  the  free  list. 
The  act  provided  also  for  the  free  entry  of 
wheat,  flour,  and  potatoes,  if  the  country  of 
origin  permitted  the  free  admission  of  similar 
products  from  the  United  States.  It  is  not 
probable  that  these  changes  will  be  of  impor- 
tance in  the  immediate  future  excepting  for 
the  trade  on  the  northern  border. 

One  of  the  most  important  changes  in  the 
act  related  to  sugar.  On  this  commodity  the 
duty  was  reduced  from  1§  cents  a pound  to 
one  cent  a pound  until  May  1,  1916.  After 
that  date  it  is  to  be  admitted  free.  By  abolish- 
ing this  duty  the  treasury  receipts  were  bound 
to  fall  off  over  $50,000,000  annually.  It  is 
probable,  too,  that  the  economic  effects  of  this 
change  will  be  more  far  reaching  than  those  of 
any  other  paragraph  of  the  act.  Many  of  the 
producers  in  Louisiana  and  in  the  beet  sugar 
states  will  not  find  it  possible  to  continue  in 
business  without  tariff  protection,  even  though 
the  act  allows  the  free  importation  of  machin- 
ery for  sugar  making. 

Respecting  earthenware  and  glassware  the 
reductions  were  general,  but  the  duties  re- 
mained comparatively  high.  Thus,  the  reduc- 
tions on  window  and  plate  glass  were  about 
two-fifths,  but  the  previous  rates  had  been  pro- 
hibitive. On  fine  china  and  porcelain  the 
rates  were  reduced  by  only  a small  fraction; 
since  there  is  practically  no  domestic  manu- 
facture of  these  articles,  the  duties  are  to  be 
regarded  as  for  revenue  and  not  for  protection. 
On  earthernware  and  crockery  the  reductions 
were  about  one-third,  but  in  these  cases  the 
duties  were  decidedly  protective  and  the  rates 
left  in  force  were  sufficiently  high  to  be,  in 
some  cases,  still  prohibitive. 

The  changes  in  the  duties  on  iron  and  steel 
were  numerous  but  not  particularly  important, 
since  protection  ceased  to  be  a matter  of  vital 
importance  to  these  industries  as  far  back  as 
1890.  Iron  ore,  pig  iron,  scrap  iron,  slabs, 
blooms  and  Bessemer  ingots  and  steel  rails 
were  the  most  important  items  in  this  schedule 
to  be  admitted  free  of  duty.  Of  the  manu- 
factured products,  agricultural  implements  and 
machinery  were  entered  on  the  free  list. 

Most  of  the  articles  in  Schedule  D (wood 
and  wooden  ware)  were  heavily  reduced,  and 
timber,  lumber,  shingles,  boards  and  planks 
135  5 


were  made  free.  In  Schedule  M,  wood  pulp 
and  rag  pulp  were  made  free,  and  most  of  the 
other  items  reduced.  In  Schedule  N (sun- 
dries), coal  and  coke,  leather,  boots,  and 
shoes  and  most  varieties  of  gloves  were  made 
free  and  large  reductions  were  made  in  the 
other  items. 

Other  Provisions. — The  Payne-Aldrich  Act 
included  a “tariff  threat”  by  enacting  a 25 
per  cent  maximum  schedule  against  countries 
which  did  not  give  us  favorable  tariff  treat- 
ment. But  no  foreign  nation  was  found  to 
discriminate  in  the  sense  of  the  tariff  act.  That 
clause  was  dropped  out  of  the  Underwood  Act, 
but  the  clauses  relating  to  the  dumping  of 
goods  were  continued  practically  unchanged. 
The  act  included  a 5 per  cent  rebate  on  goods 
imported  in  American  bottoms;  but  it  was 
thought  by  the  Treasury  Department  to  con- 
flict with  various  treaties,  and  its  enforcement 
was  suspended.  To  meet  possible  deficiencies 
in  revenue  because  of  the  reductions  and  the 
enlarged  free  list,  an  income  tax  was  included. 

See  Democratic  Party  ; Free  Trade  and 
Protection;  Sixteenth  Amendment;  Under- 
wood, Oscar  W. ; Tax,  Income;  articles  un- 
der Tariff,  and  tariffs  by  name. 

References:  N.  I.  Stone,  “New  Tariff:  a Ret- 
rospect and  a Forecast”  in  Review  of  Reviews 
(Oct.,  1913)  ; “Underwood-Simmons  Tariff”  in 
ibid  (Nov.,  1913)  ; N.  Longworth,  “Democratic 
Tariff  Bill,”  in  Outlook  (May  31,  1913)  ; “Prog- 
ress of  the  Tariff  Bill”  in  Jour,  of  Pol.  Econ. 
(June,  1913)  ; leading  editorial  on  the  Presi- 
dent’s tariff  message  in  Review  of  Reviews 
(May,  1913),  515;  H.  Parker  Willis,  “The  Tar- 
iff of  1913”  in  Jour,  of  Pol.  Econ.  (Jan.,  Feb., 
March,  1914)  ; Am.  Year  Book,  1913,  28-38, 
349-354,  531-540;  text  of  the  Act  of  October 
3,  1913  in  Statutes  at  Large ; discussions,  F.  W. 
Taussig,  “The  Tariff  Act  of  1913,”  in  Quart. 
Jour,  of  Econ.,  XXVIII,  No.  1. 

A.  N.  Holcombe. 

UNEARNED  INCREMENT.  A term  popu- 
larly employed  to  designate  an  increase  in  the 
value  of  property  without  corresponding  sacri- 
fice or  service  on  the  part  of  its  owner.  Ex- 
amples of  unearned  increment  are  the  increase 
in  value,  through  general  economic  changes,  of 
government  bonds,  corporation  securities,  rare 
paintings,  books,  antiques.  Strictly  speaking, 
unearned  increment  appears  also  in  connection 
with  stocks  of  goods  rendered  more  valuable 
by  some  unanticipated  event,  a war,  drought, 
etc.  The  most  important  form  of  unearned 
increment,  however,  is  the  rise  in  the  value  of 
land  resulting  from  the  progress  of  population 
and  industry.  The  entire  value  of  land,  apart 
from  improvements  upon  it,  may  be  regarded  as 
a sum  of  increments  of  this  character,  accrued 
since  the  first  appropriation  of  the  land. 

Especially  noteworthy  in  recent  decades  have 
been  the  unearned  increments  connected  with 
urban  lands.  In  old  countries,  agricultural 


UNEMPLOYMENT 


lands  seldom  increase  rapidly  in  value,  and  in 
many  cases,  as  in  Great  Britain,  tend  rather 
to  fall. 

Unearned  increment  has  long  been  recognized 
by  social  reformers  as  an  appropriate  source 
of  public  revenue.  John  Stuart  Mill  proposed 
a valuation  of  all  lands,  with  the  purpose  of 
appropriating  to  the  state  any  subsequent  in- 
crease in  value.  In  1870  a Land  Tenure  Re- 
form Association  was  founded  in  England  for 
the  purpose  of  bringing  about  this  reform.  A 
similar  association  was  organized  in  Germany 
in  the  next  decade.  No  practical  results  were  at- 
tained till  the  opening  of  the  twentieth  century 
when  a large  number  of  German  cities  adopted 
the  plan  of  levying  special  taxes  upon  the  un- 
earned increment  from  land.  In  Breslau,  which 
may  be  treated  as  typical,  in  respect  to  this 
form  of  taxation,  a graduated  tax,  collected 
upon  the  transfer  of  real  estate,  is  levied  upon 
an  increase  of  value,  in  excess  of  10  per  cent, 
accrued  since  the  last  transfer,  or  since  1895. 
This  tax  ranges  from  6 per  cent  on  an  incre- 
ment of  from  10  to  20  per  cent,  to  25  per 
cent  on  an  increment  of  100  per  cent  or  more. 
The  full  tax  is  collected  only  when  the  period 
in  which  the  increment  has  accrued  is  five 
years  or  less  in  the  case  of  unimproved  real 
estate.  Increments  accruing  in  ten  years  ( im- 
proved) or  twenty  years  (unimproved)  pay 
only  one-third  of  the  tax;  increments  accruing 
in  still  longer  periods  pay  two-ninths  of  the 
tax. 

In  the  United  Kingdom  a similar  principle 
was  introduced  into  national  taxation  by  the 
increment  value  duty  of  1909.  Upon  the 
transfer  or  sale  of  building  sites  or  upon  the 
grant  of  a lease  of  over  fourteen  years,  there 
is  to  be  levied  a tax  of  fl  in  every  full  £5 
of  increment  value  in  excess  of  10  per  cent,  ac- 
cruing between  transfers  or  since  April  30, 
1909.  Bodies  corporate  holding  land  perman- 
ently are  subject  to  the  tax  every  fifteen  years. 

See  Rent;  Tax,  Land  and  Real  Estate; 
Tax,  Single. 

References:  W.  H.  Dawson,  The  Unearned 
Increment  (1890)  ; J.  B.  Napier,  The  New 
Land  Taxes  (1910)  ; C.  H.  Chomley  and  R.  L. 
Outhwaite,  Land  'Values  Taxation  (1909). 

Alvin  S.  Johnson. 

UNEMPLOYMENT.  Unemployment  exists 
in  most  large  industrial  centres  at  all  times 
of  the  year,  among  wage-earners,  able  and  will- 
ing to  work.  Unemployment  may  also  be  due 
to  inefficiency,  physical  disability  or  unwilling- 
ness to  work,  thus  raising  the  problem  of  the 
unemployable  as  distinct  from  the  unemployed. 

Situation. — Fluctuations  of  employment  are 
recorded  in  publications  of  the  United  States 
Labor  Bureau  and  those  of  some  of  the  states, 
notably  Massachusetts  and  New  York,  supple- 
mented by  reports  of  public  employment  bu- 
reaus ( see  Employment  Agencies).  A con- 
servative estimate  made  by  the  New  York 


Commission  on  Employers’  Liability  and  Un- 
employment (1911),  is  that  in  ordinary  years 
of  business  prosperity,  taking  all  industries 
into  consideration,  out  of  every  one  hundred 
persons,  sixty  will  be  steadily  employed;  forty 
will  be  working  irregularly.  Of  those  who  have 
irregular  employment,  three  will  always  be  out 
of  work.  The  New  York  Department  of  Labor 
after  eliminating  idleness  due  to  disability  and 
labor  disputes,  estimated  the  mean  percentage 
of  unemployment  for  the  last  half  of  1910  was 
11.1  as  compared  with  10.8  for  1909.  Similar 
figures  for  the  end  of  December  are  15.5  for 
1910  as  against  16.6  in  1909.  In  1909  and  1910 
much  lower  percentages  of  unemployment  are 
shown  than  in  1907  and  1908;  and  higher 
percentages  than  in  1904,  1905  and  1906,  be- 
fore the  annual  depression.  The  high  ratio  of 
unemployment,  coupled  with  the  prevailing  rate 
of  wages,  is  a serious  menace  to  the  standard 
of  living  of  wage-earners  and,  therefore,  to 
the  welfare  of  the  state. 

Remedies. — The  following  include  the  chief 
remedies  that  have  been  proposed:  (1)  publi- 
cation by  trade  or  governmental  authorities 
of  the  conditions  of  the  labor  market;  (2) 
establishment  of  employment  bureaus  and 
registry  offices;  (3)  establishment  of  boards 
of  conciliation  and  arbitration  to  eliminate  the 
unemployment  due  to  strikes;  (4)  adoption 
of  a shorter  work  day;  (5)  restriction  of  immi- 
gration; (6)  establishment  of  labor  or  farm 
colonies;  (7)  insurance  against  unemploy- 
ment ; ( 8 ) agencies  to  make  work,  e.  g.,  public 
works. 

Public  Works. — The  classic  historical  ex- 
ample of  making  work  for  the  unemployed  is 
the  wholly  unsuccessful  public  workshops  in 
France  established  by  the  provisional  govern- 
ment after  the  revolution  of  1848.  Local  au- 
thorities in  England  tried  in  1892-93  to  open 
relief  works  during  the  winter  months  for  the 
assistance  of  the  unemployed:  but  the  work 
proved  attractive  to  the  lower  class  of  un- 
skilled laborers,  instead  of  to  regular  workers 
temporarily  out  of  work.  “The  pace  and 
standards  of  the  inefficient  spread  by  contag- 
ion to  the  few  efficient  men  employed.”  The 
Massachusetts  board  on  unemployment  in 
1895  said:  “During  a severe  depression  of 
industry  and  trade,  a municipality  may  be 
justified  in  entering  upon  special  works,  with, 
however,  the  distinct  recognition  that  the  cost 
of  such  work  will  be  increased.”  The  consensus 
of  opinion  in  America  seems  to  be  that  in  brief 
emergencies,  when  well  managed,  direct  relief 
is  better  than  relief  works. 

See  Employment  Agencies;  Labor,  Rela- 
tion of  the  State  to  ; Poverty  and  Poor  Re- 
lief. 

References:  “Unemployment  and  Lack  of 
Farm  Labor”  in  New  York  Commission  on  Em- 
ployer’s Liability,  Third  Report  (April  26, 
1911 ) ; E.  T.  Devine,  Desirability  of  Establish- 
ing an  Employment  Bureau  in  the  City  of 


588 


UNFAIR  LIST— UNIFORM  STATE  LEGISLATION 


New  York  (1909)  ; W.  H.  Beveridge,  Unem- 
ployment (1909);  J.  H.  Muirhead,  By  What 
Authority?  (1909);  Massachusetts  Board  to 
Investigate  the  Subject  of  the  Unemployed,  Re- 
port (1895)  ; British  Royal  Commission  on 
Labor,  Fifth  and  Final  Report  (1894);  R.  S. 
Seebohm  and  B.  Lasker,  Unemployment,  a 
Social  Study  (1911);  Am.  Year  Book,  1911, 
361,  ibid,  1912,  403,  407. 

S.  McC.  Lindsat. 

UNFAIR  LIST.  “Unfair  lists”  are  published 
lists  containing  the  names  of  firms  against 


whom  a labor  unioii  maintains  a boycott. 
Every  effort  is  made  by  the  unions  to  give 
these  lists  the  widest  possible  publicity.  Since 
the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court,  in  Loewe  vs. 
Lawlor  (28  U.  S.  301,  1908),  holding  that 
unions  are  liable  for  treble  damages  for  losses 
sustained  through  boycotts,  the  publication  of 
“unfair  lists”  has  practically  ceased.  See 
Boycotts;  Employees’  Associations;  Labou 
Organizations.  Reference:  M.  H.  Schaffner, 
“Recent  Boycott  Decisions”  in  Am.  Acad,  of 
Pol.  and  Soc.  Sei.,  Annals,  XXVI  (1910),  23- 
33.  J.  R.  C. 


UNIFORM  STATE  LEGISLATION 


Divergence  of  Legislation. — Our  dual  system 
of  government,  the  federal,  with  control  in  na- 
tional affairs,  and  the  state,  with  control  by 
each  state  of  its  internal  affairs,  has  its 
recognized  advantages.  It  has  also  certain 
disadvantages.  The  states  are  bound  by  social 
and  commercial  relations  and  are  separated 
only  by  invisible  boundaries,  and  their  law  is 
based  on  the  common  law  of  England,  except 
in  Louisiana  and  some  of  the  western  states 
affected  by  its  influence.  But  even  before  the 
Revolution  legislation  had  modified  the  law 
of  England.  Differences  in  the  new  state  con- 
stitutions introduced  further  divergencies. 
Since  then,  an  unceasing  and  ever  increasing 
flow  of  legislation  has  tended  to  accent  dif- 
ferences in  state  legislation,  often  through  the 
development  of  different  fields  of  action.  Thus, 
the  law  of  ownership  of  the  foreshore  and 
tidal  waters  have  no  application  in  Iowa,  nor 
have  laws  relating  to  mining  rights  any  inter- 
est in  New  Hampshire. 

Harmonizing  Legislation. — There  is,  however, 
a broad  legislative  field  of  common  interest 
in  all  the  states,  over  which  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment has  no  control,  in  which  uniformity 
of  legislation  can  be  reached  through  comity 
between  the  states  in  adopting  uniform  laws. 
This  is  true,  even  though  the  enlargement  of 
the  control  of  the  Federal  Government  over  in- 
terstate commerce,  over  admiralty,  and  par- 
ticularly the  establishment  of  the  power  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  to  declare 
unconstitutional  and  void  any  state  law  or 
constitution  that  conflicts  with  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States,  have  tended  towards 
uniformity  in  the  realm  of  interstate  and 
federal  relation  of  the  states  and  the  United 
States.  The  tendency  of  bench  and  bar  to 
follow  precedent  has  also  worked  towards  har- 
mony in  the  construction  of  legislation.  Later 
constitutions  have  drawn  upon  earlier  ones, 
to  a certain  extent,  and  the  modern  legislative 
reference  bureaus  (see)  keep  legislators  in- 
formed upon  legislation  on  similar  matters  in 
other  states.  Particular  forms  of  legislation, 


such  as  restrictions  on  the  sale  of  liquors,  pro- 
vision for  labor  bureaus,  employers’  liability 
acts,  and  so  forth,  are  thus  spread  from  state 
to  state. 

Centrifugal  Tendencies. — All  these  irregular 
and  indefinite  tendencies  towards  uniformity 
are  subject  to  the  legislative  power  of  each 
state  to  amendment  or  repeal ; so  that  statutes, 
even  if  once  alike,  soon  tend  to  differ  again. 
The  result  is  a chaos  of  legislation  in  which 
an  act  that  is  a felony  in  one  state  may  be  a 
misdemeanor  in  another,  and  not  punishable 
at  all  in  a third  state.  A man  may  even  have 
a different  legal  wife  in  several  different  states, 
and  dying,  he  may  leave  as  many  legal  widows, 
one  in  each  state. 

American  Bar  Association. — To  simplify  this 
tangle,  a movement  has  been  going  on  for 
unification  of  particular  fields  of  law  by  the 
enactment  in  different  states  of  the  same  stat- 
ute. The  primary  step  was  the  formation  of 
the  American  Bar  Association,  August  21, 
1878.  The  first  object  stated  in  the  call  was 
“to  assimilate  the  laws  of  the  different  states;” 
and  the  first  article  of  the  constitution  defined 
an  object  of  the  association  to  be  “to  advance 
the  science  of  jurisprudence,  to  promote  the 
administration  of  justice  and  uniformity  of 
legislation  throughout  the  Union.” 

Committees  of  the  Bar  Association. — As 
early  as  1882  a committee  of  the  association 
submitted  forms  of  certain  statutes  to  bring 
about  uniformity  in  state  legislation.  A prac- 
tical step  in  advance  was  taken  in  1886  at  the 
instance  of  Frederick  G.  Bromberg,  President 
of  the  Bar  Association  of  Alabama,  by  a reso- 
lution urging  uniform  legislation  concerning 
negotiable  instruments,  calling  attention  to 
the  English  Bills  of  Exchange  Act  and  recom- 
mending its  adoption  by  the  legislatures  of  the 
several  states.  At  the  meeting  of  the  Amer- 
ican Bar  Association  in  1887,  a committee  re- 
ported in  favor  of  a national  bankruptcy  act/ 
and  of  national  legislation  to  regulate  com- 
mercial transactions  between  citizens  of  dif- 
ferent states;  also  recommending  that  the 


UNIFORM  STATE  LEGISLATION 


Congress  should  enact  a statute  relating  to 
bills  of  exchange  and  other  commercial  paper, 
so  far  as  they  are  involved  in  interstate  com- 
merce. 

In  1889  the  president  of  the  American  Bar 
Association  appointed  a committee  of  one 
member  from  each  state  having  members  in 
the  association,  to  meet  in  convention,  to 
compare  and  consider  the  laws  of  the  different 
states,  and  to  prepare  and  report  to  the  as- 
sociation recommendations  and  measures  to 
bring  about  the  desired  uniformity.  This 
committee  has  been  appointed  every  year  since 
then,  its  membership  gradually  increasing  to 
fifty,  and  it  is  now  (1913)  one  of  the  stand- 
ing committees. 

Commission  on  Uniformity  of  Legislation. — 

This  committee  reported  in  1890  that  the  legis- 
lature of  New  York  had  passed  an  act  author- 
izing the  governor  to  appoint  three  commis- 
sioners for  the  promotion  of  uniformity  of 
legislation,  to  examine  certain  stated  subjects, 
“to  ascertain  the  best  means  to  effect  an  as- 
similation and  uniformity  in  the  laws  of  the 
states,  and  especially  to  consider  whether  it 
would  be  wise  and  practicable  for  the  state  of 
New  York  to  invite  the  other  states  of  the 
Union  to  send  representatives  to  a convention 
to  draft  uniform  laws  to  be  submitted  for  the 
approval  and  adoption  of  the  several  states.” 

The  committee  recommended  the  passage  by 
'each  state  and  by  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States  of  a similar  act,  and  that  the  report 
and  resolutions  be  printed  and  distributed 
throughout  the  country. 

In  1891  the  committee  reported  that  as  it 
had  been  found  to  be  impossible  for  the  mem- 
bers to  meet  in  convention,  a circular  had  been 
sent  to  each  member  and  to  others,  asking 
what  steps  had  been  taken  to  secure  the  ap- 
pointment of  commissioners  in  the  different 
states.  The  replies  showed  that  commissioners 
had  been  appointed  in  New  York,  Pennsyl- 
vania, Massachusetts,  Michigan,  New  Jersey 
and  Delaware.  The  committee  found  a sub- 
stantial agreement  of  opinion  that  the  desired 
uniformity  could  best  be  secured  by  the  adop- 
tion by  the  state  legislatures,  of  uniform  acts 
prepared  by  these  commissioners.  The  wisdom 
of  this  conclusion  has  been  verified  by  the  re- 
sults of  experience.  “There  was  a substantial 
agreement  in  the  view  that  the  most  urgent 
and  immediate  need  of  a uniformity  or  unifica- 
tion was  in  the  matters  affecting  directly 
the  business  common  to  and  coextensive  with 
the  whole  country,  such  as  the  enforcement 
of  contracts;  the  validity,  negotiability  and 
construction  of  commercial  paper;  and  the 
formalities  of  all  legal  instruments  and  the 
proofs  of  their  authenticity.  It  was  appre- 
hended that  sudden,  radical  and  fundamental 
changes  in  the  laws  of  divorce,  descent  and 
distribution,  however  desirable,  would  meet 
with  the  greatest  difficulty,  and  in  most  states, 
changes  would  more  likely  be  adopted,  if  at 


all,  after  the  general  advantages  of  uniform- 
ity in  commercial  matters  had  been  demon- 
strated by  experience.” 

The  committee  on  uniform  state  laws  has 
reported  from  year  to  year  to  the  American 
Bar  Association  the  appointment  by  state 
after  state  of  commissioners  on  uniformity  of 
legislation,  and  now  there  are  commissioners 
from  fifty-three  states,  the  District  of  Colum- 
bia and  our  insular  possessions,  leaving  only 
the  state  of  Nevada  unrepresented.  As  these 
commissioners  thus  appointed  by  the  states 
meet  in  conference  each  year,  the  week  before 
the  American  Bar  Association  meets,  and  in  the 
same  place,  it  has  naturally  resulted  that  the 
work  on  uniformity  of  legislation  has  been 
done  by  the  commissioners  at  their  conferences, 
and  not  by  the  committee  on  uniform  state 
laws  of  the  American  Bar  Association. 

Uniform  Negotiable  Instruments  Law. — At 
the  conference  held  in  Detroit  in  1895,  the 
committee  on  commercial  law  was  authorized 
to  employ  expert  assistance  to  draft  a uniform 
act  relating  to  negotiable  instruments.  John 
J.  Crawford,  an  expert  in  this  branch  of 
law,  was  employed  to  prepare  such  a draft. 
It  was  then  printed  and  distributed  for  com- 
ment and  criticism. 

At  the  conference  of  1896  this  draft  was 
adopted  by  the  conference  and  recommended 
for  passage  by  the  state  legislatures.  It  was 
subsequently  endorsed  by  the  committee  on 
uniform  state  laws  of  the  American  Bankers’ 
Association  as  a “better  law  on  the  subject 
than  any  they  could  possibly  frame.”  Their  re- 
port was  adopted,  and  the  negotiable  instru- 
ments law  was  distributed  throughout  the 
country  by  this  association.  Year  after  year 
it  has  been  adopted  in  state  after  state,  and 
it  is  now  the  law  in  forty-six  states,  terri- 
tories, possessions  and  the  District  of  Colum- 
bia. 

Uniform  Sales  Act,  Warehouse  Receipts  Act, 
Bills  of  Lading  Act  and  Stock  Transfer  Act. — 

The  conference  secured  the  services  of  Pro- 
fessor Williston  of  the  Harvard  Law  School 
to  draft  a uniform  sales  act:  and  of  the  same 
eminent  authority  with  Barry  Mohun  of  the 
Washington  bar,  to  draft  a uniform  ware- 
house receipts  act.  The  sales  act  has  been 
adopted  in  eleven,  and  the  warehouse  receipts 
act  in  thirty,  of  our  states  and  territories. 
In  the  same  way  a uniform  bills  of  lading 
act  has  been  framed  and  is  now  the  law  in 
twelve  states;  and  a uniform  transfer  of 
stock  act  has  been  framed,  and  has  been 
adopted  in  ten  states.  These  acts  were  draft- 
ed by  Professor  Williston. 

Methods  of  Preparation. — After  careful  con- 
sideration of  each  section  of  every  one  of  these 
uniform  laws  in  committee  of  the  whole,  by  the 
conference,  with  the  draftsman,  each  draft  is 
printed  in  pamphlet  form  with  notes  and 
references  to  leading  cases  in  every  part  of  the 
country.  Copies  are  distributed  among  jurists, 


590 


UNIFORM  STATE  LEGISLATION 


judges,  law  schools,  textbook  writers,  lawyers, 
business  associations  and  others  whose  interests 
may  be  affected  by  the  act  under  consider- 
ation. The  committee  on  commercial  law  gives 
public  hearings  in  different  cities  during  the 
winter,  to  hear  suggestions  for  and  against 
the  act  under  consideration  Consideration 
thereof  is  resumed  at  the  next  annual  confer- 
ence and  changes  are  made  both  from  practical 
and  from  theoretical  points  of  view.  This 
course  is  continued  from  year  to  year,  so  long 
as  the  commissioners  think  it  desirable.  After 
reaching  agreement  in  this  painstaking  way  in 
committee  of  the  whole,  on  each  section  of  the 
proposed  act,  and  after  report  accordingly  to 
the  conference,  a vote  is  taken  upon  the  final 
adoption  of  the  completed  act,  each  state  cast- 
ing one  vote  through  its  commissioners  present. 
The  final  vote  is  generally  unanimous.  The 
expert  chosen  to  draft  a uniform  law  must  be 
one  who  has  knowledge  of  the  law  on  the  sub- 
ject and  the  decisions  thereon  in  all  the  states 


through  recommendations  to  the  state  legis- 
lature by  the  same  body  that  framed  the  uni- 
form law.  If  different  legislatures  amend  the 
law  differently,  there  will  be  an  end  to  uni- 
formity in  legislation. 

Additional  Uniform  Acts  under  Consider- 
ation.— The  draft  of  a uniform  partnership 
law  is  still  under  consideration  from  year  to 
year  by  the  conference,  delayed  through  the 
death  of  Dean  Ames  of  the  Harvard  Law 
School.  At  the  conference  held  in  Boston  in 
August  1911,  a uniform  child  labor  law  was 
adopted  after  two  years  consideration.  It  was 
recommended  for  passage  by  the  legislat- 
ures that  met  in  1912.  A uniform  law  for 
marriages  and  marriage  licenses  was  also 
adopted.  The  conference  has  under  consider- 
ation a uniform  employers’  liability  act,  a 
uniform  incorporation  act,  and  a uniform 
partnership  act. 

The  states  which  have  adopted  the  various 
laws  to  October  1,  1913,  are  as  follows: 


and  also  in  England.  He  must  know  the  his- 
tory of  the  conflicting  principles  and  doctrines 
that  have  resulted  in  the  tangle  of  conflicting 
laws  and  decisions  in  that  particular  branch 
of  the  law.  The  number  of  such  men  is 
limited. 

Relation  of  the  Courts  to  these  Laws. — The 

opinions  by  the  courts  of  many  states,  in  cases 
arising  under  the  uniform  Negotiable  Instru- 
ments Law,  show  appreciation  of  the  value  of 
the  work  of  this  conference.  See  for  instance, 
Brewster  vs.  Schrader,  26  Misc.  480;  Balti- 
more and  Ohio  R.  Co.  vs.  First  Nat.  Bk.  of 
Alexandria,  102  Va.  753;  Am.  Bk.  of  Orange 
vs.  McComb,  105  Va.  475;  Vander  Ploeg  vs. 
Van  Zunk,  135  Iowa,  350;  Rockfield  vs.  The 
First  Nat.  Bk.,  77  Ohio  St.  311 ; Dollar  Sgs. 
Banking  Co.  vs.  Bowen,  134  Wash.;  Wisner 
vs.  First  Nat.  Bk.  of  Gallitzin,  220  Pa.  21; 
First  Nat.  Bk.  of  Shawano  vs.  Miller,  139 
IFt's.  126;  Mechs.  and  Farmers’  Bk.  vs.  Kat- 
terjohn,  137  Ky.  427 ; Campbell  vs.  Fourth 
Nat.  Bk.,  137  Ky.  555;  State  Bk.  vs.  Bilstad, 
136  N.  IF.  204;  Brophy  Grocery  Co.  vs.  Wil- 
son, 45  Mont.  489;  Union  Tr.  Co.  vs.  Mc- 
Ginty,  212  Mass.  205. 

Unfortunately  the  courts  in  some  states 
have  not  yet  grasped  the  juristic  conception 
of  uniform  state  legislation  and  of  uniform 
decisions  thereunder  as  developing  a new  com- 
mon law — a law  common  to  all  the  states 
through  uniform  decisions  in  the  different 
states  under  the  same  uniform  law,  based  upon 
study  of  the  decisions  in  their  own  and  in  other 
states  of  cases  arising  under  the  same  sections 
of  the  same  law,  even  though  they  override 
prior  decisions  in  their  own  state.  To  com- 
plete the  success  of  uniform  state  legislation, 
there  must  be  uniformity  in  the  decisions  of 
cases  under  the  uniform  law.  Later,  if  amend- 
ments are  found  to  be  necessary  there  must 
also  be  uniformity  in  amendments  to  the  uni- 
form law,  This  can  only  be  successfully  done 

591 


NEGOTIABLE  INSTRUMENTS  LAW 
States 


Alabama 

Nevada 

Arizona 

New  Hampshire 

Arkansas 

New  Jersey 

Colorado 

New  Mexico 

Connecticut 

New  York 

Delaware 

North  Carolina 

Florida 

North  Dakota 

Idaho 

Ohio 

Illinois 

Oklahoma 

Indiana 

Oregon 

Iowa 

Pennsylvania 

Kansas 

Rhode  Island 

Kentucky 

South  Dakota 

Louisiana 

Tennessee 

Maryland 

Utah 

Massachusetts 

Vermont 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Virginia 

Washington 

Missouri 

West  Virginia 

Montana 

Wisconsin 

Nebraska 

Wyoming 

District  of  Columbia 
Alaska 
Hawaii 

Philippine  Islands 
WAREHOUSE  RECEIPTS  ACT 


California 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

Illinois 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Louisiana 

Maryland 

Massachusetts 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Missouri 

Nebraska 

New  Jersey 


New  Mexico 

New  York 

Ohio 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania 

Rhode  Island 

South  Dakota 

Tennessee 

Utah 

Vermont 

Virginia 

Washington 

Wisconsin 


District  of  Columbia 
Alaska 

Philippine  Islands 


SALES  ACT 


Arizona 

Connecticut 

Maryland 

Massachusetts 

Michigan 


New  Jersey 
New  York 
Ohio 

Rhode  Island 
Wisconsin 


Alaska 


UNIFORMITY  OF  PUBLIC  ACCOUNTS— UNIFORMITY  OF  RAILROAD  ACCOUNTS 


DIVORCE  ACT 


Delaware  New  Jersey  Wisconsin 

STOCK  TRANSFER  ACT 


Louisiana 
Maryland 
Massachusetts 
Michigan 
New  York 


Ohio 

Pennsylvania 
Rhode  Island 
Wisconsin 


BILLS  OF  LADING  ACT 


Connecticut 

Illinois 

Iowa 

Louisiana 

Maryland 


Massachusetts 
New  Jersey 
New  York 
Ohio 

Pennsylvania 


Alaska 


ACT  RELATING  TO  WILLS  EXECUTED  WITH- 
OUT  THE  STATE 


Colorado 

Kansas 

Louisiana 

Massachusetts 


Michigan 
Rhode  Island 
Washington 
Wisconsin 


Alaska 

FAMILY  DESERTION  ACT 


Delaware  North  Dakota 

Kansas  Texas 

Massachusetts  Wisconsin 

At  the  conference  in  Montreal  in  August, 
1913,  a special  committee,  A.  M.  Eaton,  chair- 
man, was  appointed  to  secure  uniformity  in 
judicial  decisions  in  cases  arising  under  these 
uniform  laws. 

See  Constitutions  of  States,  Characteris- 
tics  of;  Legislative  Reference  Bureau; 
Legislature  and  Legislative  Reform;  Mar- 
riage and  Divorce;  State  Legislature; 
Statutes,  State. 

References:  Conference  of  Commissioners  on 
Uniform  State  Laws,  Annual  Proceedings-,  also 
in  Am.  Bar  Assoc.,  Annual  Reports-,  J.  D. 
Crawford,  The  Negotiable  Instruments  Laio 
(1908);  J.  D.  Brannan,  Negotiable  Instru- 
ments Law  (1910)  ; S.  E.  Baldwin  in  Harvard 
Law  Revieio,  XXII,  403;  F.  Pollock,  “Law 
of  Reason”  in  Michigan  Laio  Review 
(Dec.,  1903);  texts  of  the  uniform  statutes 
in  Commission  of  Uniform  State  Laws,  Am. 
Uniform  Commonwealth  Acts  (1910);  Am. 
Year  Rook,  1911,  172.  Amasa  M.  Eaton. 


UNIFORMITY  OF  PUBLIC  ACCOUNTS. 

Since  1895  there  has  been  substantial  progress 
in  a national  movement  to  secure  uniformity 
in  the  keeping  of  municipal  accounts.  It  is 
desirable  that  the  expenses  of  one  municipality 
be  contrasted  with  that  of  another,  in  order, 
if  possible,  to  determine  whether  there  has  been 
extravagance,  and  to  promote  more  economical 
administration.  Such  procedure  also  tends  to 
make  municipal  accounts  more  intelligible,  and 
thus  enable  citizens  to  understand  more  clear- 
ly the  purposes  for  which  expenditures  are 
made,  and  to  compare  financial  operations  for 
a series  of  years.  On  account  of  the  differences 
in  the  forms  of  city  governments  which  have 
been  chartered  under  different  state  laws,  it 
is  natural  that  the  systems  of  accounting 


should  vary.  In  some  cities  the  accounts  ie- 
cord  cash  transactions  only;  and  in  others 
cash  receipts  and  warrant  expenditures,  which 
represent  expenditures  authorized,  but  not 
necessarily  paid.  In  others,  the  accounts  set 
forth  the  amounts  accruing  as  revenue  or  ex- 
penditures, regardless  of  whether  received  or 
paid.  Confusion  has  also  arisen  because  pay- 
ments are  classified  according  to  the  adminis- 
trative agencies  expending  the  same,  rather 
than  according  to  their  objects.  In  many  cases 
the  system  of  keeping  municipal  records  is 
prescribed  by  antiquated  statutory  provisions 
or  by  charter  requirements.  Another  source 
of  embarrassment  is  the  lack  of  a standard 
terminology  in  accounting.  There  are  indi- 
cations, however,  that  accountancy  is  being 
recognized  as  an  independent  business  art  or 
profession,  having  in  view  something  more  than 
proficiency  in  bookkeeping. 

Methods  in  Cities. — The  National  Municipal 
League,  organized  in  1894,  early  took  the  lead 
in  emphasizing  the  need  of  uniform  municipal 
accounting,  and  in  1901  the  city  of  Newton, 
Mass.,  published  a report  of  its  finances  ac- 
cording to  the  plan  proposed  by  the  League. 
Baltimore,  Chicago,  and  several  Massachusetts 
cities  followed;  then  Ohio  passed  a uniform 
accounting  law,  which  has  been  imitated  by  a 
few  other  states.  Massachusetts  in  1906  au- 
thorized its  bureau  of  statistics  to  compile, 
analyze  and  publish  the  financial  returns  of 
cities.  In  the  meantime  the  federal  Bureau 
of  the  Census  has  engaged  in  the  work  of  com- 
piling satisfies  of  cities,  now  published  in  an- 
nual volumes.  Many  states  now  require  ac- 
counts of  public  institutions,  or  groups  of  such 
institutions,  to  be  submitted  in  a prescribed 
form  so  as  to  publish  comparative  statistics. 
The  federal  accounts  are  by  no  means  uniform 
within  the  departments,  and  in  1911  a Presi- 
dent’s Efficiency  Commission  (see)  was  created 
to  study  the  whole  question  and  suggest  re- 
forms. See  Budgets,  State  and  Local;  Pub- 
lic Accounts.  References:  F.  A.  Cleveland, 
Chapters  on  Municipal  Administration  and  Ac- 
counting ( 1909 ) ; R.  H.  Hess,  “Cost  of  Govern- 
ment in  Minnesota”  in  Minnesota  Tax  Com- 
mission, Second  Biennial  Report  (1910),  chs. 
xxii-xxiii;  Statistics  of  Cities,  Special  Annual 
Reports  (since  1903)  ; J.  A.  Fairlie,  Essays  in 
Municipal  Administration  (1908),  275-285. 

Davis  R.  Dewey. 

UNIFORMITY  OF  RAILROAD  ACCOUNTS. 

Previous  to  the  enactment  of  the  Act  to  Regu- 
late Commerce  in  1887,  there  was  little  uni- 
formity in  the  accounting  systems  of  the  var- 
ious railroads.  Section  20  of  the  act  of  1887 
provided  that  the  commission  might,  within  its 
discretion,  prescribe  the  manner  in  which  the 
accounts  of  carriers  should  be  kept.  This  pro- 
vision was  a part  of  the  section  requiring  an- 
nual reports  and  prescribing  their  character, 
and  such  development  of  uniform  accounting 


592 


UNION— UNION  PARTY 


ns  took  place  in  the  early  years  of  the  com- 
mission’s history  was  associated  with  the  move- 
ment for  uniform  annual  reports. 

A “classification  of  operating  expenses,” 
adopted  by  the  state  railroad  commissioners 
in  1879,  was  in  general  use  among  the  rail- 
roads and  this  was  early  revised  and  issued 
by  the  commission.  Through  the  requirement 
of  uniformity  in  annual  reports,  uniformity 
had  developed  to  some  extent  in  the  bookkeep- 
ing methods  of  the  carriers. 

But  section  20  was  not  deemed  sufficently 
comprehensive  in  its  terms  to  authorize  the 
commission  to  impose  a system  of  accounting 
upon  the  railroads.  By  an  amendment  to  the 
act  in  1906  the  commission  was  given  author- 
ity to  prescribe  bookkeeping  methods,  and 
penalties  were  provided  for  failure  to  conform 
to  the  methods  prescribed.  Employment  of 
examiners  to  inspect  the  books  was  authorized. 
Under  this  authority  the  commission,  in  colla- 
boration with  the  accounting  officers  of  the 
railroads,  has  proceeded  with  the  construction 
of  a uniform  system  of  accounting  which  in- 
cludes every  phase  of  railroad  operating  and 
finance.  This  work  was  carefully  completed 
in  1913  and  is  being  adopted  generally  by  the 
railroads.  Opposition  has  developed  to  some 
of  the  orders  of  the  commission,  notably  in 
the  matter  of  depreciation  accounts,  and  cer- 
tain matters  of  dispute  will  have  to  be  passed 
upon  by  the  courts  before  the  system  of  uni- 
form accounting  can  be  put  completely  into 
operation.  See  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission; Railroad  Capitalization;  Rail- 
road Commissions,  State.  Reference:  H.  C. 
Adams  in  Quart.  -Jour,  of  Econ.,  XXII  (1908), 
361-383.  F.  H.  D. 

UNION.  A word  often  vaguely  used  in 
somewhat  different  senses.  It  is  sometimes 
used  to  mean  the  United  States  as  a federal 
state  or  federal  republic;  sometimes  the  na- 
tional government  in  distinction  from  the 
states;  sometimes  the  relationship  between  the 
different  commonwealths  of  the  federal  state. 
Especially  in  early  days  the  word  Union  was 
used  in  a somewhat  more  primitive  sense  to 
mean  the  cooperation  of  the  states  and  people 
as  contradistinguished  from  disunion  or  seces- 
sion. A.  C.  McL. 

UNION  LABOR.  This  term  is  applied  to  all 
work  done  by  the  members  of  labor  organi- 
zations, or  under  conditions  which  are  estab- 
lished by  a collective  bargain  between  unions 
and  employers.  It  is  more  broadly  applied 
also  to  labor  unions  and  their  activities  con- 
sidered collectively.  See  Labor  Organi- 
zations; Open  and  Closed  Shop.  Reference: 
F.  T.  Carlton,  Hist,  and  Problems  of  Or- 
ganized Labor  (1911).  J.  R.  C. 

UNION  LABOR  PARTY.  This  party  ap- 
peared in  national  politics  in  a single  cam- 


paign, that  of  1888.  It  was  the  successor  of 
the  Greenback  party  (see)  and  the  predecessor 
of  the  Populist  party  (see),  representing 
essentially  the  principles  of  these  parties.  It 
was  formed  by  a union  of  the  Greenback 
Labor  Party  (see),  with  the  industrial  trade 
union  movement  in  politics.  Its  name  im- 
plies the  purpose  for  which  it  stood,  to  se- 
cure the  union  of  rural  and  urban  labor 
for  industrial  reforms  on  advanced  democratic 
lines.  Its  platform  related  chiefly  to:  (1) 
land;  (2)  transportation;  (3)  money.  It  op- 
posed land  monopoly  and  favored  limitation  of 
land  ownership;  demanded  public  ownership 
of  transportation  lines;  a national  greenback 
currency,  with  “free  coinage  of  silver  ( see 
Silver  Coinage  Controversy)  while  we  have 
free  coinage  of  gold;”  arbitration  in  labor 
troubles;  a graduated  income  tax;  popular 
election  of  U.  S.  Senators;  and  woman  suf- 
frage. It  proclaimed  as  the  paramount  issue 
“the  abolition  of  usury,  monopoly,  and  trusts.” 
The  party  nominated  A.  J.  Streeter,  of  Illi- 
nois, for  President,  and  polled  146,897  votes. 
See  Labor  Parties.  References:  E.  Stan- 
wood,  Hist,  of  the  Presidency  (1898)  ; M.  Hill- 
quit,  Hist,  of  Socialism  in  the  U.  8.  (1903). 

J.  A.  W. 

UNION  PARTY.  The  Union,  or  the  Na- 
tional Union  party  was  the  name  assumed 
by  the  Republican  party  in  the  campaign  and 
election  of  1864  and  for  the  years  immediately 
following.  The  assault  on  the  flag  at  Sumter 
and  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War  tended  to 
dissolve  party  lines  in  the  North,  and  men 
of  all  parties  rallied  to  the  support  of  the 
LTnion.  The  war  had  not  advanced  far,  how- 
ever, until  party  opposition  arose  to  the  war 
administration,  and  new  lines  of  party  cleav- 
age appeared.  This  opposition  worked  under 
the  name  and  with  the  organs  of  the  Demo- 
cratic party  and  it  sought  to  turn  Mr.  Lin- 
coln’s administration  out  of  power  on  the 
ground  that  the  war  was  a failure  as  a means 
of  saving  the  Union;  that  it  was  being  per- 
verted from  a Union-saving  war  to  a war  for 
abolition,  that  the  Constitution  was  being 
violated  by  arbitrary  arrests,  the  suppression 
of  free  speech,  etc.  Mr.  Lincoln  and  his 
supporters  appealed  for  support  to  the  “War 
Democrats”  and  to  all  who  would  stand  by  the 
LTnion  at  whatever  cost  and  continue  the  war 
for  its  preservation.  The  Republicans  were, 
therefore,  ready  to  abandon  their  distinctive 
party  character,  to  take  a new  name,  and  to 
put  forward  a new  paramount  issue:  and, 
“laying  aside  all  differences  of  political  opin- 
ion,” they  required  only  one  test  of  member- 
ship in  the  party,  namely,  a desire  for  “the 
unconditional  maintenance  of  the  Union,  the 
supremacy  of  the  Constitution  and  the  com- 
plete suppression  of  the  existing  rebellion  by 
vigorous  war  and  all  apt  and  efficient  means.” 
Thus  the  national  committee  in  its  “call” 


593 


UNION  SAVER— UNITED  NETHERLANDS 


for  the  convention,  assumed  responsibility  for 
suppressing  the  party  name,  which  was  done 
also  in  the  official  proceedings  of  the  conven- 
tion. In  order  to  give  a “Union”  and  not  a 
‘Republican”  cast  to  the  party,  Andrew 
Johnson,  a Democrat  from  Tennessee,  was 
nominated  for  Vice-President  with  Lincoln, 
and  many  former  Douglas  and  Breckinridge 
Democrats  in  the  North  and  in  the  border 
states  came  into  the  “LTnion”  party  in  1804, 
while  others  who  had  supported  Lincoln  and 
the  Republicans  in  I860  on  the  issue  of  slav- 
ery extension  refused  their  support  to  the  so- 
called  “LTnion”  party  in  its  war  methods  of 
saving  the  Union.  The  great  body  of  the 
“Constitutional  Democrats”  held  this  “Nation- 
al Union”  party  to  be  merely  the  Republicans 
under  another  name,  as  in  fact  it  was,  for 
the  most  part;  and  they  charged  the  Republi- 
cans with  resorting  to  this  change  of  name 
and  issue  as  a means  of  gaining  for  themselves 
the  benefit  of  the  deep  seated  and  wide  spread 
Union  sentiment  in  northern  and  border  states. 
After  the  war  the  Union  party  divided  into 
Conservative  and  Radical  wings  on  the  prob- 
lem of  reconstruction  (see).  The  Radicals 
came  into  dominating  control  of  the  party 
and  in  the  national  presidential  convention  of 
1868  the  name  “National  Union  Republican” 
party  was  assumed.  See  Democratic  Party; 
Republican  Party.  References:  W.  A.  Dun- 
ning, “The  Second  Birth  of  the  Republican 
Party”  in  Am.  Hist.  Review,  XVI  (1910),  56- 
63 ; J.  K.  Hosmer,  Outcome  of  the  Civil  War 
(1907),  ch.,  ix.  James  A.  Woodburn. 

UNION  SAVER.  The  element  of  the  Whig 
party  during  the  two  decades  preceding  the 
Civil  War,  which  advocated  compromising 
measures  in  dealing  with  slavery.  They  would 
preserve  the  “compromises  of  the  Constitution” 
and  save  the  Union  at  the  price  of  granting 
the  concessions  demanded  by  the  South. 

0.  C.  H. 

UNIT  RULE.  This  rule  is  in  vogue  in 
Democratic  national  conventions.  When  in- 
structions are  given  to  delegates  by  the  state 
conventions  to  vote  as  a unit,  such  instruc- 
tions are  recognized  and  enforced  by  the  na- 
tional convention;  the  majority  of  the  dele- 
gation has  a right  to  determine  how  the  total 
vote  from  the  state  shall  be  cast.  “When  the 
states  are  called  to  vote,  the  announcement 
of  the  chairman  of  the  delegation  is  accept- 
ed as  the  correct  vote  of  the  delegation  un- 
less challenged  by  some  member  of  it,  in  which 
case  the  delegation  is  polled  in  open  conven- 
tion. If  the  delegation  is  under  unit  instruc- 
tions the  vote  of  the  state  is  then  cast  as  a 
unit  with  the  majority;  if  not,  the  vote 
stands  as  polled.”  Thus  the  state  convention 
is  recognized  as  of  supreme  authority.  The 
Republicans  have  never  adopted  this  rule.  It 
is  an  inheritance  of  the  Democratic  party 


and  a survival  of  its  traditional  state 
rights  principles.  “I  bid  you  consider  long 
and  well,”  said  a delegate  in  the  Demo- 
cratic convention  in  1884,  “before  you  strike 
down  the  sovereign  power  of  our  state  ex- 
pressed by  the  unanimous  will  of  its  dele- 
gates.” There  was  much  discussion  of  the 
rule  in  the  convention  of  1912,  but  it  was 
finally  decided  to  enforce  the  rule  “except  in 
such  states  as  have  by  mandatory  statutes 
provided  for  the  nomination  and  election  of 
delegates  to  national  conventions  in  congres- 
sional districts.”  See  Convention,  Political; 
Nomination  of  the  President.  References: 
J.  A.  Woodburn,  Political  Parties  and  Party 
Problems  (1903),  182-190;  C.  Becker,  “Unit 
Rule  in  National  Nominating  Conventions”  in 
Am.  Hist.  Review,  V (1899),  64-83. 

A.  C.  McL. 

UNITARY  STATE.  That  form  of  govern- 
ment in  which  the  entire  governmental  au- 
thority is  vested  fundamentally  in  a single 
organization,  in  distinction  from  a federal 
government,  and  in  which  the  local  units  are 
creatures  of  the  central  government,  their 
existence  and  powers  being  modified  or  de- 
stroyed at  its  pleasure.  Examples,  are  France 
and  England.  See  States,  Classification  of. 

B.  E.  H. 

UNITED  LABOR  PARTY.  The  smaller, 

and  the  more  radical,  of  two  Labor  parties 
which  appeared  in  the  presidential  contest  of 
1888.  It  agreed  with  most  of  the  platform  of 
the  Union  Labor  party  (see)  of  that  year, 
but  differed  from  that  party  chiefly  by  its  in- 
sistence upon  the  single  tax  and  the  abolition 
of  private  property  in  land.  It  traced  eco- 
nomic evils  to  “a  fundamental  wrong — the 
making  of  land  the  exclusive  property  of  only 
a portion  of  the  community.”  It  proposed  to 
take  the  unearned  increment  for  society  and 
have  “no  man  taxed  on  the  wealth  he  pro- 
duces.” Rev.  Father  McGlynn  was  prominent 
in  the  party’s  councils.  It  cast  2,808  votes 
for  R.  H.  Cowdrey,  of  Illinois,  for  President. 
See  Labor  Parties.  Reference:  Appleton’s 
Annual  Cyclopedia,  1888,  778. 

J.  A.  W. 

UNITED  NETHERLANDS.  Stirred  by  the 

horrors  of  the  “Spanish  Fury”  there  was 
formed  on  November  8,  1576,  a treaty  be- 
tween the  several  provinces  of  the  Nether- 
lands. This  agreement  was  known  as  the 
“Pacification  of  Ghent.”  By  its  terms,  the 
provinces  bound  themselves  to  unite  in  driv- 
ing out  the  foreign  soldiery,  the  Protestant 
faith  was  established  in  Holland  and  Zee- 
land  and  was  guaranteed  toleration  in  other 
provinces,  and  the  Inquisition  was  condemned. 
This  treaty  was  confirmed  by  popular  accla- 
mation. In  1579  this  agreement  took  definite 
and  lasting  form  in  the  Union  of  Utrecht,  by 


594 


UNITED  STATES  AS  A FEDERAL  STATE 


which  William  the  Silent,  Prince  of  Orange, 
brought  together  the  seven  provinces  of  Hol- 
land, Zeeland,  Utrecht,  Gelderland,  Zutphen 
and  the  two  Frisian  provinces  into  a league 
which  was  eventually  to  grow  into  the  Repub- 
lic of  the  United  Netherlands.  It  endured 
down  to  1746,  when  an  hereditary  stadtholder- 
ship  was  accepted.  The  form  of  polity  under 
which  the  Netherlands  were  organized  was  a 
loose  confederation,  leaving  always  a backdoor 
of  escape  open  from  a federal  to  a monarchical 
form.  An  assembly  of  delegates,  called  the 


States  General,  deliberated  for  the  entire  con- 
federation, possessing  the  power  of  levying 
duties  as  well  as  of  making  war  and  of  nego- 
tiating peace.  A glaring  weakness  was  found 
in  the  rule  of  unanimity  of  all  the  separate 
estates  in  war,  peace  and  alliance.  The  modern 
kingdom  of  the  Netherlands  was  formed  in 
1815.  See  Confederation;  Federal  State. 
References:  H.  Treitschke,  Politik  (1900), 
II,  311;  J.  D.  Wooley,  Pol.  Sci.  (1889),  II, 
223-235;  T.  E.  May,  Democracy  in  Europe 
(1891),  51-86.  B.  E.  H. 


UNITED  STATES  AS  A FEDERAL  STATE 


Definition. — A federal  state  has  been  de- 
fined by  Mr.  Dicey  as  “a  political  contrivance 
intended  to  reconcile  national  unity  and  powef 
with  the  maintenance  of  ‘state  rights.’  ” 
While  this  definition  might  perhaps  be  at- 
tacked on  purely  theoretical  grounds,  it  will 
hold  good  for  practical  purposes.  Certainly 
the  United  States  may  justly  be  said  to  have 
been  established  to  attain  such  objects,  to  make 
the  Union  strong  and  competent,  while  leaving 
or  reserving  to  the  states  adequate  power  to 
care  for  local  interests.  The  nature  of  the 
federal  system  in  America  has  been  elaborate- 
ly discussed  in  American  history  in  connec- 
tion with  the  doctrine  of  state  rights  and 
state  sovereignty,  and  gradually  through 
practical  operation  of  government,  through 
civil  war,  and  through  a multitude  of  judicial 
decisions,  the  nature  of  the  American  Union 
has  been  established  or  brought  to  light. 

Location  of  Sovereignty. — In  considering 
any  system  the  first  question  must  naturally 
be  the  location  of  sovereignty.  This  very 
word,  so  freely  bandied  about  in  political 
harangues  and  theoretical  treatises,  always 
presents  difficulties  because  of  the  uncertainty 
of  its  real  significance.  But  if  we  mean  by 
the  word  nothing  more  than  the  power,  recog- 
nized by  the  legal  structure  of  the  state,  ulti- 
mately to  do  everything  and  any  thing  of  a 
political  character,  we  should  have  to  say  that 
sovereignty  resides  in  America  in  the  power 
which  can  amend  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  which  could,  therefore,  redistribute 
power  between  the  center  and  the  parts  or  put 
new  limits  on  governmental  action.  As  the 
law  now  stands  there  is  only  one  peculiar  re- 
striction on  the  power  of  amendment,  viz.,  the 
provision  that  no  state  shall,  without  its  con- 
sent, be  deprived  of  its  equal  suffrage  in  the 
Senate  (Art.  V).  We  are  not  thinking  in 
terms  of  law  at  all  when  we  speak  as  if  the 
mass  of  the  people,  by  methods  unprovided  for 
by  the  existing  system,  could  freely  work  their 
will  in  the  reorganization  of  the  republic.  It 
must  be  said  however  that  this  theory  as  to  the 
residence  of  sovereignty  in  the  amending 


power  can  not  be  considered  established  either 
by  judicial  construction  or  by  ordinary  as- 
sumption. It  is  still  common  to  speak  of  one 
of  the  commonwealths  of  the  Union  as  a 
sovereign  state,  and  by  this  is  meant  that  it 
possesses  great  powers  of  sovereignty  and, 
probably,  even  more,  attributes  of  sovereignty. 
It  was  common  in  years  gone  by  to  speak  of 
divided  sovereignty,  and  though  theoretical 
publicists  may  cast  such  an  idea  to  the  winds 
as  illogical  and  inconceivable,  it  is  probably 
correct  to  say  that  on  the  whole,  if  we  look 
through  the  course  of  constitutional  construc- 
tion, the  ordinary  notion  has  been  that  the 
states  came  into  the  Union  and  surrendered  a 
portion  of  their  sovereignty. 

This  matter  of  sovereignty  is  now,  fortu- 
nately, only  of  historical  or  theoretical  interest. 
It  is  now  well  established  that  we  have  a 
Constitution,  which  provides  for  its  own  es- 
sential alteration  by  amendment,  assumes  the 
existence  of  states  possessed  of  all  power 
which  is  not  prohibited  either  expressly  or  im- 
pliedly by  the  Federal  Constitution.  Despite 
the  great  changes  wrought  by  the  Civil  War 
and  especially  in  the  adoption  of  the  Four- 
teenth Amendment  (see),  the  fundamental 
fact  of  distribution  is  still  stated  in  the  Tenth 
Amendment: 

The  powers  not  delegated  to  the  United  States 
by  the  Constitution,  not  prohibited  by  it  to  the 
states,  are  reserved  to  the  states  respectively,  or 
to  the  people. 

The  Federal  Constitution  is  a grant  of 
powers,  and  the  government  has  only  the  power 
granted.  There  has,  however,  been  a tendency, 
especially  noticeable  in  recent  years,  to  de- 
clare that  the  Federal  Government  possesses 
rights  and  authority  beyond  the  enumerated 
powers.  One  form  of  argument  in  behalf  of 
the  theory  has  its  attractive  qualities;  for  it 
is  cogently  argued  that  the  nation  is  and 
should  be  totally  competent  and  that  when 
the  states  cannot  act,  because  the  need  to  be 
met  is  not  one  merely  of  a single  locality, 
then  the  national  government,  representing  all 
the  people,  should  have  the  complete  power  to 


595 


UNITED  STATES  AS  A FEDERAL  STATE 


act.  Tli is  doctrine  is  different  from  the  doc- 
trine of  implied  powers  (see)  and  even  dif- 
ferent from  that  of  resulting  powers  (see)  ; 
but  it  is  not  easily  distinguishable  from  that 
of  “inherent  sovereignty”  which  would  appear 
to  mean  that  all  legislative  power  must  be 
vested  somewhere,  that  the  states  can  care  only 
for  purely  local  matters,  and  that  consequently 
all  powers  national  in  their  scope  must  be 
vested  in  the  national  government,  a doctrine 
which  was  emphatically  rejected  by  the  Su- 
preme Court  in  1907  in  the  case  of  Kansas  vs. 
Colorado  (200  U.  8.  46). 

Two  Governments. — The  scheme  of  federal 
organization  in  the  United  States  contemplates 
the  existence  of  two  governments  immediately 
over  each  citizen,  each  government  limited  in 
its  scope,  but  each  with  authority  to  act  with- 
out eonllict  or,  commonly,  without  even  con- 
tact with  the  other,  and  to  act  directly 
through  its  own  officers.  Such  a scheme  is 
not  a necessary  method  in  a federal  state;  in 
Germany,  for  example,  the  central  govern- 
ment largely  depends  upon  the  commonwealth 
officials  in  the  execution  of  the  laws  of  the 
empire.  But  American  experience  under  the 
Confederation  (see)  instructed  the  framers  of 
our  Constitution  to  avoid  relationship  with 
state  governments.  This  absence  of  contact 
between  governments  cannot  be  fully  main- 
tained; the  court  system  of  the  national  gov- 
ernment is  to  some  degree  interlocked  with 
the  court  system  of  the  states ; and  while  legis- 
lation could  presumably  go  further  than  it  has 
done  to  secure  exclusive  jurisdiction  in  fed- 
eral courts,  complete  isolation  would  practical- 
ly be  impossible;  legislation  has  provided  for 
the  right  of  appeal  under  certain  conditions 
from  state  courts  to  the  federal  Supreme  Court, 
as  well  as  for  the  removal  of  causes  (see 
Courts,  Federal).  Federal  courts  have  even 
gone  to  the  extent  of  enjoining  proceedings  in 
state  courts,  a step  which,  however,  would  be 
taken  only  in  exceptional  circumstances. 
Moreover,  the  courts  of  the  United  States  have 
issued  injunctions  to  state  officials  restraining 
them  from  carrying  out  acts  alleged  to  be  un- 
constitutional; and  writs  of  mandamus  have 
been  likewise  awarded.  Exceptions  are,  how- 
ever, here  unimportant;  the  main  quality  of 
the  American  federal  system  is  that  each  gov- 
ernment makes  and  administers  its  own  laws, 
and  in  the  vast  majority  of  cases  uses  its  own 
officers  and  those  alone.  The  simple  principle 
is  that  if  one  government  is  acting  within  its 
constitutional  limits,  the  other  will  not  in- 
terfere. A principle  which  makes  this  whole 
system  more  workable  than  it  otherwise  would 
be  is  this,  that  an  officer  attempting  to  execute 
an  unconstitutional  law  is  in  law  not  acting  as 
an  officer. 

Concurrent  Power. — The  fact  that  certain 
powers  are  given  to  the  national  government 
is  not  complete  evidence  that  the  states  can- 
not legislate;  on  the  contrary  the  states  may 


also  legislate  provided  they  are  not  prohibited; 
the  prohibition  may  be  express  or  implied,  and 
the  implication  may  arise  from  the  character 
of  the  power  and  from  the  nature  of  the  two 
governments  and  their  fields  of  activity.  In 
some  few  cases  there  is  opportunity  for  actual 
concurrent  action ; in  others,  even  when  the 
state  has  the  right  to  legislate  upon  a certain 
subject,  its  legislation  is  suspended  when  Con- 
gress enters  the  field  (see  Concurrent 
Powers  ) . 

Supreme  Law  of  the  Land. — The  Constitu- 
tion and  the  laws  of  the  United  States  and  all 
treaties  made  under  the  authority  of  the 
United  States  are  the  supreme  law  of  the  land 
(Art.  vi,  If  2.)  All  state  acts  or  constitutions 
at  variance  with  the  constitutional  law  and 
treaties  are  ipso  facto  void.  Thus  the  Consti- 
tution itself  is  law,  and  the  courts  of  the  states 
are  called  upon  by  a recognition  of  its  binding 
effect  to  preserve  the  essentials  of  the  federal 
system.  The  early  defenders  of  “state  rights” 
did  not  so  much  seek  to  prove  that  the 
states  were  not  bound  by  the  plain  sense  of 
the  Constitution,  as  to  declare  that  the  nation- 
al government  was  so  bound  and  it  was  not 
the  final  judge  of  its  own  authority  (see 
Virginia  and  Kentucky  Resolutions).  Of 
course  this  principle  was  insisted  upon  by  the 
advocates  of  state  sovereignty  and  nullification. 
The  federal  Supreme  Court  always  maintained 
its  right  to  judge,  in  cases  properly  brought 
before  it,  of  the  extent  of  federal  and  state 
authority.  This  right  of  the  court,  often  as- 
serted even  in  early  days,  is  now  a settled 
principle  of  the  American  law  (see  Law, 
Constitutional  American;  Courts  and  Un- 
constitutional Legislation).  It  is  need- 
less to  say  that  the  states  may  by  the  process 
of  amendment  place  an  interpretation  on  the 
Constitution  or,  as  we  have  said,  radically 
alter  its  terms. 

New  States. — The  United  States  has  gradu- 
ally grown  by  the  admission  of  new  states 
(Art.  IV,  Sec.  iii)  and  for  this  the  Constitu- 
tion expressly  provides  (see  New  States, 
Admission  of).  There  is  some  reason  for 
thinking  that  the  framers  of  the  Constitution 
did  not  intend  to  make  the  equality  of  states  a 
constitutional  necessity  (see  Constitution  of 
the  United  States,  Compromises  of).  When 
the  subject  of  admission  of  new  states  was 
under  discussion  in  the  Convention,  there  was 
objection  from  some  of  the  members  to  the 
admission  of  new  states  in  the  West  on  terms 
of  equality  with  the  old,  and  the  final  provi- 
sion of  the  Constitution  on  the  subject  looks 
like  a compromise  or  an  evasion  of  the  prin- 
ciple. The  actual  practice  of  Congress  in  ad- 
mitting new  states  has  likewise  thrown  doubt 
upon  the  character  of  the  LTnion  in  this  par- 
ticular. The  right  to  place  conditions  on  ad- 
mission is  not  open  to  question  and  probably 
this  right  would  include  the  power  to  place 
conditions  which,  could  they  be  enforced,  would 


596 


UNITED  STATES  AS  A TERRITORIAL  EXPRESSION 


have  the  effect  of  preventing  the  new  state 
from  exercising  freely  in  all  respects  the  full 
measure  of  political  power  possessed  by  other 
members  of  the  Union.  Conditions  of  the  lat- 
ter variety,  valid  as  conditions  precedent, 
cannot  probably  be  legally  enforced  after  ad- 
mission; we  may  consider  it  as  established 
doctrine  that  a state  once  in  the  Union  has  its 
full  and  equal  share  of  political  power,  or,  to 
use  the  words  of  the  Federal  Court,  “All  the 
rights  of  dominion  and  sovereignty  which  be- 
longed to  the  original  states”  (Bolin  vs.  Ne- 
braska, 170  U.  S.  83;  Coyle  vs.  Oklahoma, 
221  V.  S.  559). 

Indestructible  Union. — The  Civil  War  de- 
cided once  for  all  that  the  states  could  not 
secede  and  that  the  Union  was  indestructible. 
The  right  to  coerce  a state  was  a subject  of 
considerable  discussion  at  the  outbreak  of  the 
war.  The  Constitution  plainly  does  not  pro- 
vide for  coercion,  and  probably  in  strictest 
theory  there  is  no  need  at  any  time  for  actual 
coercion  of  states  as  subh;  the  central  govern- 
ment coming  into  immediate  contact  with  its 
own  citizens  can  hold  them  to  their  allegiance 
and  can  force  them  to  obey  the  law.  No 
means  are  provided  by  the  Constitution  for 
compelling  states  to  perform  their  political 
functions.  Should  a state  refuse  to  abide  by 
a decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  in  a case  where  a state  was  a party, 
for  example  in  a suit  between  states,  difficulties 
might  conceivably  arise;  but  in  all  probability 
here  again  the  power  over  individuals,  a power 
supported  by  the  doctrine  that  officers  of  states 
acting  illegally  are  not  officers  in  the  eye  of 
the  law,  would  in  most  cases  avoid  in  theory 
the  actual  conflict  between  governments. 
Mandamus  moreover,  as  we  have  said,  may  in 
some  circumstances  be  awarded  to  compel  per- 
formance of  duties  purely  administrative  in 
character. 

Citizenship. — A full  appreciation  of  the  na- 
ture of  the  federal  system  necessitates  knowl- 
edge of  the  principles  of  citizenship  and  also 
of  the  relations  between  the  states.  These  sub- 
jects are  discussed  in  other  portions  of  this 
Cyclopedia  and  only  a word  is  necessary  here 
( see  Citizenship  in  tiie  United  States; 
Compacts  Between  States;  Double  Citizen- 
ship; Privileges  and  Immunities;  Inter- 
state Law).  The  United  States  bestows  citi- 
zenship on  aliens ; and  a person  born  or  natura- 
lized in  the  United  States  and  subject  to  the 
jurisdiction  thereof  is  a citizen  of  the  United 
States  and  the  state  wherein  he  resides.  In 
general  the  principles  of  private  international 
law  (see)  are  the  principles  of  interstate  law; 
but  the  Constitution  has  made  certain  matters 
( see  Extradition;  Faith  and  Credit;  Judg- 
ments, Interstate  Recognition  of)  , which 
might  otherwise  rest  on  comity,  constitutional 
obligations. 

See  Bundesstaat;  Concurrent  Powers; 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  Pro- 


hibitions in;  Double  Citizenship;  Federal 
State;  Interstate  Law  and  Relations; 
State  Sovereignty;  States,  Classification 
of. 

References:  W.  W.  Willoughby,  Constitu- 
tional Law  of  the  U.  8.  (1910),  passim , Nature 
of  the  State  (1896),  238-275;  J.  Bryce,  Am. 
Commonwealth  (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  32^37. 
312-358;  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Government  and 
Politics  (1910),  ch.  iii;  A.  V.  Dicey,  Intro- 
duction to  the  Study  of  the  Law  of  the  Consti- 
tution (1908),  134-176;  J.  W.  Burgess,  Pol. 
Sci.  and  Comparative  Constitutional  Law 
(1893),  I,  142-154. 

Andrew  C.  MacLaughlin. 

UNITED  STATES  AS  A TERRITORIAL 
EXPRESSION.  The  United  States  as  a terri- 
torial expression  has,  in  international  law,  a 
meaning  different  from  that  which  it  has  re- 
ceived in  constitutional  law.  Within  this 
latter  field  it  has,  in  turn,  a variety  of  signifi- 
cations. Internationally  speaking  the  United 
States  includes  every  portion  of  the  world’s 
area  over  which  it  claims,  and  is  by  other 
nations  recognized  to  have,  paramount  political 
authority.  Indeed  there  is  some  justification 
for  saying  that  it  includes  territories  tempor- 
arily under  the  de  facto  authority  of  the 
United  States  and  for  the  control  of  the  af- 
fairs of  which  the  United  States  is  internation- 
ally responsible.  This  international  signifi- 
cance of  the  term  is  pointed  out  by  Justice 
Brown  in  his  opinion  in  the  Insular  Case  of 
Downes  vs.  Bidwell  (182  V.  S.  244)  where  he 
says : 

( In  dealing  with  foreign  sovereignties,  the  term 
“United  States”  has  a broader  meaning  than 
where  used  in  the  Constitution,  and  includes  all 
territories  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Fed- 
eral Government,  wherever  located.  In  its  treaties 
and  conventions  with  foreign  nations  this  govern- 
ment is  a unit.  This  is  so,  not  because  the  terri- 
tories comprise  a part  of  the  government  estab- 
lished by  the  people  of  the  United  States  in  their 
Constitution,  but  because  the  Federal  Government 
is  the  only  authorized  organ  of  the  territories,  as 
well  as  of  the  states  in  their  foreign  relations 

Constitutionally  speaking,  the  term  United 
States  has,  as  has  been  said,  several  distinct 
meanings.  In  the  first  place  it  means  all  the 
areas  on  land  or  water  which  are  beneath  the 
sovereignty  of  the  political  entity  known  as 
the  United  States.  In  this  sense  the  consti- 
tutional and  international  meanings  of  the 
term  are  practically  synonymous.  In  the 
second  and  more  restricted  sense  the  term 
United  States  is  held  to  include  the  states  of 
the  Union  and  those  territories  which  have, 
by  congressional  action,  been  incorporated  into 
the  Union.  In  a third  and  still  more  terri- 
torially restricted  sense,  the  term  United 
States  has  reference  only  to  the  member  states 
of  the  Union.  In  the  Insular  Cases  to  which 
reference  has  been  made  above.  Justice  Brown 
would  have  given  to  the  term  United  States 
this  third  constitutional  meaning.  The  four 
other  justices  who  concurred  in  the  judgment 


UNITED  STATES,  POPULATION  OF— UNIVERSITIES  AND  COLLEGES 


which  was  rendered  gave  to  the  term  the 
second  meaning.  The  four  dissenting  justices 
argued  that  it  should  be  held  to  apply  to  un- 
incorporated as  well  as  incorporated  terri- 
tories. The  opinion  of  the  four  concurring 
judges  would  seem,  by  the  language  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  in  Rassmussen  vs.  United 
States  (197  U.  8.  516),  to  have  been  definitely 
adopted  as  the  doctrine  of  that  tribunal. 

See  Citizenship  in  the  United  States; 
Insulae  Cases;  Territory  in  International 
Law;  Territory,  Constitutional  Questions 
of;  Territory  of  the  United  States,  Organ- 
ized. 

References:  W.  F.  Willoughby,  Territories 
and  Dependencies  (1905);  J.  H.  Latane,  Am. 
as  a World  Power  (1907),  eh.  viii. 

W.  W.  Willoughby. 

UNITED  STATES,  POPULATION  OF.  See 

Population  of  United  States. 

UNITED  STATES  vs.  PETERS.  In  a pro- 
ceeding in  an  admiralty  court  of  the  United 
States  the  right  to  the  proceeds  of  a prize 
was  adjudicated.  Subsequently  the  state  of 
Pennsylvania  asserted  a right  to  such  pro- 
ceeds. Thereupon  in  a proceeding  in  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  United  States  to  compel 
the  judge  of  the  admiralty  court  to  carry 
into  effect  his  decision  (1809,  5 Cranch  115), 
it  was  held  that  a state  can  not  by  its  action 
annul  judgments  of  federal  courts  nor  de- 
termine the  jurisdiction  of  such  courts;  and 
also  that  the  state  was  not  a party  within 
the  prohibition  of  the  Eleventh  Amendment. 
See  Court  of  Appeals  in  Cases  of  Capture; 
Eleventh  Amendment  ; States  as  Parties 
to  Suits.  References:  J.  F.  Jameson,  Es- 
says in  Constitutional  History  (1889);  R. 
Hildreth,  Hist,  of  U.  8.  (1880),  III,  Sec.  2, 
155-165.  E.  McC. 

UNIVERSITIES  AND  COLLEGES,  EN- 
DOWED AND  PRIVATE.  Usage  of  the  words 
“university”  and  “college”  differs  in  the 
United  States  from  that  of  other  countries, 
although  showing  a descent  from  England. 
The  hordes  of  students  pouring  into  the  cities 
of  Europe  at  the  dawn  of  learning,  formed  a 
universitas  or  “whole,”  which  it  was  neces- 
sary to  divide  into  many  collegia  or  socie- 
ties, each  engaged  in  the  pursuit  of  a particu- 
lar kind  of  knowledge.  This  system  gave  rise 
to  a university  of  Oxford  and  another  at 
Cambridge,  each  composed  of  many  colleges. 

This  concept  of  an  institution  of  higher 
education  was  brought  to  America  by  gradu- 
ates of  these  universities,  ninety  of  whom,  it 
is  said,  emigrated  to  New  England  prior  to 
1648.  The  religious  motive  influencing  migra- 
tion gave  an  ecclesiastical  turn  to  the  first 
seats  of  learning  established,  thus  transform- 
ing the  manifold  university  into  the  unified 
college.  The  colonial  institutions  were  col- 


leges in  name  and  in  function;  but  by  adding 
courses  of  study,  without  changing  their  gen- 
eric form,  they  later  assumed  the  title  of  uni- 
versities and  thereby  caused  a confusion  of 
terms. 

Modern  Definitions. — This  confusion  exists 
to  the  present  day.  Any  institution  of  high- 
er learning  feels  at  liberty  to  call  itself  a 
university  although  consisting  of  only  one 
institution  and  perhaps  devoted  to  one  line 
of  study.  As  time  progressed  and  the  organ- 
ization grew  more  complex,  the  university  be- 
gan to  call  its  subordinate  divisions  “col- 
leges,” in  imitation  of  the  English  system. 
Thus  Cornell  University  consists  of  nine  col- 
leges, viz.-.  Graduate,  Arts  and  Sciences,  Law, 
Medicine,  Veterinary,  Agriculture,  Architec- 
ture, Mechanical  Engineering  and  Mechanic 
Arts,  and  Civil  Engineering.  But  each  col- 
lege is  an  integral  part  of  the  university  in 
general  administration,  fiscal  management, 
financial  support  and  in  the  interchange  of 
students.  Each  is  independent  only  in  such 
minor  details  as  determining  the  course  of 
study,  the  laboratory  charges  and  the  re- 
quirement for  graduation.  This  subdivision 
into  parallel  colleges  of  undergraduate  grades 
is  usually  quite  ignored  by  the  students  in 
their  social  organizations. 

The  word  “university”  is  also,  in  a few 
cases,  employed  to  designate  an  institution  de- 
voted wholly  or  in  large  part  to  graduate  in- 
struction. Few  of  our  institutions  have  the 
courage  to  depart  from  the  tradition  that  their 
graduate  students  require  a peculiar  pre- 
requisite training  which  they  alone  are  com- 
petent to  give;  fewer  still  are  able  to  endure 
the  stigma  of  small  numbers  which  a total 
separation  of  graduate  from  undergraduate  in- 
struction would  bring.  The  rare  institutions 
which  claim  to  impart  only  graduate  instruc- 
tion find  a saving  practice  in  a broad  defini- 
tion of  the  word  “graduate.”  The  impractic- 
ability of  drawing  a sharp  line  between  gradu- 
ate and  undergraduate  courses  in  the  United 
States  is  due  largely  to  the  characteristic  haste 
and  desire  to  enter  speedily  a lucrative  ca- 
reer. Personal  efficiency  is  as  distinctly  the 
purpose  of  higher  education  in  this  country  as 
personal  culture  is  in  England  or  personal 
knowledge  in  Germany. 

As  defined  by  the  National  Association  of 
State  Universities: 

The  term  “college”  is  restricted  to  a branch  of 
the  university,  which  has  a considerable  faculty 
devoted  to  teaching  the  special  subjects  of  that 
branch.  The  following  lines  of  work  in  the  uni- 
versity are  to  be  organized  into  colleges:  fa)  Arts 
and  Sciences;  (b)  Medicine;  (c)  Law;  (d)  Engi- 
neering; (e)  Agriculture. 

The  Association  of  American  Universities 
added  the  proviso  that  “the  college  must  main- 
tain a standard  of  admission  which  is  the 
equivalent  of  that  required  by  the  Carnegie 
Foundation  for  the  Advancement  of  Teaching 
and  must  offer  instruction  leading  to  a first 


UNIVERSITIES,  STATE— UNIVERSITY  EXTENSION 


degree  in  Arts,  Letters  or  Science.”  By  this 
arrangement  the  undergraduate  work  constitut- 
ing the  “College”  would  lead  to  a bachelor’s 
degree;  the  graduate  work  constituting  the 
“Graduate  School”  would  lead  to  the  master’s 
or  doctorate  degrees.  But  the  Doctor  of  Philos- 
ophy and  Doctor  of  Divinity  of  the  graduate 
school  must  be  distinguished  from  the  Doctor 
of  Medicine,  the  Doctor  of  Veterinary  Medicine, 
and  the  Doctor  of  Dental  Surgery  of  the  pro- 
fessional schools  which  are  partly  under- 
graduate courses.  This  confusion  of  terms  is 
increased  by  the  ambition  to  assume  the  title 
of  “university.”  Of  the  more  than  six  hundred 
institutions  entitled  by  their  charters  to  grant 
degrees,  not  thirty  deserve  the  title  of  “uni- 
sity”;  and  at  least  one  of  them  is  a city  high 
school.  Many  colleges  take  the  liberty  of 
granting  doctorate  degrees;  some  honorary, 
some  requiring  a minimum  of  resident  work, 
and  some  for  revenue  only. 

Private  and  Public  Institutions. — American 
colleges  and  universities  may  be  classified  into 
church  supported  or  privately  endowed  institu- 
tions, as  contrasted  with  those  maintained  by 
the  state  and  federal  governments.  But  even 
those  of  the  first  class  maintain  some  distinct 
relationship  to  the  state;  their  charters  are 
usually  granted  by  the  state  legislatures  or  by 
an  official  in  whom  the  power  is  vested  by  law 
and  those  charters  become  contracts  not  re- 
pealable  by  later  legislative  acts.  The  power 
of  conferring  degrees  is  commonly  based  upon 
legislative  authority  although  the  preparation 
for  the  degree  is  in  no  wise  controlled  by  the 
state. 

Colleges  in  colonial  days  received  government 
aid  in  various  ways;  but  after  the  Revolution, 
they  were  supported  largely  by  private  bene- 
factions and  by  church  contributions.  State 
control  was  resisted  by  the  institutions  be- 
cause their  mission  was  largely  to  train  up 
ministers  who  should  be  free  from  the  taint 
of  religious  establishment.  Pinckney  and 
Madison,  however,  in  the  Federal  Convention, 
would  have  inserted  in  the  Constitution  a pro- 
vision for  a national  university  under  the 
support  and  control  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment. Washington  repeatedly  advocated  the 
same  plan.  As  the  state  constitutions  were 
adopted,  several  embodied  the  thought  of  a 
state  supported  university,  Pennsylvania  be- 
ing among  the  first.  The  Dartmouth  College 
case  (see),  in  1819,  which  was  a contest  for 
control  between  two  boards,  one  representing 
the  state  and  the  other  the  church,  is  charac- 
teristic of  the  trend  of  the  times.  North 
Carolina,  South  Carolina,  and  Virginia  really 
established  state  colleges  or  universities,  as 
they  were  ambitiously  called.  As  the  new 
states  were  carved  out  of  the  Northwest,  they 
established  the  precedent  of  giving  large  tracts 
of  land  for  the  support  of  colleges  and  uni- 
versities. Congress  in  1862  gave  grants  of 
public  lands  to  all  the  states  and  territories, 


which  were  bestowed  upon  these  state  insti- 
tutions or  which  were  used  to  found  new 
“Agricultural  and  Mechanical  Colleges.”  The 
states  have  contributed  to  the  support  of 
these  colleges  by  grants  of  money  and  land. 

Numbers. — In  1912  there  were  596  universi- 
ties in  the  United  States;  89  were  under  state 
or  municipal  control,  and  507  on  private 
foundation.  They  employed  a teaching  force 
of  30,034,  and  enrolled  199,518  students. 
Twenty  years  earlier  there  were  430 
creditable  institutions  of  higher  learning,  en- 
rolling 47,425  students,  and  employing  8,472 
instructors.  During  the  same  period  the  per- 
centage of  women  to  men  in  colleges  and  uni- 
versities rose  from  nineteen  to  nearly  fifty. 
The  number  of  earned  doctorate  degrees  in- 
creased from  138  to  514,  and  the  number  of 
honorary  doctorate  degrees  decreased  from 
930  to  742. 

See  College;  Degrees,  Academic;  and 
under  Education. 

References:  C.  F.  Thwing,  College  Admin- 
istration (1900),  ch.  i;  G.  Compayre,  Abelard, 
and  the  Origin  and  Early  History  of  Univer- 
sities (1893)  ; Commissioner  of  Education,  Am 
nual  Report  ( 1909 ) , I,  90-93 ; Carnegie  Foun- 
dation for  the  Advancement  of  Teaching,  Re- 
ports-, Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  797,  ibid,  1911, 
817-823;  ibid,  1912,  804-814. 

E.  E.  Sparks. 

UNIVERSITIES,  STATE.  See  State 
Universities. 

UNIVERSITY  EXTENSION.  The  thought 
of  extending  university  teaching  to  the  general 
public  through  organized  centres  first  took 
shape  at  the  University  of  Cambridge,  Eng- 
land, in  1873.  It  was  intended  to  serve  the 
great  middle  class.  Twenty-five  courses  of 
paid  lectures  were  given  by  University  in- 
structors in  Derby,  Nottingham  and  Leicester. 
The  total  attendance  was  about  3,200,  of  whom 
368  took  the  examinations.  The  movement 
spread  to  Oxford,  to  Victoria  University,  and 
to  London,  and  later  to  Scotland  and  Ireland. 

In  1888,  Dr.  John  H.  Vincent  and  Professor 
Herbert  B.  Adams,  of  Johns  Hopkins  Univer- 
sity, with  others,  issued  an  elaborate  pro- 
spectus for  a “Chautauqua  University  Exten- 
sion,” which  proposed  to  cooperate  with  socie- 
ties and  organizations  by  using  the  extension 
methods  of  England.  Spasmodic  centres  were 
organized  and  lectures  given  in  Baltimore, 
Buffalo,  St.  Louis,  Cleveland,  New  York,  Chi- 
cago, Milwaukee,  and  Denver. 

The  first  permanent  organization  was  made 
at  Philadelphia,  in  1890,  when  the  American 
Association  for  the  Extension  of  University 
Teaching  was  formed.  Professor  R.  G.  Moul- 
ton, one  of  the  most  successful  extension 
lecturers  in  Cambridge,  was  brought  over  and 
the  work  regularly  inaugurated  at  Roxborough 
in  November,  1890-  During  the  winter  follow- 


599 


UNRECONSTRUCTED— UNWRITTEN  LAW 


ing,  23  centres  were  organized  in  and  about 
Philadelphia  and  supplied  with  lecturers 
drawn  from  colleges  in  the  vicinity.  Citizens 
of  Philadelphia  contributed  largely  to  the  sup- 
port of  the  undertaking;  a monthly  magazine 
known  as  University  Extension  was  estab- 
lished; and  the  work  was  extended  to  adjacent 
cities  in  Pennsylvania,  New  Jersey,  and  Dela- 
ware. The  legislature  of  New  York  aided  by 
appropriating  $10,000  for  the  introduction  of 
the  work  in  that  state  under  Melvil  Dewey, 
Secretary  of  the  University  of  the  State  of 
New  York.  A national  conference  assembled 
in  Philadelphia  in  December,  1891. 

The  zeal  speedily  abated  and  the  movement 
ended  or  assumed  other  forms  in  all  except  a 
few  localities.  Dr.  William  R.  Harper,  who 
had  taken  part  in  the  Chautauqua  Extension 
work,  created  a university  extension  division 
in  the  University  of  Chicago  in  1890,  placed 
Professor  Moulton  at  its  head,  and,  until  his 
death  in  1906,  maintained  the  most  successful 
extension  work  done  in  America.  During  its 
best  years,  the  division  sent  out  as  many  as  29 
lecturers  to  188  centres  who  lectured  to  53,- 
841  people.  The  centres  extended  from  west- 
ern Pennsylvania  to  Kansas  and  from  Minne- 
sota to  Kentucky  inclusive. 

The  lecture  was  usually  followed  or  preceded 
by  a class  or  quiz  on  the  points  made  in  the 
previous  lecture.  Students  were  encouraged  to 
submit  written  exercises  which  were  annotated 
and  graded  by  the  lecturer  and  then  returned 
to  the  writer.  At  the  end  of  the  course  of 
lectures,  an  examination  was  held,  and  a 
grade  given  upon  the  written  work  and  ex- 
amination. Credit  toward  a degree  was  al- 
lowed in  many  institutions  for  satisfactory 
grades  gained  in  extension  work. 

A few  extension  lecture  centres,  study 
classes  and  correspondence  classes  are  still 
continued  (1913)  by  the  American  Society  at 
Philadelphia,  by  the  University  of  California 
and  spasmodically  in  a few  cities.  In  Boston 
a formal  system  of  extension  courses  was 
founded  in  1910  by  a combination  of  the  Lowell 
Fund  for  lectures  with  five  colleges  and  uni- 
versities of  the  vicinity,  conferring  a special 
degree  of  A.  A. — Associate  in  Arts. 

Reasons  for  the  decline  of  the  movement  in 
America  may  be  found  in  the  fickleness  of 
popular  favor,  the  rise  of  correspondence 
schools,  the  multiplication  of  Chautauqua  as- 
semblies, the  abundance  of  reading  matter,  and 
the  growing  attendance  upon  free  high  schools. 
A large  part  of  the  class  which  supports  ex- 
tension teaching  in  England  goes  to  college  in 
America. 

In  recent  years,  the  University  of  Wiscon- 
sin, which  formerly  maintained  a strong  de- 
partment under  the  Cambridge  plan,  has  de- 
veloped a new  idea  which  is  being  adopted  by 
other  tax-supported  institutions,  i.  e.,  of  ex- 
tending public  service  to  the  communities  of 
the  state  by  lectures,  pamphlets,  references  and 


libraries.  The  plan  includes  the  organization 
of  night  schools,  apprentice  schools,  debating 
societies,  artisan  conferences,  instruction 
trains,  secondary  agricultural  schools,  nature 
study  leaflets,  correspondence  schools,  and  the 
like.  Similar  work  has  been  inaugurated  by 
the  state  universities  or  state  colleges  of  Penn- 
sylvania, Ohio,  Oklahoma,  Georgia  and  others. 
The  prime  purpose  is  to  carry  to  the  people 
the  knowledge  gained  in  the  agricultural,  en- 
gineering and  mining  experiment  stations  of 
the  states. 

See  Education,  Recent  Tendencies  in 
Libraries,  Public  ; Schools,  Correspondence  ; 
Schools,  Night;  Schools,  Summer;  Univer- 
sities and  Colleges,  Endowed  and  Private. 

References:  D.  H.  Roberts,  Eighteen  Years  of 
University  Extension  (1891)  ; Commissioner  of 
Education,  Annual  Reports,  1891-1892,  ch. 
xxi;  H.  B.  Adams,  “University  Extension  and 
Its  Leaders”  in  Review  of  Reviews,  III  ( 1891 ) , 
593-609,  University  Extension,  I-IV  ( 1891— 
94),  passim-,  L.  E.  Reber,  “University  Exten- 
sion” in  Science,  XXXII  (1910),  97-104. 

E.  E.  Sparks. 

UNRECONSTRUCTED.  A term  applied  to 
southerners  who  did  not  accept  the  settle- 
ment after  the  Civil  War  as  equitable  or 
necessarily  permanent,  particularly  the  Four- 
teenth and  Fifteenth  Amendments.  In  general, 
the  term  applies  simply  to  people  who  still 
feel  that  the  treatment  of  the  South  justifies  a 
permanent  resentment  toward  the  North. 
Much  of  this  sense  of  abiding  grievance  dis- 
appeared in  the  Spanish  War  of  1898  when 
former  Confederate  officers  received  commands 
and  northern  and  southern  troops  served  to- 
gether. See  Reconstruction.  References: 
W.  A.  Dunning,  Essays  on  the  Civil  War  and 
Reconstruction  ( rev.  ed.,  1907 ) , Reconstruc- 
tion— Pol.  and  Economic  (1907);  W.  Wilson, 
Hist,  of  the  Am.  People  (1902),  V;  W.  L. 
Fleming,  Documentary  Hist,  of  Reconstruction 
(1906-07).  A.  B.  H. 

UNWRITTEN  LAW.  Not  only  by  the  com- 
mon law  which  prevails  in  England  and  in  the 
United  States  but  also  by  the  civil  law  which 
prevails  in  Europe,  the  law  consists  not 
only  of  legislative  enactments  but  also  of  those 
principles  of  right  and  justice  which  are  based 
on  custom  and  usage  of  the  people  and  recog- 
nized in  the  courts  in  the  determination  of 
controversies.  That  portion  of  the  law  ob- 
served and  administered  in  the  courts  which 
has  not  been  enacted  or  promulgated  in 
constitutions  or  statutes  is  called  the  un- 
written law.  Its  principles  and  rules  are 
ascertained  by  reference  to  the  promulgated 
opinions  of  the  courts  in  the  decision  of  par- 
ticular cases,  and  the  discussions  and  explana- 
tions of  principles  by  authors  or  expositors 
who  have  come  to  be  recognized  as  learned  in 
the  branches  of  law  of  which  they  treat.  The 


600 


URBAN  DISTRICT  COUNCIL— UTAH 


decisions  and  expositions  thus  promulgated 
are  not  a part  of  the  written  law  although 
they  have  been  reduced  to  writing,  but  they  are 
treated  as  statements  of  the  unwritten  law 
so  far  as  they  do  not  interpret  and  apply  the 
provision  of  the  written  law.  Even  in  that 
respect  they  are  not  a part  of  the  written  law 
but  only  explanations  and  expositions  of  it. 
The  use  of  the  term  “unwritten  law”  as  ex- 
pressing some  popular  sentiment  of  the  com- 
munity which  will  be  recognized  by  juries  in 
the  trial  of  particular  classes  of  cases  outside 
of  the  rules  and  principles  recognized  by  the 
courts  in  performing  the  function  of  determin- 
ing the  law  both  written  and  unwritten  is 
wholly  unauthorized.  See  Law,  Common. 

E.  McC. 

URBAN  DISTRICT  COUNCIL.  The  name 
of  the  administrative  organ  of  the  “ur- 
ban district,”  a local  area  established  by  the 
English  Local  Government  Act  of  1894  (57  and 
58  Victoria,  C.  73).  These  areas  are  for  the 
most  part  the  so-termed  improvement  dis- 
trict, and  health  districts,  which,  prior  to 
1894,  had  been  created  by  various  general  acts 
relating  to  public  works  and  public  health. 
There  are  820  urban  districts  in  England  and 
Wales.  They  range  in  size  from  Childwall  in 
Lancashire  with  a population  of  about  250  to 
Willesden  in  Middlesex  with  a population  of 
about  150,000.  New  districts  may  be  created 
by  the  County  Council,  after  a poll  of  the 
electors  has  been  taken,  but  such  action  must 
be  confirmed,  before  it  becomes  operative,  by 
the  Local  Government  Board. 

The  urban  district  council  is  an  elective 
body,  its  members  being  chosen  by  the  voters 
for  a three-year  term,  and  as  a rule  one  third 
of  the  councillors  retire  each  year.  The  suf- 
frage is  broader  than  at  borough  or  county 
elections;  it  includes  all  lodgers  who  are  quali- 
fied to  vote  at  parliamentary  pollings,  and  all 
women  who  are  ratepayers  whether  married 
or  not,  although  husband  and  wife  may  not 
both  qualify  on  the  same  property.  Any  voter 
may  be  elected  to  the  council,  women  included. 
Elections  take  place  on  the  first  Monday  in 
April.  Unlike  the  borough  council,  the  urban 
district  council  adds  no  aldermen  to  its  num- 
ber ; its  selects  its  own  chairman  annually,  and 
its  members  serve  without  pay. 

The  powers  of  the  urban  district  council 
are  connected  chiefly  with  highways  and  sani- 
tation. It  is  the  chief  local  authority  in  both 
these  fields  of  administration.  In  addition  it 
has  various  powers  with  respect  to  local  li- 
braries, baths  and  washhouses,  burial  grounds, 
and  parks.  It  has  some  educational  powers 
under  the  Education  Act  of  1902,  and  with 
the  approval  of  the  central  authorities  may 
own  and  operate  gas  or  electric  lighting 
works,  or  tramways.  The  council  obtains  its 
revenue  by  the  levy  of  a district  rate,  from 
treasury  subventions,  and  from  betterment 


taxes.  With  the  approval  of  the  Local  Gov- 
ernment Board  it  may  negotiate  loans  for  per- 
manent improvements  or  for  the  establishment 
of  public  utilities. 

See  Distkicts,  Rural,  Administrative; 
Local  Government  in  England. 

References:  J.  Redlich  and  F.  W.  Hirst, 
Local  Government  in  England  (1903),  II,  116- 
143;  R.  Donald,  Municipal  Year  Book  of  the 
United  Kingdom,  1910,  253-351;  W.  B. 

Odgers,  Local  Government  (1901),  129-148; 
Local  Government  Board,  Annual  Report. 

W.  B.  Munro. 

URBAN  POPULATION.  In  the  United 
States  this  term  is  applied  to  the  inhabitants 
of  units  of  local  governments  of  2500  inhabi- 
tants or  more;  formerly  the  term  applied  to 
municipalities  of  8,000  or  more.  See  ClTi’s, 
Classification  of;  Population  of  tiie 
United  States.  A.  B.  H. 

URUGUAY.  Uruguay,  a buffer  region  be- 
tween Spain  and  Portugal,  was  finally  attached 
to  the  viceroyalty  of  La  Plata.  Independence 
from  Spain  was  declared  coincident  with  that 
of  Argentina  (see),  but  national  independence 
in  1825.  The  country  lies  between  latitude  30° 
and  35°  south,  and  longitude  53°  and  58°  30' 
west  (Greenwich),  embracing  an  area  of  72,210 
square  miles  with  a population  of  1,112,000, 
over  15  per  square  mile.  The  present  (1910) 
constitution  (slightly  modified  since)  was 
adopted  in  1830,  and  provides  for  a senate 
and  a chamber  of  deputies.  Senators  are 
elected  indirectly,  one  for  each  department, 
for  six-year  terms,  renewed  by  thirds  every, 
two  years.  Deputies  are  elected  directly  by 
popular  vote,  one  for  every  3,000  inhabi- 
tants, for  three-year  terms.  The  president 
and  vice-president  are  chosen  by  Congress  for 
a term  of  four  years,  and  are  not  immediately 
eligible  for  reelection;  the  cabinet  is  composed 
of  six  ministers:  interior;  foreign  affairs  and 
worship;  public  works;  industries,  labor  and 
public  instruction;  war  and  marine;  finance. 
They  are  appointed  by  the  president.  The  ju- 
dicial branch  is  a supreme  court  elected  by 
congress.  Politically  the  republic  is  divided 
into  19  departments,  governed  by  a jefe 
politico  appointed  by  the  president.  The 
capital  is  Montevideo.  State  religion  is  Ro- 
man Catholic.  Reference:  J.  I.  Rodriguez, 
Am.  Constitutions  (1905),  II,  157-202;  Pan 
American  Union,  Publications.  A.  H. 

UTAH.  Settlement. — Utah  was  settled  by 
a band  of  Mormon  colonists  in  July,  1847. 
The  valley  of  the  Great  Salt  Lake  became  their 
first  home,  and  here  was  begun  the  building 
of  a united  economic,  social,  and  political  or- 
ganization, which  in  time  produced  a pros- 
perous state.  The  early  settlers  of  Utah  were 
a distinct  type  of  economic  society,  and  ac- 
cepted as  right  a prophet-teacher  and  leader. 


601 


UTAH 


who  to  them  had  divine  authority.  The  type 
of  society  was  the  authoritative. 

The  valley  of  the  Great  Salt  Lake  had  a 
reluctant  soil.  The  rainfall  was  limited, 
averaging  about  ten  inches,  and  the  land  was 
bleak  and  sterile.  Nevertheless,  the  people 
went  immediately  to  work  and  agriculture  be- 
came the  principle  pursuit,  and  the  desert 
waste  was  transformed  into  beautiful  private 
gardens.  From  the  first,  the  tilling  of  the  soil 


and  its  powers  be  divided  into  three  branches 
— legislative,  judicial,  and  executive.  Each 
member  of  the  legislature  was  to  take  the 
oath  to  support  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  and  that  of  the  state  of  Deseret.  The 
executive  power  was  vested  in  a governor,  a 
lieutenant  governor,  a secretary,  an  auditor, 
and  treasurer.  The  judiciary  consisted  of  a 
supreme  court,  and  such  other  courts  as  the 
legislature  might  provide. 


has  been  the  keynote  to  Utah’s  development, 
and  as  coal  and  iron  have  been  the  natural 
staple  products  of  America,  so  have  they  been 
in  Utah.  American  ingenuity  was  brought 
into  play,  and  we  find  nail,  furnace,  clothing, 
and  leather  factories  as  early  as  1850.  The 
people  were  forced  at  first  to  cope  with  very 
primitive  conditions,  and  beginning  as  they 
did,  the  industrial  history  of  Utah  is  most 
phenomenal. 

Government  before  1847. — Before  the  treaty 
of  Guadalupe  Hidalgo  in  1848,  Utah  belonged 
to  Mexico.  There  are,  however,  no  records  to 
show  that  any  Spanish  colonists  were  per- 
manently established  within  the  present  con- 
fines of  the  state. 

Early  Government. — As  early  as  the  year 
1849,  Utah  was  organized  into  a provisional 
government  with  all  the  order  of  legislative, 
judicial,  executive  offices  regularly  filled  un- 
der a constitution. 

The  general  assembly  of  the  state  of  Deseret 
(see)  held  its  first  session  on  July  2,  1849,  at 
Salt  Lake  City.  During  the  month,  it  was 
decided  to  petition  Congress  for  admittance 
into  the  Union,  and  a memorial  signed  by  a 
large  number  of  citizens  was  sent  to  Congress. 

The  provisional  government  provided  that 
the  seat  of  government  be  at  Salt  Lake  City, 


Utah  Territory  Organized  by  Congress. — 
In  September,  1850,  Millard  Fillmore,  Pre- 
sident of  the  United  States,  signed  the  act 
creating  the  territory  of  Utah.  Brigham  Young 
was  appointed  governor.  In  April,  1851,  the 
general  assembly  of  the  provisional  govern- 
ment was  dissolved,  and  the  state  of  Deseret 
was  merged  into  the  territory  of  Utah.  The 
legislative  assembly  of  the  provisional  govern- 
ment passed  some  notable  acts,  among  which 
were  bills  for  the  building  and  improvement  of 
roads  and  bridges,  and  the  establishment  of 
the  first  university  west  of  the  Missouri  River. 

Early  Town  Government. — Brigham  Young 
directed  the  settlement  of  Salt  Lake  City,  and 
practically  all  of  the  cities  of  Utah.  Being 
of  New  England  descent,  he  understood  the 
English  form  of  village  government.  Every 
town  was  systematically  laid  out,  with  broad 
streets  and  walks,  and  on  each  side  a stream 
of  water  and  an  avenue  of  trees.  This  system 
implied  an  abundance  of  land,  and  the  head  of 
the  family  owned  his  home.  There  was  no 
social  distinction,  but  a complete  political, 
social,  and  religious  democracy,  and  univer- 
sality of  manual  labor.  The  meeting  house 
was  built  in  the  centre  of  the  town,  which  was 
used  for  meetings  on  Sunday,  and  during  the 
week,  for  the  village  school,  and  for  such  other 


602 


UTI  POSSIDETIS 


meetings  as  might  be  called  by  the  chief  officer 
of  the  town.  Here  all  the  people  met  at  times 
in  town  meeting  to  discuss  affairs  pertaining 
to  the  community — the  moral,  the  agricultural, 
the  political,  and  the  social  conditions.  These 
villages  have  grown  into  the  cities  of  Utah. 
They  were  distinctly  of  the  old  Teutonic  type, 
and,  outside  of  New  England,  were  possibly 
the  most  distinct  type  ever  developed  in 
America. 

State  Constitution. — Utah  was  admitted 
to  the  Union  January,  1896.  Its  state  consti- 
tution provides  for  all  the  departments  of 
government  which  are  customary  in  our  nation- 
al Constitution.  It  distinctly  says  that  “the 
state  of  Utah  is  an  inseparable  part  of  the 
Federal  Union” — that  perfect  toleration  of 
religious  sentiment  is  guaranteed;  polygamous 
or  plural  marriages  are  forever  prohibited 
( see  States,  Admission  of).  A public  school 
system  is  provided  with  the  state  university 
at  its  head.  Charitable  institutions  are 
well  supported.  The  elective  state  officers 
are  a governor,  secretary  of  state,  audi- 
tor, treasurer,  attorney  general,  superin- 
tendent of  public  instruction,  seven  dis- 
trict judges,  and  three  members  of  the  su- 
preme bench.  The  constitution  expressly  de- 
clares that  the  “rights  of  citizens”  of  the  state 
“to  vote  and  hold  office  shall  not  be  denied  or 
abridged  on  account  of  sex.” 

Political  Parties. — In  the  early  days  of 
Utah,  there  arose  two  political  parties,  which 
became  known  as  the  People’s  and  the  Liberal 
parties  respectively.  As  Utah  was  settled  by 
a religious  band  of  people,  thoroughly  united 
in  religion  and  industry,  they  naturally  became 
united  politically,  especially  when  there  came 
among  them  those  who  opposed  their  economic 
and  religious  institutions.  The  people  united 
locally  in  their  town  government,  naturally 
became  united  in  their  territorial  politics. 
There  was,  however,  strict  political  and  reli- 
gious tolerance  in  Utah  from  the  first.  In  1870 
there  was  organized  in  Salt  Lake  City  the 
Liberal  party,  composed  largely  of  those  peo- 
ple who  opposed  the  religious  tenets  of  the 


Mormons.  Until  1890,  these  two  political 
parties  waged  many  a battle,  but  after  the 
declaration  by  the  Mormon  Church  in  1890 
that  polygamy  should  be  abandoned  as  a reli- 
gous  tenet,  the  people  of  the  state  divided  on 
national  party  lines,  and  both  the  Republican 
and  the  Democratic  parties  have  at  times  been 
successful  at  the  polls. 

Education.  — Utah’s  public  school  system 
dates  back  to  1847,  when  the  first  school  was 
opened  in  Salt  Lake  City.  The  first  legisla- 
tive act  passed  by  the  first  legislature  of  the 
territory  was  for  the  establishment  and  build- 
ing of  roads  and  bridges;  the  second  act  was 
for  the  maintenance  of  schools.  School  houses 
were  invariably  among  the  first  structures  in 
every  town.  A striking  evidence  of  the  growth 
of  the  school  system  since  the  admission  of 
Utah  as  a state  is  shown  by  the  following 
figures:  1896,  expenditure  for  public  schools, 
$909,955.35.  In  1909—10,  the  total  expendit- 
ure was  $3,182,874.29,  or  $30.34  per  capita. 
There  are  more  than  104,000  children  within 
school  age  in  Utah.  The  University  of  Utah 
is  at  the  head  of  the  public  school  system  of 
the  state.  There  are,  in  addition,  the  Agri- 
cultural College  and  the  Brigham  Young  Uni- 
versity at  Provo.  Besides  the  state  schools, 
there  are  a number  of  sectarian  institutions, 
all  doing  work  of  advanced  grade. 

See  Constitutions,  State,  Characteristics 
of;  State  Governments,  Characteristics  of. 

References:  O.  F.  Whitney,  Hist,  of  Utah 
(1892-1904);  H.  H.  Bancroft,  Hist,  of  Utah 
(1889);  L.  E.  Young,  Hist,  of  Education  in 
Utah  (1913);  J.  Tullidge,  Hist,  of  Salt  Lake 
City  (1886)  ; F.  N.  Thorpe,  Federal  and  State 
Constitutions  (1909),  VI,  3687-3735. 

Levi  E.  Young. 

UTI  POSSIDETIS.  A phrase  used  in  inter- 
national law  to  indicate  that  the  parties  shall 
retain  possession  of  that  which  has  been  re- 
duced to  their  possession  during  the  war.  See 
Conquest,  Right  of;  Status  Quo  Ante 
Bellum;  Territory  in  International  Law. 

G.  G.  W. 


136 


603 


VACANCIES  IN  OFFICE— VAGRANCY 


V 


VACANCIES  IN  OFFICE.  A vacancy  in  a 
public  office  may  be  brought  about  in  any  one 
of  the  following  ways:  (I)  by  refusal  to  accept 
office;  (2)  by  removal  by  competent  authority ; 
(3)  by  impeachment;  (4)  by  resignation; 

( 5 ) by  death ; ( 6 ) by  expiration  of  the  term 
of  office.  The  vacancy  thus  created  is  filled 
in  various  ways  according  to  the  laws  of  the 
state  and  the  nature  of  the  case.  For  vacan- 
cies in  the  United  States  Senate  the  Federal 
Constitution  provided,  up  to  1913,  that  “if 
vacancies  happen  by  resignation,  or  other- 
wise, during  the  recess  of  the  legislature  of  a 
state,  the  executive  thereof  may  make  tem- 
porary appointments  until  the  next  meeting 
of  the  legislature,  which  shall  then  fill  such 
vacancy”  (Art.  I,  Sec.  iii,  ft  2).  This  clearly 
meant  that  the  governor  could  not  appoint 
if  the  legislature  was  in  session  when  the 
vacancy  occured ; but  if  the  legislature  ad- 
journed without  an  election,  did  the  vacancy 
then  exist?  Could  the  governor  then  ap- 
point? The  Senate  has  at  different  times, 
taken  opposite  ground  on  the  reception  of 
persons  so  appointed,  but  in  1900  refused 
to  seat  Matthew  Quay  of  Pennsylvania  on  such 
an  appointment.  Under  the  Seventeenth 
Amendment  (see)  the  governor  can  appoint 
to  a vacancy  only  in  such  states  as  may  by 
statute  have  so  provided. 

Vacancies  in  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives must  be  filled  by  special  election, 
which  is  the  usual  practise  for  vacancies 
in  state  legislatures  (Art.  I,  Sec.  ii,  If  4). 
To  avoid  a hiatus  the  terms  of  some  public 
officers  are  made  for  a fixed  period  “and  until 
their  successors  shall  be  appointed.”  The 
President  has  authority  (Art.  II,  Sec.  ii,  U 3) 
to  fill  up  all  vacancies  that  may  happen  during 
the  recess  of  the  Senate,  by  granting  commis- 
sions which  shall  expire  at  the  end  of  their 
next  session.  In  a few  cases  in  city  govern- 
ments, so  many  vacancies  have  been  made  by 
simultaneous  resignation,  that  the  city  coun- 
cil no  longer  had  a quorum  and  could  do  no 
business. 

See  Appointments  to  Office;  Employees 
of  Government;  Removal  of  Public  Offi- 
cials. 

Reference:  C.  R.  Fish,  Civil  Service  and  the 
Patronage  (1905).  A.  B.  H. 

VACCINATION,  COMPULSORY.  During 

the  Civil  War  orders  were  obtained  from  com- 
manders in  some  cases  directing  the  vaccin- 
ation of  an  entire  command.  In  1828  the 


state  of  Connecticut  enacted  that  children 
attending  the  public  schools  should  present  a 
certificate  of  vaccination,  and  this  is  the  prac- 
tice in  several  of  the  states.  There  have 
been  numerous  cases  of  refusal,  and  suits  by 
irate  parents.  The  principle  that  the  state 
may  compel  health  precautions  to  be  taken  is 
widely  recognized;  and  the  resistance  to  vaccin- 
ation is  usually  based  upon  an  argument  that 
the  method  does  not  accomplish  the  end  pro- 
posed. See  Contagious  Diseases;  Health, 
Public  Regulation  of.  Reference:  J.  A. 
Fairlie,  Municipal  Administration  (1908),  126. 

A.  B.  H. 

VAGRANCY.  Definition. — A vagrant  or 
tramp  is  “an  able-bodied  man  without  any 
visible  means  of  support”  and  without  fixed 
abode.  In  this  last  respect  he  differs  from  the 
typical  beggar  (see).  The  essential  character- 
istic of  the  vagrant  is  that  of  “work-shyness” 
or  voluntary  idleness. 

Significance. — The  wide  extent  of  vagrancy 
and  its  cost  to  society  are  appalling.  It  is  esti- 
mated that  there  are  a half  a million  tramps 
in  the  United  States,  which  cost  the  railroads 
alone  $25,000,000  a year;  in  the  state  of  New 
York  not  less  than  $2,000,000.  It  is  not  sur- 
prising that  society  early  took  steps  to  eradi- 
cate the  evil  by  repressive  legislation  with 
severe  penalties. 

Legal  Status. — Statutes  against  vagrancy 
make  possible  the  punishment  of  acts  which 
in  themselves  appear  innocent,  such  as  loiter- 
ing about  public  places,  when  done  by  persons 
of  a certain  description.  Thus  Freund  points 
out  in  his  Police  Power  that  in  New  York: 

The  charge  of  vagrancy  serves  simply  to  justify 
an  arrest  made  for  other  purposes  for  which,  how- 
ever, an  arrest  cannot  legally  be  made.  The  prac- 
tice of  our  police  authorities  thus  sanctions  a 
form  of  preventive  arrest  which  has  no  warrant 
in  our  law,  but  which  is  recognized  in  Germany 
as  within  the  inherent  powers  of  the  police.  This 
mere  precautionary  arrest  is  lawful  under  our 
law  only  in  order  to  prevent  an  offense  which  is 
imminent  or  in  course  of  being  committed. 

The  criminality  of  vagrancy  rests  upon  “a 
combination  of  three  circumstances:  the  ab- 
sence of  lawful  means  of  support,  the  neglect 
to  seek  employment,  and  the  offensive  exhi- 
bition of  such  condition.”  The  purpose  of 
vagrancy  statutes  is  to  protect  the  public 
from  the  expense  of  supporting  the  vagrant 
as  well  as  from  his  disorder.  Vagrancy  is 
made  a penal  offense  by  state  statutes.  In  ad- 
dition, charters  of  cities  often  confer  power 
to  restrain  and  punish  vagrancy. 


604 


VALLANDIGHAM,  CLEMENT  L. 


Difficulties. — Legislation  has  not  checked 
vagrancy  in  the  United  States.  The  chief  rea- 
son for  this  lack  of  progress  lies  in  the  fact 
that  vagrancy  is  a national  problem,  and  the 
unit  of  control  is  the  state.  While  some  states, 
notably  Massachusetts,  have  laws  well  calcu- 
lated to  make  it  disagreeable  to  be  a tramp, 
this  type  of  legislation  and  enforcement  must 
become  general  among  the  states  before  a com- 
plete solution  is  possible. 

Popular  sympathy  exists  for  a man  who 
represents  himself  as  out  of  work,  without 
funds  and  seeking  employment.  The  occa- 
sional earnest  but  penniless  seeker  for  work 
for  whom  provision  is  necessary,  still  makes 
the  presence  of  thousands  of  vagrant  parasites 
possible.  It  is  a matter  of  common  knowledge 
that,  save  in  times  of  industrial  depression, 
the  great  body  of  vagrants  wandering  over 
the  country  are  voluntarily  idle.  Public 
opinion  must  discountenance  the  feeding  of 
vagrants  at  back  doors,  and  discourage  the 
so-called  “missions”  which  lodge  tramps.  It 
has  been  urged  that  such  places  be  brought 
under  the  police  ordinances  which  apply  to 
the  better  class  of  lodgings,  and  regulate  air 
space,  light  and  sanitary  provisions,  bathing 
regulations,  etc. 

A further  cause  of  failure  is  in  part  due  to 
the  overcrowded  conditions  of  jails  in  many 
places,  particularly  in  winter.  Persons  com- 
mitted for  slight  offenses,  among  which  va- 
grancy is  classed,  are  often  turned  loose  in 
order  to  leave  room  for  those  whose  offenses 
are  more  serious.  Tramps  frequently  court 
short  sentences  and  welcome  commitment  to 
some  penal  institution  where  they  will  be 
cared  for  during  the  season  of  cold  weather, 
and  these  serve  as  a contributory  cause;  also 
the  relative  ease  of  travel  on  freight  cars. 
This  can  be  met  in  part  by  the  legislative 
enactment  of  severe  penalties  for  illegally  rid- 
ing on  cars,  and  in  part  by  a system  of  efficient 
railroad  policing. 

Remedies. — In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  one 
thing  which  the  professional  vagrant  will  not 
face  is  the  requirement  of  hard  work,  it  is 
coming  to  be  felt  that  the  overseers  of  the 
poor  in  every  town  should  provide  decent  ac- 
comodations of  food  and  lodging  for  wayfarers, 
but  in  return  therefor  should  demand  work ; 
and  that  refusal  on  the  part  of  wayfarers  to 
comply  with  this  demand  should  constitute 
prima  facie  evidence  of  tramping.  Wayfarers 
should  not  be  lodged  in  police  stations.  All 
persons  convicted  of  vagrancy  should  receive 
indeterminate  sentences  of  a maximum  of 
eighteen  months  and  be  sent  to  a farm  colony 
for  “detention,  humane  discipline,  instruction 
and  reformation.” 

The  causes  for  the  creation  of  a vagrant 
class  differ  from  the  causes  which  explain  its 
persistence.  They  are  many  and  deep  rooted. 
In  general  they  are  the  same  as  the  causes  of 
poverty  plus,  often,  the  strong  desire  to  wander. 


In  the  opinion  of  an  expert  on  the  subject, 
the  “most  effective  check  on  vagrancy  is  the 
proper  kind  of  education  of  the  young  during 
the  years  from  ten  to  twenty.  The  schools, 
the  home  and  the  church  must  all  do  their 
part  in  preparing  youth  for  a reasonable,  hon- 
est and  efficient  life.  Child  labor,  illness,  men- 
tal defectiveness,  congestion  of  population, 
truancy,  orphanage,  inefficiency,  low  wages, 
overwork,  industrial  accidents,  diseases  of  occu- 
pation, the  temptations  of  crime,  seasonal  and 
irregular  trades;  all  these  causes  and  many 
more  operate  to  produce  the  youthful  tramp.” 

See  Beggars ; Charities,  Associated;  Char- 
ities, Public  Agencies  for;  Lodging  Houses, 
Public;  Poverty  and  Poor  Relief;  Social 
Reform  Problems. 

References:  O.  F.  Lewis,  Tramp  Problem 
(1912),  217-227,  Vagrancy  in  the  U.  8. 
( 1907 ) ; Mass.  Board  to  Investigate  the 
Subject  of  the  Unemployed,  “Wayfarers 
and  Tramps”  in  Blass.  House  Doc.,  No.  50 
(1895),  Pt.  II;  E.  Kelly,  Elimination  of  the 
Tramp  (1908);  W.  H.  Dawson,  Vagrancy 
Problem  (1910);  Michigan  State  Library  Ref- 
erence Dept.,  Laws  of  the  Various  States  Re- 
lating to  Vagrancy  (1910);  N.  Y.  School  of 
Philanthropy,  “Farm  Colonies”  in  Library 
Bulletin,  No.  1 (1911).  S.  McC.  Lindsay. 

VALLANDIGHAM,  CLEMENT  L.  Clement 
L.  Vallandigham  (1820-1871)  of  Ohio,  was 
already  widely  known  as  an  outspoken  state 
rights  Democrat  when,  in  1858,  he  was  elected 
to  the  national  House  of  Representatives.  He 
believed  that  the  South  had  been  wronged  and 
that  the  newly  organized  Republican  party 
was  founded  upon  the  iniquitous  principle  of 
sectional  domination.  During  the  earlier 
months  of  the  Civil  War  his  unsparing  attacks 
upon  the  Lincoln  administration  and  his 
avowed  leadership  of  the  elements  by  whom  the 
war  was  opposed  led  to  repeated  efforts  to 
accomplish  his  expulsion  from  the  House.  In 

1863  he  was  arrested,  tried  by  a military 
commission,  and  sentenced  to  imprisonment. 
The  sentence  was  commuted  by  Lincoln  to 
banishment  and  Vallandigham,  as  a kind  of 
practical  joke,  was  transported  to  Confederate 
soil,  whence  he  made  his  way  to  Canada.  In 

1864  he  returned  to  Ohio,  was  an  unsuccessful 
candidate  for  governor  and  during  the  en- 
suing six  years  his  influence  within  the  ranks 
of  the  Democratic  party,  state  and  national, 
was  of  first  rate  importance.  He  wrote  a 
portion  of  the  national  platform  of  1864,  as- 
sisted in  the  nomination  of  McClellan,  and 
led  his  party  in  denunciation  of  the  radical 
Republican  programme  of  reconstruction. 
Near  the  end  of  his  life,  however,  he  counseled 
the  Democrats  to  abandon  the  reconstruction 
issue  and  to  take  their  stand  upon  broader  and 
more  patriotic  issues.  At  all  stages  of  his 
career  he  advocated  the  maintenance  of  the 
Union.  He  was  opposed  merely  to  what  he 


VALUATION  OF  IMPORTED  GOODS— VALUE 


regarded  as  tlie  unwarrantable  attempt  of  one 
section  to  dictate  to  another  what  the  nature 
of  its  institutions  should  be. 

References:  J.  L.  Vallandigham,  Life  of  Cle- 
ment L.  Vallandigham  (1872)  ; J.  Walter, 
Ed.,  Record  of  Hon.  C.  L.  Vallandigham 
(1883);  J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  the  U.  S. 
(1893-1906),  IV,  eh.  xix;  J.  G.  Nieolay  and 
J.  Hay,  Abraham  Lincoln  (1890),  VII,  ch. 
xii.  F.  A.  Ogg. 

VALUATION  OF  IMPORTED  GOODS.  Val- 
ues of  dutiable  goods  imported  and  subject  to 
customs  duties  are  ascertained  and  recorded 
by  appraisers.  The  Treasury  department  also 
keeps  a record  of  the  value  of  all  merchandise 
imported,  whether  free  or  dutiable.  This  is 
derived  from  the  manifests  of  ships,  and  is 
published  in  the  statistical  reports  of  the 
government.  D.  R.  D. 

VALUATION  OF  PUBLIC  UTILITIES. 

Official  valuations  of  public  utilities  may  be 
required  for  the  following  public  purposes: 

(1)  taxation;  (2)  accounting  and  capitali- 
zation; (3)  rate-making;  (4)  public  purchase. 
Methods  vary  with  their  purpose.  Valuations 
for  tax  assessment  and  capitalization  are 
based  on  statutory  requirements;  valuations 
for  regulation  of  rates  and  for  condemnation 
of  property  must  be  based  on  principles  of 
just  compensation  as  worked  out  by  the  courts. 
Such  principles  have  as  yet  been  but  vaguely 
defined.  In  the  leading  ease  of  Smyth  vs. 
Ames  (169  U.  S.  466,  1898),  Justice  Harlan 
said: 

We  hold,  however,  that  the  basis  of  all  calcula- 
tions as  to  reasonableness  of  rates  . . . must  be 
the  fair  value  of  the  property  being  used  by  it  for 
the  convenience  of  the  public. 

As  to  how  this  fair  value  is  to  be  esti- 
mated, Justice  Harlan  merely  indicates  that 
the  original  cost  of  construction,  the  cost  of 
subsequent  betterments  and  additions,  the  cost 
of  reproduction,  the  par  and  market  value  of 
stocks  and  bonds,  the  probable  earning  capacity 
of  the  property  and  perhaps  other  elements 
should  be  taken  into  consideration.  In  two 
recent  cases  decided  by  the  United  States  Su- 
preme Court,  almost  the  only  basis  or  ele- 
ment of  value  considered  has  been  that  of  cost 
of  reproduction  less  existing  depreciation 
(Willcox  vs.  Consolidated  Gas  Company,  212 
U.  8.  19,  1909  and  Knoxville  vs.  Water  Com- 
pany, 212  U.  S.  1,  1909).  It  is  probably  fair 
to  say,  however,  that  there  is  yet  no  agree- 
ment or  authoritative  determination  as  to 
what  constitutes  “fair  value.”  Among  the 
various  standards  and  combinations  of  stand- 
ards tried  or  advocated  are: 

(1)  Market  Value  or  Commercial  Value  as 
a Going  Concern.— The  Washington  Railroad 
Commission  lias  used  this  as  its  final  standard, 
though  it  has  considered  cost  of  reproduction, 
original  cost  and  many  other  factors  as  hav- 


ing a probative  use  in  the  determination  of 
market  value.  The  Commission  holds,  how- 
ever, that  market  value  must  be  based  on  earn- 
ings under  reasonable  rates  of  charge.  Thus 
an  equation  is  presented  with  two  unknown 
quantities.  How  this  difficulty  can  be  avoided 
has  not  been  fully  explained. 

(2)  Actual  Cost  or  the  Actual  Unimpaired 
Investment. — This  includes  the  original  con- 
struction cost  plus  expenditures  for  additions 
and  betterments  but  excluding  all  expendi- 
tures for  renewals,  replacements  and  for  all 
other  purposes  not  properly  chargeable  to 
capital  under  correct  accounting  principles. 

(3)  Cost  of  Reproduction. — This  is  the  cost 
to  reproduce  the  property  at  present  prices  of 
land,  labor  and  materials.  The  estimate  of 
cost  of  reproduction  may  be  based  on:  (1) 
the  cost  of  an  exact  duplication  of  the  present 
plant;  (2)  the  cost  of  an  equally  efficient  plant. 

Prices  of  labor  and  materials  may  have  gone 
up  or  down,  thus  resulting  in  an  advantage 
under  the  reproduction  cost  method  either  to 
the  company  or  to  the  public.  As  to  land  and 
certain  other  factors  under  the  reproduction 
theory,  the  advantage  is  all  one-sided;  for 
through  a considerable  period  of  years  land 
values  almost  always  show  an  advance  and 
almost  never  a decline.  The  advance  is  some- 
times enormous  and  represents  a large  por- 
tion of  the  total  reproduction  cost  of  the 
property  of  certain  utilities.  There  is  no  cor- 
responding offset  due  to  a general  decline  in 
the  price  of  any  other  element  entering  into 
the  total  cost. 

See  Assessment  of  Taxes  ; Francitise 
Tax;  Municipal  Ownership;  Public  Serv- 
ice Commissions  ; Public  Service  Corpo- 
rations; Railroads,  Physical  Valuation  of. 

References:  J.  W.  Alvord,  “Notes  on  Going 
Value  and  Methods  for  its  Computation”  in 
Am.  Water  Works  Assoc.,  Proceedings,  1909, 
184-279;  L.  Metcalf  and  J.  W.  Alvord,  “Going 
Value  of  Water  Works”  in  Am.  Society  of 
Civil  Engineers,  Transactions,  LXXIII  (1911), 
326-391;  LI.  E.  Riggs,  “Valuation  of  Public 
Service  Corporation  Property”  in  Am.  Society 
of  Civil  Engineers,  Proceedings  (Nov.,  1910- 
Feb.,  1911)  ; R.  H.  Whitten,  Valuation  of  Pub- 
lic Service  Corporations  (1912). 

Robert  M.  Whitten. 

VALUATION  OF  RAILROADo.  See  Rail- 
roads, Physical  Valuation  of. 

VALUATION  OF  TAXABLE  PROPERTY. 

See  Appraisal  of  Imported  Goods  for 
Duties;  Assessment  of  Taxes. 

VALUATIONS,  ASSESSED.  See  Assessed 
Valuations,  Comparative. 

VALUE.  The  value  of  any  unit  of  a com- 
modity in  a given  market  is  its  power  to 
command  other  desirable  things  in  exchange. 


606 


VAN  BUREN,  MARTIN— VENEZUELA 


This  value  arises  because  the  commodity  is 
both  useful  and  scarce — a conjuncture  of 
qualities  which  causes  men  to  desire  it.  Things 
available  in  superabundance — ordinary  air, 
water — have  no  value,  though  they  be  useful 
or  even  necessary.  Only  when  the  supply  fails 
to  satisfy  every  want  do  men  become  willing 
to  give  other  things  in  exchange  for  units  of 
them.  In  our  economic  system,  where,  money 
serves  as  both  a common  measure  of  value  and 
the  medium  of  exchange,  the  value  of  any 
unit  of  commodity  at  the  time  and  place  is 
its  price.  But  the  economist  is  concerned 
usually  not  so  much  with  the  particular  (mar- 
ket) price  resulting  from  temporary  causes 
as  with  the  (normal)  price  which  in  the  long 
run  induces  relatively  stable  equilibrium  be- 
tween supply  and  demand. 

Man  naturally  satisfies  his  desires  accord- 
ing to  the  order  of  preference.  Beginning  with 
the  commodity  most  urgently  desired,  he  takes 
successive  units  of  it  until,  in  the  progress 
towards  satiety,  he  reaches  a point  where  he 
rejects  an  additional  unit  of  the  same  com- 
modity and  takes  the  first  unit  of  another 
commodity.  Since  all  normal  men  follow  this 
order  of  preference  in  satisfying  their  desires 
for  all  commodities,  the  choice  of  any  com- 
modity— e,  g.,  apples — ceases  just  where  the 
least  eager  purchaser  shifts  his  preference  to 
another  commodity.  The  last  unit  taken  by 
him  fixes  the  quantity  required  (demand)  in 
that  market.  The  value  or  price  of  this  unit 
is  measured  by  a mutual  balancing  of  desires 
between  him  and  other  persons:  he  sets  against 
this  last  unit  the  things  which  he  must  sur- 
render or  forego  to  obtain  it;  they  set  against 
other  things  the  unit  of  commodity  supplied 
in  exchange.  This  balancing  of  desires  may 
occur  under  two  radically  different  sets  of 
conditions  (monopolies  excepted) . (1)  Where 

conditions  do  not  permit  any  addition  to  the 
existing  stock  of  the  commodity,  the  temporary 
or  market  price  of  any  unit  is  determined  by 
the  relative  eagerness  of  buyers  and  sellers 
in  adjusting  supply  and  demand.  (2)  Where 
conditions  permit  renewals  of  supply,  the  re- 
sulting normal  value  or  price  of  any  unit  is 
determined  by  the  cost  involved  in  producing 
that  unit  of  the  required  supply  which  is 
produced  at  greatest  sacrifice — sacrifice  mean- 
ing costs  in  labor,  capital  and  waiting.  Ob- 
viously, equal  units  of  a commodity  of  uniform 
grade  have  but  one  price  in  the  same  market. 
The  price  of  each  unit  must  be  not  less  than 
the  (future)  cost  of  that  which  costs  most: 
because  men  will  not  perpetually  produce  units 
which  entail  loss.  The  most  costly  unit  of 
the  required  supply  therefore  fixes  a minimum 
limit  for  normal  value  or  price.  Normally 
producers  supply  all  units  desired  at  or  above 
this  price  (effective  demand),  which  therefore 
equalizes  supply  and  demand.  The  multiplex 
influences  which  affect  both  market  and  normal 
value  must  be  sought  in  the  standard  treatises. 


See  Cost;  Distribution;  Labor;  Profits. 

References:  A.  Marshall,  Principles  of  Eco- 
nomics (Oth  ed.,  1910),  III,  V,  App.  I;  T.  N. 
Carver,  Distribution  of  Wealth  (1911),  cli. 
i ; W.  Smart,  Intro,  to  the  Theory  of  Value,  on 
the  Lines  of  Monger,  Wieser  and  Boelim- 
Bawerk  (1891).  E.  H.  Vickers. 

VAN  BUREN,  MARTIN.  Martin  Van  Buren 
(1782-1802),  eighth  President  of  the  United 
States,  was  born  at  Kinderhook,  N.  Y.,  Decem- 
ber 5,  1782.  In  1803  he  was  admitted  to  the 
bar,  and  from  1808  to  1813  was  surrogate  of 
Columbia  county.  He  affiliated  politically 
with  the  Clinton  faction  of  the  Republicans, 
and  from  1813  to  1820  sat  in  the  state  senate, 
serving  from  1815  to  1819  as  attorney  general 
also.  By  1821  he  had  separated  from  the 
Clintonians,  and  was  elected  by  the  “Buck- 
tails”  United  States  Senator.  He  was  a 
prominent  member  of  the  “Albany  regency,” 
just  then  being  formed.  He  was  one  of  the 
leading  opponents  of  J.  Q.  Adams  and  a cham- 
pion of  Jackson;  and  in  1829  resigned  the 
office  of  governor  of  New  York,  to  which  he 
had  been  elected  in  1828,  and  which  he  held 
from  January  1 to  March  12,  to  become  Secre- 
tary of  State.  With  a view  to  the  vice-presi- 
dency, he  resigned  his  secretaryship  in  1831, 
and  was  presently  appointed  minister  to  Eng- 
land; but  the  nomination  was  rejected  by  the 
Senate.  From  1833  to  1837  he  was  Vice- 
President,  and  in  1836  was  elected  President. 
He  was  renominated  by  the  Democrats  in  1840, 
but  defeated.  He  was  a candidate  for  nomi- 
nation in  1844,  but  was  rejected  because  of  his 
opposition  to  the  annexation  of  Texas.  In 
1848  he  was  the  candidate  of  the  Free-Soil 
party,  but  received  no  electoral  votes.  He  died 
at  Kinderhook,  July  24,  1862.  See  Demo- 
cratic Party;  Presidential  Elections.  Ref- 
erences: G.  Bancroft,  Martin  Van  Buren 
(1889);  E.  M.  Shepard,  Martin  Van  Buren 
( 1899 ) ; E.  H.  West,  Calendar  of  the  Papers 
of  Martin  Van  Buren  (1910);  J.  D.  Richard- 
son, Messages  and  Papers  of  the  Presidents 
(1896),  III.  W.  MacD. 

VATTEL,  EMMERICH  Von.  See  Political 
Theories  of  Continental  Publicists. 

VENEZUELA.  Venezuela,  a republic,  called 
officially  the  United  States  of  Venezuela,  is  a 
federal  union  of  states,  comparable  in  that 
regard  to  the  United  States  of  North  America, 
to  Mexico,  to  Brazil,  and  to  Argentina.  In 
Venezuela  are  twenty  states  politically  equal 
and  self-governing,  two  territories,  and  a fed- 
eral district  (which,  however,  is  not  a contigu- 
ous area,  but  comprises  some  isolated  par- 
ishes), which  are  administered  by  a governor 
appointed  by  the  president.  Venezuela  touches 
Colombia,  Brazil  and  British  Guiana.  Its 
coast  was  sighted  by  Columbus  on  his  third 
voyage,  the  name,  meaning  little  Venice,  being 


607 


VENUE— VERMONT 


given  because  of  the  singular  appearance  of 
the  lake  villages  where  the  present  city  of 
Maracaibo  is  situated.  At  first  it  was  the 
Province  of  Venezuela,  the  coast  line  being 
what  is  now  called  the  Spanish  Main,  harried 
by  British,  Dutch  and  French  buccaneers.  In 
1718  the  vice-royalty  of  New  Granada  was 
created,  and  Venezuela  became  subject  to  the 
viceroy  at  Bogota.  In  1810  the  revolt  against 
Spain  was  seriously  organized  and  finally 
carried  to  a successful  conclusion  under  Boli- 
var who  was  a native  of  Caracas.  In  1819 
the  country  became  part  of  Greater  Colombia, 
but  that  federation  was  dissolved  and  absolute 
independence  was  finally  secured  in  the  year 
1830. 

Venezuela  has  an  area  of  393,976  square 
miles  and  a population  (estimated  in  1910)  of 
2,685,606.  The  latest  constitution  is  that  of 
August  5,  1909,  and  provides  for  legislative, 
executive  and  judicial  branches  of  the  govern- 
ment. The  legislative  authority  is  bicamaral, 
resting  in  a congress  consisting  of  a senate 
and  a chamber  of  deputies;  the  senate  has  40 
members,  two  from  each  state,  elected  by  the 
state  legislatures  for  four  year  terms;  the 
deputies— numbering  one  for  each  35,000  in- 
habitants— are  elected  by  popular  vote  for  four 
year  terms,  the  suffrage  being  possessed  by  all 
citizens  21  years  old.  Congress  meets  annually 
on  April  19  at  the  capital,  for  a session  of 
70  days,  but  may  be  convened  in  extra  session. 
The  executive  authority  is  a president,  elected 
for  a term  (not  immediately  recurring)  of 
four  years;  there  is  no  vice-president,  the 
presiding  officer  of  the  council  of  government 
taking  the  president’s  place  in  case  of  need. 
This  council  consists  of  ten  members  elected 
by  congress  for  a term  of  four  years.  The 
president  appoints  a Cabinet  of  seven  minis- 
ters: interior  relations;  foreign  relations; 
finance  and  public  credit;  war  and  marine; 
promotion;  public  works;  public  instruction. 
The  judicial  authority  lies  in  the  supreme 
court,  courts  of  appeal  and  minor  courts.  Su- 
preme court  judges  are  seven,  elected  by  con- 
gress for  four  years.  The  standing  army  of 
the  country  has  about  9,000  men,  and  the  re- 
serves are  estimated  at  100,000.  The  navy 
consists  of  6 vessels  with  about  1,000  men.  The 
telegraph  and  postal  service  is  owned  and 
operated  by  the  government  (minister  of  pro- 
motion ) , and  to  some  extent  the  telephone 
service  is  nationalized,  although  private  lines 
are  allowed.  The  capital  is  Caracas.  State 
religion  is  Roman  Catholic. 

References:  J.  I.  Rodriguez,  Am.  Constitu- 
tions (1905),  I,  191-232;  Pan  American  Union, 
Bulletin  (monthly)  and  other  publications. 

Albert  Hale. 

VENUE.  In  criminal  procedure  the  venue 
is  the  place,  neighborhood,  or  county  in  which 
the  crime  is  charged  to  have  been  committed, 
which  must  be  taken  into  account  in  determin- 


ing in  what  court  the  prosecution  should  be 
conducted.  In  civil  procedure  the  venue  has 
reference  to  the  place  at  which  an  act  was 
done,  or  a transaction  occurred,  or  to  the  local 
jurisdiction  of  the  court  in  which  such  act  or 
transaction  is  inquired  into  as  a basis  for  a 
cause  of  action.  In  both  criminal  and  civil 
proceedings  there  are  provisions  for  the  change 
of  venue  from  the  jurisdiction  of  one  court 
to  that  of  another  on  account  of  some  privi- 
lege of  or  necessity  for  having  the  case  tried 
in  the  court  of  a different  local  jurisdiction. 
The  Sixth  Amendment  of  the  Federal  Consti- 
tution provides  that: 

In  all  criminal  prosecutions  the  accused  shall  en- 
joy the  right  to  a speedy  and  public  trial,  by  an 
impartial  jury  of  the  State  and  district  wherein 
the  crime  shall  have  been  committed,  which  dis- 
trict shall  have  been  previously  ascertained  by 
law. 

See  Law,  Criminal;  Trials.  E.  McC. 

VERMONT.  History.  — Vermont  declared 
herself  a free  and  independent  state  on  March 
17,  1777,  and  remained  an  independent  sov- 
ereignty for  thirteen  years,  until  admitted  to 
the  Union  March  4,  1791.  The  seat  of  gov- 
ernment is  Montpelier.  The  state  has  been 
governed  under  constitutions  adopted  in  1777, 
1786  and  1793,  with  twenty-eight  amendments, 
of  which  the  first  was  adopted  in  1828,  the 
second  to  the  thirteenth  in  1836,  the  fourteenth 
to  the  twenty-third  in  1850,  the  twenty-fourth 
to  the  twenty-sixth  in  1870,  and  the  twenty- 
seventh  and  twenty-eighth  in  1883.  The  con- 
stitutional conventions  of  1786  and  1793  in- 
stead of  amending  the  original  constitution 
adopted  July  2,  1777,  incorporated  the  changes 
into  the  original  text  and  promulgated  the 
entire  constitution.  As  these  were  adopted 
Vermont  has  had  three  constitutions. 

General  Constitutional  Provisions. — Every 
tenth  year  after  1880  the  senate  may  propose 
amendments  to  the  constitution.  If  an  amend- 
ment receives  a two-thirds  vote  in  the  senate 
and  a majority  vote  of  the  next  following  gen- 
eral assembly  (senate  and  house  of  represen- 
tatives), it  is  submitted  to  a vote  of  the  peo- 
ple, when  a majority  vote  determines  its  final 
acceptance  or  rejection.  All  citizens  of  the 
United  States  residing  in  Vermont  are  citizens 
of  the  state.  The  right  of  suffrage  is  confined 
by  the  constitution  to  male  citizens,  twenty- 
one  or  more  years  of  age,  who  have  resided  in 
the  state  one  year.  Women  taxpayers  have  a 
right  to  vote  in  all  elections  relating  to  schools 
and  school  officers  in  city,  town  and  graded 
school  districts  and  also  the  right  to  be  elected 
to  any  local  school  position  or  to  the  office  of 
town  clerk.  The  Australian  ballot  system 
was  adopted  in  1890.  Elections  for  state  offi- 
cers, for  representatives  in  Congress  and  for 
county  officers  are  held  biennially  in  Septem- 
ber instead  of  in  November,  as  in  nearly  all 
of  the  other  states.  The  results  in  elections 
in  Vermont  in  presidential  years  have,  there- 


608 


VERMONT 


fore,  had  a special  significance  in  that  the 
country  at  large  has  been  interested  in  them  as 
a possible  indication  of  the  trend  of  the  na- 
tional elections.  The  state  being  strongly  Re- 
publican, the  size  of  the  majority  has  been 
looked  to  as  the  barometer. 

Executive  and  Administrative  Officers. — The 
administrative  officers  of  the  commonwealth, 
elected  biennially  by  the  people,  are  governor, 
lieutenant  governor,  secretary  of  state,  state 
treasurer,  state  auditor  and  attorney  general. 
Congressmen  are  elected  in  the  two  congression- 


treason.  He  has  a limited  veto  power  which 
may  be  overridden  by  a majority  vote  in  each 
House. 

Legislative. — The  legislative  department  of 
the  government  consists  of  a general  assembly 
composed  of  a senate  and  house  of  represen- 
tatives. The  senate  is  made  up  of  thirty  mem- 
bers apportioned  among  the  fourteen  counties 
according  to  population  but  with  the  proviso 
that  each  county  shall  have  at  least  one  sena- 
tor. The  house  of  representatives  is  made  up 
of  two  hundred  and  forty-six  members,  one 


Boundaries  of  the  State  of  Vermont 


al  districts.  The  officers  elected  by  the  general 
assembly  are  United  States  Senators,  one  chief 
justice  and  four  associate  justices  of  the  su- 
preme court,  six  superior  judges,  superintend- 
ent of  education,  sergeant-at-arms,  adjutant 
and  inspector  general,  judge  advocate  general 
and  judges  of  the  court  of  claims.  The  officers 
appointed  by  the  governor  and  confirmed  by 
the  senate  are  state  highway  commissioner, 
commissioner  of  state  taxes,  state  geologist,  a 
commissioner  of  agriculture,  a bank  examiner, 
a fish  and  game  commissioner  and  various 
boards  and  commissions.  The  governor  has  a 
limited  power  of  appointment  and  may  grant 
pardons,  except  for  impeachment,  murder  and 


from  each  city  and  town.  The  two  houses  have 
equal  powers  in  legislation  except  that  all 
revenue  measures  must  originate  in  the  house 
of  representatives.  The  house  of  represent- 
atives was  created  by  the  constitution  of  1777 
and  the  senate  by  the  third  amendment  to  the 
constitution  adopted  in  1836.  In  addition  to 
its  regular  legislative  functions,  the  senate 
is  empowered  to  propose  amendments  to  the 
constitution  decennially,  to  try  cases  of  im- 
peachment and  to  confirm  certain  appoint- 
ments made  by  the  governor. 

Judicial. — The  judicial  department  of  the 
government  is  made  up  of  a supreme  court, 
county  courts,  courts  of  chancery,  probate 


609 


VESSELS 


courts,  court  of  claims,  justice  courts  and 
municipal  courts.  The  supreme  court  is  com- 
posed of  one  chief  justice  and  four  associate 
justices.  It  is  the  highest  court  in  the  state 
and  is  a court  of  law  and  equity.  Five  gen- 
eral terms  are  held  each  year.  There  is  no 
superior  court  but  there  are  six  superior  judges 
elected  by  the  legislature,  the  first  elected  be- 
ing designated  as  chief  judge.  A superior 
judge  and  two  assistant  judges  elected  by  the 
voters  in  each  county  constitute  the  county 
court.  The  designation  of  the  presiding  judge 
for  the  different  counties  is  left  to  the  judges 
themselves,  although  the  law  prescribes  ro- 
tation so  far  as  practicable.  The  county  courts 
have  original  jurisdiction  in  all  civil  and 
criminal  cases  within  their  respective  coun- 
ties, except  such  as  are  by  law  made  cognizable 
by  justice  courts,  and  may  render  judgment 
thereon  or  award  sentence  according  to  law 
and  may  have  appellate  jurisdiction  of  cases, 
civil  and  criminal  appealable  to  such  court. 

Local  Administration. — For  the  administra- 
tion of  local  affairs  the  state  is  divided  into 
fourteen  counties,  six  cities  and  two  hundred 
and  forty  townships.  There  is  no  special 
board  of  commissioners  or  supervisors  in  the 
different  counties,  as  in  most  of  the  other 
states,  the  county  authority  in  Vermont  being 
the  assistant  judges  of  the  county  court.  The 
assistant  judges,  sheriff  and  state’s  attorney 
are  elected  biennially  by  popular  vote.  The 
county  treasurer  is  chosen  by  the  assistant 
judges.  The  important  town  officers  are  mod- 
erator, board  of  selectmen,  clerk,  treasurer, 
assessors  and  school  directors.  The  business 
affairs  of  the  cities  are  handled  in  accordance 
with  their  charter  provisions  and  their  ad- 
ministrative officers  are  a mayor,  board  of 
aldermen,  board  of  school  commissioners,  clerk, 
treasurer,  sheriff  or  constable,  and  various 
minor  officers. 

Recent  Important  Political  Events. — Ten 
proposals  of  amendment  to  the  constitution 
were  made  by  the  senate  in  1910,  nine  of 
which  were  twice  approved  by  the  general 
assembly,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of 
the  constitution.  The  amendment  which  failed 
of  adoption  was  the  recommendation  to  remove 
from  the  constitution  the  “ten  year  time  lock.” 
The  nine  amendments  accepted  are  briefly 
summarized  as  follows:  (1)  strengthening 
the  veto  power  of  the  governor  by  requir- 
ing a two-thirds,  instead  of  a majority  vote 
to  pass  a bill  over  his  objection;  (2)  chan- 
ging the  time  of  holding  biennial  elections  from 
September  to  November,  beginning  in  1914, 
and  the  time  of  convening  the  biennial  sessions 
of  the  legislature  from  October  to  January, 
beginning  in  1915;  (3)  requiring  the  print- 
ing of  the  yeas  and  nays  of  senate  and  house 
on  any  question,  when  demanded,  immediately 
after  the  close  of  a session.  (4)  removing  the 
legislature’s  present  power  to  commute  the 
death  penalty  of  condemned  murderers  to  life 


imprisonment  and  vesting  it  in  the  governor; 
(5)  making  members  of  the  legislature  during 
their  terms  of  office  ineligible  to  any  office 
of  profit,  the  election  to  which  is  vested  in 
the  general  assembly;  (6)  repealing  the  gen- 
eral assembly’s  present  power  to  grant  special 
charters  and  obliging  new  corporations  to 
organize  under  the  general  law;  (7)  changing 
the  designation  of  judges  of  the  Supreme 
Court  to  justices;  (8)  enabling  the  general 
assembly  to  pass  employees  compensatory  acts; 

( 9 ) providing  for  the  revision  of  the  consti- 
tution by  the  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  to 
bring  it  up  to  date  by  including  all  amend- 
ments thereto  and  excluding  all  sections, 
clauses  and  words  not  in  force.  All  of  these 
amendments  except  number  5 were  adopted  by 
the  voters  in  March,  1913,  and  ratified  by 
the  governor  April  8,  1913. 

The  state  is  strongly  Republican.  At  the 
last  election  (1912)  the  tickets  in  the  field 
were  Republican,  Democratic,  Progressive,  Pro- 
hibitionist and  Socialist.  Owing  to  the  Pro- 
gressive split,  no  candidate  received  a ma- 
jority, but  the  Republican  nominee  for  gover- 
nor was  chosen  by  the  legislature.  Since  1852 
the  electoral  votes  of  Vermont  have  been 
given  to  Republican  candidates  for  President 
and  Vice-president.  Vermont  was  one  of  the 
two  states  which  cast  electoral  votes  for  the 
Republican  candidate  in  1912.  The  state  has 
four  electoral  votes. 

The  chief  political  issues  before  the  people 
during  the  past  decade,  as  indicated  by  the 
platforms  of  the  two  parties,  can  be  briefly 
summarized  as  follows:  Reduction  of  state 
taxes;  better  regulation  and  just  taxation  of 
corporations;  retention  or  rejection  of  present 
local  option  law  in  control  of  the  liquor  traffic, 
which  was  adopted  in  1902 ; good  roads ; prim- 
ary caucus  laws : reorganization  of  the  ju- 
diciary effected  in  1906  by  the  creation  of  su- 
perior court  judges;  change  in  the  present 
method  of  representation  by  towns  in  the  house 
of  representatives;  repeal  of  the  capital  pun- 
ishment law;  the  adoption  of  the  proposed 
amendments  to  the  constitution;  a state  tax 
commission;  employers’  liability  laws  and 
workingmen’s  compensatory  acts;  conservation 
of  forests  and  natural  resources;  larger  appro- 
priations for  educational  purposes. 

See  Constitutions,  State;  State  Govern- 
ments, Characteristics  of. 

References:  R.  E.  Robinson,  Vermont 
(1892)  ; S.  Williams,  Natural  and  Civil  Hist, 
of  Vermont  (2d  ed.,  1809)  ; F.  N.  Thorpe, 
Federal  and  State  Constitutions  ( 1909 ) , VI. 
3737-3781;  W.  S.  Slade,  Jr.,  Slade’s  Vermont 
State  Papers  (1823)  ; Vermont  Historical  So- 
ciety, Collections,  1870-1871,  Proceedings, 
1898;  Conant  and  Stone,  Geographical  Hist,  of 
Vermont  (1907).  Edward  D.  Field. 

VESSELS.  Vessels  are  usually  classed  as 
private  and  public.  Private  vessels  are  in 


610 


VESSELS,  ENTRY  AND  CLEARANCE  OF 


general  those  which  belong  to  the  citizens  of 
a state  and  public  are  those  which  belong  to 
the  state,  nearly  all  of  them  ships  of  war. 
When  private  vessels  are  engaged  in  the  service 
of  the  state  they  may  be  assimilated  to  public 
vessels.  Vessels  when  outside  the  territorial 
limits  of  other  states  are  under  the  juris- 
diction of  the  state  whose  flag  they  fly. 

Public  vessels  of  one  state  within  the  terri- 
torial limits  of  another  state  in  time  of  peace 
are  usually  granted  the  widest  possible  immun- 
ities from  local  jurisdiction,  though  they  may 
be  subject  to  local  harbor,  sanitary  and  like 
regulations.  The  officers  and  crews  of  public 
vessels  when  engaged  in  official  duties  are  also 
granted  so  far  as  possible  the  rights  of  extra- 
territoriality. 

Private  vessels  of  a state  within  the  terri- 
torial limits  of  another  state  in  time  of  peace 
are  usually  subject  to  the  local  jurisdiction 
except  in  regard  to  matters  which  concern  the 
internal  economy  of  the  vessels.  The  amount 
of  jurisdiction  assumed  by  different  states 
over  private  vessels  in  time  of  peace  varies. 
Some  lines  of  trade  may  be  closed  to  foreign 
vessels  and  certain  ports  may  be  similarly 
closed. 

In  time  of  war  and  when  outside  of  neutral 
jurisdiction,  the  public  vessels  of  one  bellig- 
erent are  in  general  liable  to  capture  by  the 
other  belligerent.  Vessels  engaged  in  hospital, 
scientific,  exploring,  cartel  and  other  lines  of 
work  having  no  relation  to  the  hostilities, 
and  for  the  good  of  all  mankind,  are,  when 
innocently  employed,  exempt. 

In  time  of  war,  private  vessels  of  one  bellig- 
erent are,  when  outside  of  neutral  jurisdic- 
tion in  general,  liable  to  capture  by  the  other 
belligerent.  Private  vessels  engaged  in  hospi- 
tal, scientific,  exploration  or  cartel  service  are 
exempt.  Small  coast  fishing  vessels,  and  small 
boats  engaged  in  local  trade  are  also  exempt 
by  conventional  agreement,  especially  by  the 
Hague  Convention  of  1907  with  regard  to  the 
Exercise  of  the  Right  of  Capture  in  Naval 
War.  It  is  also  customary  to  allow  a certain 
number  of  days  of  grace  for  the  departure  of 
private  belligerent  vessels  which  may  be  within 
the  ports  of  an  enemy  at  the  outbreak  of  war. 
The  period  of  grace  was  somewhat  defined  in 
1907  by  a Hague  Convention  relative  to  the 
Status  of  Enemy  Merchant  Ships  at  the  Out- 
break of  Hostilities. 

In  time  of  war  public  vessels  within  neutral 
jurisdiction  are  usually  subject  to  special  regu- 
lations in  regard  to  length  of  sojourn,  nature 
of  supplies  and  other  materials  which  may  be 
taken  on  board,  and  acts  which  may  be  per- 
formed. The  duration  of  sojourn  in  a neutral 
port  is  usually  fixed  at  twenty-four  hours, 
unless  the  stress  of  weather  or  other  excep- 
tional conditions  make  a longer  stay  impera- 
tive. 

The  departure  of  public  vessels  of  one  bellig- 
erent from  a neutral  port  may  be  regulated 


by  the  neutral  when  vessels  of  the  other  bellig- 
erent are  within  the  neutral  port.  The  simple 
passage  through  neutral  waters  is  not  re- 
garded as  necessarily  subject  to  regulation. 

Private  vessels  of  one  belligerent  when  with- 
in neutral  limits  are  exempt  from  interference 
by  the  other  belligerent. 

Public  vessels  of  a neutral  may  in  time  of 
war,  be  subject  to  special  regulations  when 
within  the  area  of  belligerent  operations  and 
when  military  necessity  requires  such  action, 
as  in  case  of  exclusion  from  a blockaded  port 
under  certain  circumstances. 

Private  vessels  of  a neutral  in  time  of  war 
are  subject  to  visit  and  search  when  outside 
neutral  jurisdiction  ( see  Right  of  Visit) 
and  are  liable  to  capture  for  violation  of  block- 
ade, or  unneutral  service  and  to  the  penalties 
and  delay  consequent  upon  carriage  of  con- 
traband. 

See  Commerce,  International;  Extra- 
territoriality; Maritime  War;  Navigation, 
Regulation  of;  Neutral  Trade,  Principles 
of;  Subsidies  to  Shipping;  Water  Bounda- 
ries. 

References:  H.  Glass,  Marine  Int.  Law 
(1895);  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law 
(1906),  I,  930-939,  II,  562-593,  1002-1123. 

George  G.  Wilson. 

VESSELS,  ENTRY  AND  CLEARANCE  OF. 

Under  the  clearance  law  of  April  22,  1902,  the 
master  of  every  vessel  engaged  in  the  foreign 
trade  is  required,  before  clearing,  to  deliver 
to  the  collector  a sworn  ship’s  manifest,  and 
the  consignors  of  the  cargo  must  likewise 
deliver  sworn  shippers’  manifests.  Then,  after 
seeing  that  the  requirements  as  to  fees,  etc., 
and  the  inspection  laws  of  the  states  are  com- 
plied with,  the  collector  issues  a clearance  for 
the  vessel  and  its  cargo,  stating  among  other 
matters  that  the  vessel  has  complied  with  the 
law.  Vessels  engaged  in  coastwise  shipping 
need  not  take  out  clearance  papers  unless  they 
clear  from  one  district  to  another. 

Upon  entry  from  foreign  ports  the  masters 
of  American  vessels  are  required  to  deposit 
with  the  port  collector  their  register  and  the 
clearance  granted  at  the  foreign  port  of  de- 
parture, to  be  retained  until  the  vessel  clears. 
Masters  of  foreign  vessels  are  required  to  pro- 
duce like  documents  to  the  collector  and  then 
deposit  them  with  the  foreign  consul  until 
they  clear.  American  vessels  are  also  required 
to  produce  letters  or  other  documents  showing 
the  names  of  the  vessel’s  owners.  All  vessels 
entering  from  foreign  ports  are  obliged  to  pro- 
duce their  original  manifests  to  the  proper 
customs  officials  for  inspection,  and  to  furnish 
true  copies  of  them.  The  entry  and  clearance 
fees  collected  are  fixed  by  the  laws  of  1886, 
1890,  1903  and  1910. 

In  compiling  records  of  entrances  and  clear- 
ances, vessels  are  recorded  as  clearing  to  the 
first  foreign  port  at  which  they  discharge 


611 


VESTED  RIGHTS,  PROTECTION  OF— VESTRY  IN  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 


cargo,  unless  the  bulk  of  it  is  discharged  at 
some  other  port;  and  as  entering  from  the 
first  foreign  port  at  which  they  loaded  cargo 
for  the  United  States. 

See  Manifests  of  Vessels:  Navigation, 
Regulation  of;  Shipping,  Regulation  of; 
Tariff  Administration. 

References:  U.  S.  Treasury  Department, 
Navigation  Laws  of  the  V.  8.  (1911);  E.  R. 
Johnson,  Ocean  and  Water  Transportation 
(1905),  ch.  v.  Grover  G.  Huebner. 

VESTED  RIGHTS,  PROTECTION  OF. 
Constitutional  Guaranties. — In  addition  to  the 
general  constitutional  principles  that  legis- 
lation is  in  its  nature  prospective  and  that  it 
is  not  within  its  province  to  deprive  one  per- 
son of  property  or  its  use  in  order  to  confer 
benefits  upon  another  ( see  Property,  Rights 
of;  Retrospective  Legislation)  there  are 
special  guaranties  in  state  constitutions  and 
specifically  in  the  Federal  Constitution  as 
against  state  as  well  as  federal  action  for  the 
protection  of  contract  and  property  rights 
against  legislative  impairment  (see  Contract, 
Impairment  of;  Due  Process  of  Law). 
Those  rights  incident  to  the  ownership  of 
property  or  arising  out  of  valid  contracts 
which  are  thus  protected  against  destruction 
or  impairment  by  subsequent  legislation  are 
in  a general  sense,  designated  as  “vested” 
rights,  although  such  term  is  not  used  in  the 
Federal  Constitution  nor  generally  in  state  con- 
stitutions. 

Property  Rights. — A full  definition  of  vested 
rights  in  property  would  involve  a definition 
of  private  property  in  its  broad  sense  as  recog- 
nized by  our  system  of  law,  for  constitutional 
provisions  have  reference  to  existing  conditions, 
with  a view  of  conserving  on  the  one  hand  pri- 
vate rights  and  on  the  other  hand  the  legiti- 
mate powers  of  government.  No  concise  defini- 
tion of  private  property  is  practicable.  Vested 
rights  in  property  may  be  explained,  however, 
by  illustrations.  In  the  first  place,  a right 
to  property  may  be  absolute  or  limited,  abso- 
lute if  all  the  rights  which  may  be  had  in 
property  are  combined  in  one  person,  limited 
or  qualified  if  in  the  same  property  different 
persons  have  coordinate  interests  so  that  the 
rights  of  one  are  limited  or  qualified  by  those 
of  the  other.  But  a limited  or  qualified  inter- 
est may  be,  nevertheless,  a fully  vested  right 
although  as  to  full  enjoyment  of  such  right 
there  is  an  element  of  contingency.  There 
may,  therefore,  be  a vested  right  in  a merely 
contingent  estate.  But  so  long  as  there  is  a 
mere  prospect  or  expectancy  of  ownership  or 
enjoyment  which  may  or  may  not  accrue  by 
reason  of  contingencies  not  provided  for,  such 
prospect  or  expectancy  is  not  a vested  right. 
A wife’s  prospective  dower  interest  in  land 
belonging  to  her  husband  is  dependent  on  the 
provision  of  law  existing  at  the  time  of  the 
husband’s  death  and  during  his  lifetime  her 


interest  is  as  to  its  nature  and  extent  only  an 
expectancy,  unless,  indeed,  by  the  existing  law 
she  is  given  some  right  of  which  no  action  or 
conduct  on  the  part  of  her  husband  can  de- 
prive her.  Likewise,  under  the  rules  of  inherit- 
ance the  children  of  the  owner  of  property  may 
have  an  expectancy  that  on  the  death  of  such 
owner  they  will  inherit  such  interests  in  his 
property  as  the  law  may  provide;  but  so  long 
as  this  expectancy  may  be  affected  or  defeated 
by  the  act  of  the  owner  it  does  not  constitute  a 
vested  right  in  his  property. 

Contract  Rights. — After  a contract  has  been 
so  made  and  executed  as  that  the  parties  are 
bound  by  it,  the  rights  of  each,  whether  its 
terms  and  provisions  have  been  fully  executed 
as  between  them  or  have  been  executed  as  to 
one  while  they  remain  executory  as  to  the 
other,  or  remain  still  executory  as  to  both,  are 
guaranteed  as  against  impairment  by  legis- 
lation (see  Contract,  Impairment  of).  But 
so  far  as  the  contract  remains  in  whole  or  in 
part  executory  the  limitation  afforded  by  law 
for  the  protection  and  enforcement  of  the  obli-. 
gations  of  either  party  may  be  modified  by 
general  changes  in  the  rules  of  evidence  or 
procedure  with  this  limitation  only,  that  the 
changes  must  not  be  such  as  to  substantially 
deprive  either  party  of  an  adequate  remedy. 
The  principles  applicable  to  changes  in  judi- 
cial procedure  in  case  of  contract  rights  are 
also  applicable  in  a general  way  to  like  changes 
in  relation  to  property  rights,  the  general  prin- 
ciple observed  being  that  a right  which  has 
accrued  and  become  vested  cannot  be  substan- 
tially diminished  or  impaired  by  subsequent 
legislation.  There  is  no  vested  right  as  to  the 
forms  and  methods  of  future  judicial  pro- 
ceedings, but  the  judgments  of  courts  which 
fix  and  determine  precedent  and  existing 
rights  are  not  subject  to  future  impairment  by 
legislative  action. 

See  Contract,  Impairment  of;  Due  Proc- 
ess of  Law;  Property,  Rights  of;  Retro- 
spective Legislation. 

References:  T.  M.  Cooley,  Constitutional 
Limitations  (7th  ed.,  1903),  500-595;  H.  C. 
Black,  Constitutional  Law  (3d  ed.,  1910),  596- 
COO.  Emlin  McClain. 

VESTRY,  IN  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT. 

From  early  times  in  England  the  assembly  of 
parishioners  for  deciding  on  matters  of  church 
business  was  known  as  the  vestry,  from  the 
robing  room  of  the  church,  in  which  such 
meetings  were  held.  Under  the  Tudors,  the 
vestry  was  made  the  basis  of  a distinctly  civil 
administration,  especially  in  regard  to  poor 
relief  and  highways.  All  the  inhabitants  were 
nominally  entitled  to  attend  these  meetings; 
but  the  records  available  indicate  the  attend- 
ance of  only  a small  number  of  the  more  sub- 
stantial persons. 

By  the  first  part  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury, it  had  become  customary  to  choose  in 


612 


VETO  POWER 


the  open  vestry  a select  committee  to  advise 
the  parish  officers;  this  committee  in  many 
places  came  to  fill  vacancies  in  its  own  member- 
ship, and  in  this  form  the  select  vestry  de- 
veloped into  a close  corporation,  whose  powers 
were  later  recognized  as  legal  by  prescription. 
During  the  eighteenth  century  such  select 
vestries  were  important  organs  of  local  govern- 
ment in  England. 

In  the  early  days  of  Virginia  parishes  were 
organized  with  a vestry  of  twelve  “selected 
men,”  who  were  chosen  at  first  by  the  parish- 
ioners, but  later  the  practice  of  cooptation 


was  established  as  in  the  “select  vestry”  of 
England.  The  select  committee  of  the  English 
vestry  may  be  the  origin  of  the  selectmen  of 
the  New  England  towns;  but  in  the  latter 
case  annual  elections  were  maintained  and 
the  selectmen  never  acquired  legal  recognition 
as  a close  corporation. 

See  Parish  Vestry  in  England. 

References:  J.  A.  Fairlie,  Local  Government 
in  Counties,  Towns  and  Villages  ( 1906 ) , chs. 
i,  ii ; S.  and  B.  Webb,  English  Local  Govern- 
ment, the  Parish  and  the  County  (1906),  Bk.  I. 

John  A.  Fairlie. 


VETO  POWER 


Historical.  — The  veto  power,  which  is 
possessed  by  the  President,  the  governors  of 
all  the  states  (except  North  Carolina)  and 
the  mayors  of  many  cities,  is  properly  not  an 
executive  but  a legislative  power.  It  is  part 
of  our  English  heritage  transmitted  through 
colonial  times.  In  England  the  king  was  once 
the  lawmaking  authority;  he  presided  over  his 
council,  entertaining  petitions  and  granting 
redress.  In  the  fifteenth  century  he  was  de- 
prived of  all  but  a negative  voice  when  Parlia- 
ment establishel  the  practice  of  submitting 
petitions  in  the  form  of  statutes.  Though  still 
regarded  as  part  of  the  legislature,  he  has 
lost  even  the  right  of  veto,  no  case  of  its 
exercise  having  occurred  since  1707.  But  while 
the  veto  fell  into  desuetude  at  home  (through 
the  rise  of  cabinet  government),  its  operation 
remained  unimpaired  in  the  colonies.  There 
the  governors  roused  irritation  by  their  abuse 
of  it;  and  the  fact  that  colonial  laws,  even 
after  receiving  the  governor’s  assent,  might  be 
disallowed  by  the  king  and  sometimes  were 
disallowed  purely  in  the  interests  of  the  mother 
country  was  put  forward  in  the  Declaration 
of  Independence  (see)  as  one  of  the  causes  of 
separation.  Under  these  circumstances  and 
in  view  of  the  popularity  which  the  doctrine 
of  separation  of  powers  then  had,  it  is  re- 
markable that  the  convention  of  1787  en- 
trusted to  the  President  even  a qualified  veto. 

President’s  Veto. — It  is  provided  in  the 
Constitution  that  every  bill  which  is  adopted 
by  Congress  and  every  order,  resolution  or 
vote  which  requires  the  concurrence  of  both 
houses  (except  a vote  to  adjourn)  must  be 
submitted  to  the  President  and,  to  become  a 
law,  must  receive  his  signature  (Art.  I,  Sec.  vii, 
Tflf  2,  3).  In  practice  there  are  two  exceptions 
to  this  rule:  concurrent  resolutions  (see) 
from  which  Congress  has  always  excluded 
matter  of  a legislative  nature,  and  constitu- 
tional amendments  (see).  The  President  is  al- 
lowed ten  days  (Sundays  excepted)  to  consider 
every  measure  submitted  to  him.  He  usually 
secures  the  opinion  of  the  head  of  that  de- 


partment to  which  the  subject  matter  relates 
and  sometimes  also  consults  the  Attorney  Gen- 
eral on  any  legal  questions  involved.  If,  in  the 
light  of  these  opinions  and  of  his  own  examina- 
tion, he  finds  serious  grounds  for  disapproval, 
he  may  return  the  measure,  with  a statement 
of  his  objections,  to  the  house  in  which  it 
originated;  and  it  will  then  become  law  only 
if  repassed  through  both  houses  by  a two- 
thirds  majority  of  those  present.  It  appears 
that,  once  having  exercised  the  veto,  the  Presi- 
dent cannot  recall  it;  for  in  President  Grant’s 
second  administration  Congress  twice  refused 
to  allow  him  to  consider  bills  which  he  had  re- 
turned with  objections.  The  President  cannot 
veto  single  items  of  a bill.  In  order,  there- 
fore, to  secure  his  acceptance  of  some  measure 
to  which  he  is  hostile  Congress  has  occasionally 
attached  it  as  a “rider”  (see)  to  an  appropria- 
tion bill  (see),  thus  giving  the  President  the 
alternative  of  giving  way  or  losing  the  money 
necessary  for  government  expenditures.  In- 
stead of  resorting  to  the  veto  the  President  may 
express  his  disapproval  simply  by  withholding 
his  signature;  such  was  the  course  taken  by 
Mr.  Cleveland  with  regard  to  the  Wilson  Tariff 
Bill.  One  of  two  things  may  then  happen.  If 
Congress  remains  in  session,  the  bill  becomes 
law,  after  the  expiration  of  ten  days,  without 
being  signed;  but  if  Congress  adjourns  sine  die 
within  that  period  and  thus  prevents  the 
President  from  sending  his  veto  message,  the 
bill  does  not  become  law.  It  follows  that  the 
President  has,  in  effect,  an  absolute  veto  over 
all  bills  passed  through  Congress  in  the  last 
ten  days  of  the  session.  This  is  called  the 
“pocket  veto.”  Though  rarely  used,  it  has  the 
advantage  of  protecting  the  country  from  de- 
fective legislation  in  the  rush  of  business  which 
usually  marks  the  days  immediately  preceding 
adjournment.  As  to  whether  the  President  may 
sign  a bill  after  the  adjournment  of  Congress 
the  Constitution  is  silent.  A precedent  was 
created  in  favor  of  such  power  when  Congress 
recognized,  by  amending  it,  an  act  which  had 
been  signed  under  such  circumstances  by  Presi- 


VETO  TOWER 


dent  Lincoln.  Moreover,  the  United  States  Su- 
preme Court  decided,  in  a case  under  the  Illi- 
nois provision  which  was  copied  from  the  Fed- 
eral Constitution,  that  signature  after  adjourn- 
ment and  within  ten  days  of  presentation  was 
valid.  But  however  favorable  this  decision 
may  be  to  the  cause  of  good  government,  it  is 
not  in  line  with  the  practice  or  expressed  views 
of  the  federal  executive. 

Purposes  of  the  Veto. — According  to  Hamil- 
ton (the  Federalist)  the  President’s  veto  was 
first  to  protect  the  executive  against  en- 
croachment on  the  part  of  Congress,  and, 
secondly,  to  prevent  hasty  and  imprudent 
legislation.  At  that  time  there  seems  to 
have  been  no  idea  that  the  veto  would 
be  necessary  to  check  the  enlargment  of 
the  power  of  Congress  in  other  ways  than  at 
the  expense  of  the  executive;  yet  vetoes  for  the 
protection  of  the  executive  have  been  fewer 
in  number  and  of  less  practical  importance 
than  those  based  on  other  constitutional 
grounds.  Out  of  08  bills  which  have  been 
vetoed  as  unconstitutional  only  21  were  regard- 
ed as  encroaching  on  the  executive,  ten  of  these 
being  reconstruction  measures  which  were  con- 
demned on  other  grounds  as  well.  In  the  early 
days  the  Presidents  acted  mainly  in  defence  of 
the  Constitution;  and  although  vetoes  on  the 
ground  of  expediency  grew  more  numerous 
from  the  time  of  Jackson,  they  remained 
decidedly  in  the  minority  until  after 
the  Civil  War. 

After  that  period,  since  the  general  gov- 
ernment found  itself  possessed  of  pow- 
ers which  had  hitherto  been  disputed, 
questions  of  administration  became  more 
important.  The  veto  changed  its  charac- 
ter. It  is  now  commonly  exercised  where  the 
President  regards  a measure  as  objectionable 
either  in  principle  or  in  probable  results.  Ac- 
cording to  President  Cleveland  the  presidential 
review  of  legislation  was  intended  to  “invoke 
the  exercise  of  executive  judgment,  and  invite 
independent  executive  action.”  Most  of  the 
Presidents  have  used  the  veto  sparingly.  Down 
to  the  close  of  President  Roosevelt’s  second  ad- 
ministration in  1909  it  appears  to  have  been 
employed  541  times;  but  of  these  bills  265  were 
private  pension  bills  of  which  Cleveland  vetoed 
260.  Washington  used  the  veto  only  twice. 
It  was  never  used  by  John  Adams,  Jefferson,  J. 
Q.  Adams  or  Van  Buren,  who  served  full  terms; 
or  by  W.  H.  Harrison,  Taylor,  Fillmore  or 
Garfield.  President  McKinley  vetoed  14  bills, 
President  Roosevelt  about  40.  It  should  be 
noted  that  in  signing  bills  Presidents  have 
sometimes  indicated  objections  which  Congress 
has  afterwards  remedied  by  supplementary 
legislation. 

Effects. — The  veto  power  has  worked  well 
and  met  with  popular  approval.  It  has  pro- 
tected the  Constitution  in  cases  where  the 
character  of  the  measures  was  such  as  might 
have  prevented  the  testing  of  their  validity  in 


the  courts.  It  has  discouraged  the  waste  of 
public  money  and  stood  in  the  way  of  hasty 
and  unwise  legislation.  Far  from  resenting  its 
extension  the  people  have  come  to  regard  it 
as  a wholesome  check  upon  a body  whose  ways 
are  sometimes  regarded  with  suspicion  as  lack- 
ing firmness  in  the  face  of  sectional  or  private 
influences.  The  fact  that  the  veto  is  not  abso- 
lute, but  to  be  effective  requires  the  support  of 
more  than  one-tliird  of  the  vote  in  each  house 
is  a guarantee  against  its  abuse.  It  speaks 
well  for  the  discretion  of  our  Presidents  that 
so  few  bills  have  been  passed  over  their  veto ; in 
the  time  of  Tyler  one  (the  first  instance)  ; 
Pierce,  five;  Johnson  (see)  fifteen;  Grant  four; 
Hayes,  one;  Arthur,  one;  Cleveland,  two.  The 
case  of  Johnson  was,  of  course,  peculiar  (see 
Reconstruction).  Sometimes  Congress  has 
been  deterred  from  passing  objectionable  mea- 
sures by  the  knowledge  that  the  President  was 
prepared  to  veto  them ; and  President  Roose- 
vent  went  so  far  as  to  announce  publicly  that 
he  would  take  that  course  with  regard  to  cer- 
tain measures  pending  in  Congress. 

Governor’s  Veto. — Our  earliest  state  con- 
stitutions show,  in  many  respects,  a con- 
fidence in  the  legislature  and  a distrust  of  the 
executive;  and  it  was  natural,  after  the  abuse 
of  the  veto  power  in  colonial  times,  that  in 
most  cases  no  provision  should  have  been  made 
for  its  continuation.  Tbe  veto  was  granted  in 
only  three  of  the  thirteen  states:  Massachu- 
setts, South  Carolina  and  New  York.  In  South 
Carolina,  where  it  was  absolute,  it  was  al- 
most immediately  abolished  and  not  re- 
stored till  1865;  in  New  York,  where 
it  was  limited,  it  rested  with  a board 
of  revision  consisting  of  the  governor 
and  the  judges  of  the  supreme  court;  in  Massa- 
chusetts the  veto  belonged  to  the  governor, 
but  could  be  overridden  by  a two-thirds  vote  of 
the  houses.  But  faith  in  the  elected  executive 
increased.  Between  1785  and  1850  four  of  the 
original  states  (Georgia,  Pennsylvana,  Connec- 
ticut, and  New  Jersey)  had  granted  the  veto. 
Since  then  all  except  North  Carolina  have  done 
so.  Of  the  other  states  all  but  four  adopted 
the  veto  at  the  time  of  their  admission  to  the 
Union;  and  these  four  did  so  subsequently, 
Ohio  being  the  last  in  1903.  New  York  in  1821 
and  Illinois  in  1848  abolished  the  board  or 
revision,  transferring  its  powers  to  the  gover- 
nor. 

All  measures  requiring  the  concurrence  of 
both  houses  are  subject  to  the  veto;  the  only 
exceptions  are  constitutional  amendments,  re- 
ferenda, and  questions  of  adjournment.  All  the 
more  recent  constitutions  and  some  of  the  old 
ones  by  amendment  (two-thirds  of  the  states) 
allow  the  governor  to  veto  single  items  in  ap- 
propriation bills;  Washington,  Virginia  and 
Ohio  extend  this  provision  so  as  to  have  it 
apply  to  all  bills.  This  is  undoubtedly  a great 
advance  over  the  federal  law  and  illustrates 
very  well  the  growing  disposition  to  regard 


614 


VICE  INVESTIGATIONS 


the  governor  as  the  guardian  of  the  public 
welfare  against  the  corrupt  schemes  of  legis- 
lators. The  veto  is  used  not  only  in  the  case  of 
measures  which  the  governor  may  regard  as 
unconstitutional,  but  also  in  the  case  of  those 
which  run  counter  to  his  policy. 

In  all  the  states  (except,  of  course,  North 
Carolina)  the  procedure  follows  the  general 
lines  laid  down  in  the  Federal  Constitution.  If 
the  governor  approves  a bill,  he  signs  it;  if  he 
disapproves,  he  returns  it,  with  a statement 
of  objections,  to  the.  house  in  which  it  origi- 
nated (except  in  Kansas  where  he  returns  it  to 
the  lower  house  and  in  Georgia  where  the 
house  is  not  specified).  The  majority  required 
to  override  the  veto  varies,  only  nine  states 
following  the  federal  practice  (two-thirds  of 
those  present  in  both  houses).  In  one  state, 
Connecticut,  only  a majority  of  those  present 
is  required;  in  eight  states  a majority  of  all 
members;  in  23  states  a majority  of  two-thirds 
of  all  of  the  members;  in  four  of  the  states 
a majority  of  three-fifths  of  all  the  mem- 
bers; in  Virginia  a majority  of  all  the  members 
and  also  two-thirds  of  those  present;  in  Mass- 
achusetts two-thirds  of  all  the  members  of  the 
original  house  and  two-thirds  of  those  present 
in  the  other  house.  Bills  are  seldom  carried 
over  the  veto,  partly  because  of  the  large  ma- 
jority usually  required  and  partly  because  of 
public  attention  which  the  governor’s  mes- 
sage fixes  upon  the  legislature.  Even 
when  the  governor  acts  from  partisan 
motives,  the  dominant  party  can  hard- 
ly master  a sufficient  vote  in  both  houses. 
The  time  allowed  the  governor  for  the  con- 
sideration of  bills  varies  from  three  to  ten 
days;  five  days  is  the  time  allowed  in  21 
states.  Unless  approved  or  vetoed  within  that 
time  the  bills  normally  become  law.  But  in 
cases  where  the  legislature  has  adjourned  in  the 
meantime  the  procedure  varies  in  the  different 
states.  In  eleven  states  the  bills  do  not  become 
law;  in  eleven  others  they  do  not  become  law 
unless  signed  within  a specified  time,  varying 
from  three  days  in  the  case  of  Minnesota  to  30 
in  the  case  of  New  York.  In  Missouri  and 
Iowa  they  may  be  approved  or  disapproved 
within  thirty  days.  In  the  remaining  states 
the  bills  become  law  unless  objected  to,  usually 
within  a period  of  five  to  thirty  days,  and,  in 
some  cases,  unless  returned  the  next  session  of 
the  legislature.  No  power  which  the  governor 
possesses  strengthens  his  hands  more  or  serves 
the  public  interest  better.  The  growing  im- 
portance of  his  office  is  not  due  to  his  execu- 
tive authority  which  is  small,  but  to  the  low 
repute  into  which  some  of  our  state  legisla- 
tures have  fallen  and  to  the  service  which  he 
performs  in  detecting  and  thwarting  sinister 
schemes. 

The  Mayor’s  Veto. — In  many  of  our  cities 
the  mayor  has  the  power  to  veto  the  ordinances 
of  the  local  legislative  body,  the  majority  re- 
quired for  repassage  varying  as  in  the  states. 


In  some  cities — including  Baltimore,  Boston, 
New  Orleans,  Philadelphia,  St.  Louis,  New  York 
and  San  Francisco,  and  most  cities  of  Ohio 
and  Illinois — this  power  extends  to  the  items 
of  appropriation  bills.  In  the  state  of  New 
York  the  mayor,  either  alone  or  in  conjunction 
with  the  council,  according  to  the  size  of  the 
city,  may  veto  any  special  bill  affecting  the 
city;  and  the  bill  cannot  become  law  unless  re- 
passed by  the  legislature  in  the  same  session. 
The  veto  of  the  mayor,  though  useful,  has  much 
less  importance  than  that  of  the  governor  be- 
cause of  the  steady  decay  of  the  city  councils 
and  the  transfer  of  their  powers  to  other 
bodies. 

See  Executive  and  Congress  ; Executive 
and  Executive  Reform  in  American  Sys- 
tems; Governor  of  the  State;  Municipal 
Government  in  the  United  States,  Organi- 
zation of;  President,  Authority  and  In- 
fluence of. 

References:  C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Government 
and  Politics  (1910)  ; J.  Bryce,  Am.  Com. 
monwealth  (1911),  J.  H.  Finley  and  J.  F. 
Sanderson,  Am.  Executive  and  Executive  Me- 
thods (1908),  chs.  vi,  xv;  E.  C.  Mason,  Veto 
Power  (1891)  ; Rhode  Island  State  Library, 
Veto  Power  in  the  Several  States  (1907). 

Charles  A.  Beard. 

VICE  INVESTIGATIONS.  The  moral  con- 
ditions in  American  cities  including  systematic 
understandings  between  proprietors  of  pro- 
hibited callings  and  the  police,  have  led 
to  systematic  investigations  by  private 
agencies  or  by  public  officials  in  several  cities. 
In  some  eases  the  only  way  to  get  evidence  has 
been  by  pretending  to  open  a gambling  house, 
or  unlicensed  saloon,  or  disorderly  house,  and 
involving  members  of  the  police  force  in  what 
is  thus  proven  to  be  their  ordinary  practice  of 
taking  protection  money.  Three  elaborate  in- 
vestigations have  recently  been  made,  one  in 
New  York,  one  in  Minneapolis,  and  one  in 
Chicago,  dealing  with  child-life,  housing,  gam- 
bling, dance  houses,  and  other  dangerous  amuse- 
ments, the  social  evil  and  the  white  slave 
traffic.  See  Amusements,  Regulation  of  ; 
Gambling;  Liquor  Legislation;  Police  in 
American  Cities;  Public  Morals,  Care  For; 
Social  Evil,  Regulation  of;  Social  Reform 
Problems;  Tenement  House  Regulation; 
Vagrancy.  References:  House  Reports  (on 
White  Slave  Traffic),  61  Cong.,  2 Sess.,  No. 
47  (1909)  ; Senate  Doc.,  61  Cong.,  3 Sess., 
No.  702  (1910);  U.  S.  Immigration  Commis- 
sion, “Importing  Women  for  Immoral  Pur- 
poses” in  Sen  Doc.,  61  Cong.,  2 Sess.,  No.  190 
(1909);  Chicago  Vice  Commission,  Social 
Evil  in  Chicago  (1911,  4th  ed.,  1912)  ; Minne- 
apolis Vice  Commission,  Report  to  the  Mayor 
(1911);  New  York  Committee  of  Fourteen, 
Social  Evil  (1910);  New  York  Committee  of 
Fifteen,  Social  Evil  (2d  ed.,  1912)  ; Philadel- 
phia Vice  Commission,  Report  (1913)  ; Port- 


615 


VICE-PRESIDENT— VILLAGES,  INCORPORATED 


land,  Oregon,  Vice  Commission,  Report 
(1913)  ; G.  J.  Kneeland,  Commercialized  Pros- 
titution in  New  York  (1913).  A.  B.  II. 

VICE-PRESIDENT.  Since  deputy  gover- 
nors were  familiar  in  Colonial  times,  it  was 
natural  for  the  Constitutional  Convention  of 
1787  to  provide  for  a Vice-President  to  act  in 
case  of  accidental  vacancy  of  the  presidency 
or  disability  of  the  President.  By  making  him 
the  presiding  officer  of  the  Senate  a regular 
function  was  assigned  to  him  (Art.  I,  Sec. 
iii,  Art.  II,  Sec.  i,  1,  6).  However,  even 

men  like  John  Adams  and  Thomas  Jefferson 
could  not  rescue  the  vice-presidency  from  in- 
eptitude; and  a waggish  member  in  1789  pro- 
posed to  give  the  Vice-President  the  title  of  “his 
superfluous  excellency.”  Under  the  original 
provision  for  election,  the  Vice-President  was 
the  man  who  had  the  second  highest  number 
of  votes,  which  meant  that  he  might  probably 
be  of  the  opposite  party  from  the  President 
(Art.  II,  Sec.  i,  U 3).  The  Twelfth  Amend- 
ment (see)  adopted  in  1804  so  arranged  it 
that  the  Vice-President  will,  unless  there  is  no 
choice  by  electors,  infallably  be  of  the  same 
party  as  the  President.  Since  Jefferson,  no 
former  Vice-President  has  ever  been  chosen  to 
be  President,  with  the  exception  of  Roosevelt. 
Some  men  of  distinction  have  served  in  the 
office;  but  candidates  are  usually  nominated 
rather  with  a view  to  getting  the  votes  of  a 
particular  section  or  of  the  wing  of  a party 
than  for  their  supposed  qualifications  for  the 
presidency.  See  Presidential  Electors  ; 
Presidential  Elections;  Presidential  Suc- 
cession; Senate  of  the  United  States. 
References:  E.  Stanwood,  Hist,  of  the  Presi- 
dency (1898);  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Commonwealth 
(4th  ed.,  1910);  J.  T.  Morse,  John  Adams 
(1899),  Thomas  Jefferson  (1899);  H.  von 
Holst,  John  C.  Calhoun  (1899)  ; E.  M.  Shepard, 
Martin  Van  Buren  (1899)  ; lives  of  other  Vice- 
Presidents.  A.  B.  H. 

VICE-PRESIDENTS  OF  THE  UNITED 
STATES.  Following  is  a list  of  the  first 
twenty-eight  Vice-Presidents  of  the  United 
States: 

1789  (April  301—1797  (March  31,  John  Adams. 

1797  (March  4) — 1801  (March  3),  Thomas  Jefferson. 

1801  (March  4) — 1805  (March  31,  Aaron  Burr. 

1805  (March  4) — 1812  (April  20),  George  Clinton 
(Reelected,  1809;  died  in  office,  April  20.  1812). 

1813  (March  4)— 1814  (died  in  office,  Nov.  23),  El- 
bridge  Gerry 

1817  (March  4) — 1825  (March  3),  Daniel  D.  Tomp- 
kins (Reelected,  1827). 

1825  (March  41—1832  (resigned,  Dec.  28),  John  C. 
Calhoun  (Reelected,  1829). 

1833  (March  4)— 1837  (March  3),  Martin  Van 
Buren. 

1837  (March  4)— 1841  (March  3),  Richard  M. 
Johnson. 

1841  (March  4)— 1841  (succeeded  to  the  presidency 
on  death  of  Harrison,  Apr.  4),  John  Tyler. 

1845  (March  4)— 1849  (March  3)  George  M.  Dallas. 

1849  (March  4) — 1850  (succeeded  to  the  presi- 
dency on  death  of  Taylor,  July  9),  Millard  Fill- 
more. 

1853  (March  41— 1S53  (died  in  office,  Apr.  18),  Wil- 
liam It.  King. 


1857  (March  4) — 1861  (March  3),  John  C.  Breckin- 
ridge. 

1801  (March  4) — 1865  (March  3),  Hannibal  Ham- 
lin. 

1865  (March  4) — 1865  (succeeded  to  the  presidency 
on  death  of  Lincoln,  Apr.  15),  Andrew  Johnson. 

1869  (March  4) — 1873  (March  3i,  Schuyler  Colfax. 

1873  (March  4) — 1875  (died  in  office,  Nov.  22), 
Henry  Wilson. 

1877  (March  4)— 1881  (March  3),  William  A. 
Wheeler. 

1881  (March  4) — 1S81  (succeeded  to  the  presidency 
on  death  of  Garfield.  Sept.  19),  Chester  A.  Arthur. 

1885  (March  4)— 1885  (died  in  office,  Nov.  25), 
Thomas  A.  Hendricks. 

1889  (March  4)— 1893  (March  3),  Levi  P.  Morton 

1893  (March  4)— 1897  (March  3),  Adlai  E.  Steven- 
son. 

1897  (March  4)— 1S99  (died  in  office,  Nov.  21), 
Garret  A.  Hobart. 

1901  (March  4 ) — -1901  (succeeded  to  the  presidency 
on  death  of  McKinley,  Sept.  14),  Theodore  Roose- 
velt. 

1905  (March  4)— 1909  (March  3),  Charles  W.  Fair- 
banks. 

1909  (March  4)— 1912  (died  in  office,  Oct.  30), 
James  S.  Sherman. 

1913  (March  4)— Thomas  R.  Marshall. 

Reference:  “Brief  Biographical  Notes”  in 
Congressional  Biographical  Dictionary  (1903). 

A.  B.  H. 

VIGILANCE  COMMITTEE.  A term  applied 
to  committees  formed  in  the  North  previous 
to  the  Civil  War  to  aid  in  the  escape  of  fugi- 
tive slaves  (see).  Also  a name  adopted  by  the 
voluntary  organization  for  the  purpose  of 
keeping  peace  in  California  in  the  days  of 
the  great  migration.  0.  C.  H. 

VILLAGES,  INCORPORATED.  Variety.— 

In  addition  to  the  more  important  urban 
municipalities  there  are  in  the  United  States 
many  thousand  (over  10,000  of  less  than  8000 
population  in  1900)  of  small  semiurban  com- 
munities. These  smaller  municipal  corpora- 
tions are  called  in  different  states  villages, 
boroughs  and  incorporated  towns;  and  in  some 
states  even  the  smallest  villages  are  included 
in  the  term  cities.  Such  incorporated  villages 
and  towns  are  not  only  smaller  in  size  than 
most  cities;  but  they  also  have  a simpler  sys- 
tem of  government  and  exercise  a smaller 
range  of  functions.  At  the  same  time  they 
differ  from  the  New  England  towns  and  town- 
ships in  the  middle  Atlantic  and  north  cen- 
tral states  in  covering  only  detached  areas 
and  in  dealing  for  the  most  part  with  the 
special  needs  of  the  compactly  built  districts. 

Distribution. — Comparatively  few  of  these 
incorporated  villages  are  found  in  New  Eng- 
land ; as  in  these  states  the  town  governments 
usually  serve  the  needs  of  the  villages  as  well 
as  the  rural  sections  of  the  towns.  But  since 
1890  there  has  been  some  tendency  in  several 
of  these  towards  the  separate  incorporation 
of  villages  and  boroughs.  The  larger  number 
of  incorporated  villages  are  found  in  the  north- 
central  group;  in  the  southern  states,  where 
there  is  no  general  system  of  township  govern- 
ment, the  tendency  is  for  smaller  villages  than 
in  the  northern  states  to  be  incorporated. 


VIRGINIA 


During  the  colonial  period,  besides  the  muni- 
cipal corporations  called  cities,  a number  of 
smaller  places  were  incorporated  as  boroughs 
in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey.  About  the 
end  of  the  eighteenth  century  several  villages 
were  incorporated  in  New  York.  From  these 
states  the  organization  of  incorporated  villages 
and  towns  has  extended  to  the  south  and  west; 
and  some  have  been  established  in  several  New 
England  states.  For  a time  such  villages  and 
boroughs  were  incorporated  by  special  acts 
of  the  state  legislatures.  But  in  1834  a general 
law  was  passed  for  the  organization  of  bo- 
roughs in  Pennsylvania,  and  in  1847  a general 
law  for  the  incorporation  of  villages  in  New 
York. 

General  Laws. — Most  states  now  have  a 
general  law  for  the  incorporation  of  villages, 
boroughs  or  incorporated  towns;  but  there  is 
also  a considerable  amount  of  special  legis- 
lation for  particular  communities.  Under  the 
general  laws,  the  procedure  for  incorporation 
usually  requires  a petition  from  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  proposed  village  and  a popular  vote 
on  the  proposition.  The  petition  goes  in  some 
states  to  a local  judge,  in  others  to  the  county 
board  and  in  New  York  to  the  supervisor  or 
supervisors  of  the  town  or  towns  concerned. 
In  some  states  ( e.  </.,  Ohio  and  Missouri) 
villages  may  be  established  by  the  county  board 
without  a formal  vote  of  the  electors  in  the 
proposed  village. 

In  many  cases  the  statute  establishes  a 
minimum  population  for  new  villages,  most 
commonly  from  two  hundred  to  three  hundred. 
The  maximum  population  of  villages  varies 
more  widely.  In  New  York  and  Pennsylvania 
the  minimum  population  for  cities  is  10,000; 
in  Ohio,  Virginia  and  Louisiana  it  is  5,000; 
in  Missouri  and  Alabama,  3,000,  in  a number 
of  other  states,  2,000.  Municipal  corporations 
below  these  figures  are  legally  villages  or 
boroughs  in  the  respective  states ; but  some- 
times a village  or  borough  will  have  a consider- 
ably larger  population  before  steps  are  taken 
to  reincorporate  as  a city. 

Functions. — The  functions  and  importance 
of  village  government  vary  considerably  in 
different  sections  of  the  country.  In  New 
England,  the  villages  deal  only  with  the  special 
needs  of  the  more  compactly  built  section, 
such  as  fire  protection,  police,  street  paving 
and  sidewalks,  sewers,  water  works  and  street 
lighting.  In  most  of  the  middle  Atlantic  and 


north  central  states,  the  general  purposes  of 
village  government  are  about  the  same;  but  in 
practice  the  villages  are  more  important,  and 
in  some  cases  the  villages  absorb  some  of  the 
township  functions.  In  several  states  (Penn- 
sylvania, New  Jersey,  Wisconsin,  Minnesota, 
and  the  Dakotas),  the  villages  are  independ- 
ent of  the  townships,  and  the  usual  township 
functions  are  added  to  those  of  the  village. 

Organization. — Village  organization  is  com- 
paratively simple.  The  principal  authority  is 
a board  of  trustees  or  council,  most  often  com- 
posed of  from  five  to  seven  members,  elected 
at  large  for  one  or  two  years.  In  states  where 
the  smallest  villages  are  organized  as  cities, 
members  of  the  council  are  sometimes  elected 
by  wards.  Such  village  boards  have  power  to 
pass  ordinances  on  many  subjects  enumerated 
in  the  statutes,  a limited  power  of  taxation, 
and  of  authorizing  special  assessments  for 
street  improvements.  Borrowing  powers  are 
generally  dependent  on  a popular  vote. 

The  chief  official  of  a village  is  usually 
called  the  mayor  or  president,  and  is  elected 
for  one  or  two  years.  His  special  legal  au- 
thority has  not  been  of  much  importance;  but 
in  some  states  there  is  now  a tendency  to 
invest  him  with  the  veto  and  appointing  power, 
as  in  the  case  of  city  mayors.  Other  village 
officers  include  a clerk,  treasurer,  constable, 
street  commissioner,  and  in  some  states  asses- 
sor, attorney  and  justice  of  the  peace.  In 
states  where  there  are  villages  of  considerable 
size  there  may  be  additional  officers,  as  in  the 
New  York  village  law. 

Significance. — The  system  of  village  gov- 
ernment plays  a more  important  part  in  the 
local  government  of  the  country  than  has 
generally  been  recognized;  and  is  indeed  close- 
ly connected  with  the  existence  and  importance 
of  town  and  township  government.  The  arti- 
ficial nature  of  the  township  area  in  the  north 
central  states,  and  the  limited  powers  of  the 
townships  have  led  to  the  development  of  vil- 
lage governments  which  attend  to  much  of  the 
more  important  business  of  the  New  England 
town;  and  the  villages  in  the  southern  and 
far  western  states  take  the  place  to  some  extent 
of  a general  system  of  township  government. 

See  Borough;  Proprietary  Villages; 
Towns  and  Townships. 

Reference:  J.  A.  Fairlie,  Local  Government 
in  Counties,  Towns  and  Villages  (1906),  ch. 
xi.  John  A.  Fairlie. 


VIRGINIA 


Settlement  and  Early  Administration.— 

Virginia  was  settled  by  105  English  colo- 
nists, sent  out  by  the  London  company,  in 
1607.  They  chose  a site  on  the  James  River 
some  forty  miles  northwest  of  Norfolk.  New 
settlers  arrived  almost  every  year  until  1619 


but  almost  as  many  were  carried  off  by  disease, 
famine  or  Indian  attacks.  The  little  com- 
munity was  under  the  authority  of  the  gover- 
nors and  councils  appointed  by  the  company 
until  1619,  when  a house  of  burgesses  was 
granted  which  henceforth  exercised  the  right 


617 


VIRGINIA 


to  vote  taxes  for  the  government  and  the  com- 
mon defense.  In  1024  the  authority  of  the 
London  company  was  transferred  to  the  Brit- 
ish monarch  who  appointed  the  governors  and 
enjoyed  the  right  to  veto  all  local  law.  The 
governors  in  turn  nominated  to  the  Crown  the 
members  of  the  council,  and  all  administrative 
officers.  The  county  courts  were  composed  of 
a board  of  magistrates  who  were  originally 
named  by  the  governor  but  who  were  practi- 
cally self-perpetuating  afterwards.  ' The  par- 
ishes, or  smaller  units  of  government,  were 
under  the  control  of  vestries  originally  elected 
by  the  congregations  but  these  again  became 
self-perpetuating.  Most  of  the  affairs  of  local 
government,  such  as  the  building  of  bridges, 
the  opening  of  roadways  and  the  engaging  of 


diciary  was  reorganized  though  the  county 
courts  remained  as  before,  and  in  general  the 
same  men  were  continued  in  power  both  in 
legislative  and  judicial  departments.  The  suf- 
frage was  extended  slightly  while  representa- 
tion was  distributed  in  a way  to  curb  the 
power  and  influence  of  the  growing  western 
countries.  In'  1786  the  Virginia  legislature 
passed  resolutions  asking  for  a convention  of 
delegates  from  other  states  for  the  purpose 
of  strengthening  the  Confederation.  The  Fed- 
eral Convention  (see)  met  in  Philadelphia  and 
in  September  following  submitted  a new  con- 
stitution to  the  several  states.  Though  Vir- 
ginia leaders  had  been  most  influential  in 
drafting  the  new  document,  great  hostility  was 
immediately  manifested  especially  in  the 


Boundaries  of  the  State  of  Virginia,  Showing  Territorial  Changes 


teachers,  devolved  upon  the  courts  which  as- 
sembled monthly  at  the  court  houses  where  the 
people  gathered  at  the  same  time  to  transact 
business,  to  listen  to  political  speeches  and 
to  urge  their  causes  either  in  court  or  with  the 
judges  sitting  as  administrative  officers. 

The  house  of  burgesses,  like  the  English 
House  of  Commons,  steadily  increased  its 
powers,  supported  as  it  was  always  by  the 
county  courts,  until  the  governors  nominally 
independent  were  really  subordinate  to  it. 
The  governor  and  council,  sitting  during  the 
earlier  period  with  the  burgesses,  later  formed 
a separate  body  (about  1080).  It  could  veto 
acts  of  the  more  popular  assembly,  but  this 
in  time  became  only  a suspensive  power.  The 
governor  and  council  sat  also  as  a general 
court  to  decide  causes  appealed  from  the  county 
courts. 

Revolutionary  Changes.  — The  Revolution 
brought  a new  constitution  but  little  real 
change.  The  royal  governor  was  superseded  by 
an  executive  chosen  by  the  joint  houses  of  the 
legislature;  the  council  became  the  senate,  an 
upper  house  of  fifty  members,  with  a real 
veto  on  the  acts  of  the  other  body ; and  the 
burgesses  were  changed  to  a house  of  delegates, 
chosen  annually  from  each  county.  The  ju- 


middle  and  western  parts  of  the  state.  The 
smaller  eastern  counties  where  slavery  was 
dominent  were  almost  unanimously  in  favor 
of  adoption.  A convention  was  called  for 
June  2,  1788,  and  after  a long  and  bitter  con- 
test the  delegates  of  the  eastern  counties  won 
and  the  Federal  Constitution  was  adopted 
(June  26) . 

Virginia  Loses  Ascendency. — Virginia  was 
the  mainstay  of  the  Jefferson  party  (see 
Democratic-Republican  Party)  which  gained 
control  of  the  Federal  Government  in  1801; 
middle  and  western  Virginia  strongly  favored 
the  war  ■with  England  in  1812;  but  at  the 
close  of  that  struggle  in  1816  the  scepter  passed 
from  the  hands  of  the  so-called  “Virginia 
dynasty”  to  those  of  the  South  Carolina 
leaders  and  their  western  allies.  In  1829  the 
centre  of  power  was  shifted  still  further  west- 
ward and  Virginia  seemed  to  be  out  of  the 
national  current.  Reform  measures  were 
agitated  1815  to  1828  and  a new  constitutional 
convention  called  in  1829  and  again  in  1850 
to  readjust  the  representation  of  the  different 
sections  of  the  state.  Little  was  really  done 
and  western  Virginia  remained  half  hostile 
till  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  war  (see  West 
Virginia). 


618 


VIRGINIA 


Secession. — In  February,  1861,  a fourth  con- 
vention of  the  people  met  in  Richmond  to  de- 
cide whether  Virginia  should  secede  from  the 
Union.  On  April  17  the  ordinance  of  secession 
(see)  was  passed  and  submitted  to  popular 
vote  late  in  May,  after  the  war  had  already  be- 
gun, and  when  a vote  on  the  merits  of  the  ques- 
tion was  impossible.  Every  county  east  of  the 
Alleghenies  returned  overwhelming  majorities 
in  favor  of  secession;  the  forty  counties  west 
of  the  same  boundary  took  steps  toward  form- 
ing a separate  government  and  declared  in- 
dependence on  June  11,  1861.  At  the  close  of 
the  war  in  1865,  a “rump”  government  at 
Alexandria,  with  Francis  H.  Pierpont  as  gov- 
ernor, was  transferred  to  Richmond  by  order 
of  President  Johnson;  but  this  government  was 
superseded  by  the  military  authority  of  the 
Federal  Government  in  1867,  and  in  1868,  after 
the  right  of  suffrage  had  been  conferred  upon 
the  freedmen,  a fifth  convention  was  held. 
The  resulting  constitution  and  laws  confirmed 
the  acts  of  the  military  government,  reestab- 
lished and  improved  the  school  system  and  gave 
Virginia  history  a new  direction.  The  Four- 
teenth and  Fifteenth  Amendments  (see)  to  the 
Federal  Constitution  were  adopted  by  Virginia 
in  1869,  and  on  January  26,  1870,  the  state  was 
readmitted  to  the  Union  (see  Recoxstruc- 
tion).  There  was  much  friction  in  local 
politics  particularly  in  the  settlement  of  the 
ante-bellum  debt  and  on  the  negro  question 
until  1902,  when  the  present  constitution  was 
adopted.  Under  its  provisions  the  negroes  are 
effectually  barred  from  the  polls  by  the  fran- 
chise clauses  which  require  the  ownership  of 
property  or  ability  to  write  and  evidence 
of  the  payment  of  poll  taxes  for  three  years 
preceding  registration;  about  one  half  of  the 
white  voters  are  also  eliminated  ( see  Negro 
Suffrage) . 

Administration. — The  governor  of  Virginia 
is  now  chosen  by  popular  vote  for  terms  of 
four  years ; he  is  the  head  of  the  state,  he 
exercises  the  veto,  appoints  numerous  minor 
officials  and  receives  a salary  of  $5,000  per 
annum.  The  departments  of  administration, 
secretary  of  state,  treasurer,  attorney  general 
and  so  on  are  also  elected  by  the  people,  each 
for  a term  of  four  years.  The  legislature 
meets  biennially  on  the  first  Monday  in  Jan- 
uary and  remains  in  session  only  sixty  days. 
Members  of  the  house  of  delegates  are  chosen 
every  two  years  while  senators  are  elected 
for  terms  of  four  years,  the  former  representing 
as  nearly  as  may  be  the  counties,  the  latter 
districts,  which  frequently  include  several  coun- 
ties. Representation  is  apportioned  according 
to  population  and  not  according  to  voters, 
a plan  which  allows  the  older  counties,  where 
there  are  many  negroes,  even  more  weight 
in  legislation  than  in  ante-bellum  times  when 
the  slaves  were  represented  as  property.  The 
judiciary,  composed  of  a court  of  appeals,  cir- 
cuit and  municipal  courts,  is  elective  for  terms 
137 


by  the  legislature.  The  county  courts,  former- 
ly the  governing  oligarchies  of  the  state,  have 
practically  ceased  to  exist  and  the  business  of 
the  county  is  in  the  hands  of  supervisors 
chosen  by  popular  vote  for  so-called  magisterial 
districts,  of  which  there  are  from  three  to 
eleven  in  each  county;  the  supervisors  levy 
the  taxes,  audit  the  county  finances  and  per- 
form most  of  the  administrative  functions 
formerly  devolving  upon  the  county  courts. 
In  each  county  there  is  also  a sheriff,  a treas- 
urer, a commonwealth’s  attorney  and  a clerk 
of  the  court,  all  chosen  by  popular  vote  for 
stated  terms.  In  the  districts  there  is  a 
coroner,  appointed  by  the  judge  of  the  circuit 
court;  justices  of  the  peace,  constables  and 
overseers  of  the  poor,  elected  for  definite  terms. 
Organized  communities  of  less  than  5,000  peo- 
ple are  designated  by  law  as  towns,  while 
groups  of  more  than  5,000  are  called  cities 
and  in  both  local  self-government,  except  in 
the  appointment  of  the  judges,  obtains.  The 
judges  are  appointed  by  the  legislature.  The 
greatest  progress  is  being  made  in  public  edu- 
cation. In  1907  there  were  enrolled  in  the 
schools  369,241  children,  though  the  school  pop- 
ulation numbered  630,204;  and  in  the  same 
year  $3,357,475  was  expended  for  schools,  which 
is  a large  sum  when  the  total  taxable  wealth  is 
taken  into  account.  The  value  of  property, 
real  and  personal,  is  $541,456,220  while  the 
public  debt  is  $25,110,320.  In  1870  this  debt 
was  $45,000,000.  A part  of  this  difference 
was  assigned  by  the  U.  S.  Supreme  Court  in 
1910  to  West  Virginia  but  the  larger  portion 
has  been  paid  direct  from  the  state  treasury. 

Parties. — The  main  interests  of  the  people 
are  agricultural  and  there  are  few  towns  of 
importance,  Richmond,  Norfolk  and  Petersburg 
being  the  more  notable  with  populations  ran- 
ging from  100,000  down  to  25,000.  The  state 
is  normally  Democratic  by  a majority  of  from 
20,000  to  30,000 ; both  federal  Senators  are 
Democratic  (1913)  and  all  the  representatives, 
but  one,  belong  to  the  same  party.  General 
elections,  both  national  and  state,  attract 
little  attention  and  not  one  half  of  those  who 
might  vote  do  so.  The  voluntary  primary 
which  is  applied  only  in  the  Democratic  party 
offers  the  real  occasion  for  rivalry  and  conflict 
and  it  is  in  this  way  that  the  decisions  of  the 
people  on  matters  of  policy  are  made. 

Population. — The  population  was  747,610  in 
1790,  880,200  in  1800,  974,600  in  1810,  1,065,- 
116  in  1820,  1,211,405  in  1830,  1,239,797  in 
1840,  1,421,661  in  1850,  1,596,318  in  1860, 
2,061,612  in  1910. 

See  Secession;  South;  Virginia  and  Ken- 
tucky Resolutions. 

References:  C.  H.  Ambler,  Sectionalism  in 
Virginia  (1910);  J.  S.  Bassett,  Writings  of 
Colonel  William ■ Byrd  (1901);  R.  Beverley, 
Hist,  of  Virginia  (1855);  A.  Brown,  Genesis 
of  the  U.  S.  (1890),  The  First  Republic 
in  America  (1898)  ; P.  A.  Bruce,  Econ- 


619 


VIRGINIA  AND  KENTUCKY  RESOLUTIONS 


omic  Hist,  of  Virginia  in  the  17th  Century 
(1895),  Institutional  Uist.  of  Virginia  in  the 
17th  Century  (1910);  J.  E.  Cooke,  Virginia 
(1900);  Debates  of  the  Convention  of  1829- 
30  (1830)  ; T.  R.  Dew,  Review  of  the  Debates 
in  the  Virginia  Legislature  of  1831-32  (1852)  ; 


W.  W.  Henning,  Statutes  at  Large  of  Virginia 
(1819);  R.  R.  Howison,  Hist,  of  Virginia 
(1849)  ; Rev.  W.  Meade,  Old  Churches,  Minis- 
ters and  Families  of  Virginia  (1857);  W.  P. 
Palmer,  Calendar  of  Virginia  State  Papers 
(1875-84).  William  E.  Dodd. 


VIRGINIA  AND  KENTUCKY  RESOLUTIONS 


Origin. — In  1798  the  Federal  party,  elated 
by  the  temporary  popularity  which  was  the 
result  of  the  trouble  with  France,  passed  the 
Alien  and  Sedition  Acts  (see).  These  acts, 
if  not  unconstitutional,  certainly  may  be  said 
to  have  reached  the  very  border  of  legality. 
They  were  thought  by  the  Republican  leaders 
seriously  to  menace  individual  liberty  and  to 
be  a clear  expression  of  Federalistie  doctrine; 
they  appeared  to  bear  out  the  accusation  often 
brought  by  the  Republicans  that  the  Federalists 
were  intent  upon  building  up  a tyrannical 
government  and  disregarding  the  constitution- 
al limits  upon  the  authority  of  the  central 
government.  Jefferson  and  Madison  and  some 
of  their  followers  thought,  therefore,  that  it 
was  time  to  speak  out  and  to  denounce  Fed- 
eral methods  of  interpretation  and  these  acts 
in  particular.  Resort  was  had  to  the  state 
legislatures  of  Virginia  and  Kentucky.  A set 
of  resolutions  for  the  consideration  of  the 
Kentucky  legislature  was  drawn  up  by  Jeffer- 
son; but  the  fact  of  his  authorship  was  not 
known  until  many  years  later.  Madison  pre- 
pared a set  for  the  Virginia  legislature.  The 
Kentucky  legislature  adopted  resolutions  No- 
vember 16,  1798,  which  were  similar  to  those 
prepared  by  Jefferson  but  did  not  follow  his 
text  in  all  particulars.  Virginia  acted  the 
next  month,  December  24.  The  resolutions 
were  sent  out  by  both  states  for  the  consider- 
ation of  the  other  members  of  the  Union  and 
brought  forth  responses  from  many  of  them, 
the  subject  being  fully  discussed  in  most  of 
the  legislative  bodies  of  the  Union.  In  1799 
(November  22)  the  legislature  of  Kentucky 
issued  a reply  to  the  responses  received  from 
the  various  states  and  the  next  year  (1800) 
a long  and  elaborate  report  prepared  by  Madi- 
son was  adopted  by  the  Virginia  legislature. 

Significance. — These  resolutions  are  of  great 
significance  in  America  constitutional  history. 
Coming  as  they  did  from  the  two  men  whose 
names  were  most  closely  associated  with  the 
beginnings  of  the  Republican  party,  they  were 
continually  referred  to  in  later  years  as  an 
authoritative  statement  of  constitutional  as 
well  as  party  doctrine.  They  were  over  and 
over  again  brought  up  in  the  discussions  con- 
cerning the  nature  of  the  American  Union  and 
the  rights  of  the  states;  for  the  time  came 
when  it  appeared  to  be  sufficient  to  cite  the 
“resolutions  of  ’98,”  as  they  were  called,  to 


substantiate  fully  the  doctrine  of  complete  and 
unalloyed  state  sovereignty. 

Main  Principles.- — As  far  as  the  theory  of 
government  is  concerned  the  most  important 
part  of  the  Virginia  resolutions  is  the  third 
paragraph.  It  declares : 

That  this  Assembly  doth  explicitly  and  peremptor- 
ily declare  that  it  views  the  powers  of  the  Federal 
Government  as  resulting  from  the  compact  to  which 
the  States  are  parties,  as  limited  by  the  plain 
sense  and  intention  of  the  instrument  constituting 
that  compact ; as  no  further  valid  than  they  are 
authorized  by  the  grants  enumerated  in  that  com- 
pact ; and  that,  in  case  of  a deliberate,  palpable, 
and  dangerous  exercise  of  other  powers  not  grant- 
ed by  the  said  compact,  the  States,  who  are  par- 
ties thereto,  have  the  right  and  are  in  duty  bound 
to  interpose  for  arresting  the  progress  of  the  evil, 
and  for  maintaining  within  their  respective  limits 
the  authorities,  rights,  and  liberties  appertaining  to 
them. 

Of  the  first  Kentucky  resolutions  the  most 
important  paragraph  is  the  first.  It  declares: 

That  the  several  States  composing  the  United 
States  of  America,  are  not  united  on  the  principle 
of  unlimited  submission  to  their  general  govern- 
ment ; but  that  by  compact  under  the  style  and 
title  of  a Constitution  for  the  United  States  and 
of  amendments  thereto,  they  constituted  a general 
government  for  special  purposes,  delegated  to  that 
government  certain  definite  powers,  reserving  each 
State  to  itself,  the  residuary  mass  of  right  to  then- 
own  self-government ; and  that  whensoever  the 
general  government  assumes  undelegated  powers, 
its  acts  are  unauthoritative,  void,  and  of  no  force  : 
That  to  this  compact  each  State  acceded  as  a 
State,  and  is  an  integral  party,  its  co-States  form- 
ing, as  to  itself,  the  other  party  : That  the  gov- 
ernment created  by  this  compact  was  not  made 
the  exclusive  or  final  judge  of  the  extent  of  the 
powers  delegated  to  itself ; since  that  would  have 
made  its  discretion,  and  not  the  Constitution,  the 
measure  of  its  powers  ; but  that  as  in  all  other 
cases  of  compact  among  parties  having  no  com- 
mon Judge,  each  party  has  an  equal  right  to 
judge  for  itself,  as  well  of  infractions  as  of  the 
mode  and  measure  of  redress. 

The  second  set  of  Kentucky  resolutions  (Nov. 
22,  1799)  asserted: 

That  the  principle  and  construction  contended 
for  by  sundry  of  the  state  legislatures,  that  the 
General  Government  is  the  exclusive  judge  of  the 
extent  of  the  powers  delegated  to  it,  stops  nothing 
[short]  of  despotism — since  the  discretion  of  those 
who  administer  the  government,  and  not  the  Con- 
stitution, would  be  the  measure  of  their  powers : 
That  the  several  states  who  formed  that  instru- 
ment being  sovereign  and  independent,  have  the 
unquestionable  right  to  judge  of  the  infraction  : 
and.  That  a Nullification  by  those  sovereignties,  of 
all  unauthorized  acts  done  under  color  of  that  in- 
strument is  the  rightful  remedy. 

Interpretation. — The  interpretation  of  these 
documents  is  not  an  easy  matter  but  a careful 
study  of  their  provisions,  in  light  of  the  politi- 
cal thinking  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  of 
the  circumstances  under  which  they  were  pro- 


620 


VIRGINIA  AND  KENTUCKY  RESOLUTIONS 


duced,  will  indicate  that  they  were  not  intended 
to  announce  the  doctrine  of  state  sovereignty 
in  the  sense  in  which  those  words  were  com- 
monly used  from  the  time  of  Calhoun  onward. 
It  is  well  to  remember  that  the  first  and  most 
obvious  intention  of  the  framers  of  these  docu- 
ments was  to  pronounce  against  the  validity  of 
the  Alien  and  Sedition  Acts  and  to  declare 
the  invalidity  and  impropriety  of  the  Feder- 
alist interpretation  of  the  Constitution.  They 
sought  to  make  plain  that  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment was  not  entitled  to  proceed  on  the  theory 
that  there  were  no  limits  upon  its  authority; 
and  the  Kentucky  resolutions  stated  very  clear- 
ly that  the  central  government  was  not  the 
final  judge  of  its  own  authority. 

The  interpretation  must  depend  in  very 
large  measure  upon  the  significance  of  certain 
salient  words,  especially  the  words  “compact” 
and  “sovereign.”  Let  us  notice  first  that  the 
purpose  was  to  protest  distinctly  against  the 
theory  that  the  United  States  Government  was 
possessed  of  all  power — a theory  which  might 
have  been  proper,  if  the  Government  had  been 
established  without  reference  to  states  or  if 
the  states  had  not  been  in  existence  at  the 
time  the  Constitution  was  adopted.  The  asser- 
tion is  made,  therefore,  that  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment obtained  its  powers  as  a result  of  the 
compact  between  states  and  that  its  authority 
is  limited  by  the  plain  terms  of  the  instrument. 

Compact. — To  the  defenders  of  state  sov- 
ereignty in  later  years,  the  use  of  the  word 
compact  appeared  in  itself  sufficient  to  show 
that  in  1798  the  Constitution  was  looked  upon 
as  a mere  contract  or  treaty  between  states. 
This  is  the  first  and  most  fundamental  error 
in  the  common  interpretation  of  these  docu- 
ments. Compact  was  the  most  solemn  and 
serious  word  in  the  political  vocabulary  of  the 
men  of  the  eighteenth  century.  Society  itself 
as  well  as  government  was  founded  on  compact, 
and  government  rested  upon  the  consent  of  the 
governed  (see  Social  Compact).  This  latter 
phrase,  moreover,  did  not  mean  that  all  per- 
sons should  have  representation,  but  that  gov- 
ernment sprang  from  consent  and  agreement. 
The  notion  that  government  or  constitution 
was  the  product  of  the  will  of  a preexisting 
unity — a body  politic  with  power  to  announce 
its  decisions  and  to  lay  down  limits  on  gov- 
ernment— was  a conception  quite  foreign  to 
the  thinking  of  the  men  who  drew  up  these 
resolutions.  The  word  “compact,”  therefore, 
can  be  dismissed  altogether  as  no  indication 
that  the  framers  of  the  Virginia  and  Ken- 
tucky Resolutions  thought  that  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  was  a mere  treaty 
between  sovereignties  who  retained  their  power 
and  self-determination  in  all  respects  undi- 
minished. The  word  would  rather  imply  the 
belief  that  the  United  States  and  the  national 
government  were  established  by  the  same  sort 
of  fundamental  action  as  that  by  which  state 
governments  and,  in  fact,  all  free  states  and 


governments,  came  into  existence  and  by  which 
they  obtained  their  right  and  authority  to  act. 

Reserved  Rights. — No  principle  was  more 
common  to  the  political  thinkers  of  America 
in  the  later  decades  of  the  eighteenth  century 
than  the  principle  that  free  governments  must 
be  limited  and  that  no  government  can  be 
free  if  there  are  not  restraints  upon  its  au- 
thority. This  principle  was  applied  in  the 
resolutions  to  the  national  government  in  its 
relation  to  people  and  states.  Moreover,  men 
on  entering  society  or  in  establishing  civil 
government  were  supposed  to  surrender  a por- 
tion of  their  rights  in  order  that  the  remainder 
might  be  better  protected  and  secured.  There 
were  certain  natural  rights,  however,  which 
were  not  surrendered  and  these  were  beyond 
the  reach  of  government.  It  is  noteworthy, 
therefore,  that  Jefferson  in  his  resolutions, 
and  the  Kentucky  legislature  also,  makes  use 
of  this  doctrine  of  natural  rights.  The  last 
words  of  the  first  Kentucky  resolutions  asked 
that  the  “co-States,  recurring  to  their  natural 
rights  in  cases  not  made  federal,”  would  con- 
cur in  declaring  the  obnoxious  acts  void.  The 
conception  quite  evidently  is  that,  although 
the  states  in  entering  the  Union  gave  up  cer- 
tain rights,  they  were  not  bound  together  on 
the  principle  of  “unlimited  submission  to  their 
general  government”  but  had  certain  reserved 
rights  which  they  were  obliged  to  defend. 

The  same  thought  is  carried  out  by  the 
declaration  that  the  states  of  the  Union  by  a 
compact  “constituted  a general  government  for 
special  purposes,  delegated  to  that  government 
certain  definite  powers,  reserving  each  State 
to  itself,  the  residuary  mass  of  right  to  their 
own  self-government.” 

Parties. — Of  course  to  thinkers  of  a later 
time  the  assertion  that  the  Constitution  was 
formed  by  the  states  who  were  parties  to  it 
seemed,  in  itself,  adequate  for  the  establish- 
ment of  the  doctrine  that  it  was  merely  a 
contract  between  sovereignties  who  remained 
possessed  of  their  sovereignty  in  undiminished 
vigor.  What  has  been  said  in  the  preceding 
paragraphs  about  the  normal  connotations  of 
the  word  “compact”  is  perhaps  sufficient  to 
disclose  the  unsuitableness  of  this  interpreta- 
tion. But  we  may  say  again  that  the  organi- 
zation of  governments  and  commonwealths  by 
an  agreement  between  parties  was  not  a strange 
conception  to  the  men  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury, nor  did  the  fact  that  parties  existed  be- 
fore the  contract  indicate  that  they  remained 
fully  possessed  of  all  their  powers  after  the 
contract  (see  State  Sovereignty).  On  the 
contrary  they  might  very  well  have  lost  irre- 
trievably the  powers  which  they  voluntarily 
surrendered,  and,  as  a result  of  surrender  and 
agreement,  a substantial  legal  order  might,  ac- 
cording to  the  thinking  of  the  times,  have 
come  into  existence — a legal  order  which  was 
entitled  to  undisputed  sway  within  the  limits 
set  down  by  the  agreement. 


621 


VIRGINIA  DYNASTY— VIRGINIUS  EPISODE,  1873 


Right  to  Judge. — The  right  of  the  individual 
to  protect  his  natural  or  reserved  rights  was 
part  of  the  fundamental  thinking  of  the  Ameri- 
can Revolution.  Moreover,  in  the  determin- 
ation of  crucial  and  critical  matters  and  in 
times  of  real  danger  to  individual  liberty  the 
individual  or  the  people  must  be  the  ultimate 
judges  of  whether  the  government  had  tran- 
scended the  limits  of  its  authority  and  en- 
croached upon  their  inalienable  rights.  This 
form  of  political  thinking  underlay  the  Vir- 
ginia and  Kentucky  resolutions.  The  estab- 
lishment of  a government,  which  was  a real 
government  with  actual  authority,  naturally 
sprang  from  agreement;  but  some  rights  were 
necessarily  reserved,  for  no  government  was 
possessed  of  all  authority;  and  those  reserved 
rights  could  be  protected  and  should  be  pro- 
tected by  those  that  had  established  the  govern- 
ment and  entered  into  the  arrangement.  And 
just  as  the  persons,  the  original  sovereigns, 
that  have  commonly  established  government, 
determine  whether  their  reserved  rights  are 
affected,  so  the  states  must  finally  decide  for 
themselves ; the  government  was  not  made  “ex- 
elusive  or  final  judge  of  the  extent  of  powers 
delegated  to  itself.”  From  all  these  consider- 
ations we  see  that  it  was  quite  natural  for 
the  Republican  leaders,  when  they  were  striv- 
ing to  resist  the  growing  power  of  the  central 
authority  and  to  assert  state  rights,  to  de- 
clare that  the  central  government  was  not  the 
judge  of  its  own  powers,  that  it  was  limited 
by  the  plain  sense  of  the  compact,  and  that 
the  states  had  the  right  and  the  duty  to  inter- 
pose for  arresting  the  progress  of  the  evil  and 
for  maintaining  their  rights. 

Sovereignty.  — Those  that  believed  that 
these  resolutions  asserted  the  doctrine  of  un- 
diminished and  unqualified  state  sovereignty, 
naturally  also  referred  to  the  word  sovereign 
as  if  that  in  itself  were  conclusive  proof  of 
their  interpretation.  In  this  connection  it 
should  be  noticed  that  Madison  distinctly  dis- 
avowed the  interpretation  put  on  the  Virginia 
and  Kentucky  resolutions  by  the  South  Caro- 
linians in  1832;  he  pointed  to  the  fact  that 
in  early  days  sovereignty  was  supposed  to  be 
divisible.  Probably  writers  of  constitutional 
history  will  always  have  differences  of  opinion 
on  the  subject;  but  it  appears  to  the  writer 
of  these  paragraphs  that  the  early  orthodox 
doctrine  coincides  with  this  conception  of 
divided  sovereignty  and  that  the  notion  of 
the  men  who  framed  the  Constitution  was  that 
a state  could  come  into  the  Union  and  give  up 
irrevocably  a portion  of  its  sovereignty,  just 
as  the  individual,  the  original  sovereign,  sur- 
rendered, when  he  entered  society,  the  liberty 
which  was  his  in  a state  of  nature. 

Conclusion.— These  resolutions,  therefore,  in- 
stead of  being  the  logical  forerunner  of  later 
doctrines  of  undiminished  sovereignty,  put 
forth  a different  theory  and  rest  upon  think- 
ing totally  at  variance  with  later  arguments 


in  behalf  of  state  sovereignty.  For  the  ortho- 
dox doctrine  of  state  sovereignty  was  based 
on  the  theory  of  indivisible  sovereignty,  and 
on  the  impossibility  of  constituting  unity  and 
superior  legislative  authority  by  agreement  or 
consent.  By  the  theory  of  the  resolutions 
compact  results  in  the  establishment  of  real 
government;  the  states  lose  a portion  of  their 
sovereignty;  but  the  national  government  has 
not  unlimited  power  nor  right  to  judge  in 
critical  cases  of  the  extent  of  that  power; 
the  states  retaining  reserved  rights  can  pro- 
tect those  rights. 

See  Nullification  Controversy;  Seces- 
sion Controversy;  State  Sovereignty;  Vir- 
ginia. 

References:  J.  Elliot,  Journal  and  Debates 
of  the  Federal  Convention  ( 1830 ) , IV,  App., 
357-388;  F.  M.  Anderson,  “Contemporary  Opin- 
ion of  the  Virginia  and  Kentucky  Resolutions” 
in  Am.  Hist.  Rev.,  V (1899-1000),  45-225; 
A.  C.  McLaughlin,  “Social  Compact  and  Con- 
stitutional Construction”  in  ibid,  467 ; E.  D. 
Warfield,  The  Kentucky  Resolutions  of  1798 
(1887)  ; C.  W.  Loring,  Nullification,  Secession, 
Webster’s  Argument  and  the  Kentucky  and 
Virginia  Resolutions  (1893)  ; H.  von  Holst, 
Constitutional  Ilistcrry  of  the  U.  S.,  I,  (1877), 
144-167 ; J.  Lalor,  Cyclopedia  of  Political 
Science  (1890),  II,  672-677. 

Andrew  C.  McLaughlin. 

VIRGINIA  DYNASTY.  A name  given  by 
opponents  of  Virginia’s  domination  of  national 
affairs  to  the  men  from  Virginia  (Jefferson, 
Madison,  Monroe)  who  filled  the  presidency 
from  1801  to  1825.  O.  C.  H. 

VIRGINIUS  EPISODE,  1873.  The  Yir- 
ginius,  a vessel  sailing  under  the  American 
flag  with  men  and  supplies  bound  for  the  Cuban 
insurgents,  was  seized  by  a Spanish  war  ves- 
sel on  the  high  seas  October  31,  1873,  and 
taken  to  Santiago,  Cuba,  where  within  a week 
fifty-three  of  her  passengers  and  crew  were 
condemned  to  death  by  a military  court  and 
executed.  The  LTnited  States  at  once  demanded 
redress  on  the  grounds : ( 1 ) that  the  vessel  was 
seized  on  the  high  seas  on  a charge  of  piracy 
which  Spain  was  unahle  to  sustain;  (2)  that 
American  citizens,  no  matter  what  their 
offence,  were  entitled  under  treaty  to  a civil 
trial.  The  incident  came  near  precipitating 
war,  but  Spain  succeeded  in  proving  that  the 
Virginius  was  fraudulently  registered  and  did 
not  have  the  right  to  carry  the  American  flag. 
Spain  finally  surrendered  the  vessel  to  the 
United  States  and  paid  an  indemnity  for  the 
lives  of  the  persons  executed.  See  Cuba  and 
Cuban  Diplomacy;  High  Seas;  Neutral 
Trade,  Principles  of;  Spain,  Diplomatic  Re- 
lations with.  References:  J.  B.  Moore,  Am. 
Diplomacy  (1905),  79-80,  Foreign  Relations 
(1874),  922-1117  (1875),  1144-1153  (1876), 

J.  H.  L. 


486-535. 
622 


VITAL  STATISTICS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


VITAL  STATISTICS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


Value  of  Vital  Statistics. — Vital  statistics 
as  ordinarily  understood  are  the  statistics  de- 
rived from  the  records  of  the  chief  events  of 
human  life,  namely,  those  of  births,  deaths, 
marriages,  divorces,  and  sickness.  Sickness  or 
morbidity  statistics  are  so  incomplete  in  many 
countries  as  well  as  in  the  United  States  that 
they  do  not  enter  very  largely  into  inter- 
national comparisons.  Nearly  all  civilized 
countries  at  the  present  day  maintain  adequate 
records  of  the  other  classes  of  vital  events 
and  their  statistical  study  is  considered  very 
important.  Such  records  are  of  great  value 
to  the  individual  and  to  society,  apart  from 
their  uses  as  the  bases  of  vital  statistics. 

The  prevalence  of  various  diseases,  especially 
those  of  an  infectious  character,  with  their 
incidence  upon  the  various  classes  of  the  popu- 
lation by  sex,  age,  color,  nationality,  and  as 
related  to  occupational  influences  and  the 
causes  of  infant  mortality,  must  be  constantly 
followed  by  public  health  workers.  The  prac- 
tical applications  of  sanitary  science  have 
caused  large  reductions  in  the  death  rates 
during  recent  years.  There  is  a very  general 
tendency  to  a reduction  in  the  birth  rate. 
The  fluctuations  of  marriage  rates  are  closely 
related  to  social  and  economic  conditions,  and 
the  rapid  increase  of  the  divorce  rate  in  the 
United  States  is  evidence  of  needed  attention 
to  the  conditions  underlying  this  phenomenon. 
In  general,  for  many  important  problems  af- 
fecting the  individual,  civic,  state  and  national 
welfare,  the  appeal  is  to  vital  statistics,  and 
it  is  therefore  highly  desirable  that  there 
should  be  a sound  basis  of  correct  registration 
records. 

Inadequacy  in  United  States. — The  United 
States  is  far  behind  nearly  all  other  civilized 


countries  of  the  world  with  respect  to  the  regis- 
tration of  vital  statistics.  This  is  because  such 
registration  is  conducted  entirely  under  the 
laws  of  the  various  states,  or  under  local 
municipal  ordinances  in  the  absence  of  state 
laws,  and  is  not,  consequently,  under  federal 
direction  or  subject  to  a general  and  uniform 
law  for  the  entire  country.  While  the  regular 
decennial  enumerations  of  population,  insti- 
tuted in  1790  for  the  purpose  of  apportioning 
political  representation,  afford  an  excellent 
basis  of  comparison  for  such  vital  statistics 
as  may  be  obtained,  the  Government  has  never 
undertaken,  and  it  is  supposed  has  no  con- 
stitutional authority  to  undertake,  the  direct 
collection  of  vital  statistics  by  the  only  means 
by  which  such  data  can  successfully  be  col- 
lected, namely,  by  the  immediate  registration 
of  the  events  as  they  occur. 

About  the  middle  of  the  last  century,  follow- 
ing the  establishment  of  national  registration 
in  England  (1837),  there  was  an  active  inter- 
est in  the  subject  of  vital  satistics  in  the 
United  States  and  several  states  enacted  laws 
for  this  purpose.  A schedule  of  mortality 
was  introduced  among  the  inquiries  of  the 
seventh  census.  This  system  was  continued 
for  the  successive  federal  censuses  until  the 
twelfth  (1900),  and  in  the  later  one  an 
effort  was  also  made  to  present  the  number 
of  births  during  the  census  year  as  derived 
from  the  addition  of  the  deaths  of  infants 
born  and  dying  in  that  year  and  the  number 
of  infants  under  one  year  of  age  enumerated  in 
the  population  returns.  The  data  obtained  in 
this  way  were  not  sufficiently  complete,  how- 
ever, to  afford  reliable  birth  rates  or  death 
rates,  although  they  were  found  valuable  for 
certain  internal  comparisons. 


DEATH  RATES  IN  THE  REGISTRATION  AREA 


Year 

Population  of 
Continental 
United  States 

Population  of 
Registration  Area 

1 Deaths  in 
Registration  Area 

Number 

Per 

Cent 

Number 

Rate 
per  1000 
Popu- 
lation 

Census  vear,  1879-1880  

50.155.7S3 

S.538.366 

17.0 

178,645 

19.8 

Census  vear,  18S9-1890  — 

62,622,250 

19.659.440 

31.4 

3S6.212 

19.6 

Census  year,  1899-1900 

28,807.269 

37.9 

512.669 

17.8 

Calendar  year,  1900  ..  

30.765.61.S 

40.5 

539,939 

17.6 

Calendar  year,  1901  

77,747.402 

31.370,952 

40.3 

518,207 

16.5 

Calendar  vear.  1902  _ 

79,365,396 

32.029.S15 

40.4 

508,640 

15.9 

Calendar  year,  1908  

80,983,390 

32,701,083 

40.4 

524.415 

16.0 

Calendar  year,  1904  ... 

82.601.3S4 

33,345,163 

40.4 

551,354 

16.5 

Calendar  vear.  1905  

84.219.378 

34,052,201 

40.4 

545.533 

16.0 

Calendar  vear,  1906  -- 

85,837.372 

41,983,419 

48.9 

658.105 

15.7 

Calendar  year.  1907  

87,455,366 

43.016.990 

49.2 

687,034 

16.0 

Calendar  year.  1908  

89.073.360 

46.789.913 

52.5 

691.574 

14.8 

Calendar  year.  1909  

90.691,354 

50.870,518 

56.1 

732.538 

14.4 

Calendar  year,  1910  

92.309,348 

53.843,896 

58.3 

805,412 

15.  C 

Calendar  year.  1911  

93.927.342 

59,275,977 

63.1 

839.284 

14.2 

Calendar  year.  1912  

95,545.336 

60,427.133 

63.2 

838,251 

13.9 

1 Exclusive  of  stillbirths. 

623 


VITAL  STATISTICS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


Deaths. — Beginning  with  the  tenth  census 
(1880),  transcripts  of  registration  records  of 
deaths  were  accepted  for  two  states,  Massachu- 
setts and  New  Jersey,  and  also  for  the  District 
of  Columbia,  and  certain  cities,  in  which  it 
was  believed  that  the  registration  of  deaths 
was  most  nearly  complete.  The  states  and 
cities  thus  selected  constituted  what  was  known 
as  the  registration  area  and  the  rates  based 
on  the  returns  from  this  area  were  sharply 
distinguished  from  the  less  reliable  rates  based 
partly  or  completely  upon  enumerators’  re- 
turns. The  history  of  registration  since  1880 
has  been  that  of  the  development  of  the  regis- 
tration area.  The  growth  of  the  registration 
area  for  deaths,  the  proportion  that  it  bears 
to  the  total  population  of  the  country,  and 
also  the  total  number  of  deaths  registered  and 
the  death  rates  per  1,000  population,  are  given 
in  the  table  on  the  preceding  page. 

The  population  included  in  the  registration 
area  for  deaths  is  thus  seen,  for  the  year 
1911,  to  comprise  more  than  one  half  (57.9 
per  cent)  of  the  total  estimated  midyear  popu- 
lation of  continental  United  States.  Besides 
the  District  of  Columbia  and  53  cities  in  non- 
registration states,  returns  were  received  from 
the  following  states:  California,  Colorado, 
Connecticut,  Indiana,  Kentucky,  Maine,  Mary- 
land, Massachusetts,  Michigan,  Minnesota, 
Missouri,  Montana,  New  Hampshire,  New 
Jersey,  New  York,  North  Carolina  (municipal- 
ities of  1,000  population  and  over),  Ohio, 
Pennsylvania,  Bhode  Island,  Utah,  Vermont, 
Washington,  Wisconsin. 

For  this  area  the  deaths  and  death  rates 
from  some  of  the  most  important  causes  of 
death  were  as  follows: 


Cause  of  Death . 

Deaths  in 
Registration 
Area,  1911 

Death  Rates 
per  100,000 
Population 

Typhoid  fever  - 

12,451 

21.0 

Measles  

5.922 

10.0 

Scarlet  fever 

5,243 

8.8 

Whooping  cough  

Diphtheria  (including 

6,682 

11.3 

croup)  - --  

11,174 

18.9 

Tuberculosis  

81.796 

138.0 

Cancer  -- 

Organic  heart  di- 

44,024 

74.3 

senses -- 

83.525 

140.9 

Pneumonia  --  --- 

Diarrhoea,  enteritis 

(infants  under  2 

52,868 

89.2 

years)  

Bright’s  disease  and 

acute  nephritis  

External  causes  (ac- 

45,868 

77.4 

57,803 

97.5 

cident,  suicide,  etc.) 

63,650 

3.7 

Births. — The  registration  of  births  is  far 
more  defective,  even  for  areas  for  which  the 
returns  of  deaths  are  believed  to  be  substan- 
tially complete,  than  the  registration  of  deaths. 
Reluctance  to  enforce  birth  registration  laws 
and  to  prosecute  physicians  or  midwives  that 
fail  or  neglect  to  comply  with  their  require- 
ments is  the  chief  reason  for  the  fact  that 
there  are  not  in  the  United  States,  certainly 
were  not  up  to  within  a very  short  time,  any 


birth  rates— not  even  for  a single  state  or 
city — that  can  be  accepted  as  fully  complete. 

The  first  collection  of  births  from  registra- 
tion sources  by  the  Bureau  of  the  Census  was 
for  the  year  1908.  From  the  special  report 
on  the  subject  it  appeared  that  about 
1,300,000  births  were  recorded  in  the  United 
States  or  perhaps  about  one-half  of  the 
number  that  probably  occurred.  Only  for  a 
limited  area  were  transcripts  continued  for 
the  years  since  1908,  as  shown  in  the  following 
table  which  shows  the  total  births  returned 
for  each  year  and  the  birth  rates  per  1,000 
population : 


Year 

Estimated 

Midyear 

Population 

Births 
Exclusive  of 
Stillbirths 

Birth  Rate 
per  1,000 
Population 

1908 

21,296,119 

547,665 

25.7 

1909 

21,759,262 

543,185 

25.0 

1910 

22,222,404 

555,486  1 

25.0  1 

1 Provisional. 

The  births  included  in  the  preceding  table 
are  those  that  occurred  in  the  six  New  Eng- 
land states,  Pennsylvania,  Michigan,  the  city 
of  New  York  and  the  District  of  Columbia,  the 
latter  coterminous  with  the  city  of  Washing- 
ton. 

Improvement  of  American  Registration. — A 

considerable  part  of  the  activity  of  the  Bureau 
of  the  Census  since  its  permanent  organization 
in  1902  has  been  in  the  direction  of  aiding 
the  development  of  better  registration  of  vital 
statistics.  This  work  has  necessarily  been 
undertaken  with  the  cooperation  of  the  state 
sanitary  authorities,  and  numerous  bills  have 
been  drafted,  many  of  which  are  now  repre- 
sented by  laws  in  successful  operation.  What 
are  known  as  the  essential  principles  of  regis- 
tration have  been  defined  and  adopted  as 
“Rules  of  Statistical  Practice,”  together  with 
other  regulations  for  the  standardizing  of  vital 
statistics,  by  the  registration  officials  of  the 
United  States  organized  as  a special  section 
of  the  American  Public  Health  Association. 
A “model  law”  drafted  in  accordance  with 
these  requirements  forms  the  basis  of  the 
legislation  now  recommended  for  adoption  by 
the  states. 

The  essential  principles  of  registration  as 
embodied  in  the  model  law  may  be  briefly 
summarized:  (1)  immediate  registration 

(deaths  before  interment,  births  within  ten 
days  and  not,  compulsorily,  less  than  three 
days  in  rural  districts)  ; (2)  standard  certifi- 
cates; (3)  compulsory  burial  or  removal  per- 
mits for  deaths,  and  some  effective  check  on 
the  accuracy  of  registration  for  births  (by 
deaths  of  infants  under  1 year,  special  enumer- 
ation, newspapers)  ; (4)  efficient  local  regis- 
trars, properly  compensated  (twenty-five  cents) 
for  each  certificate  registered  and  returned  in 
compliance  with  law  only,  and  so  distributed 
that  the  least  possible  inconvenience  will  be 
caused  physicians  and  undertakers  in  filing 


624 


VOLUNTEER 


certificates;  (5)  sole  responsibility  for  register- 
ing deaths  and  obtaining  burial  or  removal 
permit  in  advance  of  interment  upon  under- 
taker or  person  disposing  of  body  and  sole 
responsibility  for  registering  births,  within  the 
time  limit  set  by  law,  upon  the  attending 
physician  or  midwife  ( parent  in  absence  of 
such  attendance)  ; (6)  an  efficient  state  regis- 
trar, with  full  power  and  responsibility  to 
enforce  the  law,  in  direct  connection  with  the 
local  registrars  (any  county  official  interven- 
ing in  any  capacity  between  the  state  regis- 
trar and  local  registrars  means  failure  of  the 
law);  (7)  prompt  monthly  returns  of  the 
original  certificates  from  the  local  registrars 
to  the  state  registrar,  with  report  of  “no 
births”  or  “no  deaths”  when  such  was  the  case 
and  official  statement  of  completeness  of  regis- 
tration or  report  of  delinquents;  (8)  all 
this  is  useless  to  secure  complete  legal  records 
and  statistics  of  the  highest  practical  value 
unless  penalties  are  provided  in  the  law,  and 
those  penalties  are  enforced. 

The  revised  United  States  standard  certifi- 
cate of  death — the  initial  schedule  upon  which 
the  comparability  of  all  mortality  statistics 
depends — has  displaced  to  a very  great  extent 
the  dissimilar  forms  in  use  up  to  1902,  and 
is  included  in  all  progressive  legislation.  There 
still  remains  very  much  to  be  done,  however, 
before  the  United  States  shall  possess  a na- 
tional system  of  vital  statistics  at  all  com- 
parable to  those  of  European  countries,  and 
the  question  may  be  raised  whether  more 
direct  connection  and  oooperation  of  federal 
and  state  agencies  cannot  be  brought  about 
for  the  attainment  of  this  purpose.  Congress 
has  so  far  assumed  merely  an  advisory  and 
suggestive  relation  to  the  matter,  but  if  the 
national  importance  of  reliable  vital  statistics 
were  fully  appreciated,  it  is  probable  that  effec- 
tive measures  could  be  put  into  operation. 

Marriages  and  Divorces. — Two  special  inves- 
tigations have  been  made  by  authority  of  Con- 
gress relative  to  the  movement  of  marriage  and 
divorce  in  the  United  States.  The  first,  con- 
ducted by  the  Bureau  of  Labor,  included  the 
twenty-year  period  1867-1886,  and  the  second, 
the  reports  relating  to  which  have  recently 
been  published  by  the  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
covered  the  twenty  years  1887-1906.  The 
number  of  marriages  and  divorces  recorded  for 
each  year  of  the  latter  investigation,  together 
with  the  rates  per  1,000  population,  are  given 
in  the  accompanying  table. 

These  rates  are  merely  the  crude  rates. 
More  exact  comparisons  may  be  made  of  the 
rates  of  persons  married  to  persons  of  mar- 
riageable age  or  of  persons  divorced  to  married 
persons.  The  records  of  marriages  and  di- 
vorces are  more  complete  than  the  records  of 
births  and  deaths  and  cover,  practically,  the 
entire  United  States.  For  the  year  1906  the 
population  corresponding  to  the  marriage  re- 
turns was  81,458,750  or  97.4  per  cent  of  the 


MARRIAGE  AND  DIVORCE 


Year 

Marriages 

Divorces 

Rates 

per  1,000  Population 

Marriages 

Divorces 

1887 

482,680 

27,919 

8.7 

0.47 

1888 

504,373 

28,669 

8.8 

0.48 

1889 

530,937 

31,735 

9.1 

0.52 

1890 

542,307 

33,461 

9.0 

0.53 

1891 

562,004 

35,540 

9.2 

0.55 

1892 

577,335 

36,579 

9.1 

0.56 

1893 

578,457 

37,468 

9.0 

0.56 

1894 

565,798 

37,568 

8.6 

0.55 

1895 

598,633 

40,387 

8.9 

0.58 

1896 

613,719 

42,937 

9.0 

0.61 

1897 

622,112 

44,699 

8.9 

0.62 

1898 

625,253 

47,849 

8.8 

0.65 

1899 

650,585 

51,437 

9.0 

0.69 

1900 

685,101 

55,751 

9.3 

0.73 

1901 

716,287 

60,984 

9.6 

0.79 

1902 

746,364 

61,480 

9.8 

0.78 

1903 

785,926 

64,925 

10.1 

0.81 

1904 

780,856 

66,199 

9.9 

0.81 

1905 

804,016 

67,976 

10.0 

0.82 

1906 

853,079 

72,062 

10.5 

0.86 

total  estimated  population  of  the  country;  that 
for  divorces  was  practically  the  total  popu- 
lation. For  the  years  1867-1886  marriage  re- 
turns were  received  from  only  1,728  out  of 
2,627  counties,  while  for  the  years  1887-1906 
returns  included  2,598  counties  out  of  2,844. 
Only  six  counties  were  not  represented  in  the 
returns  for  divorces.  Marriage  licenses  are 
now  required  in  all  states  so  that  the  statis- 
tical data  concerning  the  persons  married  can 
be  obtained  in  advance.  There  is  considerable 
loss,  however,  in  the  return  of  marriages  per- 
formed, so  that  it  is  probable  that  the  num- 
ber of  marriages  completely  recorded  is  less 
than  the  actual  number.  For  various  reasons 
however,  the  statistics  of  marriages  and  di- 
vorces published  by  the  various  states  are  not 
of  very  satisfactory  character  as  a rule.  In 
the  federal  report  it  was  stated  that  although 
25  states  had  laws  providing  for  the  state 
registration  of  marriages,  only  8 furnished 
figures  that  could  be  used. 

See  Population  of  the  United  States. 

References:  U.  S.  Census  Bureau,  Decennial 
Reports  (7tli,  1850  to  13th,  1910)  ; Annual 
Reports-,  Special  Reports  on  Marriage  and 
Divorce,  1867—1906  (1909)  ; Pamphlets  includ- 
ing “Practical  Registration  Methods,”  “Legal 
Importance  of  Registration  of  Births  and 
Deaths,”  “Tuberculosis  in  the  United  States,” 
“Physician’s  Pocket  Reference  to  the  Inter- 
national List  of  Causes  of  Death”;  Commis- 
sioner of  Labor,  “Marriage  and  Divorce”  in 
First  Special  Report,  1867-1886  (rev.  ed., 
1897);  C.  D.  Wright  and  W.  C.  Hunt,  Hist, 
and  Growth  of  the  U.  S.  Census,  1790-1890 
(1900);  also  state  and  city  Registration  Re- 
ports. Cressy  L.  Wilbur. 

VOLUNTEER. — Troops  in  the  service  of  the 
United  States  during  war  are  called  volunteers, 
whether  they  enter  by  transfer  from  the  militia 
of  the  states,  by  special  enlistment  for  the 
war,  or  as  substitutes  or  conscripts  after  a 
draft  has  been  ordered.  They  receive  the  pay 


VOTE 


of  regular  soldiers  and  are  subject  to  the  same 
discipline  after  they  have  been  mustered  into 
the  Army.  Militia  regiments  are  generally 
reorganized  before  transfer,  but  the  states  have 
successfully  assumed  the  right  of  appointing 
officers  for  volunteer  regiments  throughout 
their  term  of  service.  Generals  and  the  staff 
of  a volunteer  army  are  nominated  by  the 
President;  and  certain  regiments  of  United 
States  volunteers  raised  directly  for  service  in 
Cuba  in  1898  and  in  the  Philippines  in  1899 
were  officered  by  his  authority.  Measures  have 
been  recommended  to  Congress  for  “raising 
volunteer  forces  of  the  United  States  in  time 
of  actual  or  threatened  war”  which  would 
leave  the  appointment  of  all  commissioned 
officers  to  the  President. 

Volunteer  armies  were  created  during  the 
War  of  1812  and  the  Mexican  War  under 
special  acts  of  Congress,  which  left  the  states 
in  control  of  the  recruiting  of  regiments  and 
the  appointment  of  officers.  The  latter  privi- 
lege was  maintained  throughout  the  Civil 
War  subject  to  the  action  of  the  military  au- 
thorities, who  rejected  incompetent  offi- 
cers and  made  promotions  from  the  ranks 
during  campaigns;  but  the  War  Depart- 
ment had  to  take  charge  of  recruiting 
after  the  failure  of  the  states  to  fill 
their  respective  quotas  by  enlistment  or  con- 
scription in  1862.  The  states  were  allowed, 
however,  to  organize  new  regiments  of  re- 
cruits ; and  this  system,  by  which  inexperienced 
officers  secured  commands  while  the  ranks  of 
veteran  organizations  were  not  filled,  appears 
to  have  been  the  capital  defect  of  the  military 
administration  up  to  1865.  The  state  officials 
were  also  able  to  secure  the  discharge  of 
soldiers  on  the  plea  of  disability,  with  slight 
regard  for  the  needs  of  the  Army-  Short  terms 
of  enlistment  were  also  tolerated.  Over  a mil- 
lion veterans  were  serving  in  the  Union  Army 
in  1865,  and  there  had  been  nearly  three  times 
that  number  of  enlistments  during  the  war. 
For  the  Spanish-American  War  of  1898, 
200,000  volunteers  were  recruited,  mostly  by 
the  states;  but  a law  of  1899  authorized  the 
enlistment  of  United  States  volunteers  for 
service  in  the  Philippines. 

See  Army,  Standing;  Bounties  to  Soldiers 
and  Sailors;  Conscription  and  Draft;  En- 
listment, Naval  and  Military;  Militia; 
Officers,  Military  and  Naval;  Reserves, 
Army  and  Navy;  Substitute,  Military. 

References:  J.  D.  Cox,  Military  Reminis- 
cences (1900),  I,  439-441;  F.  V.  Greene, 
Revolutionary  War  and  the  Military  Policy  of 
the  U.  8.  (1911),  208,  292,  305-311,  316-319; 
E.  Upton,  Military  Policy  of  the  U.  S.  (1907), 
137,  202,  216-222,  230-234,  248-253,  403, 
434-442;  U.  S.  War  Department,  Military 
Laics  (1908),  192-204,  1173,  Annual  Reports, 
1899-1903  (1904),  5,  6,  77,  78,  145  (1910),  I, 
51-53,  127,  134-144  (1912),  27,  118-135. 

C.  G.  Calkins. 


VOTE.  Partisanship  can  never  be  separated 
from  personality.  Not  only  the  leaders  but  the 
party  itself  becomes  endowed  in  the  popular 
mind  with  distinct  character,  will  and  aspir- 
ation. So,  too,  the  racial  or  social  groups  that 
make  up  the  party  show  fairly  stable  qualities. 
“The  Irish  vote,”  for  instance,  denotes  a race 
consciousness  and  an  inheritance  that  influence 
party  action.  For  years  it  was  considered  a 
valuable  asset  of  the  Democratic  party.  The 
probable  effect  upon  the  Irish  vote  of  any  pro- 
posed policy  toward  England  must  always  be 
duly  weighed.  In  like  manner  “the  German 
vote”  is  influential.  Its  anti-slavery  leaning 
made  it  a natural  element  in  the  formation 
of  the  Republican  party,  and  largely  by  its 
help  Missouri  was  made  a free  state  and  kept 
in  the  Union.  The  traditional  Teutonic  con- 
servatism has  also  appeared  in  the  German 
vote  on  all  questions  of  finance  and  currency 
legislation,  on  whicn  matters  it  has  supported 
the  Republican  party.  But  on  legislation  in 
restriction  of  the  liquor  traffic  Republicans  do 
not  always  feel  secure  of  the  German  vote. 
The  Bohemian  and  the  Italian  vote  has  each 
its  peculiar  quality.  But  most  important  of 
these  racial  political  influences  is  “the  negro 
vote”  which  has  profoundly  affected  political 
life  in  one  half  of  the  nation  for  forty  years 
( see  Negro  Suffrage).  There  are  both  dis- 
advantages and  advantages  in  this  effort  to 
secure  the  “vote”  of  men  of  different  nation- 
alties.  Mr.  Ford  justly  says: 

The  extent  to  which  accidents  of  foreign  na- 
tivity or  extraction  are  made  use  of,  to  constitute 
what  is  known  in  politics  as  ‘a  vote’  is  generally 
regarded  as  the  great  weakness  of  American  poli- 
tics, but  it  is  really  a stage  in  the  process  of 
fusion.  In  order  that  ‘the  Irish  vote,’  ‘the  Ger- 
man vote,’  ‘the  Italian  vote,’  etc.,  shall  be  recog- 
nized as  such,  they  must  display  a spirit  of  mu- 
tual accommodation  and  enter  into  amicable  rela- 
tions. It  is  a matter  of  common  observation  in 
the  polities  of  our  great  cities  that  a surprising 
amount  of  intimacy  and  association  between  peo- 
ple of  different  nationalities  is  thereby  brought 
about  ( Rise  and  Growth  of  Am.  Politics,  p. 
307). 

Anything  that  becomes  of  vital  interest  to  a 
large  number  of  citizens  is  likely  to  move  them 
as  a voting  mass.  The  influence  of  religion 
on  the  vote  is  sometimes  evident.  The  church 
vote,  especially  the  Catholic  vote,  is  frequently 
a calculable  factor  in  a given  election.  The 
Mormon  vote  is  the  determing  power  in  Utah 
and  is  largely  influential  in  some  other  western 
states.  The  temperance  vote  and  the  whiskey 
or  saloon  vote  are  reckoned  with  in  drawing 
party  platforms.  “The  venal  vote”  usually 
means  simply  that  votes  are  in  the  market; 
but  in  many  localities  the  venal  vote  has  as- 
sumed permanent  institutional  characteristics 
( see  Bribery). 

Perhaps  the  most  important  group  division 
in  our  political  life  is  that  between  the  rural 
vote  and  the  city  vote.  This,  indeed,  was  dis- 
tinctly at  the  root  of  the  original  party  divi- 
sion. Aristocracy,  or  the  money  power,  forti- 
fied itself  in  the  cities;  democracy  took  to  the 
626 


VOTE,  POPULAR 


woods.  At  no  time  has  this  division  been  ab- 
sent from  our  politics.  Predatory  wealth  has 
sought  to  entrench  itself  in  the  city  vote.  The 
city  versus  the  state  of  New  York  epitomizes 
the  conflict  throughout  the  entire  history  of 
the  nation.  The  rural  or  farmers’  vote  has  at 
all  times  shown  a tendency  to  express  a dis- 
tinct purpose.  Occasionally  the  farmers  have 
broken  loose  from  party  organization  or 
organized  a new  party.  The  granger  laws 
(see  Granges)  and  the  Populist  party  (see) 
are  noted  results  of  such  action. 

See  Ballott;  Party,  Place  and  Signifi- 
cance of;  Suffrage;  Woman  Suffrage. 

References:  G.  D.  Luetscher,  Early  Political 
Machinery  in  U.  8.  (1903)  ; J.  Bryce,  Am. 
Commonwealth  (4th  ed.,  1910),  II  ch.  lv ; H.  J. 
Ford,  Rise  and  Growth  of  Am.  Politics 
(1898),  306-8.  Jesse  Macy. 

VOTE,  POPULAR.  Colonial  and  Constitu- 
tional.— The  term  popular  vote  is  used  in  the 
United  States  in  several  different  significa- 
tions, as  follows:  (1)  a broad  suffrage  in 
contradistinction  to  a limited  suffrage;  (2) 
election  by  popular  choice  in  contradistinction 
to  election  by  a representative  body;  (3)  a 
vote  upon  a measure,  such  as  a constitutional 
amendment  (see),  a statute  under  the  system 
of  referendum  (see),  or  on  the  sale  of  liquor 
(see  Local  Option),  in  contradistinction  to 
a vote  by  a legislature  or  city  council;  (4) 
more  commonly,  an  expression  of  the  public 
will  by  the  voters,  in  contradistinction  to  votes 
by  legislative  bodies  or  electoral  colleges. 

A popular  vote  in  the  first  sense  is  nowhere 
complete  in  any  election,  since  various  classes 
of  the  population,  such  as  minors,  prisoners, 
the  mentally  defective,  and  in  some  states 
paupers,  are  excluded  (see  Franchise).  In 
1913  women  remained  excluded  from  the  full 
state  suffrage  in  all  the  forty-eight  states 
except  ten;  and  in  all  elections  considerably 
less  than  the  numbers  of  persons  who  are 
entitled  to  the  suffrage  actually  cast  their 
votes;  so  that  the  recognized  popular  vote 
may  be  that  of  a minority. 

The  colonies  usually  employed  the  direct 
popular  vote  without  intermediary,  but  there 
were  three  methods  by  which  actual  choices 
could  be  made  in  a secondary  fashion.  (1) 
In  the  colonial  governments  and  in  municipal 
governments,  officials  were  often  designated  by 
the  legislatures  or  the  city  councils.  (2)  In 
Connecticut  there  was  a system  by  which  the 
voters  first  cast  their  ballots  for  candidates; 
and  those  having  a sufficient  number  of  bal- 
lots were  again  voted  upon  by  the  voters. 
(3)  In  Maryland  there  was  a system  of  elect- 
ing senators  to  the  state  legislatures  by  a 
board  of  electors,  thus  substituting  an  elec- 
toral for  a popular  vote. 

The  Federal  Constitution  provided  for  a 
popular  vote  in  the  choice  of  members  of  the 
lower  House  of  Congress,  but  at  the  same 


time  introduced  indirect  elections  for  two 
other  classes  of  national  officers.  (1)  The 
Senators  were  to  be  chosen  in  no  other  way 
than  by  the  legislatures — this  being  prac- 
tically a continuation  of  the  system  of  desig- 
nating members  of  the  Continental  Congress 
(see)  and  the  Congress  of  the  Confederation. 
(2)  Presidential  electors  were  to  be  chosen  in 
such  manner  as  the  states  might  designate; 
in  some  states  regularly  for  many  years,  and 
in  one  state  (Colorado)  in  its  first  election 
of  1876,  electors  were  chosen  by  the  legisla- 
ture. (3)  Whether  the  electors  were  chosen 
by  legislature  or  popular  vote,  they  were  inter- 
mediary in  the  choice  of  President;  and  no 
popular  votes  could  be  cast  for  the  candi- 
dates for  the  presidency  and  the  vice-presi- 
dency. 

Popular  Vote  for  Senators. — The  choice  of 
Senators  by  the  legislature  dates  back  to  a 
time  when  the  state  legislatures  were  sup- 
posed to  supply  the  virtue  and  wisdom  of  the 
whole  commonwealth ; but  there  were  several 
objections  to  it  which  grew  stronger  as  time 
went  on.  (1)  Deadlocks  were  frequent,  and 
sometimes  were  not  broken,  so  that  a state 
went  unrepresented,  or  partially  represented. 
(2)  It  was  much  easier  to  corrupt  a legis- 
lature than  a whole  body  of  electors ; and 
elections  were  frequently  purchased.  (3)  A 
type  of  men  could  command  a majority  in 
the  legislature  who  could  not  under  any  cir- 
cumstances have  been  elected  by  the  votes  of 
the  electors. 

For  these  and  other  reasons  the  Seventeenth 
Amendment  to  the  Constitution  (see)  was 
adopted  in  1913.  Thenceforward  Senators 
could  be  designated  only  in  one  of  two  ways : 
(1)  by  popular  vote  of  the  whole  state;  (2) 
by  temporary  appointment  to  a vacancy  by 
the  governor,  in  those  states  where  the  legis- 
lature by  statute  shall  have  authorized  such 
appointment.  Up  to  1914  there  had  been  one 
such  popular  election  (in  Maryland)  and  one 
appointment  (in  Georgia). 

Majority  and  Plurality. — Since  the  theory  of 
the  popular  vote  is  that  the  larger  number  of 
votes  represents  a majority  of  the  people,  it 
was  frequent,  though  not  invariable,  in  early 
colonial  and  federal  times  to  require  a ma- 
jority of  all  votes  cast  in  order  to  constitute 
an  election  by  popular  vote.  Where  this  sys- 
tem obtained,  particularly  in  Rhode  Island, 
it  oftens  required  second,  and  even  third  elec- 
tions; hence  now  it  is  almost  the  invariable 
practice  to  accept  a plurality  as  decisive. 
Where  there  are  three  or  more  candidates,  the 
largest  number  of  votes  may  be  less  than  half, 
or  less  even  than  a third,  of  all  the  votes  cast. 
This  result  has  led  to  the  suggestion  of  the 
preferential  vote  (see). 

Presidential  Elections. — Although  the  Con- 
stitution was  deliberately  framed  so  as  to  per- 
mit the  choice  by  an  electoral  majority  of  a 
President  who  did  not  receive  a majority  or 


627 


VOTE,  POPULAR 


even  a plurality  of  the  popular  votes  cast,  it 
seems  to  have  been  the  intention  to  make  sure 
that  no  President  should  be  elected  who  had 
not  a substantial  support  in  a considerable 
number  of  states.  It  was  also  supposed  that 
the  electors  would  act  upon  their  own  judg- 
ment. As  early  as  1796  however,  most  of  the 
electors  were  chosen  with  the  expectation  that 
they  would  vote  for  a particular  candidate. 
Where  the  legislature  chose  electors  of  a state 
they  were  commonly  all  of  the  same  political 
faith,  although  in  1824  the  New  York  legis- 
lature chose  twenty-six  electors  who  voted  for 
Adams,  one  for  Jackson,  five  for  Crawford, 
and  four  for  Clay;  and  split  delegations  were 
chosen  by  the  legislatures  of  Delaware  and 
Louisiana. 

Even  under  the  system  of  state  wide  popu- 
lar vote,  delegations  may  be  divided.  (1)  The 
legislature  of  any  state  may,  if  it  so  direct, 
cause  the  electors  for  that  state  to  be  chosen 
by  districts.  Maryland  followed  that  system 
to  1832 ; and  in  1892  the  legislature  of  Michi- 
gan districted  the  state  and  thereby  divided 
the  state.  (2)  With  this  exception,  from  the 
election  of  1836  on,  all  the  electors  except 
those  chosen  by  legislatures,  have  been  chosen 
by  general  ticket;  hence  usually  the  ticket 
which  receives  a plurality  of  popular  votes 
elects  all  the  electors  of  that  state.  If,  how- 
ever, the  vote  is  very  close  the  electors  hav- 
ing the  highest  vote  on  their  ticket  may  over- 
run those  having  the  lowest  vote  on  another 
ticket.  Thus  in  California  in  1880  where  in 

161.000  votes  the  difference  on  the  head  of  the 
ticket  was  only  78,  one  Republican  elector  was 
chosen  along  with  five  Democratic  electors. 
The  same  thing  happened  in  the  same  state  in 
1912,  where  two  of  the  Democratic  electors 
cut  off  the  lowest  two  on  the  Progressive 
ticket,  so  that  only  eleven  Progressives  were 
elected. 

Minorities  and  Minus  Pluralities. — Not  only 
may  the  electors  of  a state  represent  a mi- 
nority of  the  state  votes,  but  the  majority  of 
the  total  electoral  vote  may  represent,  and  in 
many  cases  actually  has  represented,  a mi- 
nority of  the  total  popular  vote.  Not  until 
1824  was  the  popular  vote  tabulated,  and  not 
until  1888  did  the  statistical  authorities  of 
the  Federal  Government  publish  official  tables; 
but  from  figures  .collected  by  the  political 
almanacs,  and  later  by  encyclopedias,  we  know 
that  in  the  presidential  election  of  1824  Jack- 
son  had  50,000  votes  more  than  Adams,  but 

40.000  less  than  his  other  three  opponents 
together.  From  1828  to  1840  the  candidate 
who  got  the  required  majority  of  the  elec- 
toral vote  had  not  only  a plurality  but  also 
a majority  of  the  popular  vote.  In  1844 
Polk  had  only  37,000  more  votes  than  Clay, 
and  the  Liberty  vote  was  enough  to  put  him 
in  a minority  of  25,000.  Taylor,  in  1848, 
had  a safe  plurality,  but  a minority  of 
152,000.  The  election  of  1856  was  the  first 


since  1828  in  which  there  had  been  more  than 
two  strong  candidates,  and  the  result  was  that 
Buchanan  was  in  a minority  of  372,000. 
Among  the  four  candidates  in  1860  Lincoln 
had  500,000  votes  more  than  Douglas,  but 
nearly  a million  less  than  all  his  opponents 
taken  together.  In  1876,  though  Hayes  was 
was  elected  by  a majority  of  one  electoral 
vote,  he  was  in  a minus  plurality  of  251,000 
and  a minority  of  345,000.  Garfield,  in  1880, 
had  only  7,000  popular  votes  more  than  Han- 
cock, and  was  in  a minority  of  313,000.  Cleve- 
land, in  1884,  had  a plurality  over  Blaine,  but 
as  there  were  two  lively  minor  parties  his 
minority  was  233,000.  In  1888  Harrison  was 
deficient  by  about  100,000  plurality  and  was 
in  a minority  of  500,000.  Cleveland  was 
elected  President  in  1892  though  in  a minority 
of  a million— which  was  about  the  size  of  the 
Populist  vote.  From  1896  to  1908  the  elec- 
toral and  popular  majorities  agreed,  and 
Roosevelt,  in  1904,  had  a clear  majority  of 
1,734,000.  In  1912  came  the  most  striking 
case  of  a discrepancy  between  the  popular  and 
electoral  votes:  Wilson  carried  43  of  the  48 
states,  had  a clear  electoral  majority  of  338 
and  a plurality  of  over  2,000,000;  but  was  in 
a minority  of  2,500,000. 

Effects  of  the  Popular  Vote. — The  foregoing 
analysis  shows  that  most  Presidents  would 
have  been  elected  by  at  least  a plurality  if  the 
election  had  been  directly  popular:  the  only 
instances  where  the  popular  vote  of  the  per- 
son elected  President  was  less  than  that  of 
another  candidate  are  Hayes  in  1876  and  Har- 
rison in  1888.  Nevertheless  the  present  elec- 
toral system  relieves  the  tension  by  giving  no 
advantage  to  a large  state  majority  over  a 
small  one.  In  the  state  of  Texas  the  regular 
Democratic  vote  is  regularly  from  three  to  four 
times  that  of  all  other  parties  put  together, 
but  there  is  no  temptation  to  roll  up  a big 
vote  for  President.  In  Vermont  the  vote  was 
for  years  two  or  three  to  one  for  the  Republi- 
cans, but  there  was  no  object  in  increasing 
that  vote.  On  the  other  hand,  where  the  votes 
are  very  close,  a small  popular  majority  may 
carry  a great  block  of  electoral  votes — as  was 
the  case  in  New  York  where  in  1884  a plurality 
of  1047  for  Cleveland  gave  him  the  36  votes 
of  that  state  and  the  election ; but  this  was 
balanced  in  1888  when  a plurality  of  about 

15,000  turned  the  same  state,  with  its  36  votes, 
over  to  Harrison  and  elected  him.  In  such 
close  votes  precautions  against  fraud  and  roll- 
ing up  a big  aggregate  are  intensified. 

Proposal  of  a Direct  Presidential  Election.— 
It  would  appear  therefore  that  to  substitute  a 
direct  popular  vote  electing  by  a plurality,  in 
place  of  the  present  machinery  of  the  electoral 
colleges,  would  in  a few  cases  alter  the  result. 
It  would,  however,  much  intensify  the  situa- 
tion in  close  total  votes.  At  present  the  lie  of 
the  electoral  vote  can  usually  be  known  by  mid- 
night of  election  day,  while  the  official  count 


628 


VOTE,  POPULAR,  ON  LEGISLATIVE  QUESTIONS— VOTERS,  COLONIZATION  OF 


of  the  popular  vote  may  be  delayed  for  weeks. 
Polk’s  plurality  of  36,725  in  1844  probably 
could  not  have  been  ascertained  at  that  time 
earlier  than  three  or  four  weeks  after  the  elec- 
tion. The  count  of  the  vote  of  1888  showed 
only  7,018  in  favor  of  Garfield — a figure  which 
would  have  been  reversed  by  deliberate  mis- 
counts in  a few  states,  or  perhaps  even  by  a 
more  accurate  count.  On  the  other  hand,  in 
all  elections  since  1888  the  plurality  of  the 
winner  has  been  unmistakable.  The  marked 
tendency  toward  getting  rid  of  artificial  meth- 
ods of  nominating  and  electing  candidates  sets 
against  the  present  system,  and  if,  as  the 
figures  seem  to  prove,  the  result  under  a popu- 
lar vote  would,  in  most  cases,  be  the  same  as 
under  the  electoral  vote,  it  is  not  unlikely  that 
the  system  of  the  Federal  Government  will 
before  long  correspond  with  that  of  all  the 
states,  so  that  the  President  and  Vice  Presi- 
dent will  be  chosen  by  direct  popular  vote. 

See  Ballot;  Convention,  Political;  Direct 
Legislation  ; Direct  Primary  ; Party  Sys- 
tem in  Doubtful  States;  Representatives, 
Election  of;  Senators,  Election  of;  Elec- 
toral Count  for  President;  General  Ticket 
System;  Minority  Representation;  Pivotal 
State;  Popular  Government;  Presidential 
Elections;  Frimary;  Public  Opinion  and 
Popular  Control;  Representative  Govern- 
ment; Senators;  Sovereignty  of  the  People. 

References:  James  Bryce,  Am.  Common- 
wealth (rev.  ed.  1010),  II,  chs.  lxxi,  lxxvi- 
Ixxxvii;  W.  E.  H.  Lecky,  Democracy  and 
Liberty  (1896);  H.  S.  Maine,  Popular  Gov- 
ernment (1886);  M.  Ostrogorski,  Democracy 
and  the  Organization  of  Political  Parties 
(1902);  A.  de  Toequeville,  Democracy  in 
America  (Reeves’  trans.,  1835,  Bowen’s  trans., 
2 vols.  1863)  ; C.  W.  Eliot,  American  Contri- 
tutions  to  Civilization  ( 1897 ) ; Edmund 
Kelly,  Government  or  Human  Evolution 
(1900);  Elisha  Mulford,  The  Nation  (1871)-, 
C.  E.  Merriam,  Hist,  of  Am.  Political  Theoi'ics 
(1903);  A.  B.  Hart,  National  Ideals  Histori- 
cally Traced  (1907),  chs.  vi,  viii;  H.  Munster- 
berg,  The  Americans  (1904);  E.  Stanwood, 
Hist,  of  the  Presidency  (1898),  passim;  A.  E. 
McKinley,  Suffrage  Franchise  in  the  Colonies 
(1905)  ; J.  H.  Robinson,  Original  and  Derived 
Features  of  the  United  States  Constitution 
(1890),  225,  230;  R.  B.  Mosher,  Executive 
Register  of  the  U.  S.  (1903),  passim;  Jesse 
Macy,  Party  Organization  and  Machinery 
(1904),  chs.  vii,  xiii,  xxi;  J.  A.  Woodburn, 
Political  Parties  and  Party  Problems  (1903), 
chs.  ix,  xv,  xxi ; C.  A.  Beard,  Am.  Government 
and  Politics  (1910),  469-487;  A.  B.  Hart, 
Actual  Government  (1903),  ch.  iv;  list  of 
popular  votes  by  states  in  Presidential  Elec- 
tions. Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

VOTE,  POPULAR,  ON  LEGISLATIVE 
QUESTIONS.  Fourteen  states  provide  for 
enacting  laws  by  popular  vote.  Attempts,  in 


the  absence  of  constitutional  authorization,  to 
refer  measures  to  the  electorate  for  final 
decision  have  been  blocked  by  the  courts  as 
an  unwarranted  delegation  of  legislative 
power,  upon  the  general  principle  that  a legis- 
lative body  cannot  delegate  its  authority. 
Legislatures,  however,  not  infrequently  pro- 
vide for  a popular  vote  on  a given  measure 
as  an  extra-legal  test  of  public  sentiment.  The 
Illinois  Public  Opinion  Law  (1901)  provides 
that  on  the  petition  of  ten  per  cent  of  the 
registered  voters  of  the  state  the  proposition 
which  they  advocate  shall  be  placed  upon  the 
ballot  at  the  general  election  as  a “question 
of  public  policy.”  This  device  is  sometimes 
called  the  “advisory  initiative.”  See  Legis- 
lation, Direct;  Legislative  Power,  Theory 
of;  Local  Option  System;  Referendum. 
References:  T.  M.  Cooley,  Constitutional  Limi- 
tations (7th  ed.,  1903)  ; A.  T.  Lowell,  Public 
Opinion  and  Popular  Government  (1913). 

G.  H.  H. 

VOTERS,  ASSOCIATIONS  OF.  See  Muni- 
cipal Voters’  League  of  Chicago;  Non- 
Partisan  Political  Organizations;  Politi- 
cal Clubs;  Tammany. 

VOTERS,  CHALLENGE  OF.  In  order  to 

prevent  election  frauds  the  parties  may  ap- 
point official  challengers  to  watch  the  polls 
and  prevent  illegal  voting.  Generally,  any 
citizen,  also,  who  has  reason  to  believe  the 
law  is  being  violated  is  entitled  to  challenge 
any  voter  and  to  state  his  objections.  For- 
merly challenging  was  the  chief  way  of  pro- 
tecting the  ballot,  and  it  is  still  important  in 
country  districts.  But  in  towns  and  cities, 
required  registration  of  all  voters  tends  to 
eliminate  the  need  for  challenging.  In  pri- 
maries where  a complete  system  of  registration 
has  not  been  evolved  the  challenge  is  also 
used.  Although  registration  has  reduced  the 
necessity  for  the  services  of  the  official  chal- 
lenger it  has  not  removed  the  right  of  chal- 
lenging any  voter  who  is  believed  to  be  un- 
authorized to  vote.  See  Ballot;  Election 
System  in  United  States;  Polls.  References: 
R.  L.  Ashley,  The  Am.  Federal  State  (1902), 
429;  F.  C.  Meyer,  Nominating  Systems  (1902), 
407,479.  ‘ J.  M. 

VOTERS,  COLONIZATION  OF.  In  crowded 

city  wards  colonization  of  voters  is  sometimes 
attempted.  Groups  of  voters  transferred  from 
a “safe”  precinct  to  a “doubtful”  one  get  a 
show  of  legal  residence  for  the  few  days  neces- 
sary before  the  election.  Or  vagabonds  and 
the  floating  population  ( see  Floaters)  from 
outside  the  city  also  become  legal  residents  of 
a ward.  More  often  illegal  colonization  is 
practiced;  men  without  even  this  brief  resi- 
dence in  the  district  are  registered  and  voted. 
All  these  are  frankly  purchased  for  the  occa- 
sion and  disappear  promptly  upon  the  issue 


629 


VOTERS,  REGISTRATION  OF 


of  the  contest.  The  same  methods  are  also 
resorted  to  in  state  elections.  Residents  of 
one  state  are  temporarily  transferred  across 
the  line  to  help  in  saving  their  neighbors  for 
the  party.  See  Campaign,  Political  ; Frauds, 
Electoral.  References:  M.  Ostrogorski,  De- 
mocracy and  the  Party  System  (1910),  177; 
F.  J.  Goodnow,  Pol.  and  Administration 
(1900),  29;  C.  E.  Russell,  “At  the  Throat  of 
the  Republic”  in  Cosmopolitan,  XLIV  (1907- 
OS).  J.  M. 

VOTERS,  REGISTRATION  OF.  In  order 
that  only  those  who  are  entitled  to  vote  may 
do  so,  most  states  provide  for  the  registra- 
tion of  voters,  by  the  preparation  of  official 
lists  of  qualified  electors  to  be  used  as  check- 
lists at  the  polls.  The  necessity  of  such  a 
procedure  obviously  varies  with  the  size  of 
the  voting  precinct  and  with  the  character, 
stability  and  homogeneity  of  its  population. 
Thirty-two  states  provide  for  registration  of 
voters.  Eight  insist  upon  the  registration 
of  voters  in  towns  or  cities  of  certain  classes, 
or  of  a minimum  population  varying  from 
800  in  North  Dakota  to  25,000  in  Missouri. 
In  Rhode  Island  non-taxpayers  are  required 
to  register  each  year  before  June  30,  although 
no  election  is  to  be  held  for  four  months  there- 
after. New  Hampshire,  Indiana,  Arkansas  and 
Texas  do  not  require  registration. 

Varying  Laws. — The  make-up  of  the  board 
of  registrars  and  its  procedure  are  determined 
largely  by  the  political  conditions  of  the  sev- 
eral states — for  registration  is  a device  which 
can  be  made  to  serve  various  purposes.  In 
states  where  political  parties  are  pretty  evenly 
matched,  the  boards  are  generally  bipartisan, 
and  their  task  is  the  compilation  of  the  au- 
thentic voting  list.  Thus,  in  Massachusetts 
cities  and  towns,  at  stated  times  prior  to  an 
election,  the  board  of  registrars  holds  sessions, 
at  which  applicants  may  present  themselves 
to  prove  that  they  possess  the  requisite  qualifi- 
cations for  the  suffrage.  But  for  the  enroll- 
ment of  voters  in  Boston,  a house  to  house 
canvass  is  made  by  the  police,  under  the  super- 
vision of  a special  listing  board.  Rhode 
Island’s  requirement  of  registration  only  from 
non-taxpayers  is  consistent  with  her  tax-pay- 
ing requirement  for  the  municipal  suffrage, 
and  tends  to  increase  the  relative  influence 
of  the  propertied  class.  In  New  York  cities 
of  over  1,000,000,  the  registrars  put  the  appli- 
cant through  a minute  catechism  not  only 
as  to  his  name,  age,  birthplace,  address  and 
occupation,  but  also  as  to  the  number  of  the 
floor  or  room  where  he  lives,  and  the  name 
of  the  owner  or  lessee  of  the  building;  if  he 
can  write,  he  is  required  to  sign  his  name.  If 
he  is  challenged  on  election  day,  the  compari- 
son of  his  answers  to  these  same  questions  and 
of  his  signature  with  the  data  on  file  affords 
a dependable  test  of  his  identity.  These 
methods,  introduced  by  the  law  of  1908,  have 


greatly  reduced  the  evils  of  repeating  and 
personation. 

Southern  Registration  Laws. — In  the  South, 
before  the  recent  suffrage  amendments  were 
added  to  the  constitutions,  not  a few  of  the 
states  had  practically  eliminated  the  negro 
vote  by  complicated  or  shrewdly  designed  regis- 
tration laws.  In  some  instances  the  law  al- 
lowed the  posting  of  the  registration  lists  for 
so  brief  a time  or  in  so  inconspicuous  a place, 
that  hundreds  of  the  less  vigilant  came  to  the 
polls  only  to  find  that  their  names  had  got 
dropped  from  the  list.  In  other  states,  where 
registration  closed  weeks  before  election,  and 
where  a card  of  registration  had  to  be  pre- 
sented at  the  polls,  hundreds  of  heedless  ne- 
groes could  be  relied  upon  to  lose  their  cards 
or  to  trade  them  off  for  a trifling  sum.  Under 
the  new  constitutional  amendments,  the  regis- 
trar’s task  has  been  to  determine  whether 
applicants  possessed  the  requisite  qualifi- 
cations for  the  suffrage,  and  especially  acute 
discrimination  has  been  directed  to  deciding 
whether  the  would-be  voter  can  “read  the  Con- 
stitution, or  understand  it  when  read  to  him, 
or  give  a reasonable  interpretation  thereof,” 
or  whether  he  “understands  the  duties  and 
obligations  of  citizens  under  a republican 
form  of  government”  (see  Negro  Suffrage). 

Membership  of  Boards. — Whether  registra- 
tion shall  be  a farce,  a piece  of  partisan 
machinery,  or  an  essential  guarantee  of  the 
fairness  of  elections  depends  both  upon  the  pro- 
visions of  the  registration  law,  and  upon  the 
men  charged  with  its  administration.  The 
New  Jersey  law  of  1911  has  taken  the  lead  in 
attempting  to  put  registration  in  the  hands 
of  competent  men  of  high  repute.  . In  each  elec- 
tion district  of  the  state,  it  provides  for  a 
“board  of  registry  and  election,”  made  up  of 
two  members  from  each  of  the  two  leading 
parties.  Men  of  good  moral  character  may  be 
nominated  to  the  civil  service  commission  by 
the  chairman  of  the  county  committees  of 
the  two  parties,  or  by  petitions  from  five 
voters,  each  petition  giving  detailed  infor- 
mation and  being  accompanied  by  a certificate 
as  to  the  nominee’s  fitness  and  intention  to 
vote  for  the  candidates  of  the  specified  party. 
The  persons  thus  named  are  then  examined 
by  the  civil  service  commission  to  test  their 
eyesight  and  power  to  distinguish  colors, 
their  ability  to  read  and  write,  to  add  and 
subtract,  their  knowledge  of  the  duties  of 
an  election  officer,  their  health  and  moral 
character.  The  selection  of  members  for  the 
several  district  election  hoards  of  registry  and 
election  is  made  by  drawing  by  lot  slips  from 
a box  containing  the  names  of  men  who  have 
passed  these  examinations. 

See  Ballot;  Election  System  in  United 
States;  Suffrage. 

References:  F.  R.  Mechem,  Law  of  Public 
Offices  and  Officers  (1890),  149-156;  G.  W. 
McCrary,  Am.  Law  of  Elections  (4th  ed., 


630 


VOTES,  CANVASS  OF— VOTING,  COMPULSORY 


1897),  93-185;  M.  H.  Throop,  Law  Relating  to 
Public  Officers  (1892),  132-138;  W.  H.  Mich- 
ael, “Elections”  in  Cyclopedia  of  Law  and 
Procedure  (1905),  XV,  302-309. 

George  H.  Hatnes. 

VOTES,  CANVASS  OF.  In  the  United 

States  the  phrase  “canvass  of  votes”  is  used 
in  three  distinct  senses.  (1)  In  the  first  place, 
it  may  mean  the  going  about  in  a district  and 
soliciting  votes  by  house  to  house  visitation, 
and  personal  interviews.  In  some  states  to 
an  increasing  extent  the  canvass  is  being  con- 
ducted by  mail.  Thus,  in  Oregon,  where  this 
system  is  most  highly  developed,  the  individual 
voter  is  not  only  Hooded  with  newspapers,  con- 
taining editorials,  speeches,  and  paid  political 
advertisements,  and  with  personal  and  party 
appeals,  but  the  state  itself  provides  him  with 
a campaign-book,  setting  forth  all  the  issues 
of  the  pending  election,  accompanied  by  argu- 
ments for  and  against  candidates  and  meas- 
ures. In  such  a city  as  New  York,  there  is 
a political  hierarchy,  running  down  from  the 
state  committee  through  the  county  executive 
committee  to  the  election  district  captain,” 
who  stands  or  falls  as  he  succeeds  or  fails  in 
getting  out  every  voter  of  his  party  both  on 
registration  days  and  at  the  elections.  Tam- 
many Hall  (see)  owes  its  power  to  the  per- 
fection of  its  organization  for  doing  this  work, 
and  to  the  skill  it  shows  in  ingratiating  it- 
self into  the  social  and  economic  life  of  those 
whom  it  seeks  to  influence. 

(2)  In  the  second  place,  the  canvass  of 
votes  means  the  careful  examination  of  the 
chances  in  a prospective  election  and  the  fore- 
cast of  its  results.  Party  managers  and  edit- 
ors are  alert  for  every  clue  which  may  indi- 
cate how  the  gusts  of  popular  opinion  are 
veering.  Straw  ballots  are  taken,  influential 
citizens  are  interviewed,  endorsements  are  se- 
cured and  appraised.  But  the  most  eagerly 
sought  basis  for  the  forecast  comes  from  the 
election  district  captains  in  great  cities.  It 
is  a part  of  their  task  to  get  close  to  the  in- 
dividual voter,  to  study  his  peculiarities,  and 
to  find  out  his  preferences,  before  every  pri- 
mary contest.  An  organization  like  Tammany 
meets  with  few  election  surprises. 

(3)  In  the  third  place,  canvass  of  votes 
means  the  collating  and  summarizing  of  the 
results  of  an  election.  When  the  polls  are 
closed,  the  count  of  ballots  is  made  by  the 
local  canvassing  board — called  by  different 
names  in  different  states.  Upon  the  board 
equal  representation  is  usually  given  to  the 
two  leading  parties,  so  that,  in  the  absence 
of  collusion,  an  honest  count  may  be  assured 
by  their  vigilance  in  the  interest  of  their 
respective  parties.  It  is  the  established  doc- 
trine that  in  the  absence  of  a specific  grant 
of  power  authorized  by  the  constitution,  the 
duties  of  county  and  state  canvassing  boards 
are  wholly  ministerial.  Theirs  is  almost  ex- 


clusively an  arithmetical  task — to  count  the 
returns.  They  have  no  power  to  go  behind 
the  returns  and  inquire  into  the  legality  of 
votes  cast,  nor  to  throw  out  the  votes  of  a 
district  in  which  fraud  is  alleged.  The  board’s 
determination  of  the  persons  elected  is  prima 
facie  evidence  only  of  their  election.  An  ag- 
grieved candidate  or  party  may  still  contest 
the  validity  of  the  election. 

See  Ballott;  Campaigns,  Political;  Elec- 
tion Returns  ; Election  System  in  the 
United  States;  Elections,  Contested;  Re- 
turning Boards. 

References:  G.  W.  McCrary,  Am.  Law  of 
Elections  (4th  ed.,  1897),  ch.  viii.,  186-242; 
F.  R.  Mechem,  Law  of  Public  Offices  and  Offi- 
cers (1890),  207-212;  M.  LI.  Throop,  Law 
relating  to  Public  Officers  (1892),  153-159; 
W.  H.  Michael,  “Elections”  in  Cyclopedia  of 
Law  arid  Procedure  (1905),  XV;  T.  M.  Cooley, 
Constitutional  Limitations  (7th  ed.,  1903). 

George  H.  Haynes. 

VOTING.  See  Ballot;  Suffrage. 

VOTING,  ABSTENTION  FROM.  See  Vot- 

ing, Compulsory. 

VOTING,  COMPULSORY.  A mere  plurality 
of  those  voting  decides  most  contests  in  Amer- 
ica. Elections  are  rare  in  which  victory  might 
not  have  been  turned  into  defeat,  had  the  stay- 
at-homes  voted.  In  the  presidential  election 
of  1900  the  total  vote  was  13,960,000 — only 
74  per  cent  of  the  possible  vote.  When  more 
than  a fourth  of  the  electors  are  absent  or 
silent,  the  election  yields  a very  inadequate 
expression  of  public  opinion.  Compulsory  vot- 
ing— already  in  operation  in  Belgium,  Aus- 
tria, and  Spain — is  often  advocated  as  the 
means  for  securing  a convincing  expression  of 
the  people’s  will.  Furthermore,  if  voting  were 
made  compulsory,  it  is  urged  that  party  man- 
agers and  candidates  would  be  spared  an  enor- 
mous amount  of  work  and  money,  often  verg- 
ing upon  corruption,  now  put  forth  to  get 
out  the  vote,  and  that  an  end  would  be  put 
to  one  of  the  most  pernicious  forms  of  brib- 
ery, the  paying  of  voters  not  to  vote. 

Reasons  for  Abstention. — These  arguments 
in  favor  of  compulsion  rest  upon  the  assump- 
tion that  abstention  from  voting  is  for  the 
most  part  both  voluntary  and  blame-worthy. 
But  in  1900  many  were  debarred  from  voting 
by  tax  qualifications.  Over  300,000  men  of 
voting  age  were  shut  out  as  paupers,  prisoners, 
insane,  or  as  lacking  the  educational  tests 
required  by  some  states.  Change  of  residence 
shortly  before  election  may  have  prevented  two 
voters  in  a hundred  from  voting,  and  as  many 
more  may  have  been  kept  from  the  polls  by 
their  employment,  such  as  sailors,  railroad  em- 
ployees, students,  traveling  men;  600,000  of 
the  presumptive  voters  were  past  seventy,  and 
the  disabilities  of  age  must  have  kept  a large 


631 


VOTING,  CUMULATIVE— VOTING  IN  LEGISLATIVE  BODIES 


proportion  of  them  at  home.  Sickness  would 
account  for  the  absence  of  thousands  of  other 
men.  Accident,  and  mistakes  as  to  registra- 
tion and  election  procedure  cost  many  their 
votes.  In  the  South,  hundreds  of  thousands 
of  negroes  were  kept  from  the  polls  by  laws 
and  practices  deliberately  adopted  to  produce 
that  result.  This  one  cause  goes  far  toward 
accounting  for  the  drop  in  the  proportion  of 
actual  to  presumptive  voters  from  81  per  cent 
in  1880  to  74  per  cent  in  1900.  If  account 
be  taken  of  these  various  groups  of  absentees, 
it  has  been  estimated  that  negligence  is  to  be 
imputed  to  not  more  than  one  in  six  of  the 
stay-at-home  voters  in  that  election. 

Increasing  Proportion. — Moreover,  the  evi- 
dence of  statistics  is  clear  that,  excluding  such 
abnormal  interference  as  the  disfranchising  of 
the  negroes,  an  increasing  proportion  of  the 
population  participate  in  elections.  In  the  ex- 
citing contest  in  Massachusetts  over  the 
adoption  of  her  constitution  in  1780,  only  one 
in  25  of  her  population  voted;  in  the  state 
election  of  1910  the  number  rose  to  almost 
one  in  seven. 

Remedies. — Illinois’  lead  has  been  followed 
by  one  or  two  other  states  in  penalizing  stay- 
at-homes  by  requiring  that  jurymen  be  drawn 
first  from  the  non-voters’  list.  But  it  is  of 
doubtful  justifiability  to  make  those  who  have 
been  negligent  of  one  civic  duty  exceptionally 
eligible  for  the  paid  performance  of  a more 
responsible  public  service.  The  most  logical 
penalty  for  non-voting  is  disfranchisement 
until  the  offender  purges  himself  by  the  pay- 
ment of  a fine.  But  it  must  be  remembered 
that  usually  a large  majority  of  the  non- 
voters are  kept  from  the  polls  through  no 
fault  or  choice  of  their  own.  Often,  too,  con- 
scientious voters,  faced  by  an  unworthy  nomi- 
nation in  their  own  party  and  unwilling  to 
join  their  opponents,  have  made  their  rebuke 
of  party  leaders  most  effective  by  simply  ab- 
staining from  voting.  Even  this  form  of  com- 
pulsory voting  would  therefore  do  injustice 
to  many,  and  impair  needed  discipline  of  bad 
leadership.  The  publication  of  the  list  of  non- 
voters might  have  a salutary  effect.  Beyond 
that,  it  is  doubtful  if  the  law  should  put 
pressure  upon  the  electors. 

The  cure  of  avoidable  abstention  from  vot- 
ing lies  in  making  voting  interesting,  in  per- 
suading the  voter  that  his  ballot  amounts  to 
something.  Direct  legislation  (see)  in  Oregon 
calls  out  a large  vote.  Direct  primary  (see) 
laws  in  many  states  have  quickened  the  voters’ 
interest  by  putting  in  their  hands  the  selec- 
tion of  candidates;  but,  in  states  where  one 
party  is  supreme,  the  result  has  been  to  cut 
down  the  percentage  of  votes  cast  at  the 
election,  when  the  whole  issue  has  already 
been  settled  in  the  preliminary  contest  over 
choosing  candidates. 

See  Ballot;  Election  System  in  United 
States;  Suite age. 


References:  E.  M.  Shepard,  Compulsory  Vot- 
ing (1891)  ; A.  B.  Hart,  “The  Exercise  of  the 
Suffrage”  in  Pol.  Sci.  Quart.,  VII  (1892),  307- 
329;  F.  W.  Holls,  “Compulsory  Voting”  in 
Am.  Acad,  of  Pol.  and  Soc.  Sci.,  Annals  (April, 
1891),  586-614;  J.  W.  Garner,  Intro,  to  Pol. 
Sci.  (1910),  500.  George  H.  Haynes. 

VOTING,  CUMULATIVE.  A system  of 
voting  at  elections  under  which  the  elector 
has  as  many  votes  as  there  are  persons  to 
be  elected  to  a given  office,  and  can  give  them 
all  to  one  candidate  or  distribute  them  as  he 
pleases.  See  Minority  Representation; 
Proportional  Representation.  G.  C.  S. 

VOTING,  INDEPENDENT.  Within  the 

party  independent  voting  is  contrasted  with 
regular,  or  partisan  voting.  Any  departure 
from  the  extreme  partisan  ideal,  accord- 
ing to  which  all  the  members  of  a party 
always  and  everywhere  vote  the  straight  party 
ticket,  implies  independent  voting.  Motives 
for  such  action  are  various.  Often  it  is  for 
the  sake  of  party  discipline,  warning  party 
managers  of  the  trend  of  public  opinion  and 
sometimes  resulting  in  wholesome  changes  in 
the  issues  or  the  men  brought  forward.  The 
conscientious,  independent  attitude  of  a por- 
tion of  the  party  constituency,  ready  to  sacri- 
fice the  party  for  the  sake  of  moral  or  political 
principle,  is  the  best  preservative  of  party 
purity.  Its  value  has  even  received  official 
party  recognition,  as  when,  for  successive  years 
the  Republican  platform  for  the  state  of  Iowa 
contained  a clause,  known  as  “the  bad  man 
plank,”  pledging  the  party  members  to  de- 
feat at  the  polls  any  unworthy  candidate  that 
a party  convention  should  nominate.  A grow- 
ing sentiment  is  apparent  in  favor  of  inde- 
pendent voting,  especially  in  municipal  elec- 
tions. See  Ballot,  Australian;  Loyalty  to 
Party;  Non-Partisian  Political  Organi- 
zations; Regularity  in  Politics;  Third 
Parties.  References:  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Common- 
loealth  (1910),  II,  320-337;  C.  A.  Beard,  Am. 
Government  and  Politics  (1910),  703-705; 
J.  S.  Clarkson,  “The  Politician  and  the  Phari- 
see” in  North  Am.  Revieio,  CLII  (1891),  613- 
623;  D.  B.  Eaton,  “Parties  and  Independents” 
in  ibid,  CXLIV  (1887),  549-564. 

Jesse  Macy. 

VOTING  IN  LEGISLATIVE  BODIES. 

Process. — Votes  in  American  legislative  bodies 
are  taken  in  several  ways,  all  members  who 
are  present  being  legally  but  not  actually  re- 
quired to  vote  unless  excused.  (1)  The  presid- 
ing officer  asks  for  the  ayes  and  noes,  decid- 
ing by  the  sound.  (2)  The  members  rise,  the 
presiding  officer  and  clerk  counting  the  affirm- 
ative and  negative.  In  Congress  this  is  called 
a division.  (3)  When  demanded,  tellers  are 
appointed,  and  those  on  each  side  are  counted 
as  they  pass  the  tellers.  In  the  House  of 


632 


VOTING  IN  THE  AIR— VOTING,  PREFERENTIAL 


Representatives,  40  members  may  call  for 
tellers.  Two  tellers  are  stationed  in  the  main 
aisle  of  the  hall  and  the  members,  first  affir- 
mative and  then  negative,  pass  between  them. 
(4)  Yeas  and  nays  are  the  most  formal  means 
of  voting  ordinarily  in  use.  The  names  are 
called  alphabetically,  the  vote  of  each  member 
being  recorded.  When  the  entire  list  has  been 
called  the  clerk  calls  again  those  names  to 
which  there  was  no  response.  No  debate  is 
allowed,  but  any  member  may  change  his  vote 
before  the  announcement  is  made.  In  Congress 
the  yeas  and  nays  may  be  demanded  by  one- 
fifth  of  the  members  (Const.  Art.  I,  Sec.  1, 
^ 3).  They  are  not  required  even  on  constitu- 
tional amendments  before  Congress.  The 
yeas  and  nays  are  the  ordinary  method  of 
voting  in  state  legislatures,  unless  the  ayes  and 
noes  are  deemed  sufficient.  (5)  Voting  may 
be  by  show  of  hands  or  (6)  by  ballot.  The 
last  use  of  the  ballot  in  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives was  in  1868. 

Requirements  for  Majority. — By  American 
law  a majority  in  a legislative  body  is  a ma- 
jority of  those  present.  This  is  the  usage 
in  the  houses  of  Congress  and  in  some  of  the 
eastern  state  legislatures,  but  in  a majority  of 
the  states  no  bill  is  passed  unless  accepted  by 
a majority  of  all  elected  to  the  house.  Special 
majorities  are  required  for  special  measures, 
such  as  constitutional  amendments  (see), 
and  ratification  of  treaties  (see). 

See  Divisions;  Quorum. 

References:  Rules  of  the  House  of  Reps. 
(1910),  §§  494^504,  622-625,  648-652,  748- 
752.  R.  L.  A. 

VOTING  IN  THE  AIR.  Said  of  a voter 
who  casts  his  ballot  for  a candidate  who  has 
no  chance  of  being  elected,  particularly  of  one 
who  votes  a third  party  ticket;  also  applied 
(by  William  M.  Evarts,  1879)  to  “scratching” 
(see)  a straight  ticket.  0.  C.  H. 

VOTING  MACHINES.  Despite  the  import- 
ant reforms  in  voting  methods  effected  by  the 
adoption  of  the  Australian  ballot  (see)  there 
yet  remained  many  opportunities  for  mistakes, 
for  fraud,  and  for  contests  over  the  count. 
For  Americans  it  was  natural  that  the  next 
recourse  should  be  to  mechanical  devices  to 
ensure  speed,  secrecy  and  accuracy.  Inventors 
and  promoters  were  not  slow  to  see  that  if 
the  use  of  voting  machines  became  universal 
or  even  general,  the  financial  returns  from 
the  one  that  proved  most  successful  could  not 
fail  to  be  enormous.  Within  a few  years  more 
than  100  patents  have  been  issued  for  voting- 
machine  devices;  most  of  these  have  been  as- 
siduously acquired  by  two  or  three  corpor- 
ations. At  the  present  time  four  or  five  dif- 
ferent voting  machines  are  on  the  market. 

The  introduction  of  voting  machines  has 
encountered  not  a little  resistance.  In  Massa- 
chusetts, where  they  were  used  in  some  cities 


as  early  as  1896,  they  had  to  be  given  up  be- 
cause of  a ruling  of  the  supreme  court  that 
they  did  not  comply  with  the  constitution’s 
requirement  that  certain  state  officers  be 
elected  by  “written  ballots.”  In  1911,  how- 
ever, this  obstacle  was  removed  by  a consti- 
tutional amendment.  In  New  Jersey  cities, 
voting  machines  were  extensively  used  for 
several  years,  but  in  1911  this  use  was  stopped 
by  a law  supported  mainly,  it  is  alleged,  by 
men  who  were  too  ignorant  or  careless  to  vote 
without  assistance  in  preparing  their  ballots 
and  by  those  who  wished  either  to  sell  or 
buy  votes.  Opposition  to  voting  machines  has 
been  grounded  on  the  fear  that  their  compli- 
cated mechanism  would  get  out  of  order  by 
accident  or  by  manipulation;  that  their  cost — 
from  $500  upwards — would  represent  an  enor- 
mous initial  expense;  and  that  charges  for 
repairs  and  storage  would  prove  a burden. 

In  their  favor  the  following  claims  are 
made:  they  insure  secrecy  of  the  ballot;  they 
discourage  the  buying  and  selling  of  votes; 
they  make  impossible  defective  ballots  which 
now  are  often  numerous  enough  to  determine 
the  result;  the  count  is  absolutely  accurate, 
and  the  results  are  known  at  once;  the  records 
cannot  be  tampered  with,  and  election  contests 
and  recounts  are  eliminated.  Despite  their 
large  initial  cost,  in  different  cities  it  has 
been  estimated  that  they  have  effected  sav- 
ings amounting  to  a yearly  return  on  the 
investment  of  from  10  to  45  per  cent;  for 
where  they  are  used,  far  fewer  voting  precincts 
are  needed,  the  costs  for  election  officers  and 
ballot  clerks  are  greatly  reduced,  the  printing 
of  thousands  of  ballots  is  avoided,  and  the 
upkeep  of  much  voting  paraphernalia  is  made 
unnecessary. 

An  act  of  the  Fifty-fifth  Congress  author- 
ized their  use  in  federal  elections.  They 
have  been  introduced  in  15  or  more  of  the 
states,  including  many  of  the  largest,  e.  g., 
New  York,  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  and  California. 
They  have  been  used  with  satisfaction  in  at 
least  29  New  York  cities  and  towns.  For 
Rochester,  a city  of  218,000  inhabitants,  92 
voting  machines  are  required.  They  have  been 
in  use  there  for  more  than  a decade  and  are 
reported  to  give  thorough  satisfaction. 

See  Ballot;  Polls;  Suffrage. 

References:  A.  C.  Ludington,  Am.  Ballot 
Laios,  1888-1910  (1911);  Conf.  City  Gov., 
Report  (1910),  504-8.  George  H.  Haynes. 

VOTING  PRECINCT.  See  Precinct,  Elec- 
toral. 

VOTING,  PREFERENTIAL.  Although  the 
majority  vote  in  regular  elections  has  been 
abandoned  in  America,  except  in  a few  cases, 
the  recent  spread  of  the  idea  of  the  direct 
primary  ( see  Primary,  Direct)  has  produced 
legislation  which  opposes  nomination  by  a 
hare  plurality  when  many  candidates  are  in 


633 


VOTING,  PREFERENTIAL 


the  field.  One  form  of  legislation  adopted 
in  five  states  and  a few  cities  is  called  pref- 
erential voting,  this  being  an  adaptation  of 
a method  in  use  in  Australia.  The  primary 
ballot  provides  that  the  voter  may  designate 
his  first  choice  and  his  second  choice  for  each 
office.  In  the  Idaho  system,  which  requires  a 
majority  for  the  nomination  of  all  candidates, 
the  votes  may  indicate  their  first  choice  only, 
or  both  first  and  second  choices.  If  no  one 
receives  a majority  of  the  first  choice  votes 
cast  by  members  of  his  party  for  any  office, 
both  the  first  and  second  choices  are  counted 
for  that  office.  In  the  Washington  direct 
primary  system,  every  voter  must  designate 
both  hi3  first  and  his  second  choice  for  any 
office  for  which  his  party  has  four  or  more 
candidates,  but  he  does  not  state  his  second 
choice  if  there  are  fewer  than  four  candidates. 
If  there  are  four  or  more  candidates  and  no 
one  has  40  per  cent  of  the  first  choice  votes 
cast,  second  choices  are  added  to  the  first. 
Still  another  form  of  preferential  voting  has 
been  adopted  by  Wisconsin  and  Minnesota. 
This  permits  the  designation  of  second  choices, 
but,  if  no  candidate  has  the  required  number  of 
first  choice  votes  for  nomination,  the  candidate 
with  the  smallest  first  choice  vote  is  discarded. 
The  votes  that  were  cast  for  this  candidate 
as  first  choice  are  then  distributed  among 


the  candidates  whom  these  voters  designated 
as  their  second  choice.  This  process  is  con- 
tinued until  one  person  has  the  number  of 
votes  required  for  nomination.  In  Oregon,  the 
voters  may  designate  first,  second,  third,  and 
other  choices  for  two  state  offices.  If  none 
has  a majority  of  first  choices,  the  second 
choices  are  added,  with  third  choices  if  neces- 
sary to  give  one  candidate  a majority.  Owing 
to  the  large  number  of  candidates  who  fre- 
quently seek  nomination,  some  minimum  per- 
centage of  the  total  vote  may  be  necessary  in 
order  to  avoid  the  selection  of  minority  candi- 
dates by  absurdly  low  votes.  All  of  these  sys- 
tems of  preferential  voting  are  exceedingly 
complicated,  like  systems  of  proportional  repre- 
sentation (see).  The  difficulty  is  being  met 
in  some  southern  states  by  second  elections. 
In  some  states  it  is  being  avoided  by  organized 
party  effort;  in  still  others  it  has  been  dis- 
regarded entirely.  See  Primary,  Direct;  Pro- 
portional Representation.  References:  E. 
M.  Bacon  and  A.  Morrill,  Direct  Elections  and 
Law  Making  Toy  Popular  Vote  (1912),  114- 
130;  R.  Tyson,  “Various  Voting  Systems”  in 
Arena,  XXXIX  (1908),  59-64,  Preferential 
Voting  (1911);  S.  G.  Lowrie,  “Second  Choice 
Nominations”  in  Am.  Pol.  Sci.  Review,  V 
(1911),  600-604;  W.  Hoag  et  al.,  in  Equity 
Series,  July,  1910.  R.  L.  Ashley. 


634 


WADE,  BENJAMIN  F.— WAGES 


W 


WADE,  BENJAMIN  F.  Benjamin  F.  Wade 

(1800-1878),  a native  of  Massachusetts,  was 
admitted  to  the  bar  in  Ohio  in  1827.  In 
1837-39  and  1841-43  he  was  a Whig  member 
of  the  state  senate  of  Ohio;  from  1847  until 
1851  he  served  as  a state  district  judge;  and 
in  1851,  through  a coalition  of  the  Free  Soil 
and  Whig  members  of  the  legislature,  he  was 
elected  to  the  United  States  Senate,  where  his 
service  was  continuous  from  1851  to  1809. 
Wade  was  an  uncompromising  opponent  of 
slavery.  Upon  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War 
he  advocated  the  emancipation  and  arming  of 
the  slaves,  the  execution  of  the  Confederate 
leaders,  and  the  confiscation  of  the  property 
of  persons  engaged  in  rebellion.  To  the  con- 
ciliatory attitude  and  moderate  measures  of 
the  Lincoln  administration  he  was  unalter- 
ably opposed,  and  when,  in  1864,  the  President 
pocketed  the  Wade-Davis  bill,  under  whose 
terms  the  reconstruction  of  the  southern 
states  was  to  be  thrown  into  the  hands  of 
the  radical  majority  of  Congress,  Wade  joined 
Davis  in  the  promulgation  of  a vituperative 
manifesto  in  which  it  was  alleged  that  Lin- 
coln was  neither  honest  in  his  purposes  nor 
fit  to  be  continued  at  the  head  of  the  nation. 
As  an  advocate  of  congressional  reconstruction, 
Wade  became  one  of  the  most  relentless  of 
President  Johnson’s  opponents;  and,  despite 
the  fact  that  in  1867  he  had  been  elected 
president  pro  tem.  of  the  Senate,  he  voted 
with  the  minority  of  his  colleagues  for 
the  President’s  impeachment  and  thus  came 
within  one  vote  of  being  President.  See  Im- 
peachment;  Republican  Party.  References: 
A.  G.  Riddle,  Life  of  Benjamin  F.  Wade 
(1886)  ; J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (1893- 
1906),  IV,  ch.  xxiii;  J.  G.  Nicolay  and  J.  Hay, 
Abraham  Lincoln  (1890),  IX,  ch.  ii;  Cong. 
Globe,  38  Cong.,  1 Sess.,  App.  F.  A.  O. 

WADE-DAVIS  MANIFESTO.  An  answer  to 
President  Lincoln’s  explanation  of  his  refusal 
to  sign  the  Wade-Davis  Reconstruction  Bill, 
from  Senator  Benjamin  F.  Wade  and  Repre- 
sentative Henry  Winter  Davis,  published  in  the 
New  York  Times  of  August  5,  1864,  bitterly  at- 
tacking the  President  for  his  “grave  executive 
usurpation,”  and  declaring  “that  the  author- 
ity of  Congress  is  paramount.”  See  Wade, 
Benjamin  F.  O.  C.  H. 

WAGE-EARNERS  MADE  PREFERRED 
CREDITORS.  Practically  every  American 
state  and  territory  makes  wage-earners  pre- 
138 


ferred  creditors  in  the  settlement  of  estates  of 
deceased  employers  and  in  cases  of  bankruptcy, 
assignments,  executions,  etc.;  and  debts  due 
for  labor  rendered  or  materials  furnished 
must  be  satisfied  in  full  next  after  taxes  and 
government  claims.  Such  laws,  although  vari- 
ously interpreted,  are  constitutional  and  apply 
to  all  wages  due  at  the  time,  whether  the 
claimant  has  left  the  service  or  not.  See 
Labor,  Protection  to;  Mechanics’  Lien. 
Reference:  C.  A.  Jansen,  Mechanics’  Lien  Law 
of  New  York  (1910).  C.  F.  G. 

WAGES.  Classification. — According  to  meth- 
od of  payment,  wages  are  of  two  kinds : ( 1 ) 
time  wage,  or  wage  paid  for  a given  period  of 
labor  such  as  by  the  hour,  day  or  month;  (2) 
piece  wage  or  wage  paid  for  the  performance  of 
a definite  piece  of  work.  Variations  and  combi- 
nations of  these  two  main  forms,  such  as 
task  wage,  premium  or  progressive  wage,  col- 
lective wage,  etc.,  are  quite  numerous.  From 
another  point  of  view,  wages  are  to  be  classi- 
fied as:  (1)  real;  (2)  nominal,  or  money 
wages.  Characteristically,  the  “wages”  of  a 
commercial  community  are  paid  in  money 
(money  wages).  The  things  which  the  money 
will  purchase  are  the  real  wages.  This  dis- 
tinction is  of  vital  importance  when  compar- 
ing wages  over  long  periods  of  time.  If  a 
change  has  taken  place  in  the  purchasing 
power  of  money,  a change  in  money  wage  will 
not  necessarily  mean  a corresponding  change 
in  real  wage.  The  economist  generally  uses 
the  term  “wage”  in  the  sense  of  “real  wage.” 

Wages,  in  economic  theory,  form  a part  of 
the  value  (see)  problem,  the  particular  issue 
here  involved  being  the  evaluation  of  the  serv- 
ices of  labor — the  determination  of  the  “dis- 
tributive share”  going  to  labor.  The  word 
labor  is  here  used  in  a wide  sense  and  in- 
cludes the  services  of  professional  men,  etc., 
as  truly  as  it  does  those  of  street  cleaners. 

Historical. — Historically  viewed,  the  story 
of  the  development  of  the  theory  (or  better, 
the  theories)  of  wages  would  be  a narrative 
of  disputations.  The  doctrine  most  widely 
accepted  from  1820  to  1870  was  the  so-called 
wages  fund  theory.  John  Stuart  Mill  may  be 
regarded  as  having  given  final  form  to  the 
doctrine.  As  he  saw  it,  it  was  a demand  and 
supply  doctrine.  On  the  demand  side  there 
was  a fund  (a  portion  of  circulating  capital) 
devoted  to  paying  labor;  this  was  divided 
among  the  number  of  laborers  to  be  paid,  these 
laborers  constituting  the  supply  side.  In  the 


635 


WAGES,  REGULATION  OF 


long  run,  standard  of  living  would  be  the 
main  determinant  of  supply  by  affecting  tbe 
increase  of  population.  Mill  thus  arrived  at 
an  “average  wage”  which  could  be  altered 
only  by  changing  either  the  amount  of  the 
fund  devoted  to  paying  labor  or  the  number 
of  laborers  to  be  paid.  All  other  methods 
would  be  futile.  He  rounded  out  his  theory  by 
explaining  why  wages  vary  from  employment 
to  employment.  The  wages  fund  doctrine  was, 
however,  overthrown,  at  least  in  its  old  form, 
and  so  thoroughly  overthrown  that  Mill  him- 
self repudiated  it. 

Marginal  Productivity.— The  wage  fund  the- 
ory, the  Ricardian  doctrine  of  rent,  and  the 
Malthusian  principle  of  population,  gave  to 
socialist  writers  the  “iron  law  of  wages”  which 
held  that  by  the  very  doctrines  of  the  orthodox!)' 
economists  the  laborer  was  doomed  never  toL 
rise  above  a mere  existence  level.  The  drift 
of  present  day  doctrine  has  been  toward  a 
“productivity”  theory  of  wages.  Modern  doc- 
trine would  repudiate  the  method  of  first 
computing  an  average  wage  and  then  account- 
ing for  variations  therefrom,  for  precisely  the 
same  reasons  that  it  would  repudiate  an’ 
attempt  first  to  compute  an  average  price  of 
goods  and  then  account  for  variations  there- 
from. The  average,  if  there  is  to  be  one,  must 
be  computed  after  the  wages  of  each  laborer 
(in  the  broad  sense)  or  class  of  laborers  has 
been  determined.  The  determination  of  the 
rate  of  wages  of  each  laborer,  or  class  of  la- 
borers, is  determined  by  “marginal  product- 
ivity;” i.  e.,  individual  wages  for  a given  grade 
of  labor  will  correspond  to  the  amount  which 
is  added  to  the  product  by  the  effort  of  the 
marginal  laborer,  the  term  marginal  laborer 
here  meaning  not  the  least  competent  laborer 
but  the  laborer  of  normal  capacity  employed 
under  the  conditions  least  favorable  for  his 
productiveness.  The  whole  theory  rests  finally 
upon  a law  of  diminishing  returns  (see).  It 
assumes  that,  if  a given  quota  of  the  other 
factors  of  production  and  a given  number  of 
laborers  be  had,  a certain  amount  of  product 
will  result.  If  one  more  laborer  is  added, 
other  things  remaining  the  same,  there  will  be 
an  increase  of  product  but  not  a proportional 
increase.  Tlius  is  found  the  product  which 
can  logically  be  ascribed  to  this  laborer,  and 
this  is  termed  the  “marginal  productivity” 
of  each  of  the  laborers  in  that  group.  It  fol- 
lows that  with  an  increased  supply  of  laborers, 
other  things  remaining  the  same,  wages  will 
fall  because  marginal  productivity  will  be 
diminished;  with  a diminished  supply  of  labor, 
other  things  remaining  the  same,  wages  will 
rise  because  marginal  productivity  will  be  in- 
creased. 

Demand  and  Supply. — This  marginal  doc- 
trine has  its  critics  and  some  writers  prefer  to 
adhere  to  a demand  and  supply  theory  of 
wages,  though  it  may  be  said  in  passing  that  a 
demand  and  supply  theory  is  not  necessarily 


opposed  to  the  marginal  productivity  theory. 
The  two  theories  may  become  merely  different 
ways  of  stating  the  same  thing.  An  analysis  of 
the  demand  and  supply  statement  would  pro- 
ceed somewhat  as  follows.  The  demand  for  la- 
bor is  a derived  demand — derived  from  our  de- 
mand for  consumable  goods.  It  is  a joint  de- 
mand, for  labor  is  characteristically  demanded 
in  connection  with  other  factors  of  production 
such  as  land  and  capital.  It  is  a composite 
demand,  for  labor  is  demanded  for  many  pur- 
poses. It  is  an  elastic  demand  since  the  de- 
mand for  goods  is  elastic..  It  is  a demand 
which  is  affected  by  the  principle  of  substi- 
tution, for,  to  a considerable  extent,  other  fac- 
tors of  production,  notably  capital,  may  be 
substituted  for  labor.  On  the  supply  side  it 
is  largely  a matter  of:  (1)  the  number, 
(2)  the  abilities,  of  the  persons  who  work. 
This  involves  a consideration  of  the  laws  of 
population  and  of  all  factors  affecting  the 
efficiency  of  individuals  such  as  health, 
strength,  mental  ■ qualities,  moral  qualities, 
social  conditions,  period  of  life,  expense  of 
training,  etc.,  etc. 

See  Distribution,  Economic;  Socialism. 

References:  H.  J.  Davenport,  Value  and 
Distribution  (1908);  E.  Cannan,  A Hist,  of 
the  Theories  of  Production  and  Distribution 
in  English  Political  Economy  from  1776  to 
181)8  (1893);  T.  N.  Carver,  The  Distribution 
of  Wealth  (1904)  ; R.  H.  I.  Palgrave,  “Wages” 
in  Dictionary  of  Political  Economy  (1899); 
J.  K.  Ingram,  History  of  Political  Economy 
(2d  ed.,  1907)  ; L.  H.  Haney,  Hist,  of  Econo- 
mic Thought  (1911);  A.  Marshall,  Principles 
of  Economics,  (6th  ed.,  1910)  ; J.  B.  Clark, 
Distribution  of  Wealth  (1902)  ; F.  W.  Taussig, 
Wages  and  Capital  (1899). 

L.  C.  Marshall. 

WAGES,  REGULATION  OF.  Doctrine  of 
Self-Interest. — The  adjustment  of  wages  has 
been  left  in  the  United  States  almost  wholly 
to  private  agreements  between  employers  and 
their  workmen.  Self-interest  and  the  necessi- 
ties of  competition  dictate  that  employers  shall 
endeavor  to  keep  wages  down  as  low  as  possi- 
ble. As  to  the  time  and  manner  of  payment 
they  favor  the  system  which  enables  them  to 
produce  most  cheaply.  Jhe  workmen  on  their 
side  try  to  get  the  highest  wages  they  can 
secure,  and  to  this  end  they  often  act  through 
labor  organizations  (see). 

In  struggles  between  employers  and  their 
workmen  the  general  public  is  the  third  party 
which  pays  the  cost  of  all  adjustments  reached 
and,  as  consumer,  is  interested  in  securing  as 
low  a cost  of  production  as  possible.  On  the 
other  hand  the  general  public  is,  to  a great 
extent,  composed  of  wage-earners,  who  have  to 
share  the  burdens  imposed  by  their  class. 

Between  these  conflicting  interests  the  atti- 
tude of  the  general  public  has  varied  with  the 
social  and  political  importance  of  the  wage- 


636 


WAIVER— WALKER,  ROBERT  J. 


earners,  and  with  the  particular  question  that 
was  uppermost. 

Doctrine  of  State  Regulation. — Most  con- 
cretely it  has  been  expressed  in  new  legisla- 
tion. Formerly,  when  the  wage-earner  was 
without  political  rights  or  influence,  employers 
found  no  difficulty  in  securing  legislation 
which  enabled  them  to  get  labor  at  a cheap 
cost.  The  time,  however,  has  gone  for  maxi- 
mum wage  (see)  legislation,  and  for  laws  pro- 
hibiting combinations  of  workmen  to  increase 
their  wages.  It  is  organized  labor  which  is  to- 
day the  aggressor  in  seeking  legislation  upon 
wage  questions.  Through  legislation  it  can 
coerce  the  employer  whom  it  cannot  reach 
through  strikes. 

As  against  this  must  be  placed  the  fact  that 
most  legislation  upon  wage  matters  has  been 
lielcl  invalid  by  the  courts.  This  action  has 
been  taken  upon  the  ground  that  such  legis- 
lation violates  the  freedom  of  contract  of 
employers  and  workmen. 

In  spite  of  this  quite  a mass  of  wage  legis- 
lation has  been  placed  upon  our  statute-books. 
Most  voluminous  is  that  which  is  designed  to 
secure  to  laborers  the  full  pay  earned.  The 
earliest  laws  adopted  were  those  giving  work- 
men a prior  lien  for  wage  debts  due  them 
upon  the  products  which  they  have  helped  to 
create.  These  have  since  been  supplemented  in 
many  states  by  making  stockholders  personally 
responsible  for  the  wage-debts  of  corporations. 
These  have  generally  been  sustained  by  the 
courts. 

Disallowance  of  Wage  Laws. — A mass  of 
other  legislation  directed  toward  the  same  end, 
prohibiting  employers  from  being  interested 
in  company  stores  ( see  Store  Pay)  or  requir- 
ing that  payments  made  in  scrip  redeemable  at 
such  stores  shall  be  exchanged  for  lawful 
money  upon  demand,  have  been  very  generally 
adopted,  but  have  been  held  unconstitutional. 
The  same  is  true  of  the  laws  of  coal-mining 
states  requiring  that  coal  shall  be  weighed  be- 
fore it  is  screened.  The  laws  enacted  in  a 
few  states  which  prohibit  employers  from 
fining  workmen  because  of  imperfect  work 
have  likewise  been  held  invalid.  So,  also, 
have  most  of  the  laws,  answering  a somewhat 
different  purpose,  which  require  that  wage  pay- 
ments shall  be  made  weekly  or  monthly.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  laws  which  provide  that 
all  wages  due  must  be  paid  at  the  time  of 
discharge,  have  more  generally  been  sustained. 
Wage  exemption  laws  exist  in  nearly  all  states, 
protecting  the  laborers’  wages  to  a limited 
extent  against  garnishment  for  debts  owed  by 
him. 

Government  Wage  Scales. — Establishment 
of  a scale  of  wages  by  law  has  never  been 
attempted  in  the  United  States,  save  in  ref- 
erence to  public  work.  The  various  govern- 
ments employ  more  hands  than  any  one  pri- 
vate employer.  The  view  has  prevailed  in  this 
country  that  the  public  should  be  a model  em- 


ployer. Either  by  statute,  or  m’ore  commonly 
through  practice,  higher  wages  have  prevailed 
in  governmental  than  in  private  employment. 
This  has  enabled  private  contractors  to  do 
work  cheaper  for  the  public  than  the  govern- 
ment can.  To  offset  this,  a few  states  have 
passed  laws  to  the  effect  that  contractors  upon 
public  work  must  pay  the  prevailing  rate  of 
wages.  The  principle  of  such  legislation  has 
been  sustained  by  the  Supreme  Court,  after 
being  condemned  in  a New  York  decision.  Its 
greatest  value  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
laborer,  lies  in  the  fact  that  it  virtually  com- 
pels contractors  upon  public  work  to  pay  the 
prescribed  scale  even  when  engaged  upon 
private  jobs. 

See  Arbitration  of  Labor  Disputes;  Busi- 
ness, Government  Restriction  of;  Child 
Labor;  Labor  Bureau;  Labor  Contracts; 
Labor,  Hours  of;  Labor  Organizations; 
Labor,  Protection  To;  Labor,  Relation  of 
the  State  to;  Labor,  Women’s,  Legislative 
Control  of;  Minimum  Wage;  Unemploy- 
ment. 

References:  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Labor, 
“Labor  Laws  of  the  U.  S.”  in  22d  Annual 
Report  (1907)  ; L.  D.  Clark,  “Labor' Laws  De- 
clared Unconstitutional”  in  U.  S.  Bureau  of 
Labor,  Bulletin  No.  91  (1910),  927-47;  G.  G. 
Groat,  “Eight  Hour  and  Prevailing  Rate  Move- 
ment in  N.  Y.”  in  Pol.  Sci.  Quart.,  XXI  (1906), 
414-33;  S.  Nearing,  Wages  in  the  U.  S.,  1908- 
1910  (1911)  ; Am.  Year  Book,  1910,  431,  402, 
406,  423,  ib id,  1911,  360,  368,  ibid,  1912,  130. 

J.  R.  Commons. 

WAIVER.  The  surrender  or  abandonment 
of  some  right  or  privilege,  or  the  refusal  or 
failure  to  take  advantage  of  some  defect  or 
irregularity  or  forfeiture  by  another  person. 
As  a legal  term,  it  is  most  frequently  used  to 
denote  the  refusal  to  take  advantage  of  ir- 
regularities or  other  defects  in  the  proceedings 
of  a trial,  or  of  breaches  of  contracts,  or  of 
covenants  in  leases.  H.  M.  B. 

WAKE  ISLAND.  An  uninhabited  rocky 
islet,  about  one  square  mile  in  area,  situated 
on  the  direct  route  between  the  Hawaiian  and 
the  Philippine  Islands,  about  2,000  miles  west 
of  Hawaii  and  3,000  east  of  the  Philippines. 
It  was  taken  possession  of  by  Commander 
Taussig,  of  the  U.  S.  S.  Bennington,  January 
17,  1899.  Its  only  value  lies  in  its  possible 
use  as  a cable  station  between  Honolulu  and 
Manila.  Reference:  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of 
Int.  Law,  I (1906),  555.  G.  H.  B. 

WALKER,  ROBERT  J.  Robert  J.  Walker 
(1801-1869),  a native  of  Pennsylvania,  was 
one  of  the  ablest  of  American  Cabinet  officers 
during  the  middle  period.  He  began  the  prac- 
tice of  law  in  Pittsburgh  in  1822,  hut  in  1826 
removed  to  Misissippi.  Prior  to  1838  he  was 
a slaveholder,  but  in  that  year  he  liberated 


637 


WALKING  DELEGATE— WAR,  CARRYING  ON 


his  slaves  and  thereafter  lie  continued  a con- 
sistent advocate  of  the  policy  of  gradual  eman- 
cipation. From  1836  to  1845  lie  sat  in  the 
United  States  Senate  as  a Unionist  Democrat. 
As  an  expansionist,  lie  advocated  the  annex- 
ation of  Texas.  Throughout  the  Polk  adminis- 
tration (1845-1849)  Walker  occupied  the  post 
of  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  it  was  at 
this  period  of  his  career  that  his  public  serv- 
ices were  most  notable.  He  drafted  the  bill  by 
which  was  created  the  Department  of  the 
Interior,  financed  the  Mexican  War,  and,  Dec- 
ember 3,  1845,  presented  an  elaborate  treas- 
ury report  which  is  regarded  commonly  as  the 
most  forceful  attack  upon  the  protective  sys- 
tem that  has  ever  been  made  in  an  American 
state  paper.  The  so-called  Walker  tariff  of 
1846  was  based  upon  this  report,  and  indeed 
was  framed  largely  by  Walker  himself.  In 
1857  Walker  was  appointed  by  President  Bu- 
chanan governor  of  the  territory  of  Kansas. 
Rather  than  countenance  the  Lecompton  Con- 
stitution (see)  he  resigned,  although  subse- 
quently he  was  influential  in  procuring  the 
passage  of  the  English  Bill.  During  the  Civil 
War  he  remained  loyal  to  the  Union  and,  in 
the  role  of  financial  agent,  rendered  valuable 
service  in  Europe.  See  Democratic  Party; 
Kansas;  Tariff  Legislation,  Framing  of 
References:  G.  W.  Brown,  Reminiscences  of 
Governor  R.  J.  Walker  (1902);  E.  Thayer, 
Kansas  Crusade  (1889);  F.  W.  Taussig,  Ed., 
State  Papers  and  Speeches  on  the  Tariff 
(1892)  ; E.  Stanwood,  Am.  Tariff  Controversies 
(1903),  II,  ch.  xii;  R.  J.  Walker,  Am.  Slavery 
and  Finances  ( 1864 ) . F.  A.  Ogg. 

WALKING  DELEGATE.  The  “walking 
delegates”  is  the  business  agent  of  local  unions 
in  the  building  trades.  He  goes  about  from 
building  to  building  to  see  that  union  rules  are 
not  being  violated  by  contractors,  and  has 
power  to  call  instant  strikes  on  his  own  ini- 
tiative. This  concentration  of  power  in  the 
hands  of  the  “walking  delegate,”  with  its  op- 
portunities for  graft,  has  earned  him  much 
public  reproach.  The  salaried  organizers  of 
other  unions,  also,  are  frequently  referred  to  as 
“walking  delegates,”  but  they  have  not  such  ex- 
tensive power  as  those  of  the  building  trades. 
See  Labor  Organizations  ; Strikes.  Ref- 
erence: J.  Clarkin,  “Daily  Work  of  the  Walk- 
ing Delegate”  in  Century,  XLV  (1904),  298- 
304.  J.  R.  C. 

WAR,  CARRYING  ON.  Unauthorized  Hos- 
tilities.— The  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  reserves  to  Congress  the  power  of  de- 
claring war  as  well  as  that  of  maintaining 
forces  for  its  prosecution  (Art  I,  Sec.  viii, 

11,  12,  13,  14,  15,  16).  Hostilities  may  be  in- 
augurated, however,  by  executive  authority 
under  general  or  specific  instructions  to  the 
commanders  of  troops  on  the  frontier  or  squa- 
drons abroad.  Commodore  Porter  seized  a 


town  in  Porto  Rico  in  1825  under  a peculiar 
interpretation  of  the  instructions  which  author- 
ized him  to  pursue  pirates  in  foreign  territory; 
but  his  action  was  disavowed,  and  he  was  found 
guilty  of  disobedience  by  a court-martial. 
Commodore  Jones,  in  1842,  ocupied  Monterey 
in  California  under  a mistaken  notion  that  a 
war  with  Mexico  had  begun,  but  the  town  was 
restored  without  delay.  General  Jackson’s 
invasion  of  Florida  in  1817  was  condoned, 
though  a committee  of  the  Senate  reported  that 
he  had  “disregarded  the  positive  orders  of  the 
Department  of  War,  the  Constitution,  and 
laws”  in  raising  a volunteer  force  without  au- 
thority. In  1845  General  Taylor  was  sent  to 
guard  the  debatable  western  border  of  Texas 
with  orders  to  “drive  all  Mexican  troops  be- 
yond the  Rio  Grande”  should  invasion  be  at- 
tempted, employing  volunteers  (for  whom  Con- 
gress had  made  no  provision)  for  incursions 
into  the  territory  of  Mexico.  Battles  having 
been  fought  under  these  instructions  in  April, 
1846,  the  President  asked  Congress  to  “recog- 
nize the  existence  of  war”  and  on  May  13  he 
approved  an  act  authorizing  the  employment  of 
the  regular  forces,  the  militia,  and  50,000  vol- 
unteers to  prosecute  the  war  begun  “by  the 
act  of  the  Republic  of  Mexico.” 

Civil  War  Methods. — In  1861  there  could 
be  no  question  of  a formal  declaration  of  war 
against  the  southern  states;  but  the  Constitu- 
tion authorizes  the  use  of  the  militia  in  sup- 
pressing rebellion;  and  75,000  men  were  sum- 
moned to  assist  in  recovering  forts  and  other 
public  property  of  the  Pinion.  The  President 
asumed  authority  for  increasing  the  regular 
forces  and  volunteers  by  a proclamation  of 
May  3,  reporting  to  Congress  that  by  simi- 
lar measures,  “some  of  which  were  with- 
out any  authority  of  law,”  he  had  prevented 
the  overthrow  of  the  government;  and  on 
August  6,  all  his  acts  respecting  the  levy 
of  forces  were  made  valid  to  the  same 
extent  as  if  they  had  been  done  under  the 
previous  express  authority  of  Congress.  July 
25,  1861,  an  act  authorized  the  President  to 
accept  volunteers  in  such  numbers  as  the  ex- 
igencies of  the  public  service  appeared  in  his 
opinion  to  demand,  up  to  500.000;  but  no  limi- 
tation on  the  number  of  troops  was  allowed  to 
interfere  with  recruiting  or  the  draft.  Be- 
sides the  inevitable  criticism  in  congressional 
debates,  the  acts  of  the  President,  the  Cabinet, 
and  the  generals  in  the  field  were  scrutinized 
by  a Committee  on  the  Conduct  of  the  War; 
which  required  military  officers  to  criticize 
the  plans  of  their  superiors  for  campaigns 
then  in  progress.  Whatever  influence  such  de- 
liberations may  have  had  on  the  strategy  of 
the  Civil  War,  the  contest  had  to  be  finished 
by  a general-in-chief  left  unhampered  by  both 
the  President  and  the  Secretary  of  War. 

Spanish  War  Methods. — April  20,  1898,  Con- 
gress passed  the  Teller  Resolutions  (see)  de- 
manding the  relinquishment  of  Cuba  by  the 


638 


WAR,  CARRYING  ON 


government  of  Spain,  and  directing  and  em- 
powering the  President  to  use  the  Army  and 
Navy  and  summon  the  militia  to  make  that 
demand  effective.  Five  days  later,  April  25,  an 
act  was  passed,  at  the  request  of  the  President, 
declaring  the  existence  of  war.  Congress  had 
been  invited  to  decide  whether  the  United 
States  should  intervene  as  an  impartial  neutral 
to  enforce  a truce  bv  hostile  constraint  upon 
botli  parties,  or  as  the  active  ally  of  one  party 
or  the  other;  and  it  was  decided  that  Cuba 
should  be  free  and  independent. 

Proposed  Reforms. — Measures  to  provide 
for  an  organized  force  of  volunteers,  not  sub- 
ject to  the  constitutional  restrictions  relating 
to  the  employment  of  the  militia  (see),  are 
before  the  public.  The  most  notable  change 
proposed  is  that  of  placing  the  appointment  of 
officers  in  the  hands  of  the  President,  as  was 
done  in  authorizing  certain  regiments  of  United 
States  volunteers  in  1898  and  1899.  The  carry- 
ing on  of  war  may  be  hampered  by  short  terms 
of  enlistment,  if  these  are  authorized  by  Con- 
gress, and  it  may  be  obstructed  by  failure  to 
provide  funds  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
forces.  Reductions  to  a peace  basis  are  some- 
times provided  for  as  a sequel  to  the  con- 
clusion of  peace  in  acts  authorizing  recruit- 
ing. As  Commander-in-Chief  the  President 
can  order  a suspension  of  hostilities  at  any 
time;  but  the  consent  of  the  Senate  is  re- 
quired for  the  ratification  of  any  formal 
treaty. 

From  the  precedents  of  Lincoln’s  administra- 
tion it  appears  that  the  war  powers  of  the 
Commander-in-Chief  are  of  wide  political  im- 
port, the  emancipation  proclamation  of  1863 
being  a notable  example.  But  from  a military 
point  of  view  they  are  less  effective.  Mobili- 
zation, the  first  essential  of  a vigorous  cam- 
paign, has  to  await  discussion  and  voting  in 
Congress;  and  it  is  also  dependent  upon  agen- 
cies for  recruiting  or  drafting  men,  not  neces- 
sary in  a nation  where  all  men  of  military 
age  belong  to  organizations  already  established. 

Mobilization. — Mobilization  works  automat- 
ically under  compulsory  service  up  to  the 
point  of  filling  the  ranks  of  all  the  units  of 
the  active  army  and  providing  for  their  trans- 
portation and  supply.  Reserve  battalions  and 
other  troops  of  the  second  or  third  line  are 
allowed  more  time:  less  than  a fortnight  is 
necessary  to  place  complete  army  corps  in 
their  strategic  stations  on  the  frontiers  of 
Germany  or  France.  Even  the  voluntary  army 
of  Great  Britain  has  a scheme  of  mobilization 
for  an  expeditionary  force  of  75,000  supported 
by  trained  reserves  besides  militia  and  terri- 
torial troops  for  local  defence.  The  elastic 
organization  of  navies  offers  the  nucleus  of  a 
crew  for  every  vessel  that  can  be  put  in  com- 
mission; but  it  is  difficult  to  transfer  trained 
soldiers  from  a regiment  without  impairing 
discipline.  On  the  other  hand,  the  material 
of  the  fleet  is  more  complicated  than  that  of 


an  army;  and  much  time  may  be  consumed 
in  repair  and  equipment  unless  the  necessary 
stores  are  collected  in  advance. 

Concentration. — The  units  being  completed 
for  service,  the  next  step  is  strategic  concen- 
tration or  employment;  that  is,  distribution 
along  the  frontiers  or  coasts  which  are  to  be 
defended  or  utilized  as  the  base  of  an  offensive 
campaign.  But  neither  a fleet  nor  an  army 
can  renounce  offensive  tactics,  because  the 
strategy  of  defence  has  to  be  adopted,  and 
mobilization  and  concentration  have  to  be 
maintained  in  spite  of  appeals  for  dispersed 
garrisons  and  coast-guards  to  abate  the  alarms 
of  an  unmilitary  population.  Distant  depen- 
dencies require  for  their  protection  the  im- 
mediate assumption  of  the  offensive  by  an  ex- 
peditionary army  and  a fleet  capable  of  con- 
voying transports  through  the  zone  of  danger, 
and  protecting  the  landing  of  troops.  For 
such  expeditions,  fortified  harbors  at  home  and 
abroad  are  needed,  and  guarded  lines  of  com- 
munication are  an  element  of  safety. 

Invasion. — It  is  evident  that  colonial  de- 
fence and  the  protection  of  commerce  must 
fall  short  of  compelling  the  enemy  to  sue  for 
peace;  and  projects  of  invasion  are  often  dis- 
cussed. But  leaving  aside  the  notable  ad- 
vantage of  the  defensive  in  a self-providing 
country  separated  from  rivals  by  the  sea,  the 
occupation  of  territory  and  the  capture  of 
towns  are  ineffective  measures  as  long  as  the 
military  power  of  the  defense  is  not  encount- 
ered and  overthrown. 

Naval  Raids. — Mere  raiding  is  unprofitable, 
since  by  the  Hague  Conventions,  fleets  may  no 
longer  threaten  the  bombardment  of  undefended 
towns  to  secure  a ransom  in  money — the  ap- 
plication of  that  penalty  being  limited  to 
cases  where  necessary  supplies  are  refused. 
Commerce-destroying  has  never  been  a decisive 
measure;  and  neutral  commerce,  which  may 
cover  the  goods  of  a belligerent,  is  protected  by 
the  Declaration  of  Paris  and  other  conventions. 
Technical  considerations  relating  to  coal  sup- 
ply, the  effect  of  guns  mounted  on  shore,  and 
the  probable  armament  of  cruisers  to  patrol 
the  principal  trade-routes,  confirm  the  dis- 
trust of  raiding  and  privateering  methods  long 
felt  by  students  of  naval  history. 

Difficulties. — Commercial  blockade,  which 
was  a principal  factor  in  overthrowing  the 
Southern  Confederacy,  cannot  be  maintained 
on  any  coast  guarded  by  submarines  and  tor- 
pedo-boats. Military  blockade  to  prevent  a 
fleet  from  getting  to  sea  without  a battle  is 
still  a practicable  operation;  and  that  and 
combined  operations  against  naval  arsenals  or 
detached  possessions  are  the  chief  methods  of 
defeating  an  enemy  who  cannot  be  reached 
by  marching  across  a frontier.  Neutral  resi- 
dents and  traders  in  an  enemy’s  country  are 
entitled  to  protection  as  long  as  they  refrain 
from  assisting  either  belligerent;  private  prop- 
erty on  shore  is  no  longer  subject  to  pillage; 


639 


WAR  COLLEGES — WAR  DEMOCRATS 


and  there  is  a strong  movement,  in  which  the 
government  of  the  United  States  has  been  a 
pioneer,  to  apply  that  exemption  to  private 
property  afloat,  and  even  to  relax  the  defi- 
nition of  contraband  goods.  Restrictions 
in  regard  to  captures,  the  bombardment 
of  towns,  and  the  hospitality  of  neutral  ports 
diminish  the  temptation  to  employ  naval 
armaments  in  predatory  operations.  The 
advantages  of  the  defense  in  a populous  coun- 
try, the  hazard  of  transporting  troops  across 
the  sea,  and  the  problems  of  military  hygiene, 
tend  to  the  discouragement  of  projects  of  in- 
vasion. These  technical  difficulties,  combined 
with  economic  reasons  relating  to  the  cost  of 
armaments  and  the  value  of  foreign  commerce, 
lend  support  to  the  principle  of  arbitration 
and  other  plans  for  preventing  wars  of  specu- 
lation. 

See  Army,  Standing;  Articles  of  War; 
Conscription  and  Draft;  Courts  Martial; 
Enlistment,  Naval  and  Military;  Martial 
Law;  Militarism;  Military  and  Naval  Ex- 
penditures; Military  Law;  Militia;  Naval 
Vessels;  Officers,  Military  and  Naval; 
President,  Authority  and  Influence  of; 
Volunteer;  War  Power,  Constitutional; 
War  Powers  of  the  President;  Wars  of  the 
United  States. 

References:  J.  de  Bloch,  Future  of  War 
(1903);  F.  E.  Bray,  British  Rights  at  Sea 
(1911)  ; C.  Bridge,  Naval  Warfare  (1907)  ; J. 
Corbett,  Principles  of  Naval  Strategy  (1911)  ; 
C.  von  der  Goltz,  Operations  of  War  (1896)  ; 
W.  R.  Lawson,  Modern  War  and  War  Taxes 
(1912);  G.  F.  R.  Henderson,  Science  of  War 
(1905)  ; A.  T.  Mahan,  Naval  Strategy  (1911)  ; 
J.  D.  Richardson,  Messages  and  Papers  of  the 
Presidents  (1899),  I,  281,  512,  554,  IV,  442, 
470,  X,  102,  147,  164,  201,  204-206;  E.  Upton, 
Military  Policy  of  the  U.  S.  (1907),  185,  196, 
203,  204,  229-233;  Am.  State  Papers,  Mili- 
tary (1832),  I,  681,  741,  II,  99-103;  Am. 
State  Papers,  Naval  (1834)  II,  144,  343-346, 
424;  “Declaration  of  London”  in  Naval  Annual 
(1911),  163-181,  450-458;  U.  S.  War  Depart- 
ment, Annual  Reports  (1912),  I,  76-81,  93. 

G.  C.  Calkins. 

WAR  COLLEGES.  The  Naval  War  College 
at  Newport  was  founded  in  1886  in  order  to 
place  naval  administration  on  a war  footing 
and  provide  higher  professional  training  for 
officers.  Courses  in  tactics  and  strategy,  il- 
lustrated by  references  to  military  and  naval 
history,  are  connected  with  the  solution  of  de- 
finite problems  relating  to  hypothetical  naval 
campaigns.  Lectures  in  international  law  and 
political  history  are  also  delivered  by  eminent 
specialists;  and  the  assistance  of  Army  officers 
is  applied  to  problems  of  coast  defense.  It  is 
coordinated  with  the  General  Board  of  the 
Navy  in  preparing  plans  of  campaign  and 
measures  for  the  preparation  of  the  fleet  for 
war.  The  course  of  instruction  has  generally 


lasted  four  months,  but  it  is  proposed  to  re- 
tain part  of  the  class  of  officers  detailed  to 
receive  instruction  throughout  the  year.  Ex- 
aminations for  promotion  above  the  rank  of 
lieutenant  include  an  inquiry  regarding  attend- 
ance at  the  War  College.  The  building  of  the 
Naval  War  College  on  Coaster’s  Harbor  Island 
was  erected  in  1890  at  a cost  of  $100,000.  The 
annual  appropriation  is  about  $30,000. 

The  Army  War  College  was  founded  in  1900 
for  the  direction  of  instruction  in  the  various 
service  schools  of  application,  the  extension  of 
opportunities  for  study  in  the  Army  and 
militia,  and  the  dissemination  of  military  in- 
formation. A new  building  was  erected  for 
its  use  at  the  arsenal  at  Washington;  and 
regular  courses  of  instruction  and  lectures  are 
provided  for  a class  of  20  officers,  most  of  them 
majors  and  captains.  The  college  is  command- 
ed by  a brigadier-general,  and  he  is  assisted 
by  16  officers  of  the  General  Staff.  The  build- 
ing of  the  college  cost  about  $1,000,000,  and 
$10,000  anually  is  required  for  its  mainten- 
ance. Graduates  of  the  college  have  a note 
to  that  effect  attached  to  their  names  in  the 
Army  Register,  a form  of  distinction  not  prac- 
ticed in  the  Navy. 

See  Education,  Military  and  Naval;  War, 
Carrying  On  ; Officers,  Military  .and  Naval. 

References:  S.  B.  Luce,  “U.  S.  Naval  War 
College”  in  U.  S.  Naval  Institute,  Proceed- 
ings (1910)  II,  559-586,  III,  683-696,  “War 
College  and  Line  Officers,”  in  ibid  (1911), 
III,  785-799;  U.  S.  Navy  Department,  Navy 
Register  (1911),  237;  Navy  Regulations 

(1909),  17,  Annual  Reports  (1910),  121, 
(1912),  134;  P.  Pulsifer,  Navy  Yearbook 

(1912),  108,  655,  713;  U.  S.  War  Department, 
Annual  Reports  (1910),  I,  55,  (1912),  15,  282, 
Military  Laws  (1908),  562,  1239;  Army  Regis- 
ter (1911),  114.  C.  G.  Calkins. 

WAR,  DECLARATION  OF.  See  Declara- 
tion of  War. 

WAR  DEMOCRATS.  The  immediate  effect 
of  the  fall  of  Fort  Sumter,  April  14,  1861, 
was  to  rally  all  loyal  citizens  in  the  North,  re- 
gardless of  party,  to  the  support  of  Lincoln 
(see)  and  the  Union  cause.  On  the  evening 
of  that  day  Stephen  A.  Douglas  (see)  called 
upon  Lincoln  and  pledged  himself  “to  sustain 
the  President  in  the  exercise  of  all  his  con- 
stitutional functions  to  preserve  the  Union, 
maintain  the  Government,  and  defend  the  fed- 
eral capital.”  The  significance  of  his  support 
was  perceived  when  it  was  remembered  that  in 
the  election,  the  previous  November,  Douglas, 
as  the  Democratic  presidential  candidate  on 
a Union  platform,  had  polled  in  the  northern 
and  border  states,  with  California  and  Oregon, 
1,304,873  votes  against  1,866,452  for  Lincoln. 
On  April  19,  Buchanan  wrote  to  John  A.  Dix, 
who  had  been  his  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
from  January  11  to  March  4:  “The  North 


640 


WAR,  DEPARTMENT  OF 


will  sustain  the  administration  almost  to  a 
man;  and  it  ought  to  be  sustained  at  all  haz- 
ards.” William  Sprague  of  Rhode  Island,  the 
only  northern  Democratic  governor  east  of  the 
Rocky  Mountains,  vied  with  his  Republican 
associates  in  energy,  and  himself  led  the  first 
Rhode  Island  troops  to  Washington.  The  Dem- 
ocratic governors  of  California  and  Oregon  al- 
so responded  promptly ; while  in  New  York 
City,  which  had  gone  against  Lincoln  in  No- 
vember by  29,000,  the  departure  of  the  Seventh 
Regiment  was  attended  with  great  enthusiasm. 
At  Chicago,  May  1,  Douglas  adressed  a great 
audience  in  support  of  the  administration. 
The  death  of  Douglas,  June  3,  deprived  the 
War  Democrats  of  their  national  leader,  al- 
though his  place  in  Illinois  was  capably  taken 
by  William  A.  Richardson,  a leading  promoter 
of  the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill  (see). 

In  the  first  session  of  the  Thirty-seventh  Con- 
gress, convened  July  4,  the  Democrats  held  no 
caucus  for  Speaker  and  nominated  no  candi- 
date; and  they  joined  the  Republicans  in  vot- 
ing men  and  money  for  the  war.  Lincoln’s 
course  in  setting  aside  the  action  of  Fremont, 
who  assumed  to  free  slaves  in  Missouri,  con- 
tributed further  to  win  Democratic  support. 
The  War  Democrats,  however,  were  unwilling 
to  discredit  their  party  by  committing  them- 
selves in  general  to  Republican  declarations  of 
policy;  and  although  they  supported  the  res- 
olution declaratory  of  the  nature  and  object 
of  the  war,  adopted  July  22,  they  consented  re- 
luctantly to  the  validation  of  Lincoln’s  military 
acts,  proclamations,  and  orders,  especially  the 
suspension  of  habeas  corpus. 

In  the  fall  elections  of  1861,  efforts  were 
made  by  the  Republicans  to  induce  the  Demo- 
crats to  unite  in  the  nomination  of  coalition 
tickets,  on  platforms  limited  to  declarations  in 
favor  of  the  Union  and  the  prosecution  of  the 
wTar.  Daniel  S.  Dickinson,  a supporter  of 
Breckinridge  in  1860,  headed  a coalition  ticket 
in  New  York  and  carried  the  state  by  107,000. 
David  Tod,  a Douglas  Democrat,  was  elected 
governor  of  Ohio  on  a coalition  ticket  by 
55,000.  Elsewhere  the  suggestion  of  union 
was  rejected,  and  regular  Democratic  candi- 
dates were  nominated  on  platforms  which, 
while  approving  of  the  war,  criticized  Lin- 
coln’s habeas  corpus  policy. 

The  issuance  of  the  emancipation  proclama- 
tion. in  September,  1862,  made  it  increasingly 
difficult  for  the  War  Democrats  to  maintain 
an  independent  attitude.  Many  Democrats  in- 
sisted that  the  war  wTas  no  longer  being  fought 
for  union,  but  for  abolition;  and  “the  Constitu- 
tion as  it  is  and  the  Union  as  it  was”  became 
a slogan.  The  fall  elections  went  against  the 
Republicans,  although  the  diminished  following 
of  War  Democrats  generally  voted  with  them 
on  what  were  called  Union  tickets.  In  1863 
the  Union  party  of  Ohio  nominated  John 
Brough,  a War  Democrat,  for  governor,  secured 
such  stalwart  Republicans  as  John  Sherman 


and  Zackariah  Chandler  to  speak  for  him,  and 
elected  him  by  a majority  of  101,000.  The 
nomination  of  Andrew  Johnson  for  Vice-Presi- 
dent, in  1864,  was  the  climax  of  the  Republican 
policy  of  fraternization.  When  the  regular 
Democratic  convention  at  Chicago,  August  29, 
nominated  McClellan  and  Pendleton,  it  insured 
a division  of  the  War  Democrats,  and  held 
many  of  them  to  party  loyalty  notwithstanding 
McClellan’s  repudiation  of  the  platform.  With 
the  election  of  Lincoln  the  War  Democrats 
ceased  to  exercise  independent  influence  either 
in  politics  or  in  legislation. 

See  Democratic  Party;  Republican  Party. 

References;  J.  F.  Rhodes,  Ilist.  of  the  U.  S. 
(1893—1905),  III,  IV,  passim;  L.  Stanwood, 
Hist,  of  the  Presidency  (1898),  ch.  xxii. 

William  MacDonald. 

WAR,  DEPARTMENT  OF.  The  Depart- 
ment of  War  exercises  jurisdiction  not  only 
over  the  military  establishment,  but  also  over 
the  navigable  waters  of  the  United  States.  At 
its  head  is  the  Secretary  of  War,  who  ranks 
third  in  the  order  of  Cabinet  precedence,  and 
third  after  the  Vice-President  in  the  order  of 
presidential  succession.  He  is  charged  by  law 
with  the  duty  of  preparing  estimates  of  ap- 
propriations for  and  supervising  the  expendi- 
tures of  the  department;  he  has  oversight  of  the 
Military  Academy  at  West  Point  and  of  educa- 
tion in  the  army  war  college  at  Washington  ; 
and  the  publication  of  the  voluminous  Official 
Reoords  of  the  War  of  the  Rebellion  is  in  his 
charge.  Questions  relating  to  bridges  over 
navigable  streams  and  the  establishment  cf 
harbor  lines  are  settled  by  him.  An  assis- 
tant secretary  decides  cases  which  involve  no 
questions  of  policy  or  do  not  establish  or  re- 
verse precedents.  The  enormous  mass  of  work 
which  falls  on  the  department  is  despatched 
by  a large  staff  of  military  officers  detailed 
for  the  purpose,  as  well  as  by  a body  of  civil- 
ian clerks  and  employees. 

The  Army. — The  President  is  the  com- 
mander-in-chief of  the  Army  and  Navy;  and 
in  times  both  of  war  and  of  peace  he  con- 
cerns himself  largely  with  general  military 
policy,  as  indeed  he  is  compelled  to  do  by 
reason  of  the  fact  that,  since  the  establishment 
of  the  department  in  1789,  the  average  term 
of  service  of  a Secretary  has  been  less  than 
two  and  one-half  years.  Under  his  direction, 
the  General  Staff  Corps  prepares  plans  for 
national  defense  and  the  handling  of  military 
forces  in  time  of  war;  investigates  questions 
as  to  army  efficiency,  and  renders  professional 
aid  and  assistance  to  the  Secretary  and  to 
general  officers.  The  Chief  of  Staff  acts  under 
the  direction  of  the  President  or  the  Secre- 
tary in  matters  of  command,  discipline 
and  administration;  he  performs  the  duties 
which,  before  1903,  devolved  on  the  Gen- 
eral Commanding  the  Army.  The  General 
Staff  consists  of  a major-general  as  chief,  and 


641 


WAR,  DEPARTMENT  OF 


642 


WAR,  DEPARTMENT  OF 


643 


WAR  GOVERNORS 


twenty-eight  other  officers  detailed  for  short 
terms  from  each  grade  down  to  and  including 
captain.  The  object  is  to  place  the  control  of 
the  Army  in  the  hands  of  a body  of  trained 
men,  whose  duty  is  to  secure  efficiency  and  co- 
ordination. Although  no  war  test  has  been 
made  of  the  system,  it  cannot  fail  to  bring 
about  some  degree  of  preparedness,  a condition 
which  has  been  lacking  at  the  outbreak  of 
every  war  in  which  this  country  has  engaged 
( see  Army,  Standing). 

The  Militia. — A Division  of  Military  Affairs 
exists  for  the  purpose  of  relating  the  militia* 
to  the  army.  With  this  end  in  view  camps  of 
instruction  are  held,  at  which  the  militia  are 
trained  side  by  side  with  regular  soldiers.  In 
1910,  the  number  of  militia  so  trained  was 
40,000  men,  and  of  regulars  25,000. 

Military  Bureaus. — The  Adjutant  General 
has  charge  of  orders  issued  to  and  reports  made 
by  officers  of  the  Army.  His  office  contains  the 
military  and  medical  record  of  every  soldier 
ever  in  service,  including  soldiers  of  the  War  of 
the  Revolution ; and  these  records  are  im- 
mediately available.  The  records  of  the  Con- 
federate States  also  are  here  deposited.  The 
Inspector  General  inspects  depots,  arsenals,  and 
all  other  army  works  and  schools,  and  also 
the  accounts  of  disbursing  officers.  The 
Surgeon  General  has  administrative  control 
over  the  medical  department,  including  the 
hospital  corps  and  army  nurse  corps,  the  fa- 
mous Army  Medical  Museum  and  its  extensive 
and  valuable  library.  The  Chief  of  Ordnance 
deals  especially  with  the  fabrication  of  guns 
and  the  principles  to  be  followed  in  improving 
the  standards  of  arms.  The  Chief  of  the  Quar- 
termaster Corps  has  supervision  over  matters 
divided  before  1913  among  three  officers,  name- 
ly, the  Paymaster  General,  attending  to  the 
pay  and  accounts  of  the  Army;  the  Commis- 
sary General,  providing  subsistence  for  the 
Army ; and  the  Quartermaster  General,  in 
charge  of  stores,  means  of  transportation  and 
depots. 

The  Chief  of  Engineers  commands  the  corps 
of  engineers,  made  up  of  the  highest  grade  .men 
graduating  from  the  Military  Academy.  To 
this  corps  is  entrusted  the  spending  of  the  tens 
of  millions  of  dollars  appropriated  by  Con- 
gress for  the  improvement  of  rivers  and  har- 
bors, and  the  construction  of  the  Panama 
Canal.  The  Board  of  Engineers  for  Rivers  and 
Harbors,  a permanent  body,  exists  for  the 
purpose  of  reporting  on  any  project  for  im- 
provement referred  to  it  by  Congress. 

The  Judge  Advocate  General’s  Office  deals 
with  courts-martial  and  all  other  legal  matters 
pertaining  to  the  department.  The  Chief 
Signal  Officer  has  charge  of  telegraphs  and. 
cables  and  the  information  transmitted  through 
them. 

Insular  Affairs. — The  Bureau  of  Insular 
Affairs,  acting  under  the  immediate  direction 
of  the  Secretary,  exercises  jurisdiction  over  l 


matters  of  civil  government  in  Porto  Rico  and 
the  Philippines,  and  is  the  repository  of  Cuban 
records. 

History. — General  Henry  Knox,  Secretary  of 
War  under  the  Confederation,  continued  in 
office  under  President  Washington.  The  de- 
partment included  naval  affairs  until  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  Navy  Department  in  1789; 
and  Indian  affairs  until  the  creation  of  the 
Interior  Department  in  1849.  In  peace  times 
the  Army  was  reduced  to  a few  thousand  men; 
so  that  war  or  threat  of  war  overwhelmed  the 
department.  The  greatest  of  War  Secretaries, 
E M.  Stanton,  epitomized  the  history  of  the 
Department  when,  in  1862,  he  wrote:  “To  bring 
the  War  Department  up  to  the  standard  of  the 
times,  and  work  an  army  of  500,000  men  with 
machinery  adapted  to  a peace  establishment  of 
12,000  is  no  easy  task.”  It  is  small  wonder 
that  more  reputations  have  been  lost  than  made 
in  this  department.  The  organization  of  the 
General  Staff,  under  Secretary  Root,  after  the 
Spanish  War,  taken  in  connection  with  the 
constant  employment  of  the  Army  in  the 
Philippines  has  tended  to  efficiency.  On  the 
recommendation  of  the  General  Staff  a com- 
plete reorganization  of  the  Army  was  carried 
out  in  1913.  The  Corps  of  Engineers  has  estab- 
lished a reputation  for  faithful  work,  where 
honesty  combined  with  administrative  efficiency 
is  required. 

See  Cabinet' or  the  President;  Education, 
Military  and  Naval;  Executive  Depart- 
ments; Military  and  Naval  Expenditures; 
Military  Law;  Posts,  Military;  Military 
Prisons  ; Military'  Reservations  ; Militia. 

References:  U S.  War  Department,  Reports 
(annual)  ; C.  A.  Dana,  Recollections  of  the 
Civil  War  (1898)  ; M.  L.  Hinsdale,  History  of 
the  President’s  Cabinet  (1911)  ; II.  B.  Learned, 
The  President’s  Cabinet  (1911);  Am.  Year 
Book,  1910,  and  year  by  year. 

Charles  Moore. 

WAR  GOVERNORS.  A designation  general- 
ly applied  to  that  body  of  loyal  governors  in 
the  North  who,  during  the  Civil  War,  ably  sup- 
ported President  Lincoln.  The  disadvantages 
in  carrying  on  war  arising  from  the  dual  divi- 
sion of  power  between  the  Federal  Government 
and  the  states  were  partially  overcome  by  the 
the  sympathetic  cooperation  and  forethought 
of  those  governors  who  went  to  the  limit  of 
their  legal  powers  to  furnish  men  and  sup- 
plies. Indeed,  there  are  instances  where  they 
assumed  powers  not  expressly  granted  them, 
as  for  example  Morton’s  use  of  the  state’s  re- 
sources in  the  face  of  a hostile  legislature. 
Conspicuous  among  them  were  John  A.  An- 
drew of  Massachusetts;  Richard  Yates  of  Illi- 
nois; Oliver  P.  Morton  of  Indiana;  Andrew 
G.  Curtin  of  Pennsylvania;  Edwin  D.  Diorgan 
of  New  York;  David  Tod  and  John  Brough  of 
Ohio;  and  Samuel  J.  Kirkwood  of  Iowa.  See 
Militia;  War  Democrats;  Wars  of  the 


644 


WAR,  INTERNATIONAL  RELATIONS  DURING 


United  States.  References:  Tribune  Almanac 
(1861  to  1865);  J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  the 
United  States  (1907),  V,  234—5.  0.  C.  H. 

WAR,  INTERNATIONAL  RELATIONS 
DURING.  Definitions. — “In  treating  of  the  law 
of  war,  we  have  to  find  out  what  is  war,  which 
is  the  subject  under  investigation;  what  the 
law  which  is  sought.  Cicero  called  war  a 
contention  by  force.  LTsage,  however,  holds 
that  not  the  action,  but  the  state,  is  in- 
dicated by  the  term,  ‘war,’  so  that  war  is  the 
condition  of  contention  by  force,  as  such.” 
(Grotius,  Dc  jure  belli  ac  pads.) 

Dr.  Lieber,  in  1863,  in  the  Instructions  for 
the  Government  of  Armies  of  the  United  States 
in  the  Field,  defined  public  war  as  follows: 

Public  war  is  a state  of  armed  hostility  between 
sovereign  nations  or  governments.  It  is  a law  and 
requisite  of  civilized  existence  that  men  live  in 
political,  continuous  societies,  forming  organized 
units,  called  states  or  nations,  whose  constituents 
bear,  enjoy,  and  suffer,  advance  and  retrograde, 
together,  in  peace  and  in  war. 

Civil  War. — In  1862,  concerning  war  and 
civil  war  Mr.  Justice  Greer  said: 

War  has  been  well  defined  to  be,  “That  state  in 
which  a nation  prosecutes  its  right  by  force.”  The 
parties  belligerent  in  a public  war  are  independent 
nations.  But  it  is  not  necessary  to  constitute 
war  that  both  parties  should  be  acknowledged  as 
independent  nations  or  sovereign  states.  A war 
may  exist  where  one  of  the  belligerents  claims  sov- 
ereign rights  as  against  the  other.  Insurrection 
against  a government  may  or  may  not  culminate 
in  an  organized  rebellion,  hut  a civil  war  always 
begins  by  insurrection  against  the  lawful  authority 
of  the  Government.  A civil  war  is  never  solemnly 
declared ; it  becomes  such  by  its  accidents — the 
number,  power,  and  organization  of  the  persons 
who  originate  and  carry  it  on.  When  the  party  in 
rebellion  occupy  and  hold  in  a hostile  manner  a 
certain  portion  of  territory  : have  declared  their 
independence  ; have  cast  off  their  allegiance  ; have 
organized  armies  ; have  commenced  hostilities 
against  their  former  sovereign,  the  world  acknowl- 
edges them  as  belligerents,  and  the  contest  a war. 
They  claim  to  be  in  arms  to  establish  their  liberty 
and  independence,  in  order  to  become  a sovereign 
state,  while  the  sovereign  party  treats  them  as 
insurgents  and  rebels  who  owe  allegiance,  and 
who  should  be  punished  with  death  for  their 
treason. 

The  laws  of  war,  as  established  among  nations, 
have  their  foundation  in  reason,  and  all  tend  to 
mitigate  the  cruelties  and  misery  produced  by  the 
scourge  of  war.  Hence  the  parties  to  a civil  war 
usually  concede  to  each  other  belligerent  rights. 
They  exchange  prisoners,  and  adopt  the  other 
courtesies  and  rules  common  to  public  or  national 
wars  (Prize  Cases,  1867,  7 Black  65). 

Declarations. — In  early  times  there  were 
many  attempts  to  classify  wars,  but  classi- 
fications are  not  of  great  significance  at  present 
for  international  relations.  When  war  de  jure 
actually  exists  the  international  relations  are 
fairly  well  defined.  There  may,  however,  be  war 
de  facto,  war  in  the  material  sense,  which  may 
give  rise  to  conditions  in  which  the  legal  ob- 
ligations are  not  fully  defined  ( see  Insur- 
gency  in  International  Law). 

The  Hague  Conference  of  1907  agreed  upon 
a Convention  requiring  a declaration  of  war 
with  reasons,  or  an  ultimatum  with  a condi- 
tional declaration  of  war  (see  Declaration  of 
War).  This  declaration  should  be  issued  prior 


to  engaging  in  hostilities,  the  obligations  of 
neutrals  to  be  dependent  upon  their  knowl- 
edge of  the  declaration. 

War  between  states  not  only  changes  the  in- 
ternational relations  previously  existing  be- 
tween the  states,  but  also  gives  rise  to  new 
relations  on  the  part  of  other  states.  A civil 
war  changes  the  relations  between  the  parties 
to  it,  and  also  gives  rise  to  new  relations  on  the 
part  of  other  states.  Professor  Moore  says: 

Much  confusion  may  be  avoided  by  bearing  in 
mind  the  fact  that  by  the  term  war  is  meant  not 
the  mere  employment  of  force,  but  the  existence  of 
the  legal  condition  of  things  in  which  rights  are 
or  may  be  prosecuted  by  force.  Thus,  if  two  na- 
tions declare  war  one  against  the  other,  war  ex- 
ists, though  no  force  whatever  may  as  yet  have 
been  employed.  'On  the  other  hand,  force  may  be 
employed  by  one  nation  against  another,  as  in  the 
case  of  reprisals,  and  yet  no  state  of  war  may 
arise.  In  such  a case  there  may  be  said  to  be 
an  act  of  war,  but  no  state  of  war. 

Congress  has  power  to  declare  war  in  the 
United  States.  The  United  States  may,  how- 
ever, become  involved  in  war  through  the  act 
of  a foreign  state  in  levying  war  against  the 
United  States,  or  through  an  uprising  within 
the  United  States  and  in  such  cases: 

The  President  is  not  only  authorized  but  bound 
to  resist  force  by  force.  He  does  not  initiate 
the  war,  but  is  bound  to  accept  the  challenge  with- 
out waiting  for  any  special  legislative  authority. 
And  whether  the  hostile  party  be  a foreign  in- 
vader, or  states  organized  in  rebellion,  it  is  none 
the  less  a war,  although  the  declaration  of  it  be 
“unilateral”  (Prize  Cases,  1862,  2 Black  668). 

Belligerency. — When  war  actually  exists  the 
belligerent  parties,  whether  or  not  previously 
recognized  states,  have  belligerent  rights  as 
regards  those  states  by  which  they  leave  been 
recognized  as  belligerents,  and  as  regards  their 
relations  with  each  other. 

Effect  on  International  Relations. — The  gen- 
eral effect  of  war  is  to  put  an  end  to  the 
peaceful  relations  between  the  belligerent 
parties.  If  any  international  negotiations  are 
carried  on,  such  negotiations  are  usually 
through  the  medium  of  some  state  which  is 
friendly  to  both  parties.  During  the  Span- 
ish-American  War  of  1898,  the  French  repre- 
sentative acted  as  a friendly  medium  for  both 
the  United  States  and  Spain.  The  United 
States  performed  a similiar  service  in  the 
Russo-Japanese  War  of  1904-5. 

Effect  on  Subjects. — If  the  law  of  war  is 
strictly  enforced  all  relations  between  the  sub- 
jects of  the  belligerents  are  likewise  prohibited. 
The  circular  issued  by  the  Treasury  Depart- 
ment of  the  United  States  on  April  27,  1898, 
provided  for  the  lefusal  by  port  officers  of 
the  United  States  of:  (1)  clearance  to  ves- 
sels bound  to  ports  blockaded  by  the  United 
States;  (2)  clearance  to  vessels  carrying  con- 
traband to  Spanish  ports;  (3)  clearance  to 
vessels  with  coal  for  Spanish  ports;  (4)  clear- 
ance to  American  vessels  for  Spanish  ports. 

Many  treaties  provide  for  a certain  limited 
period  during  which  subjects  of  one  state 
within  the  limits  of  the  other  at  the  out- 


645 


WAR  OF  1812— WAR  POWER,  CONSTITUTIONAL 


break  of  hostilities  may  close  up  their  affairs 
and  depart.  In  general,  subjects  of  one  bellig- 
erent are  legally  incapable  of  contracting 
with  subjects  of  another  belligerent  during 
hostilities  (1877,  Conrad  vs.  Waples,  90 
U.  S.  279;  1892,  Briggs  vs.  United  States,  143 
U.  S.  346 ) . Many  contracts  between  the  sub- 
jects of  belligerents  entered  into  before  the  dec- 
laration of  war  are  suspended  or  dissolved  by 
war  though  it  has  been  held  that  the  statute 
of  limitations  does  not  run  during  the  period 
of  the  war  (1867,  Hanger  vs.  Abbott,  6 Wal- 
lace 532) . 

Public  Property. — The  public  property  of 
one  belligerent  within  the  territory  of  the 
other  belligerent  if  immovable  and  of  use  for 
war,  may  be  occupied  and  used  by  the  bellig- 
erent within  whose  territory  it  is.  This  bell ig- 
gerent  may  also  enjoy  the  usufruct  of  the  other 
public  property  but  property  devoted  to  edu- 
cational, religious  and  scientific  purposes  is 
not  to  be  injured.  Movable  public  property  of 
one  belligerent  within  the  territory  of  the 
other  is  liable  to  such  treatment  as  its  nature 
may  determine.  The  property  of  municipalities 
and  of  private  persons  is  generally  exempt 
except  from  such  treatment  as  may  be  due  to 
the  necessities  of  war  ( see  Private  Property 
at  Sea;  Vessels). 

Prisoners. — The  laws  of  war  now  provide 
for  the  humane  treatment  of  prisoners  of  war, 
as  war  is  now  regarded  as  aimed  against  the 
state  rather  than  against  the  subjects  of  a 
state  ( see  Prisoners  of  War). 

Effect  on  Neutrals. — The  declaration  of  war 
between  states  or  the  recognition  of  bellig- 
erency in  case  one  of  the  parties  to  the  war 
is  not  a state,  gives  rise  to  new  relations  with 
states  not  parties  to  the  war  (see  Neutrality, 
Principles  of;  Neutral  Trade,  Principles 
of;  Vessels).  The  belligerents  are,  as  regards 
the  war,  upon  the  same  basis  and  subject  to 
similar  treatment  and  restrictions.  As  neu- 
trality involves  in  general  non-participation  in 
the  hostilities  it  may  bind  the  neutral  to  pre- 
vent certain  acts,  as  the  use  of  its  territory 
as  a base;  to  tolerate  certain  acts,  as  the  visit 
and  search  of  its  private  vessels  (see  Right 
of  Visit)  ; or  to  regulate  certain  acts,  as  trade 
in  arms. 

See  Annexations  to  the  United  States; 
Arbitration  and  Peace;  Belligerency; 
Blockade;  Confederate  States  of  America; 
Conquest,  Right  of;  Contraband;  Cuba  and 
Cuban  Diplomacy;  Declaration  of  Paris; 
Declaration  of  War;  De  Facto  Government; 
Disarmament;  Drago  Doctrine;  Embargo; 
Filibusters  to  Aid  Insurrections;  Foreign 
Policy  of  the  United  States;  Free  Ships 
Make  Free  Goods;  Hague  Conferences; 
Hague  Tribunal;  Insurgency  in  Interna- 
tional Law;  International  Law,  Influence 
of  the  United  States  on;  Maritime  War; 
Neutral  Trade,  Principles  of;  Neutrality, 
Principles  of;  Noncombatant;  Peace,  Con- 


clusion of;  Prisoners  of  War;  Prize  Law 
and  Courts;  Sovereignty,  Theory  of; 
Treaties  in  International  Law;  War, 
Carrying  on;  War  Power,  Constitutional. 

References:  J.  B.  Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Law 
(1906),  VII,  152-583;  J.  Westlake,  Int.  Law 
(1907),  Pt.  II;  W.  E.  Hall,  Int.  Law  (1909), 
370,  et  seq.;  G.  G.  Wilson,  Int.  Law  (1910), 
241-381;  H.  Grotius,  De  jure  belli  ac  pads 
(1625).  George  G.  Wilson. 

WAR  OF  1812.  See  Wars  of  the  United 
States. 

WAR  POWER,  CONSTITUTIONAL.  Origin. 

— At  the  date  of  the  adoption  of  the  Consti- 
tution the  experiences  of  the  Revolutionary 
War  was  fresh  in  the  minds  of  the  members 
of  the  convention ; its  presiding  officer  had 
been  the  commander-in-chief  of  the  revolution- 
ary armies,  and  many  of  its  members  had 
exercised  military  command  in  the  continental 
line,  or  in  the  forces  raised  by  the  states  for 
the  prosecution  of  the  war.  With  such  practi- 
cal knowledge  in  its  possession  the  convention 
would  have  been  remiss,  indeed,  had  it  failed 
to  make  adequate  provision  for  the  national 
defense,  or  to  vest  in  the  several  branches  of 
the  government  sufficient  power  to  enable  them 
to  cope  with  external  violence  or  internal  dis- 
order. It  must  be  conceded,  in  the  light  thrown 
upon  its  work  by  nearly  a century  and  a half 
of  impressive  experience  that  the  Federal  Con- 
vention of  1787  performed  its  duty  in  that  re- 
gard in  an  able  and  satisfactory  manner. 

Distribution  of  Power. — The  power  to  pro- 
vide for  the  national  defense,  including  the 
important  power  of  initiative,  was  vested  in 
the  Congress,  and  to  that  branch  the  power 
to  declare  war,  together  with  the  right — then 
regarded  as  more  important  than  at  present — 
of  issuing  letters  of  marque  and  reprisal  (see), 
and  of  making  rules  for  captures  on  land  and 
water.  This  question  of  high  national  policy 
having  been  thus  satisfactorily  disposed  of, 
power  was  vested  in  the  Congress  to  raise  and 
support  armies,  to  provide  and  maintain  a 
navy  and  to  make  rules  for  the  government 
of  the  land  and  naval  forces.  The  power  to 
establish  and  maintain  land  and  naval  forces, 
a power  peculiarly  legislative  in  character, 
having  been  thus  vested  in  Congress,  the  au- 
thority to  organize,  train  and  instruct  as  well 
as  to  discipline  and  command  the  forces  so 
authorized — a function  essentially  executive 
in  its  nature,  was  then  vested  in  the  President 
in  the  clause  making  him  the  commander-in- 
chief of  the  land  and  naval  forces  and  of  the 
militia  of  the  several  states  when  called  into 
the  actual  service  of  the  United  States  (Art. 
II,  Sec.  ii,  Ifl). 

Declaration  of  War. — The  power  to  declare 
war,  as  it  affects  the  very  life  of  the  state, 
and  may  determine  its  political  existence  at 
any  time,  is  one  which  should  be  exercised 


646 


WAR  POWER,  CONSTITUTIONAL 


with  great  caution  and  deliberation,  and  should 
be  surrounded  with  substantial  and  efficient 
safeguards.  The  formal,  official  declaration 
of  war  was  regarded  as  an  incident  of  more 
serious  importance  at  the  date  of  the  adoption 
of  the  Constitution  than  is  the  case  at  present. 
The  modern  mind  assigns  greater  significance 
to  acts  and  to  questions  of  fact  and  their 
probable  consequences,  and  the  actual  outbreak 
of  hostilities  is  now  regarded  as  decisive  in 
determining  a status  of  public  war  between 
two  independent  communities.  It  should  not 
be  forgotten,  in  this  connection,  that  most  of 
the  public  wars  in  which  the  United  States 
has  been  engaged  have  begun  with  acts  of 
hostility,  originating,  in  a majority  of  cases, 
with  the  opposing  belligerent.  In  such  cases 
a previous  declaration  was  out  of  the  question, 
and  the  practice  has  been  for  Congress  to 
recognize  the  existence  of  war,  by  an  appro- 
priate act  of  legislation,  to  charge  the  Presi- 
dent with  its  diligent  prosecution  and  to  fur- 
nish the  men  and  means  for  carrying  the  exist- 
ing hostilities  to  a successful  termination. 
This  tendency  to  regard  an  act  of  hostility 
as  the  beginning  of  public  war,  rather  than 
the  formal  announcement  of  the  legislative 
will  in  that  regard  will  undoubtedly  continue 
to  prevail,  although  the  Second  Hague  Con- 
ference regarded  the  resort  to  hostilities,  with- 
out prior  declaration  or  notification,  as  an 
evil  of  sufficient  importance  to  warrant  the 
application  of  a conventional  remedy  (see 
Declaration  of  War  ) . 

Forces. — In  its  power  to  raise  armies,  and 
to  provide  and  maintain  a navy,  the  authority 
of  Congress  is  plenary,  and  its  conclusions  as 
to  the  strength  and  composition  of  the  consti- 
tutional military  forces  are  final  (Art.  I,  Sec. 
viii,  j[|f  12-16)  ; with  the  forces  so  furnished 
the  President  must  provide  for  the  defense  of 
the  country,  for  the  maintenance  of  public 
order,  and  for  the  prosecution  of  such  military 
and  naval  operations  as  may  be  declared,  or 
otherwise  determined  on  by  Congress.  As  the 
legislative  department  is  supreme  in  determin- 
ing the  strength  and  composition  of  the  forces 
to  be  employed  in  the  public  defense,  the  Presi- 
dent, as  the  constitutional  commander-in-chief, 
is  equally  independent  in  his  employment  of 
the  land  and  naval  forces  so  provided;  and 
acts  done  by  him  in  the  exercise  of  his  military 
command  are  not  reviewable  by  other  branches 
of  the  government. 

Protection  against  Domestic  Violence. — The 

constitutional  convention  was  not  satisfied 
with  having  worked  out  fields  of  appropriate 
activity  for  Congress  and  the  President  in  the 
exercise  of  the  war  powers  with  which  they 
were  respectively  invested.  The  experience  of 
the  colonies  as  to  the  manner  in  which  the 
war  powers  of  the  Crown  had  been  exercised 
was  too  recent  and  important  to  permit  the 
purposes  of  their  exercise  to  remain  without 
statutory  regulation.  With  a view,  therefore, 


to  impose  a reasonable  restriction  upon  the 
executive  in  respect  to  the  undertakings  in 
which  the  land  and  naval  force  might  law- 
fully be  employed,  they  were  made  the  subject 
of  precise  enumeration  in  a clause  providing 
that  the  militia,  might  be  used  for  three  pur- 
poses, these  were:  to  execute  the  laws  of 
the  Union,  suppress  insurrections,  and  repel 
invasions.  Under  the  first  head — to  execute 
the  laws  of  the  Union— fall  two  rather  widely 
separated  occasions  for  the  employment  of 
military  force.  A declaration  of  war  is,  in 
form,  an  act  of  Congress  which  requires  for 
its  validity  the  approval  of  the  President;  a 
declaration  of  war  would  thus  seem  to  be  a 
“law  of  the  Union”  within  the  meaning  of 
the  Constitution,  and  therefore  binding  on  all 
parts  of  the  Union.  The  same  is  true  of 
organized  opposition  to  the  execution  of  the 
laws  in  any  part  of  the  Union;  and  this  oppo- 
sition may  be  met  and  overcome  whether  it 
be  addressed  to  the  laws  of  the  United  States 
generally — as  in  the  case  of  the  Civil  War — 
or  to  particular  classes  of  laws  as,  for  example, 
those  regulating  the  collection  of  the  revenues, 
or  the  movement  of  interstate  commerce.  The 
power  to  suppress  insurrection  and  repel  in- 
vasion inheres  in  every  civilized  state  as  in- 
surrection and  invasion  constitute  attempts 
against  the  life  of  the  body  politic  and  must, 
for  that  reason,  be  vigorously  met  and  resisted. 
With  a view  to  enable  the  President  to  act 
with  the  necessary  promptness,  especially 
where  the  troops  constituting  the  regular  army 
are  so  widely  scattered  as  not  to  be  immedi- 
ately available,  he  is  authorized  by  statute 
to  call  forth  the  militia  of  the  states  nearest 
to  the  point  at  which  its  services  are  required. 

Rules  of  War. — Congress  is  not  only  charged 
with  the  decision  of  all  questions  relating  to 
the  strength  and  composition  of  the  land  and 
naval  forces  but  is  vested  with  power  to  pre- 
scribe rules  for  their  government  and  regu- 
lation. If  individual  citizens  are  to  enter 
the  military  service  it  is  of  the  highest  im- 
portance that  the  rules  of  discipline  and  con- 
duct under  which  they  are  to  live  should  be 
made  known  to  them,  and  that  the  powers  and 
duties  of  the  officers  who  are  to  command  them 
should  be  made  the  subject  of  exact  statutory 
regulation.  This  purpose  has  been  accom- 
plished, as  to  the  Army,  by  the  enactment  of  a 
code  of  rules,  known  as  the  Articles  of  War 
(see),  and  as  to  the  Navy  by  the  similar 
enactment  of  the  Rules  for  the  Government  of 
the  Navy. 

Implied  Powers. — But  very  considerable 
powers  are  exercised  by  the  President  and  by 
Congress,  in  time  of  war,  which  are  not  made 
the  subject  of  exact  description  in  the  Con- 
stitution, but  which  are  obtained  from  that  in- 
strument by  necessary  implication  from  powers 
already  granted.  The  power  to  declare  war, 
for  example,  involves  the  power  to  conduct 
hostile  operations  against  the  enemy  and, 


647 


WAR  POWERS  OF  THE  PRESIDENT— WAR,  SECRETARIES  OF 


equally,  to  invade  his  territory  and  to  estab- 
lish there  a government  by  military  occupa- 
tion. Congress  may  legislate  in  that  regard, 
as  was  the  case  in  the  reconstruction  acts  of 
1867;  but  the  practice  has  been  to  commit  the 
government  of  such  territory  to  the  President 
and  his  subordinate  military  commanders.  In- 
deed, such  legislation  is  not  necessary,  as  the 
powers  and  duties  of  generals  in  chief  com- 
mand of  occupied  territory  are  regulated 
rather  by  treaties  and  by  the  law  of  nations 
than  by  the  requirements  of  the  Constitution. 

Annexed  Territory. — Where  territory  is  ac- 
quired by  purchase,  or  by  treaty,  possession 
is  taken  by  the  executive  and  very  extensive 
powers  are  exercised  within  such  territory  by 
tlie  President  pending  its  assimilation  by  the 
operation  of  an  appropriate  act  of  legislation 
by  Congress.  Such  was  the  case  with  the 
Louisiana  Purchase  in  the  early  part  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  and  with  the  acquisition 
of  territory  from  the  State  of  Panama  ( see 
under  Territory),  for  the  construction  of  an 
interoceanic  canal. 

See  Annexations  to  the  United  States; 
Army,  Standing;  Belligerency;  Blockade; 
Declaration  of  War;  Enlistment,  Naval 
and  Military;  Insurgency  in  International 
Law;  Martial  Law;  Maritime  War;  Mili- 
tarism; Neutrality,  Principles  of;  Peace, 
Conclusion  of;  Prisoners  of  War;  War, 
International  Relations  During;  War 
Powers  of  the  President. 

References:  W.  Whiting,  War  Pcnvers  Under 
the  Constitution  (1910),  912-920;  H.  C.  Black, 
Constitutional  Law  ( 1895 ),  95-98 ; C.  M.  Clode, 
Military  Forces  of  the  Crown,  (1869),  ch. 
xxxvi;  J.  N.  Pomeroy,  Constitutional  Law, 
(10th  ed.,  1888);  J.  B.  Moore,  American  Di- 
plomacy ( 1905 ) ; A.  C.  Coolidge,  U.  S.  as  a 
World  Power  (1908).  George  B.  Davis. 

WAR  POWERS  OF  THE  PRESIDENT. 

Several  important  war  powers  are  vested  in 
the  President  by  the  Constitution,  either  ex- 
pressly or  by  necessary  implication;  these  re- 
late to  the  chief  command  of  the  land  and 
naval  forces,  and  to  the  power  to  wage  war 
which  has  been  regularly  declared  by  Con- 
gress; he  may  also  use  military  force  to 
execute  the  laws  of  the  Union,  to  supress  in- 
surrection and  repel  invasion ; where  the  prop- 
erty of  the  United  States  is  threatened,  or  the 
lives  or  property  of  its  citizens  are  endan- 
gered, he  may  take  the  necessary  steps  to  pro- 
tect them,  using  force,  where  other  methods 
have  failed,  until  the  pleasure  of  Congress  can 
be  learned.  Accordingly,  as  in  1846,  the 
President  can  practically  place  the  army  in  a 
position  leading  to  war.  In  the  exercise  of 
the  powers  thus  granted  the  authority  of  the 
President  is  plenary;  he  may  direct  military 
and  naval  operations  to  be  undertaken,  within 
the  means  placed  at  his  disposal  by  Congress, 
and  may  resort  to  such  measures  with  a view 


to  harass  and  destroy  the  enemy  as  he  may 
deem  necessary  to  the  successful  prosecution 
of  the  war  (Const.  Art.  II,  Sec.  ii,  If  1,  Sec. 
iii).  Within  the  limits  prescribed  by  the  law 
of  nations  he  may  cause  the  private  property 
of  the  enemy  to  be  taken  for  the  use  of  the 
Army,  by  way  of  requisition  or  contribution, 
and  may  direct  that  the  private  property  of 
enemy  subjects,  not  contraband  of  war,  shall 
be  liable  to  capture  on  the  high  seas  or,  in  his 
discretion,  may  allow  it  to  pass  to  its  desti- 
nation free  from  molestation.  In  a case  in 
which  such  a course  will  conduce  to  the  termi- 
nation of  the  war,  he  may  issue  instructions 
that  certain  classes  of  property  shall  be  de- 
prived of  that  quality — such  instructions  were 
contained  in  the  Emancipation  Proclamation  of 
1863 — may  exercise  similar  powers  in  a case 
of  intervention  in  the  execution  of  a treaty, 
as  in  the  Cuban  intervention  of  1906;  and  his 
orders  and  proclamations  in  such  territory 
have  the  force  of  law  and  may  be  executed,  if 
need  be,  by  a resort  to  military  force. 

See  Commander-in-Chief;  Habeas  Corpus; 
Martial  Law;  Militia;  Rebellion;  War, 
Carrying  on;  War  Power,  Constitutional. 

References:  J.  Buchanan,  James  Buchanan’s 
Administration  (1866);  D.  K.  Watson,  Con- 
stitution of  the  U.  S.  (1910),  II,  912-920; 
H.  C.  Black,  Constitutional  Law  (1895),  OS- 
98;  C.  M.  Clode,  Military  Forces  of  the  Crown 
, (1869),  II,  ch.  xxxi;  J.  N.  Pomeroy,  Consti- 
tutional Law  (10th  ed.,  1888),  372-377;  W. 
Whiting,  War  Powers  of  the  President  (1910), 
66-82;  War  Powers  under  the  Constitution 
(1910),  95-98;  bibliography  in  A.  B.  Hart, 
Manual  (1908),  § 159.  ' G.  B.  Davis. 

WAR,  SECRETARIES  OF.  Under  the  Arti- 
cles of  Confederation,  Benjamin  Lincoln  (Oct. 
1781-1783)  and  Henry  Knox  (Mar.  1785- 
1789),  served  as  Secretaries  of  War.  Follow- 
ing is  a list  of  Secretaries  since  the  establish- 
ment of  the  Department  under  the  Constitu- 
tion : 


1789  (Sept.  12) -1794  (Dec.  31),  Henry  Knox. 

1795  .Tan.  2) -1796  (.Tan.  27),  Timothy  Pickering 
(Sec.  of  State:  arl  int.  after  Dec.  10,  1795). 

1796  (.Tan.  27)-1800  (May  13),  James  McHenry. 
1800  (May  13) -1801  (Mar.  5).  Samuel  Dexter  (Sec. 

of  Treasury;  ad  int.  after  .Tan.  1,  1S01). 

1800  (June  1),  Benjamin  Stoddert  (Sec.  of  Navy; 
ad  int.). 

1801  (Mar.  5)-1809  (Feb.  16),  Henry  Dearborn. 
1809  (Fob.  17),  John  Smith  (Chief  Clerk  : ad  int.). 
1S09  (Mar.  7) -1812  (Dec.  31),  William  Eustis. 
1813  (Jan.  1),  James  Monroe  (Sec.  of  State;  ad 

int.) . 

1813  (Jan.  13) -1814  (Aug.  30),  John  Armstrong. 

1814  (Aug.  30),  James  Monroe  (Sec.  of  State;  ad. 
int.) . 

1814  (Sept.  27 ) —1815  (Mar.  14),  James  Monroe 
(Sec.  of  State:  ad  int.  after  Feb.  28,  1815). 

1815  (Mar.  14),  Alexander  J.  Dallas  (Sec.  of 
Treasury:  ad  int.). 

1815  (Aug.  D-1S16  (Oct.  21),  William  H.  Crawford. 

1816  (Oct.  22),  George  Graham  (Chief  Clerk;  ad 
int.). 

1817  (Oct.  8 ) —1825  (Mar.  3),  John  C.  Calhoun  (re- 
commissioned Dec.  16,  1817). 

1825  (Mar.  7)-1828  (May  24),  James  Barbour. 

1828  (May  26),  Samuel  L.  Southard  (Sec.  of 
Navy;  ad  int.). 


648 


WARS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


1828  (May  26)-lS29  (Mar.  3),  Peter  B.  Porter. 
1S29  (Mar.  91-1831  (June  18),  John  H.  Eaton. 

1831  (June  20),  Philip  G.  Randolph  (Chief  Clerk; 
ad  int.). 

1831  (July  21),  Roger  B.  Taney  (Atty.  Gen.;  ad 
int.). 

1831  (Aug.  1 ) -1836  (Oct.  4),  Lewis  Cass  (recom- 
missioned Dec.  30,  1831). 

1836  (Oct.  5),  Carey  A.  Harris  (Commissioner  of 
Indian  Affairs;  ad  int.). 

1836  (Oct.  261-1837  (Mar.  7),  Benjamin  F.  Butler 
(Atty.  Gen.;  ad  int.,  recommissioned  ad  int.  Mar. 
3,  18.J7 ) . 

1837  (Mar.  7 ) -1S41  (Mar.  3),  Joel  It.  Poinsett. 

1841  (Mar.  5 ) -1841  (Sept.  11),  John  Bell. 

1841  (Sept.  12 1 -1S41  (Oct.  12),  Albert  M.  Lea 
(Chief  Clerk;  ad  int.). 

1841  (Oct.  12)-1S43  (Mar.  7),  John  C.  Spencer  (re- 
commissioned Dec.  20,  1S41). 

1843  (Mar.  8 ) — 1S44  (Feb.  15),  James  M.  Porter. 

1844  (Feb.  15 ) — 1S45  (Mar.  6),  William  Wilkins. 

1845  (Mar.  6 ) — 1S49  (Mar.  7),  William  L.  Marcy. 
1S49  (Mar.  8),  Reverdy  Johnson  (Atty.  Gen.;  ad 

int.). 

1549  (Mar.  8)-lS50  (July  22).  George  W.  Crawford. 
1850  (July  23),  Samuel  J.  Anderson  (Chief  Clerk; 

ad  int.). 

1850  (July  24),  Winfield  Scott  (Maj.  Gen.  U.  S.  A. ; 
ad  int.). 

1550  (Aug.  15)-1S53  (Mar.  7),  Charles  M.  Conrad. 
1853  (Mar.  7 ) — 1S57  (Mar.  3),  Jefferson  Davis. 

1857  (Mar.  3),  Samuel  Cooper  (Adjt.  Gen.  U.  S. 

A.;  ad  int.). 

1857  (Mar.  6) -1S60  (Dec.  31 1,  John  B.  Floyd. 

1861  (Jan.  1)-1861  (Jan.  17),  Joseph  Holt  (Post- 
master Gen.;  ad  int.). 

1861  (Jan.  18 (-1861  (Mar.  5),  Joseph  Holt. 

1861  Mar.  5)-lS62  (Jan.  15),  Simon  Cameron. 


1862  (Jan.  15)-1867  (Aug.  12),  Edwin  M.  Stanton. 
1867  (Aug.  12),  Ulysses  S.  Grant  (Gen.  of  the 
Army;  ad  int.). 

1S68  (Jan.  14 ) —1868  (May  26),  Edwin  M.  Stanton 
(reinstated,  not  recognized  by  President  after  Feb. 
21,  1868). 

1S68  (Feb.  21),  Lorenzo  Thomas  (Adjt.  Gen.  U. 
S.  A.  ; ad.  int.). 

1S68  (May  28 ) -1S69  (Mar.  11),  John  M.  Schofield. 
1869  (Mar.  11)-1S69  (Sept.  6),  John  A.  Rawlins. 
1869  (Sept.  9) -1869  (Oct.  25),  William  T.  Sherman. 
1869  (Oct.  25) -1876  (Mar.  2),  William  W.  Belknap 
(recommissioned  Dec.  8,  1869;  March  17,  1873). 

IS16  (Mar.  2),  George  M.  Robeson  (Sec.  of  Navy; 
ad  int.). 

1876  (Mar.  8)  —1876  (May  22),  Alphonso  Taft. 

1876  (May  22 ) —1877  (Mar.  11),  James  D.  Cameron. 
1S<7  (Mar.  12)-1S79  (Dec.  10),  George  W.  McCrary. 
1879  (Dec.  10)-1881  (Mar.  5),  Alexander  Ramsey. 
1881  (Mar.  5 ) — 18S5  (Mar.  6),  Robert  T.  Lincoln.' 
1885  (Mar.  6)-18S9  (Mar.  5),  William  C.  Endicott. 
1889  (Mar.  5 ) —1891  (Dec.  5),  Itedfield  Proctor. 

1891  (Dec.  6),  Lewis  A.  Grant  (Asst.  Sec.;  ad 
int.) . 

1891  (Dec.  22) -1893  (Mar.  6),  Stephen  B.  Elkins. 
1893  (Mar.  6 ) —1 897  (Mar.  5),  Daniel  S.  Lamont. 
1897  (Mar.  5 ) -1899  (Aug.  1),  Russell  A.  Alger. 
1S99  (Aug.  1 ) —1904  (Feb.  1),  Elihu  Root  (recom- 
missioned Dec.  6,  1899  ; March  5,  1901) . 

1904  (Feb.  1 ) -1908  (June  30),  William  H.  Taft 
(recommissioned  March  6,  1905). 

1908  (July  1 ) -1909  (Mar.  4),  Luke  E.  Wright  (re- 
commissioned Dec.  9,  1908 ) . 

1909  (Mar.  51-1911  (May  15),  Jacob  M.  Dickinson. 
1911  (May  15)-1913  (Mar.  5),  Henry  Lewis  Stim- 

son. 

1913  (Mar.  5)-  Lindley  M.  Garrison. 

A.  B.  II. 


WARS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


Relations  to  Government.  — Although  the 
United  States,  since  its  foundation  has  been 
able  to  keep  out  of  European,  Asiatic  and  Afri- 
can wars,  and  has  but  once  been  called  upon  to 
defend  its  territory  against  an  invader,  war,  the 
Army  and  Navy,  and  the  territorial  accessions 
following  war,  have  • played  a great  part  in 
developing  the  nation.  It  was  born  in  the 
midst  of  war,  and  the  Federal  Constitution 
bears  the  mark  of  provisions  for  military  dan- 
gers, and  contains  numerous  clauses  on  the  or- 
ganization of  the  national  forces  ( see  Army). 

In  fact  the  United  States  was  at  war  before 
there  was  a formal  United  States.  The  second 
Continental  Congress  in  May,  1775,  created  a 
national  army,  soon  followed  by  a national 
navy,  and  made  rules  for  maritime  warfare. 
Congress,  on  July  6,  1775,  voted  what  was  sub- 
stantially a declaration  of  war  against  Great 
Britain;  and  at  the  end  of  the  struggle,  Con- 
gress authorized  and  ratified  the  treaty  of 
peace. 

Revolutionary  War. — The  conduct  of  the 
war  with  Great  Britain,  commonly  called  the 
Revolutionary  War,  revealed  structural  difficul- 
ties which  continue  to  the  present  day.  Con- 
gress, through  which  alone  a general  war  could 
be  waged,  and  a general  military  system  carried 
out,  was  flanked  by  the  states,  and  only  a small 
part  of  the  troops  enlisted  were  completely 
responsible  to  the  central  government.  This 
confusion  of  authority  and  interest  probably 
doubled  the  money  cost  of  the  war.  The  sys- 
tem of  raising  soldiers  was  particularly  defect- 


ive, for  at  least  four  kinds  of  revolutionary 
troops  were  raised : ( 1 ) the  continental  line, 
a small  body  of  national  troops;  (2)  the  state 
lines,  being  regiments  regularly  enlisted  and 
officered  by  the  state,  but  subject  to  the  orders 
of  the  continental  general  officers;  (3)  occa- 
sional levies  of  militia,  organized  in  companies 
or  small  parties  operating  under  the  orders 
of  the  states;  (4)  irregular  border  troops,  per- 
haps not  enlisted  at  all,  and  owing  no  obed- 
ience to  the  regular  military  authority,  often 
nothing  better  than  marauders.  The  total  num- 
ber of  troops  of  all  kinds  was  probably  about 
150,000  individuals  in  actual  service  under 
authority  during  the  war. 

The  main  characteristics  of  the  Revolution- 
ary War  were  as  follows:  (1)  the  narrow 
limits  of  most  of  the  operations,  inasmuch  as 
they  were  mostly  confined  to  a strip  along  the 
sea  coast;  (2)  complete  failure  of  the  two  Brit- 
ish attempts  to  penetrate  the  country,  under 
Burgovne  and  Cornwallis;  (3)  frontier  war- 
fare, with  Indian  allies,  which  exasperated  both 
sides  and  gave  no  military  advantage;  (4)  oc- 
cupation of  the  southern  Illinois  country  by 
George  Rogers  Clark  (see  Northwestern 
Boundary  Controversy ) ; (5)  destructive  pri- 
vateering on  both  sides;  (6)  the  final  success 
of  the  United  States  through  French  alliance 
(see)  (7)  the  defeat  of  professional  and 
experienced  British  officers  by  generals  who 
had  never  previously  commanded  anything 
stronger  than  a few  companies  of  raw  militia; 
(8)  the  defeat  and  capture  of  British  ships 


WARS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


650 


WARS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


by  the  one  American  naval  genius  of  the  war, 
John  Paul  Jones. 

Indian  Wars  from  the  Revolution  to  1815. — 

During  and  after  the  Revolution,  there  was  a 
succession  of  wars  with  Indian  tribes,  who  were 
sufficiently  numerous  and  brave  to  be  danger- 
ous enemies.  Sullivan’s  expedition  of  1779 
completely  crushed  the  Six  Nations  (see),  who 
for  a century  and  a half  had  been  a formidable 
military  power.  At  the  end  of  the  Revolution 
the  Federal  Government  assumed  the  responsi- 
bility to  the  Indians  (see  Indians,  Constitu- 
tional and  Legal  Status  of)  for  their  pos- 
session of  their  lands,  their  commerce,  their 
civilization  and  their  good  order.  Georgia 
was  a frontier  community  which  undertook  to 
fight  the  Indians  without  the  consent  and 
against  the  wishes  of  the  national  Govern- 
ment. At  various  periods  from  1790  to  1820, 
particularly  in  1795,  1814  and  1818,  Georgia 
and  Tennessee  militia,  acting  independently  of 
the  Federal  Government,  attacked  the  warlike 
Cherokees,  Creeks  and  Seminoles,  all  of  whom, 
by  1825,  were  practically  out  of  condition  to 
keep  up  a war. 

A similar  state  of  things  was  brought  about 
in  the  Northwest  by  successive  campaigns  from 
1790  on  to  the  campaign  of  Tippecanoe  in  1811. 
The  usual  result  of  these  troubles  was  the 
cession  of  land  by  the  Indians,  and  the  placing 
of  the  tribes  on  reservations  (see)  which  were 
not  part  of  the  territory  of  the  state  within 
which  they  lay,  nor  subject  to  state  law.  This 
gave  rise  to  serious  difficulty  with  Georgia  in 
the  twenties  (see  Indian  Policy  of  the 
United  States).  Most  of  the  Indian  wars 
were  carried  on  by  state  militia  called  out  for 
brief  periods. 

War  Measures  and  Petty  Wars  Down  to 
1811.- — During  the  first  decade  of  Federal  Gov- 
ernment, a test  was  made  of  the  war  powers 
in  several  different  directions.  A War  De- 
partment was  created  in  1789,  and  May  8, 
1792,  a feeble  statute  was  passed  for  the 
training  of  a state  militia.  In  1794,  when 
rupture  with  Great  Britain  seemed  likely,  Con- 
gress laid  an  embargo  on  shipping,  passed  the 
first  measures  for  fortifications  and  for  build- 
ing a navy,  and  threatened  to  confiscate  the 
property  of  British  subjects.  The  crisis  was 
removed  by  the  Jay  Treaty  (see)  ; but  a 
breach  with  France  led  to  a new  series  of 
military  measures.  In  1798  the  Navy  Depart- 
ment was  separated  from  the  War  Department; 
naval  vessels  were  completed;  the  enlistment 
of  troops  and  the  raising  of  a large  militia 
army  were  authorized;  and  July  7,  1798,  Con- 
gress declared  its  three  existing  treaties  with 
France  to  be  no  longer  in  force,  and  about 
the  same  time  authorized  the  capture  of  French 
cruisers  and  eventually  of  privateers.  Though 
there  was  no  formal  declaration  of  war,  there 
was  a little  fighting  at  sea,  and  plans  were 
made  for  seizing  Louisiana  as  the  property  of 
an  ally  of  France.  These  hostilities  were  ter- 
139  6 


minated  by  the  treaty  of  1800  (see  France, 
Diplomatic  Relations  with  ) . 

From  1802  to  1805,  the  United  States  was 
at  war  with  Tripoli,  the  real  issue  being  a 
question  of  paying  tribute  to  Tripoli  in  order 
to  prevent  the  pirates  from  seizing  American 
vessels.  An  effective  little  fleet  was  sent  out 
and  the  Tripolitans  at  last  yielded  and  gave 
up  the  claim  for  tribute.  One  effect  of  the 
war  was  the  training  of  several  hundred  naval 
officers;  and  another  was  showing  the  world 
that  there  was  no  longer  any  need  of  buying 
off  the  Barbary  pirates.  Morocco  and  Tunis 
ceased  their  depredations  as  did  Algiers  after  a 
little  brush  in  1815. 

War  of  1812. — The  country  nearly  went  to 
war  over  the  capture  of  the  frigate  Chesapeake 
by  the  British  frigate  Leopard  in  1807,  but  the 
crisis  drifted  by  until  the  summer  of  1812. 
The  principal  grievances  against  Great  Britain 
were  impressment,  and  captures  of  neutral 
merchantmen;  the  real  grievance  was  the 
contemptous  tone  and  disdainful  action  of  the 
British  Government.  The  immediate  purpose  of 
the  war  was  the  conquest  of  Canada,  to  be  held 
i’"  order  to  force  a guaranty  of  better  treatment. 
Hostilities  lasted  two  and  a half  years,  during 
which  the  war  was  badly  administered,  the 
Army  was  badly  conducted,  the  soldiers  were 
badly  armed  and  equipped,  and  the  resources 
of  the  country  were  badly  applied. 

At  sea,  American  ship  owners  lost  1700 
merchantmen,  and  at  the  end  of  the  war  not 
a public  ship  bore  the  American  flag  on  the 
Atlantic.  On  the  other  hand,  American  cruisers 
and  privateers  captured  2500  British  merchant- 
men, and  of  sixteen  ship  duels  the  Americans 
were  victorious  in  twelve.  This  success  amazed 
the  British  and  secured  better  terms  of  peace 
than  could  reasonably  have  been  hoped  for. 

On  land  the  Americans  were  defeated  in  all 
but  one  of  their  numerous  efforts  to  invade 
Canada.  Washington  was  captured  and  burned, 
part  of  Maine  and  the  little  trading  post  of 
Astoria  in  Oregon  (see)  went  into  British  pos- 
session; but  the  Americans  at  Plattsburg  and 
New  Orleans  beat  off  well  organized  British 
armies,  so  that  at  the  end  of  the  war  there 
was  a feeling  of  elation  over  the  supposed  su- 
periority of  the  American  army. 

From  a governmental  point  of  view,  the 
War  of  1812  is  full  of  national  lessons.  The 
President  delegated  a call  for  the  state  militia 
to  General  Dearborn,  and  several  of  the  New 
England  states  refused  to  permit  their  militia 
to  march,  partly  because  the  call  did  not  issue 
directly  from  the  President,  partly  on  the 
ground  that  there  was  no  “invasion,”  partly 
on  the  allegation  that  militia  were  not  obliged 
to  serve  outside  the  United  States.  Subse- 
quently, in  the  case  of  Martin  vs.  Mott  (12 
Wheat.  19)  the  Supreme  Court  overruled  these 
contentions  of  the  states.  The  militia  system 
worked  almost  as  badly  as  in  the  Revolution; 
the  army  was  made  up  almost  wholly  of  un- 


WARS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


disciplined  and  ill-armed  men.  The  public  debt 
increased  within  three  years,  from  $40,000,000 
to  $120,000,000. 

Nevertheless,  the  War  of  1812  did  much  to 
arouse  national  spirit  and  to  promote  national 
unity.  Means  of  communication  were  im- 
proved, a new  currency  and  banking  system 
provided,  domestic  manufactures  encouraged. 
Great  Britain  made  a favorable  peace,  and  from 
that  time  on  looked  upon  the  Republic  with 
manifest  respect. 

Indian  Wars,  1815-1875. — For  thirty  years 
after  the  War  of  1812,  there  was  a succession 
of  exasperating  hostilities  with  the  Indians  on 
the  western  frontier.  The  warlike  Creeks  and 
Cherokees  were  moved  across  the  Mississippi 
in  the  thirties.  Since  the  Black  Hawk  War 
(see)  of  1832,  and  the  Seminole  War,  there 
has  been  no  serious  trouble  with  Indians  east 
of  the  Mississippi  river. 

After  the  discovery  of  gold  in  California, 
there  were  constant  hostilities  with  the  tribes 
on  the  lines  of  transcontinental  land  communi- 
cation. The  fiercest  of  these  were  the  Apaches, 
who  for  forty  years  harassed  the  Southwest. 
The  powerful  and  warlike  Sioux  in  Minnesota 
rose  in  1862.  Long  hostilities  in  the  north 
culminated  in  the  annihilation  of  General 
Custer’s  command  in  1876.  The  last  notable 
Indian  wars  were  the  Modoc  War  of  1872-73, 
Sioux  War  of  1876,  and  hostilities  with  the 
Apaches  till  1886.  Since  that  time  all  of 
the  wild  Indians  have  gone  on  fixed  reserva- 
tions. These  little  wars  have  been  fought  al- 
most exclusively  by  United  States  regulars, 
the  experience  in  handling  and  provisioning 
troops  and  in  field  tactics  in  these  petty 
struggles  proving  of  much  value  to  a con- 
siderable number  of  officers  in  the  Civil  War. 

Mexican  War. — In  1846  war  was  declared 
with  Mexico  (see  Mexico,  Diplomatic  Rela- 
tions with),  the  object  being  the  conquest  of 
California,  and  of  the  intermediate  stretch  of 
New  Mexico.  The  war  is  an  illustration  of  the 
President’s  ability  to  involve  the  country  in 
hostilities  ( see  President,  Authority  and  In- 
fluence of)  . The  main  reliance  was  again  on 
state  militia  mustered  into  service  under  fed- 
eral general  officers.  Some  civilians  were  ap- 
pointed to  commands ; and  nearly  all  of  the 
successful  generals,  Wool,  Taylor  and  Scott, 
were  not  West  Pointers;  but  some  brilliant 
young  regular  officers,  such  as  U.  S.  Grant  and 
Robert  E.  Lee,  won  their  spurs  in  this  war. 
Tire  movements  of  the  troops  were  well  planned 
and  the  army  well  supplied.  General  Scott 
was  ordered  to  live  upon  the  country,  but 
found  it  impossible. 

The  military  expeditions  to  New  Mexico  and 
California  were  well  managed  (see  Territory, 
Status  of  Acquired).  For  a time  the  an- 
nexation of  the  whole  of  Mexico  seemed  likely 
(see  Guadelupe  Hidalgo,  Treaty  of).  After 
the  treaty  of  1848  was  ratified,  a question  arose 
as  to  the  status  of  territory  transferred  to  the 


United  States  but  not  yet  organized.  By  Su- 
preme Court  decision  in  the  case  of  Cross  vs. 
Harrison  (16  Hoieard  164),  it  was  held  that 
the  military  authority  of  the  President  con- 
tinued in  force  until  Congress  acted;  and  the 
general  acts  of  Congress,  such  as  the  tariff, 
took  effect  in  the  annexed  regions  as  soon  as 
the  annexation  was  completed;  a decision  re- 
versed in  1900  (see. Insular  Cases). 

The  Civil  War. — From  the  end  of  the  Mexi- 
can War  to  the  opening  of  the  Civil  War,  five 
successive  naval  expeditions  were  sent  to 
Japan,  the  last  in  1854;  and  four  times  Ameri- 
can forces  acted  in  a hostile  fashion  in  China. 
A civil  war  was  threatened  for  a time  in  Utah. 
The  main  service  of  the  Army  was  the  protec- 
tion of  the  frontier  and  of  communication 
across  the  continent. 

When  the  Civil  War  broke  out  in  1861  the 
United  States  had  a regular  Army  of  16,000 
men  actually  under  the  colors;  and  the  Navy 
had  90  steam  and  sailing  craft  in  commission 
and  available  for  use,  with  about  5,000  sailors 
and  marines. 

Both  sides  were  confronted  by  the  necessity 
of  improvising  an  army;  both  sides  went  back 
to  the  discredited  system  of  state  militia  regi- 
ments. In  the  course  of  the  struggle  about 
2,000,000  men  and  boys  were  enrolled  on  the 
Federal  side,  and  from  1,100,000  to  1,200,000 
on  the  Confederate  side.  The  early  enlistments 
were  short;  later,  veterans  reenlisted  for  three 
years  or  the  war.  Incompetent  officers  were 
weeded  out  and  promotion  was  rapid,  so  that 
cases  are  recorded  of  men  entering  the  army  as 
privates  and  coming  out  a few  years  later  as 
Major  Generals. 

Before  the  end  of  the  war,  both  sides  pos- 
sessed hardy  and  disciplined  armies,  guided  by 
seasoned  commanders.  With  few  exceptions 
the  successful  general  officers  on  both  sides 
were  graduates  of  West  Point.  The  federal 
Army  was  probably  the  best  fed  and  the  best 
provided  army  ever  put  into  the  field  up  to 
that  time.  The  southerners  had  to  contend 
against  poor  transportation  and  weak  adminis- 
trative organization. 

The  war  seriously  affected  the  governments 
of  both  North  and  South,  by  throwing  great 
responsibility  on  them,  and  especially  on  the 
executives  (see  Civil  War,  Influence  of; 
on  American  Government;  Confederate 
States),  and  involved  immense  expenditures  of 
money  and  of  life.  The  casualties  were  no  less 
than  385,000  killed  and  wounded  on  the  north- 
ern side;  on  the  southern  side,  329,000.  The 
campaigns  gave  a splendid  military  training 
to  soldiers  and  officers,  and  produced  a military 
feeling  which  was  reflected  after  the  struggle 
was  over  by  a general  creation  of  interest  in 
military  history,  the  establishment  of  military 
schools,  military  societies  and  orders,  and  by 
a preference  for  military  men  in  public  life. 
The  Federal  Government  as  a working  machine 
came  out  of  the  struggle  much  invigorated; 


652 


WARS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


and  the  western  state  governments  were 
also  strengthened  by  their  efforts  throughout 
the  war  to  second  the  work  of  the  Union  (see 
War  Governors). 

The  United  States  built  or  bought  the  vessels 
for  a blockading  fleet,  numbering  about  111 
ships;  for  a river  flotilla  numbering  about  21 
craft;  and  for  powerful  naval  squadrons  which 
took  Newbern,  Beaufort,  South  Carolina,  New 
Orleans,  and  Mobile  Bay.  The  South  was  not  a 
ship-building  region,  but  built  or  rebuilt  some 
powerful  ironclads,  and  sent  out  or  purchased 
abroad  several  fast  cruisers  (see  Alabama 
Controversy).  The  name  “privateer”  com- 
monly applied  to  these  vessels  was  a misnomer 
except  in  the  first  months  of  the  war;  they 
were  regularly  documented  ships  of  war.  The 
large  commercial  fleet  of  the  Nnited  States  was 
a favorite  object  of  attack,  and  258  merchant 
ships  were  captured  by  the  Confederates  dur- 
ing the  war. 

Spanish-American  War.  — For  thirty-three 
years  after  the  Civil  War  the  nation  was  at 
peace,  though  threats  and  rumors  of  war  arose 
over  the  neutrality  of  Great  Britain  (see 
Alabama  Controversy),  over  the  Cuban  strug- 
gle (see  Virginius  Episode)  ; and  over  the 
second  Cuban  insurrection  (see  Cuba  and 
Cuban  Diplomacy).  Sympathy  in  the  United 
States  for  the  Cubans  rose  to  a fever  height 
after  the  destruction  of  the  Maine  (see),  and 
the  trouble  culminated  in  the  authorization  of 
the  President  to  use  armed  force  by  a joint 
resolution  of  Congress  of  April  20,  1898,  which 
was  followed  immediately  by  a declaration  of 
war. 

Hostilities  ended  August  12,  1898,  with  a 
protocol  by  which  Spain  agreed  to  give  up 
Cuba  and  Porto  Rico.  Further  details  were 
adjusted  by  a treaty  of  peace  signed  in  Paris, 
December  10,  1898,  in  which  Guam  and  the 
Philippine  Islands  were  also  ceded  to  the 
United  States.  The  treaty  was  ratified  by  the 
Senate,  April  11,  1899,  and  formally  proclaimed 
April  14,  1899. 

The  war  involved  many  important  govern- 
mental and  international  questions,  such  as  the 
right  of  a nation  to  intervene  in  a war  between 
a friendly  power  and  a part  of  its  subjects  in 
rebellion;  due  notice  of  hostilities  to  an  en- 
emy’s merchant  vessels;  the  effect  of  military 
operations,  such  as  the  capture  of  Manila, 
after  the  signing  of  the  protocol;  the  right  or 
otherwise  of  the  United  States  to  occupy  re- 
mote places  in  the  Philippines  while  the 
treaty  was  still  pending;  the  power  of  the 
President  to  authorize  the  making  of  tariffs 
and  other  statutes  in  occupied  territory  by  the 
military  power;  the  President’s  authority  over 
annexed  territory  after  the  signing  of  a treaty 
and  before  Congress  had  acted;  the  question 
whether  annexed  territory  is  thereby  incorpor- 
ated into  the  United  States;  the  question 
whether  inhabitants  of  annexed  regions  auto- 
matically become  subject  to  the  Federal  Con- 


stitution, and  entitled  to  the  personal  privi- 
leges which  the  Constitution  secures. 

See  Arms,  Right  to  Bear;  Army,  Standing; 
Belligerency;  Blockade;  Boundaries  of  tiie 
United  States,  Exterior;  Boundaries  of  the 
United  States,  Interior;  Civil  War,  Influ- 
ence of,  on  American  Government;  Claims, 
International;  Coast  Defense,  Strategic 
Principles  of;  Conquest,  Right  of;  Con- 
scription and  Draft;  Courts  Martial; 
Cuba  and  Cuban  Diplomacy;  Enlist- 
ment, Naval  and  Military;  Filibusters 
to  Aid  Insurrections,  Foreign  Policy 
of  the  United  States;  Habeas  Corpus;  In- 
dian Policy  of  the  United  States;  Insur- 
gency in  International  Law;  Insurrections, 
History  of;  Insurrections,  Suppression  of; 
Intervention;  Marine  Corps;  Maritime 
War;  Martial  Law;  Military  and  Naval 
Expenditures;  Military  Law;  Militarism; 
Militia;  Naval  Vessels;  Navy,  Depart- 
ment of;  Officers,  Military  and  Naval; 
Peace,  Conclusion  of;  Pensions,  Military 
and  Naval;  Philippine  Annexation;  Prison- 
ers of  War  ; Revolution,  American,  Signifi- 
cance of;  Secession  Controversy;  Soldiers, 
Quartering  of  ; South  ; Territory,  Acquired, 
Status  of;  United  States  as  a Federal 
State;  Treason;  War,  Carrying  on;  War 
Colleges;  War,  Department  of;  War,  Inter- 
national Relations  in;  War  Power,  Consti- 
tutional; Diplomatic  relations  with  hostile 
countries  by  name. 

References:  J.  B.  McMaster,  Hist,  of  the  V. 
S.  (1883—1907);  J.  Schouler,  Hist,  of  the  ZJ. 
S.  (rev.  ed.,  1894-99)  ; J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of 
the  U.  S.  (1893-1906);  W.  Wilson,  Hist,  of 
the  U.  S.  (1902);  Ward,  Prothero,  Leathes, 
Eds.,  Cambridge  Modern  History,  VII  (1904); 
E.  M.  Avery,  Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (1904- 
1910)  ; G.  W.  Greene,  Hist.  View  of  the 
Am.  Revolution  (1865)  ; L.  C.  Hatch,  Admin- 
istration of  the  Revolutionary  Army  (1904)  ; 
The  South  in  the  Building  of  the  Nation  ( 1909— 
1910)  ; G.  R.  Clark  and  others,  Short  Hist,  of 
the  U.  S.  Navy  (1911);  E.  C.  McClay,  Hist, 
of  the  U.  S.  Navy  (1901-1912);  J.  R.‘ Speers, 
Hist,  of  Our  Navy  (1897-1898)  ; T.  Rooseveit, 
Naval  War  of  1812  (3d.  ed.,  1883)  ; T.  A. 
Dodge,  Birdseye  View  of  our  Civil  War  ( rev. 
ed , 1897);  War  of  the  Rebellion:  a Compila- 
tion of  the  Official  Records  of  the  Union  and 
Confederate  Armies  (1880-1901);  Records  of 
the  Union  and  Confederate  Names  ( 1894  in 
progress)  ; H.  E.  Flack,  Span.-Am.  Diplo.  Rela- 
tions Preceding  the  War  of  1898  (1906)  ; F.  E. 
Chadwick,  Relations  of  the  U.  S.  with  Spain 
(1910)  ; A.  T.  Mahan,  Lessons  of  the  War  icith 
Spain  (1899)  ; A.  B.  Hart,  Ed.,  The  American 
Nation  (1904-1908),  see  index,  Foundation  of 
Am.  Foreign  Policy  (1901),  ch.  ii,  National 
Ideals  Historically  Traced  (1907),  ch.  xviii; 
bibliography  in  Channing,  Hart  and  Turner, 
Guide  to  Am.  History  (1912). 

Albert  Busiinell  Hart. 


653 


WARDEN— WARRANTS 


WARDEN.  An  official  title  applied  to  offi- 
cers with  various  functions.  In  England,  the 
warden  of  the  cinque  ports  exercised  admiralty 
jurisdiction;  and  the  churchwardens  formed 
a prudential  or  administrative  committee  for 
parish  affairs.  In  the  United  States,  there  is 
a board  of  wardens  of  the  port  of  Philadelphia; 
the  name  is  regularly  used  for  the  officer  in 
charge  of  a prison  or  penitentiary;  and  the 
chief  officer  of  a borough  in  Connecticut  is 
called  a warden.  See  Borough.  References: 
Bouvier’s  Law  Dictionary  (1897),  II,  1210; 
Encyclopaedia  Brittanica  (1911),  XXVIII,  322. 

J.  A.  F. 

WARDS  IN  CITIES.  A term  used  to  desig- 
nate territorial  subdivisions  of  a city.  It 
originated  from  the  old  Teutonic  term  “war” 
meaning  to  protect  or  defend,  and  was  formerly 
applied  in  England  to  a unit  of  the  military 
organization  of  a borough  or  city  responsible 
for  the  defense  of  a gate.  Today,  city  wards 
are  districts  of  cities  established  for  specific 
civic  purposes,  such  as  units  of  representation 
in  the  city  council,  and  election,  police,  and 
taxing  districts.  They  are  also  important  units 
in  the  organization  of  political  parties.  See 
Districts,  City;  Machine,  Political. 

O.  C.  H. 

WARDS  OF  THE  NATION.  The  census  of 
1910  gives  the  Indian  population  of  the  United 
States,  exclusive  of  Alaska,  as  304,950,  count- 
ing as  Indians  all  persons  with  a recognizable 
proportion  of  Indian  blood.  A large  majority 
are  still  wards  of  the  nation,  legally  incompet- 
ent to  manage  their  own  affairs.  As  their  direct 
road  to  full  citizenship  lies  through  the  land 
allotment  system,  as  allotments  are  proceed- 
ing at  the  rate  of  about  10,000  a year,  as  a 
patent  in  fee  issues  to  about  one  in  every  ten 
allotees,  and  as  the  rising  generation  are 
starting  life  with  a common  school  education, 
the  end  of  the  era  of  Indian  wardship  is  fairly 
in  sight.  See  Citizenship  in  the  United 
States;  Indians,  Constitutional  and  Legal 
Status  of.  References:  J.  G.  ..mes,  Report  on 
Condition  of  Mission  Indians  in  California 
(1874);  U.  S.  Census  Bureau,  Report  on  In- 
dians Taxed  and  Not  Taxed  (1894). 

F.  E.  L. 

WAREHOUSE  SYSTEM.  There  are  both 
government  and  private  warehouses,  the  latter 
being  subject  to  government  regulation  when 
used  by  the  public.  The  Government  maintains 
warehouses  to  facilitate  the  import  and  export 
trade,  to  aid  in  enforcing  its  internal  revenue 
laws,  and  to  lighten  the  burdens  of  the  customs 
and  excise  duties.  An  importer  who  does  not 
wish  to  sell  his  goods  immediately,  or  who 
wishes  to  grade,  blend,  repack  or  otherwise 
change  them  before  putting  them  upon  the 
market,  may  place  them  in  a government  ware- 
house, if  there  be  one,  or  in  a private  “bonded” 


warehouse  sealed  by  a government  customs  offi- 
cial. Duty  is  not  paid  until  the  goods  are 
taken  from  the  warehouse;  and  merchandise 
may  remain  “in  any  public  or  private  bonded 
warehouse”  for  three  years. 

Tobacco  and  liquors,  both  of  which  are  sub- 
ject to  excise  duties,  may  be  placed  in  bonded 
warehouses  until  the  goods  are  marketed. 
There  are  several  bonded  warehouses  in  the 
United  States  in  which  tobacco  products  of 
various  kinds  are  manufactured.  Likewise,  it 
is  customary  for  wholesale  liquor  merchants 
to  bottle  their  “liquors  in  bond.” 

The  public  warehouses  of  chief  importance 
to  the  commerce  of  the  United  States  are  those 
in  which  grain,  cotton  and  certain  other  staple 
commodities  are  stored  and  graded  in  transit. 
It  is  necessary  for  each  state  to  regulate  care- 
fully the  business  of  public  warehousemen. 
The  commodities  that  pass  through  the  public 
warehouses  are  the  great  staples  of  interstate 
and  foreign  commerce;  and  it  is  especially 
desirable  that  the  regulations  of  the  states 
should  be  as  nearly  uniform  as  possible.  Up  to 
1911,  nineteen  states  had  adopted  a uniform 
warehouse  receipts  act.  See  Bill  of  Lading; 
Railroad  Commissions,  State;  Transporta- 
tion, Regulation  op. 

References:  The  Payne- Aldrich  Tariff  Act 
(1910)  ; Commissioner  of  Corporations,  Report 
on  the  Tobacco  Indxistry  (1909),  Pt.  I,  304; 
An.  Tear  Book  1910,  131. 

Emory  R.  Johnson. 

WARMING  THEIR  TOES.  The  expression, 
“taking  in  the  boys  and  warming  their  toes” 
dates  from  about  1890  and  signifies  the  giving 
of  offices  or  personal  advantages  to  party 
workers  who  have  helped  carry  an  election. 

O.  C.  H. 

WARRANTS.  One  of  the  most  serious 
grievances  of  the  colonies  was  the  assertion 
and  exercise  of  a prerogative  of  the  Crown  to 
issue  general  warrants  for  searching  private 
premises  in  order  to  obtain  evidence  of  politi- 
cal offenses.  This  had  been  the  subject  of  con- 
troversy in  England  and  was  made  the  basis  of 
a protest  in  Massachusetts  by  James  Otis 
against  writs  of  assistance  which  were  in  ef- 
fect general  warrants.  The  principle  contend- 
ed for  was  that  the  privacy  of  the  dwelling 
house  should  not  be  invaded  by  public  officers 
without  the  consent  of  the  owner  save  for  the 
purpose  of  making  an  arrest  for  a crime  alleged 
to  have  been  committed,  or  for  the  purpose  of 
seizing  property  obtained  by  crime,  or  made  use 
of  in  its  commission.  The  result  of  the  im- 
proper exercise  of  the  royal  prerogative 
was  the  embodiment  in  state  constitutions 
and  in  an  amendment  to  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution of  a provision  that  warrants  of 
search  and  seizure  shall  issue  only  upon  a 
showing  of  probable  cause  supported  by  oath 
or  affirmation  and  particularly  describing  the 


WARRANTS,  GENERAL— WASHINGTON 


place  to  be  searched  and  the  persons  or  things 
to  be  seized  (Amend.  IV).  The  guaranty 
is  against  unreasonable  searches  and  seizures 
and  only  those  authorized  under  a warrant 
specific  as  to  place  and  object  are  regarded  as 
reasonable.  The  protection  afforded  by  the 
constitutional  provisions  is  against  attempts 
under  the  guise  of  public  process  to  pry  into 
private  affairs  on  mere  suspicion  that  a crime 
has  been  committed  or  contemplated.  The 
principle  of  this  guaranty  is  violated  if  the 
postal  authorities  open  sealed  letters  in  the 
mail  to  discover  whether  improper  use  of  the 
mails  is  being  made.  It  is  also  violated  by 
compelling  the  production  of  private  papers  of 
the  defendant  in  a criminal  prosecution.  But 
under  proper  warrant  the  premises  of  one 
charged  with  larceny  or  receiving  stolen  goods 
may  be  searched  in  order  to  take  possession  of 
the  stolen  property,  and  similarly  proper 
search  may  be  made  for  intoxicating  liquors 
kept  for  sale  in  violation  of  law,  for  appliances 
used  in  gambling  as  prohibited  by  law,  for 
smuggled  goods,  for  goods  concealed  in  evasion 
of  the  internal  revenue  laws,  and,  indeed,  in 
a great  variety  of  cases  where  the  possession  or 
use  of  property  is  in  contravention  of  police 
or  fiscal  regulations. 

The  common  law  rule  is  that  the  dwelling 
house  cannot  be  entered  even  by  public  officers 
against  the  owner’s  consent  for  service  of  civil 
process,  that  is,  in  proceedings  to  recover  a 
money  judgment,  although  it  may  be  thus 
entered  to  make  an  arrest  under  criminal  pro- 
cedure. A warrant  is  not  always  necessary 
for  arresting  an  individual.  For  example,  a 
police  officer  does  not  need  a warrant  in  order 
to  arrest  a person,  violating  in  his  presence 
a municipal  ordinance  or  a person  who,  he 
has  good  reason  to  think,  is  guilty  of  having 
committed  a felony.  Moreover,  any  person, 
whether  a police  officer  or  not,  would  have  the 
right  to  arrest  another  person  whom  he  detects 
in  the  act  of  committing  a crime  in  his 
presence. 

See  Houses,  Private,  Constitutional  Pro- 
tection of. 

References:  T.  E.  May,  Constitutional  His- 
tory of  England  (new  ed.,  1899),  eh.  xi;  T.  M. 
Cooley,  Constitutional  Limitations  (7th  ed., 
190.3),  424-434;  Ex  parte  Jackson  (1877), 
96  U.  8.  727;  Boyd  vs.  United  States  (1886), 
116  U.  8.  616.  As  to  writs  of  assistance  in 
Massachusetts  Colony,  see  appendix  to  Quincy’s 
Reports,  395  et  seq.  E.  McC. 

WARRANTS,  GENERAL.  Warrants  au- 
thorizing searches  and  seizures  not  specific  as 
to  the  place  to  be  searched  or  the  person  or 
property  to  be  seized,  and  therefore  called 
general  warrants,  are  prohibited  by  provisions 
found  in  the  various  state  constitutions  and 
in  the  Federal  Constitution  (Amendment  IV). 
See  Houses,  Private,  Constitutional  Pro- 
tection of;  Warrants. 


WARWICK,  THE  KING  MAKER.  A so- 
briquet bestowed  upon  Marcus  A.  Hanna  (see) 
by  the  Democratic  press,  because  of  the  con- 
summate skill  he  manifested,  as  national  Re- 
publican chairman,  in  effecting  the  nomi- 
nation and  election  of  William  McKinley  in 
1896  and  1900.  The  original  bearer  of  the 
sobriquet  was  Richard  Nevill,  Earl  of  War- 
wick (cir.  1428-1471).  0.  C.  H. 

WASHBURNE,  ELIHU  BENJAMIN.  Elihu 

B.  Washburne  (1816-1887)  was  born  at 
Livermore,  Maine,  September  23,  1816.  In 
1840  he  was  admitted  to  the  bar,  and 
began  practice  at  Galena,  111.  In  1848  he 
was  a Whig  candidate  for  Congress,  but 
was  defeated.  He  was  a delegate  to  the 
Whig  national  convention  in  1852,  and  the 
next  year  was  elected  to  Congress,  remaining 
a member  of  the  House,  first  as  a Whig  and 
then  as  a Republican,  until  1869.  He  was 
most  conspicuous  in  Congress  for  his  opposition 
to  corrupt  attacks  upon  the  treasury  and  to 
extravagant  land  grants  to  railroads.  In 
1869  he  was  appointed  Secretary  of  State 
under  Grant,  whose  warm  friend  he  was,  but 
resigned  in  a few  days  on  account  of  ill  health. 
He  was  shortly  appointed  minister  to  France, 
where  he  distinguished  himself  by  courage  and 
tact  in  dealing  with  the  diplomatic  situation 
in  Paris  occasioned  by  the  Franco-Prussian 
war.  In  1877  he  resigned  his  post  and  settled 
at  Chicago,  where  he  died,  October  22,  1887. 
See  Republican  Party.  References:  E.  B. 
Washburne,  Recollections  of  a Minister  to 
France  (1887);  J.  F.  Rhodes,  Hist,  of  the 
U.  S.  (1893-1905),  VI,  VII;  R.  C.  Winthrop, 
“Career  of  Elihu  B.  Washburne”  in  Mass. 
Hist.  Society,  Proceedings,  IV,  (1889). 

W.  MacD. 

WASHINGTON.  Territorial  Settlement  of 
Boundaries. — Washington  was  a part  of  the 
Oregon  country  and  as  such  had  a part  in  the 
romantic  experiences  of  discoverers,  explorers, 
fur  traders,  Indian  fighters,  and  empire  build- 
ers. The  first  settlements  were  made  by  the 
Northwest  Company  of  Montreal  (1807)  in 
British  Columbia  and  the  next  by  the  Ameri- 
cans (The  Pacific  Fur  -Company)  at  Astoria, 
Oregon  (1811)  with  subsidiary  posts  at  Okano- 
gan and  Spokane  in  Washington.  During  the 
War  of  1812  the  American  posts  were  sold  to 
the  Northwest  Company,  but  under  the  Treaty 
of  Ghent  Astoria  was  restored  as  an  American 
possession.  However,  the  British  companies  re- 
mained in  occupation  during  the  fur-trading 
period.  The  treaty  of  joint  occupancy  with 
Great  Britain  was  made  in  1818;  there  was  a 
renewal  of  its  provision  in  1827  and  the  final 
settlement  of  boundaries  was  reached  in  1846. 
Spain  relinquished  her  claims  (1795)  under  the 
terms  of  the  Nootka  Sound  Convention  (see) 
(1790)  with  Great  Britain.  Russia  in  the 
Ukase  of  1821  asserted  her  claim  to  the  entire 


E.  M.  C. 

655 


WASHINGTON 


coast  of  the  Oregon  country.  This  claim  was 
disputed  by  Monroe’s  famous  message  to  Con- 
gress embodying  the  “Monroe  Doctrine”  which 
declared  that  the  time  was  past  for  further 
colonization  by  European  powers  on  American 
soil.  The  next  year  (1824)  a treaty  was  made 
by  Kussia  and  the  United  States  fixing  the 
boundary  of  their  claims  at  54°  40'.  In  the 
following  year  a similar  treaty  was  made  by 
Russia  and  Great  Britain.  These  transactions 
left  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States  as 
the  surviving  claimants.  There  was  not  then 
a single  American  settler  in  the  whole  region. 
The  British  fur  traders  were  in  possession  but 
still  the  Treaty  of  Joint  Occupancy  remained 
in  force.  American  missionaries  to  the  Indians 


give  nearly  all  of  what  is  now  Washington  to 
the  British.  At  that  time  there  was  but  one 
small  colony  north  of  the  Columbia  River 
yet  the  Treaty  of  1846  was  secured  with  the 
49th  parallel  as  the  boundary  (see  Fifty- 
Four,  Forty  or  Fight). 

Territorial  Government.  — The  provisional 
government  (1843-1848)  and  the  territorial 
government  created  eight  counties  north  of  the 
Columbia  River.  These  counties  had  acquired, 
in  1853,  a population  of  3,965.  With  this 
slender  showing  Congress  was  persuaded  to 
create  the  territory  of  Columbia  but  while 
the  bill  was  on  its  final  passage  the  name  was 
changed  to  Washington.  Isaac  I.  Stevens  be- 
came the  first  governor.  Under  bis  guidance 


Boundaries  of  the  State  of  Washii 

made  their  appearance  beginning  in  1834. 
Prominent  among  them  were  Jason  Lee  and 
Cushing  Fells  but  the  most  famous  was  Dr. 
Marcus  Whitman  who  was  slain  by  the  Indians 
in  the  Whitman  Massacre  (1847).  The  mis- 
sionaries were  followed  by  many  American 
settlers,  notably  the  large  caravans  of  1843, 
in  which  year  the  provisional  government  of 
Oregon  was  formed. 

During  that  critical  period  came  the  presi- 
dential campaign  of  1844  with  the  successful 
war  cry  of  “Fifty-four,  Forty,  or  Fight!” 
President  Polk  at  once  began  negotiations  on 
that  issue.  The  British,  realizing  that  settlers 
gave  better  foundation  for  claims  of  occupation 
than  did  fur  traders,  relinquished  claims  to 
what  is  now  Oregon  but  insisted  on  the  Co- 
lumbia River  as  the  boundary.  That  would 


gton,  Showing  Territorial  Changes 

the  legislature  was  convened  and  the  govern- 
ment was  begun  with  vigor.  Judicial  and 
legislative  districts  were  defined,  a system  of 
common  schools  was  provided  for,  a movement 
was  begun  for  a territorial  university,  roads 
were  planned,  a state  library  was  begun  and 
plans  were  laid  for  quieting  the  Indian  title 
to  the  lands  by  a series  of  treaties.  The  three 
district  judges  consented  to  serve  as  a commis- 
sion to  help  the  legislators  frame  the  first  body 
of  laws.  In  the  first  session  of  the  legislature 
attempts  were  made  to  enact  laws  for  prohibi- 
tion and  for  woman  suffrage,  and  Congress  was 
memorialized  to  annex  the  “Sandwich  Islands.” 
Throughout  the  territorial  period  Washington 
manifested  an  enlightened  spirit  in  laws  and 
toward  national  affairs.  It  was  a memorial 
from  the  Washington  legislature  (1866)  that 


WASHINGTON 


spurred  on  Secretary  of  State  Seward’s  nego- 
tiations for  the  purchase  of  Alaska.  The  terri- 
tory took  vigorous  ground  in  the  dispute  con- 
cerning the  possession  of  the  San  Juan  Islands 
a dispute  which  was  concluded  successfully 
for  the  Americans  by  the  arbitration  of  1871. 

State  Constitution. — The  people  were  early 
ambitious  for  statehood.  In  1878  there  con- 
vened in  Walla  Walla  a convention  to  frame 
a constitution.  The  document  was  formally 
approved  by  the  people  but  Congress  refused 
admission  at  that  time.  The  Enabling  Act  of 
1889  included  Washington  among  the  four  new 
states  to  be  admitted  (Montana,  North  Dakota, 
South  Dakota,  and  Washington).  Pursuant 
to  that  act  the  present  constitution  of  the 
state  was  framed  by  a convention  assembled 
in  Olympia.  It  was  ratified  by  the  people, 
approved  by  Congress,  and  the  new  state  began 
its  career  as  an  integral  part  of  the  nation. 

The  Legislature. — The  constitution  provides 
a bill  of  rights  in  the  thirty-two  sections  of 
Article  I and  then  declares  that  the  legislative 
branch  of  the  government  shall  consist  of  a 
house  of  representatives  of  not  less  than 
sixty-three  nor  more  than  ninety-nine  members 
to  serve  for  two  years  and  a senate  of  not 
more  than  one-half  nor  less  than  one-third 
the  number  of  members  of  the  house  of  repre- 
sentatives, to  serve  for  four  years.  In  the 
present  legislature,  1913,  there  are  ninety-six 
representatives  and  forty-two  senators.  No 
member  of  the  legislature  may  be  appointed 
or  elected  to  any  civil  office  during  the  term 
for  which  he  was  elected  as  a legislator. 
Special  legislation  is  prohibited  and  no  bill 
shall  embrace  more  than  one  subject  and  that 
shall  be  expressed  in  the  title.  The  legislature 
is  prohibited  from  authorizing  any  lottery  and 
from  granting  any  divorce.  In  territorial  days 
many  legislative  divorces  were  granted.  An- 
nual or  continuing  appropriations  are  pro- 
hibited. All  unexpended  appropriations  or 
fractions  thereof  lapse  into  the  treasury  of  the 
state  at  the  end  of  each  biennium.  Alien 
ownership  of  land  is  prohibited. 

The  Executive. — The  executive  department 
shall  consist  of  a governor,  lieutenant  gover- 
nor, secretary  of  state,  treasurer,  auditor,  at- 
torney general,  superintendent  of  public  in- 
struction, and  a commissioner  of  public  lands — 
all  elected  for  terms  of  four  years.  The  gov- 
ernor is  clothed  with  ample  executive  and  ap- 
pointive powers.  The  lieutenant  governor  pre- 
sides over  the  meetings  of  the  senate  and  suc- 
ceeds to  the  governorship  in  case  of  vacancy. 
Twice  since  statehood  (1901  and  1909)  such 
succession  has  occurred. 

The  Judiciary. — The  judicial  power  of  the 
state  is  vested  in  a supreme  court,  superior 
courts,  justices  of  the  peace  and  such  inferior 
courts  as  the  legislature  may  provide.  At 
present  (1913)  there  are  nine  justices  of  the 
supreme  court  and  forty-four  judges  of  su- 
perior cpurts.  These  two  higher  courts  are 


courts  of  record.  A casting  of  lots  determined 
the  varying  terms  of  the  first  justices  of  the 
supreme  court  after  which  vacancies  have  been 
filled  for  the  full  terms  of  six  years.  The 
justice  having  the  shortest  term  to  serve  is 
chief  justice.  This  court  has  original  juris- 
diction in  habeas  corpus,  and  quo  warranto 
and  mandamus  as  to  all  state  officers;  it  has 
appellate  jurisdiction  in  all  actions  and  pro- 
ceedings but  not  to  civil  actions  at  law  where 
the  sum  involved  does  not  exceed  two  hun- 
dred dollars,  unless  the  action  involves  the 
legality  of  a tax,  import,  assessment,  toll, 
municipal  fine,  or  the  validity  of  a statute. 
There  is  a superior  court  in  each  county,  the 
judges  being  elected  for  terms  of  four  years. 

Local  Government. — The  constitution  pro- 
vides for  township  organization  if  desired. 
Thus  far  it  has  not  been  used  except  in  Spo- 
kane county.  The  county  is  the  local  unit. 
There  are  thirty-nine  counties,  each  having 
its  officers  consisting  of  auditor,  sheriff,  clerk, 
treasurer,  prosecuting  attorney,  assessor,  su- 
perintendent of  schools,  engineer,  coroner, 
superior  court  judge,  and  county  commis- 
sioners. Cpunties,  cities,  and  towns  are  classi- 
fied according  to  population  and  their  powers 
are  graded  accordingly.  Many  of  the  cities 
have  used  their  bonding  power  in  great  pub- 
lic improvements.  Seattle  is  availing  itself 
of  a recent  law  to  organize  the  port  of  Seattle, 
using  the  power  of  the  County  of  King  to  pro- 
vide more  adequate  harbor  facilities.  Some  of 
the  cities  and  rural  districts  have  complied 
with  the  local  option  laws  to  make  prohibi- 
tion districts.  Several  of  the  cities  have  also 
adopted  the  recall  (see). 

Education.  — Generous  provision  has  been 
made  by  Congress  and  the  state  for  the 
maintenance  of  schools.  These  include  kinder- 
gartens in  cities,  graded  schools,  high  schools, 
three  normal  schools,  the  state  college  (Agri- 
culture, Mechanic  Arts,  etc.)  and  state  uni- 
versity. Tuition  is  free  as  are  textbooks  in 
many  of  the  graded  and  high  schools.  The 
state  also  maintains  a school  for  the  blind, 
another  for  defectives,  and  a reform  school. 

Parties. — Through  most  of  its  history  as 
territory  and  state,  Washington  has  been  Re- 
publican in  politics.  The  direct  primary  law 
was  in  operation  at  the  election  of  1910,  when 
one  United  States  Senator  and  two  of  the 
three  Congressmen  chosen  were  “Insurgent” 
Republicans.  At  that  same  election  an  amend- 
ment to  the  constitution  was  adopted  giving 
the  suffrage  to  women. 

Population. — The  population  has  increased 
rapidly  in  recent  years.  The  territory  began 
with  3,965  in  1853.  In  1890  the  population  of 
the  state  was  349,390  and  in  the  census  of 
1910,  1,141,990.  In  1912  the  seven  electoral 
votes  were  cast  for  Theodore  Roosevelt,  Pro- 
gressive candidate. 

See  Constitutions,  State,  Chaeacteeistics 
of;  State  Governments,  Chaeacteeistics  of. 


657 


WASHINGTON,  BOOKER  TALIAFERRO— WATER  BOUNDARIES 


References:  C.  M.  Barton,  Legislative  Manual 
of  Washington  (1889-1894);  E.  S.  Meany, 
Hist,  of  the  State  of  Washington  (1909);  F. 
N.  Thorpe,  Federal  and  State  Constitutions 
(1909),  VII,  3963-4010. 

Edmond  S.  Meant. 

WASHINGTON,  BOOKER  TALIAFERRO. 

Booker  T.  'Washington  (e.  1859-  ) was 

born  a slave  near  Hale’s  Ford,  Va.,  about 
1859.  He  was  educated  at  the  Hampton 
Normal  and  Industrial  Institute,  where  he 
graduated  in  1875,  and  at  Wayland  Semi- 
nary, Washington.  He  taught  at  Hamp- 
ton from  1879  to  1881,  and  was  then  chosen 
principal  of  the  Tuskegee  Institute,  Ala.,  of 
which  institution  he  is  still  (1914)  the  head. 
His  aim  has  been  to  fit  the  negroes  for 
citizenship  by  making  them  efficient  farmers 
and  industrial  workers;  and  the  influence  of 
the  school  upon  the  life  and  ideals  of  the  race 
has  been  very  great.  In  1892  he  established 
the  Tuskegee  conference,  an  annual  gathering 
of  negroes  for  report  of  progress;  and  in  1900 
organized  the  National  Negro  Business  League. 
He  is  the  author  of  numerous  books  and  articles 
on  various  phases  of  the  negro  question,  the 
most  important  being  The  Future  of  the  Amer- 
ican Negro  (1899),  Up  from  Slavery ; Autobio- 
graphy (1901);  Tuskegee  and  Its  People 
( 1905 ) , Life  of  Frederick  Douglass  ( 1907 ) , 
The  Story  of  the  Negro  (1909).  See  Negro 
Problem.  W.  MacD. 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C.  The  seat  of  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States;  first  called  the  Fed- 
eral City;  originally  that  portion  of  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia  comprised  in  the  L’Enfant 
plan  of  1792;  now  coterminous  with  the  Dis- 
trict. The  plan  of  the  streets  and  avenues  of 
the  original  city  has  been  extended  over  the 
entire  territory.  See  District  of  Columbia. 

C.  M. 

WASHINGTON,  GEORGE.  George  Wash- 
ington (1732-1799),  first  President  of  the 
United  States,  was  born  at  Bridges  Creek, 
Va.,  February  22,  1732.  He  served  on  the 
staff  of  Braddock  in  1755,  and  later  com- 
manded colonial  forces  employed  in  defending 
the  frontier.  In  1760  he  was  elected  a mem- 
ber of  the  house  of  burgesses,  and  in  the 
preliminary  struggle  with  Great  Britain  was 
one  of  the  leaders  of  the  patriot  cause.  He 
was  a delegate  to  the  first  and  second  con- 
tinental congresses,  1774-1775,  and  June  15, 
1775,  was  elected  Commander-in-Chief  of  the 
American  army.  He  took  command  July  3,  at 
Cambridge,  Mass.,  and  remained  at  the  head  of 
the  army  until  December  23,  1783,  when  he 
resigned.  In  the  discussion  and  correspond- 
ence looking  to  an  improvement  of  the  form 
of  national  government  he  took  an  active  part, 
presided  over  the  federal  convention  of  1787, 
and  used  his  influence  to  secure  the  ratifica- 


tion of  the  Constitution.  In  1789  he  was 
elected  President  of  the  United  States,  receiv- 
ing the  whole  number  of  electorial  votes,  69. 
In  1792  he  was  unanimously  reelected.  Al- 
though not  strictly  a party  man,  his  sympa- 
thies were  with  the  Federalists,  and  his  sup- 
port insured  the  success  of  their  policies. 
He  upheld  the  dignity  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment in  his  treatment  of  Genet  (1793),  paved 
the  way  for  friendly  commercial  relations  with 
England  by  the  Jay  treaty  (1794),  and  assert- 
ed the  federal  authority  in  repressing  the 
Whiskey  Insurrection  (1794).  He  declined  to 
be  a candidate  for  a third  term,  and  retired 
to  Mount  Vernon,  where  he  died,  December  14, 
1799.  See  Appointments  to  Office;  Execut- 
ive and  Executive  Reform  in  American  Sys- 
tem; President,  Authority  and  Influence 
of;  Revolution,  American,  Significance  of. 
References:  J.  Marshall,  Life  of  George  Wash- 
ington (1804-07),  and  atlas;  P.  L.  Ford,  True 
George  Washington  (1896)  ; H.  C.  Lodge, 
George  Washington  (rev.  ed.,  1899);  W.  C. 
Ford,  George  Washington  (1900). 

W.  MacD. 

WATCH  DOG  OF  THE  TREASURY.  Name 
applied  to  William  S.  Holman,  Representative 
in  Congress  from  Indiana  at  intervals  from 
1859  to  1895;  otherwise  called  “The  Great 
Objector.”  He  made  it  a point  to  object  to 
all  novelties  in  appropriation  bills  and  thus 
to  defeat  them  when  unanimous  consent  was 
needed.  A.  B.  H. 

WATER  BOUNDARIES.  In  open  waters, 
oceans,  gulfs,  straits,  the  jurisdiction  of  a 
state  is  usually  held  to  extend  to  three  miles 
from  the  low  water  mark  (see  Jurisdiction 
over  Waters),  though  there  is  a tendency  to 
extend  this  limit.  In  case  of  rivers  and  other 
narrow  waters  in  absence  of  conventional 
agreements,  the  boundary  is  the  middle  of  the 
water,  or  in  case  of  navigable  waters,  the 
middle  of  the  main  channel  or  thalweg  (Iowa 
vs.  Illinois,  147  U.  S.  1,  1893).  The  boundary 
may  gradually  change  through  the  slow  change 
in  the  course  of  a river  by  wearing  away  of  its 
banks  and  alluvial  deposits.  When  a river 
suddenly  changes  its  course  and  leaves  the 
old  channel,  the  boundary  still  remains  in  the 
middle  of  the  old  channel.  The  boundary  line 
in  the  Great  Lakes  in  America  and  in  some 
other  large  water  areas  is  fixed  by  conven- 
tional agreement.  See  Bays  and  Gulfs,  Juris- 
diction over;  Boundaries  of  the  United 
States,  Interior;  Navigation  of  Interna- 
tional Rivers;  Newfoundland  Fisheries 
Dispute;  Northeastern  Boundary  Contro- 
versy; Northwestern  Boundary  Contro- 
versy. References:  W.  M.  Malloy,  Treaties 
and  Conventions  (1910),  I,  620-723;  J.  B. 
Moore,  Digest  of  Int.  Laio  (1906),  I,  616- 
621;  J.  M.  Callahan,  Neutrality  of  the  Am. 
Lakes  (1898).  G.  G.  W. 


658 


WATER  CURE- 

WATER  CURE.  A term  commonly  referred 
to  as  denoting  the  method  of  torture  occasion- 
ally used  by  the  United  States  soldiers  during 
the  Philippine  insurrection,  1898-1902,  to 
force  Filipinos  to  disclose  desired  information. 
The  practice  is  said  to  have  consisted  in  pump- 
ing the  victims  full  of  water  until  the  evidence 
demanded  was  given.  0.  C.  H. 

WATER  POWER,  CONTROL  OF.  Under 
the  constitutional  power  to  regulate  in- 
terstate commerce  (Art.  I,  Sec.  viii,  H 3)  the 
national  Government  has  assumed  the  right  to 
control  navigable  streams  and  development  of 
water  powers  along  such  streams  to  the  extent 
of  preventing  any  obstruction  to  free  naviga- 
tion. Streams  flowing  through  the  territories 
where  all  the  lands  belong  to  the  public  do- 
main are,  of  course,  subject  to  the  absolute 
control  of  the  national  Government;  but  when 
a territory  is  erected  into  a state  the  unnavi- 
gable  streams  therein  pass  into  the  control  of 
the  state,  and  the  Federal  Government,  as  the 
owner  of  public  lands,  has  only  the  same 
riparian  rights  as  private  land  owners. 

Under  most  of  the  states  the  titles  to  lands 
along  unnavigable  streams  extend  to  the  mid- 
dle of  the  stream,  and  the  streams  themselves 
thus  become  the  property  of  the  land  owners, 
subject,  of  course,  to  certain  statutory  provi- 
sions, one  of  which  prohibits  the  diver- 
sion or  use  of  water  to  the  detriment  of  other 
riparian  owners.  The  use  by  a landowner,  of 
water  for  generating  power,  after  which  it  is 
all  returned  to  the  channel  of  the  stream,  does 
not  violate  this  restriction  unless  the  dams 
flood  the  lands  of  other  owners,  or  interrupt 
the  regular  flow  of  water  to  the  extent  of  in- 
juring landowners  below.  These  water  power 
developments  do  not  infringe  upon  the  rights, 
or  violate  the  statutes  of  the  state,  which, 
therefore,  has  no  direct  control  over  them. 

The  status  above  outlined  seems  to  have 
been  well  established  by  the  courts,  and  until 
quite  recent  years,  to  have  been  accepted  by  the 
national  and  state  governments.  But  the 
growing  importance  of  the  turbine  water  wheel 
as  a prime  motor,  the  development  of  power- 
transmission  over  long  distances,  thus  concen- 
trating it  at  points  of  vantage  for  industrial 
purposes,  and  the  fear  that  the  great  water 
powers  of  the  country,  and  particularly  those 
located  in  the  public  domain,  may  fall  into 
the  monopolistic  control  of  great  corporations, 
has  lead  to  a reopening  of  the  question  of  the 
ownership  and  control  of  water  powers;  and 
the  theory  is  advanced  that  natural  water- 
power sites  are  a part  of  the  public  resources 
of  the  country,  belonging  of  right  to  the  public 
at  large,  and  should  therefore  be  under  govern- 
mental regulation  and  control;  so  that  fran- 
chises for  the  development  and  use  of  water 
power  should  be  granted  only  for  limited 
periods  of  time  and  upon  -adequate  com- 
pensation to  the  public.  It  is  urged  particu- 


-WATER  SUPPLY 

larly  that  this  is  necessary  to  prevent  the  ac- 
quirement and  monopolizing  of  these  water 
powers  by  large  corporations  (see  Conserva- 
tion ) . 

On  the  other  hand  it  is  argued  that  there 
is  not  now,  nor  is  there  likely  to  be  in  the 
future,  any  necessity  for  government  con- 
trol; that  if  monopolistic  corporations  should 
obtain  control  of  great  water  powers  for  im- 
proper purposes,  they  may  be  dealt  with  as  are 
other  combinations  of  like  character;  that  the 
commercial  and  industrial  interests  of  the 
country  demand  that  the  rapid  development 
of  these  sources  of  power  should  be  unrestrict- 
ed; and  that  their  early  development  and  use 
will  tend  to  conserve  the  coal  supply  of  the 
country.  It  is  also  argued  that  if  the  invest- 
ment of  private  capital  be  hampered  by  op- 
pressive conditions,  such  development  is  likely 
to  be  discouraged  and  greatly  delayed. 

See  Conservation;  Power  for  Industry; 
Public  Works,  National,  State  and  Munici- 
pal; Water  Supply. 

References:  R.  Tavernier  and  M.  0.  Leigh- 
ton, “Public  Utility  of  Water  Powers  and 
Their  Governmental  Regulation”  in  U.  S.  Geo- 
logical Survey,  Water  Supply  (1910),  No.  238. 

Samuel  Whinery. 

WATER  SUPPLY.  Quantity. — The  import- 
ant requisites  for  a municipal  water  supply 
are  that  it  shall  be  sufficient  in  quantity  and  of 
satisfactory  quality,  not  only  for  domestic 
use,  but  for  industrial  purposes.  The  quantity 
of  water  used  in  different  American  munici- 
palities varies  greatly  with  the  population  and 
other  conditions.  The  common  unit  employed 
to  express  the  rate  of  consumption  is  the  num- 
ber of  gallons  required  for  each  inhabitant  per 
day,  usually  expressed  as  the  daily  per  capita 
consumption.  This  quantity  varies  from  50  to 
80  gallons  in  the  smaller  cities  and  from  75 
to  150  gallons  in  the  larger  cities.  In  the 
average  city  of  100,000  or  more  population  the 
consumption  does  not  ordinarily  exceed  from 
100  to  150  gallons.  This  includes  not  only  the 
water  actually  required  for  public  and  private 
use  but  that  wasted  and  the  leakage  from  the 
distributing  pipes.  In  ordinary  residences  30 
to  50  gallons  daily  per  occupant  is  an  abund- 
ant supply  for  all  domestic  purposes.  In 
foreign  cities  the  consumption  is  very  much 
less  than  in  this  country.  Thus,  the  total  daily 
per  capita  consumption  in  London  and  in 
Paris  is  only  about  40  gallons.  Some  of  this 
large  difference  is  due  to  the  freer  use  of  water 
in  American  cities,  but  the  greater  part  of  it 
is  due  to  carelessness  and  waste. 

Quality. — The  quality  of  the  water  supply 
for  municipalities  is  a matter  of  prime  im- 
portance, since  upon  it  may  largely  depend 
the  health  of  the  inhabitants.  Impurities  in 
water  are  of  two  general  kinds ; inorganic  or 
dead  organic  matter,  and  living  organisms. 
The  former  usually  consists  of  earthy  matter 


659 


WATER  SUPPLY 


or  decaying  vegetable  matter  held  in  suspen- 
sion, or  of  various  minerals  such  as  lime,  mag- 
nesia and  iron  held  in  solution.  The  impuri- 
ties held  in  suspension  if  in  sufficient  quantity, 
make  the  water  turbid  or  unclean,  and  if  in 
excess  may  render  the  water  unwholesome  and 
unfit  for  some  industrial  purposes.  Minerals 
held  in  solution  may  not  affect  the  appearance 
of  the  water  but  may  cause  the  property 
called  hardness  which,  if  excessive,  makes  the 
water  unsatisfactory  for  laundry  and  steam 
boiler  use.  But  neither  the  turbidity  nor  the 
hardness  of  water  may  be  injurious  to  persons 
drinking  it. 

Living  organisms  in  impure  water  consist 
largely  of  microscopic  plants  and  animals,  of 
a low  order,  not  usually  visible  to  the  naked 
eye,  and  they  may  not  affect  its  clear  and 
sparkling  appearance.  They  can  be  discovered 
only  by  biological  examination  under  the 
microscope.  The  great  majority  of  these  or- 
ganisms are  not,  so  far  as  we  know,  injurious 
to  health,  though  some  of  the  minute  plants,  as 
they  mature  and  decay,  may  impart  to  the 
water  a disagreeable  smell  and  taste.  But 
some  of  the  bacteria  are  known  to  be  the  direct 
cause  of  specific  diseases.  Thus,  it  is  now  def- 
initely known  that  typhoid  fever  is  caused  by 
a specific  germ,  which  in  the  great  majority 
of  cases  enters  the  human  system  through  the 
medium  of  drinking  water;  and  most  of  the 
great  epidemics  of  that  disease  have  been 
traced  to  the  use  of  water  containing  that 
germ.  In  a number  of  American  cities  where 
this  disease  had  been  especially  prevalent  the 
cases  and  deaths  have  been  reduced  to  a small 
fraction  of  their  former  number  after  the 
water  supply  had  been  properly  purified. 

Purification. — Impure  water  may  be  purified 
by  chemical  treatment,  or  by  filtration,  or  by 
a combination  of  the  two.  The  chemicals 
mostly  used  are  sulphate  of  copper  or  hypo- 
chloride  of  lime  for  destroying  organisms,  or 
sulphate  of  alumina  for  coagulating  and  pre- 
cipitating the  suspended  matter  that  causes 
turbidity.  Where  the  water  is  objectionably 
hard  it  may  be  treated  with  lime,  soda  or 
other  chemicals,  as  may  be  indicated  in  each 
case,  to  precipitate  the  minerals  held  in  solu- 
tion. 

Filtration  is  accomplished  by  passing  the 
water  through  beds  of  selected  sand  which 
not  only  strains  out  the  suspended  matter 
but  also  removes  the  minute  organisms  or 
bacteria  contained  in  the  water.  Filtration  is 
very  effective  for  the  latter  purpose.  In  good 
practice  from  96  to  99  per  cent  of  the  bacteria 
may  be  thus  removed. 

Two  methods  of  sand  filtration  are  in  com- 
mon use;  in  the  one,  called  slow  sand  filtration, 
the  water,  usually  without  previous  treatment, 
is  allowed  to  percolate  slowly  through  a bed 
of  sand  which  is  removed  and  cleaned  at  long 
intervals.  In  the  other,  called  mechanical  fil- 
tration, the  water  is  first  treated  with  a coagu- 


lant (usually  alum)  and  then  passed  through 
beds  of  sand  at  a comparatively  high  velocity, 
the  sand  beds  being  frequently  cleaned  or 
washed  by  mechanical  means  without  remov- 
ing the  sand  from  the  containing  basins.  In 
some  cases  the  coagulant  used  is  lime  and 
sulphate  of  iron,  the  former  of  which  has  the 
effect  of  removing  a part  of  the  hardness  of 
the  water  as  well  as  other  impurities. 

The  water  of  rivers  flowing  through  thickly 
populated  districts  or  through  cities  whose 
sewage  is  discharged  into  them,  is  usually 
more  or  less  contaminated  and  should  not  be 
used  for  domestic  purposes  without  purifi- 
cation. This  is  true  also  of  water  from  shal- 
low wells  in  thickly  populated  regions  or  in 
towns  and  cities. 

Public  Water-Works. — In  a large  majority 
of  American  cities  the  water  supply  is  owned 
and  operated  by  the  municipality.  This  is 
true  to  a larger  extent  than  in  the  case  of 
other  public  utilities.  Since  a pure,  abundant 
and  reliable  water  supply  is  one  of  the  most 
important  requisities  of  urban  life,  it  is  im- 
portant that  the  supply  should  be  wholly  under 
the  care  and  control  of  the  municipal  authori- 
ties, and  this  condition  can  be  best  secured 
where  the  municipality  owns  and  operates  the 
entire  plant. 

The  cost  of  constructing  water  supply  plants 
is  usually  met  by  the  sale  of  municipal  bonds. 
To  provide  for  the  payment  of  interest  and 
sinking  fund  and  to  meet  the  expenses  of  main- 
tenance and  operation,  consumers  are  charged 
for  the  water  supplied  to  them  in  accordance 
with  an  established  scale  of  “water  rates”  in 
each  city. 

Measuring. — Two  methods  are  in  use  for  de- 
termining the  quantity  of  water  supplied  to 
consumers,  each  having  its  appropriate  scale 
of  water  rates.  In  the  first,  a meter  is  placed 
upon  each  supply,  and  the  actual  quantity  of 
water  consumed  is  thus  ascertained  and 
charged  for;  In  the  second  the  charge  is 
based  upon  the  number  and  character  of  the 
fixtures  in  each  residence  through  which  the 
water  is  used,  or  upon  the  number  of  persons 
living  in  each  house.  This  method  assumes 
that  two  houses  equipped  with  similar  fixtures 
or  occupied  by  the  same  number  of  persons 
will  consume  the  same  quantity  of  water.  In 
practice,  however,  this  is  found  to  be  far 
from  true,  as  one  family  may  use  water  more 
freely  than  another  or  may  actually  waste 
large  quantities,  and  if  each  is  charged  the 
same  sum  it  may  be,  and  usually  is,  inequit- 
able. 

For  this  reason  the  meter  system  is  more 
just  and  reasonable,  since  under  it  each  con- 
sumer pays  for  the  actual  quantity  delivered 
to  him  and  no  more;  the  practice  of  metering 
each  house  is  therefore  growing,  and  meter 
charges  are  destined  to  supersede  all  other 
methods  of  taxation  for  water  privileges.  It 
is  sometimes  argued  against  the  meter  system 


660 


WATERLOO— WATERWAYS,  NATURAL,  REGULATION  OF 


that  it  is  likely  to  restrict  unduly  the  use  of 
one  of  the  prime  necessities  of  life,  particularly 
among  the  poorer  classes.  To  this  it  may  be 
replied  that  the  rates  are  so  low  as  to  make 
water  even  when  very  freely  used,  one  of  the 
cheapest  commodities  of  living;  and  with  the 
general  use  of  meters,  the  enormous  waste  of 
water  is  likely  to  be  prevented,  so  that  the 
rates  charged  to  all  consumers  may  be  mater- 
ially reduced. 

Water  Franchises. — Where  water  is  supplied 
to  a city  by  a private  corporation  or  company, 
under  a franchise  or  contract,  there  are  usually 
provisions  allowing  the  municipality  to  take 
over  the  plant  at  the  end  of  a period  of  years 
at  a valuation  to  be  agreed  upon;  but  in  too 
many  cases  the  method  of  arriving  at  this 
valuation  is  not  set  out  with  sufficient  clear- 
ness and  detail  and  in  a great  majority  of 
cases  where  the  municipality  has  undertaken 
to  exercise  this  right,  complications  and  dis- 
agreement has  arisen  as  to  the  proper  valua- 
tion of  the  property,  tangible  and  intangible, 
to  be  surrendered.  Questions  of  this  character 
have  usually  to  be  settled  by  reference  to  the 
courts  or  to  a board  of  arbitrating  commis- 
sioners. It  is,  therefore,  important  in  grant- 
ing franchises  for  water  supply,  to  state  very 
clearly  and  explicitly  how  the  value  of  the 
property  shall  be  determined  in  case  it  is 
taken  over  by  the  municipality.  In  these  fran- 
chises the  maximum  water  rates  to  be  charged 
are  usually  stated,  and  there  should  be  a pro- 
vision for  revising  these  rates  at  stated  times 
in  ease  conditions  make  it  desirable  or  neces- 
sary to  do  so. 

See  Aqueducts;  Conservation;  Health, 
Public  Regulation  of;  Municipal  Owner- 
ship; Power  for  Industry;  Public  Works, 
National,  State  and  Municipal. 

References:  H.  E.  Turneaure  and  H.  E.  Rus- 
sell, Public  Water  Supplies  (2d  ed.,  1911)  ; 
A.  P.  Folwell,  Water  Supply  Engineering  (2d 
ed.,  1909)  ; Allen  Hazen,  Clean  Water  and 
how  to  Get  it  (1907)  ; J.  T.  Fanning,  Treatise 
on  Water  Supply  Engineering  (17th  ed., 
1909)  ; W.  P.  Mason,  Water  Supply  from  the 
Sanitary  Standpoint  (3d  ed.,  1909)  ; Am.  Year 
Book,  1911,  456-458,  ibid,  1912,  287-289. 

Samuel  Whinery. 

WATERLOO.  A defeat  at  the  polls  which 
because  of  its  decisiveness  nullifies  all  further 
political  ambition  of  the  loser  and  ends  his 
political  career.  The  term  obviously  origi- 
nated from  the  fact  that  Napoleon’s  political 
ambitions  were  ended  at  Waterloo. 

0.  C.  H. 

WATERWAYS,  ARTIFICIAL.  See  Canals 
and  Other  Artificial  Waterways. 

WATERWAYS,  NATURAL,  REGULATION 
OF.  Legislative  and  Executive  Methods. — The 
national  Government  has  jurisdiction,  as  re- 


gards navigation,  over  all  the  waterways  in 
the  United  States  that  may  be  used  in  inter- 
state commerce  (see  Rivers,  Jurisdiction  and 
Navigation  of).  The  River  and  Harbor  Ap- 
propriations Act  dates  from  1870.  From  that 
time  until  1910  the  act  was  usually  passed 
upon  alternate  years,  the  only  appropriations 
for  river  and  harbor  work  during  intervening 
years  being  those  included  in  the  Sundry  Civil 
Bill  to  pay  for  work  previously  authorized  by 
a river  and  harbor  act.  In  1910,  the  policy 
of  passing  an  annual  river  and  harbor  act  was 
adopted. 

Each  River  and  Harbor  Act  calls  upon  the 
Secretary  of  War  to  survey  and  report  upon 
projects  for  improving  inland  waterways. 
These  surveys  are  made  by  the  Corps  of  Engi- 
neers of  the  United  States  Army.  The  engi- 
neer officer  in  charge  of  a particular  survey 
makes  a report  to  the  chief  of  Engineers  who 
submits  the  report  to  the  Board  of  Engineers 
for  Rivers  and  Harbors,  created  by  the  law 
of  June  13,  1902.  The  opinions  of  this  board 
together  with  the  views  of  the  Chief  of  Engi- 
neers are  submitted  by  him  to  the  Secretary 
of  War  who  transmits  the  report  to  the  House 
of  Representatives.  The  House  committee  on 
rivers  and  harbors  prepares  a bill  making  ap- 
propriations for  such  new  works  as  in  its 
judgment  are  meritorious  and  commercially 
justifiable,  and  for  the  continuance  of  such 
improvements  as  have  previously  been  author- 
ized. 

The  execution  of  works  authorized  by  Con- 
gress is  intrusted  to  the  Secretary  of  War, 
the  Chief  of  Engineers  and  the  Engineer  Corps. 
LTsually  the  United  States  has  its  work  done 
by  contract. 

Technical  Methods. — When  the  current  of  a 
river  is  not  strong  and  when  the  depth  of 
channel  at  low  water  is,  or  can  be  made,  suffi- 
cient to  meet  the  needs  of  navigation,  the 
river  is  regulated  by  dredging  of  the  channel, 
by  revetment  of  the  banks  when  needed,  and 
by  the  construction  of  cut-offs  at  sharp  bends 
in  the  stream.  Open  river  navigation  is  pro- 
vided for.  When  the  river  has  a relatively 
steep  gradient,  slack  water  navigation  is  se- 
scured  by  construction  of  dams  and  locks  at 
various  points.  There  are  two  general  types 
of  dams  employed  for  increasing  the  depth  of 
rivers — fixed  and  movable  dams.  The  movable 
dam  favored  in  the  United  States  is  con- 
structed in  small  sections  that  may  be  lowered 
to  the  bottom  of  the  stream  during  the  periods 
of  high  water  and  may  be  raised  into  position 
during  the  lower  stages  of  water.  Vessels  then 
use  the  locks  to  pass  the  dam. 

Atlantic  Waterways. — The  inland  waterways 
of  the  United  States  include  the  Great  Lakes 
and  four  groups  of  rivers — the  Atlantic,  Gulf, 
and  Pacific  groups,  and  the  Mississippi  sys- 
tem. All  the  important  rivers  flowing  into 
the  Atlantic — the  Hudson,  Delaware,  Potomac, 
James,  Savannah,  St.  John,  and  numerous 


661 


WATERWAYS,  NATURAL,  REGULATION  OF 


682 


WATERWAYS,  NATURAL,  REGULATION  OF 


shorter  ones — have  been  improved  in  their 
tidal  portions,  so  as  to  establish  ship  channels 
from  the  sea  to  important  seaports.  Few  of 
the  rivers  tributary  to  the  Atlantic  are  now 
much  navigated  above  their  tidal  sections;  al- 
though many  of  them  are  used  to  some  extent. 

Gulf  Waterways. — Of  the  rivers  tributary 
to  the  Gulf,  the  most  important  are  those  that 
discharge  their  waters  iijto  Mobile  Bay.  The 
Alabama  River  has  been  made  navigable  as 
far  as  Montgomery,  for  vessels  drawing  three 
and  one  half  feet  of  water.  The  Tombigbee 
River  is  navigable  for  vessels  of  three  feet 
draft  from  Columbus,  Miss.,  to  the  Bay,  a dis- 
tance of  341  miles.  Its  tributary,  the  War- 
rior (called  the  Black  Warrior  in  its  upper 
readies)  reaches  the  Alabama  coal  fields.  The 
Warrior  and  Tombigbee  Rivers  are  being  canal- 
ized and  slack-watered  by  the  construction  of 
locks  and  dams  that  will,  in  the  near  future, 
establish  a permanent  six-foot  waterway  from 
the  Birmingham  district  to  Mobile.  The  rivers 
of  Mississippi,  Louisiana  and  Texas,  other  than 
the  Mississippi  River — which  will  be  spoken 
of  separately — are  of  minor  importance  above 
their  tidal  sections. 

Pacific  Waterways. — There  are  two  impor- 
tant river  systems  discharging  their  waters 
into  the  Pacific,  the  Columbia  system,  and  the 
California  rivers.  In  the  California  valley,  the 
San  Joaquin  River  flows  northward  into  San 
Francisco  Bay,  and  the  Sacramento  drains 
the  northern  half  of  the  great  valley.  The  San 
Joaquin  River  has  been  deepened  to  nine  feet 
as  far  as  Stockton,  forty-five  miles  from  its 
mouth.  The  Sacramento  River  has  been  given 
a seven  foot  low-water  channel  to  the  city 
of  Sacramento,  sixty-one  miles  from  the  mouth 
of  the  river. 

The  principal  river  of  the  Pacific  Coast  is 
the  Columbia  which  has  two  important  af- 
fluents— the  Willamette  and  the  Snake  rivers. 
From  Portland,  on  the  Willamette  twelve 
miles  from  the  Columbia  and  one  hundred  and 
ten  miles  from  the  sea,  the  original  channel 
of  ten  to  fifteen  feet  in  depth  has  been  deep- 
ened to  twenty-five  feet.  At  the  Cascades  of 
the  Columbia,  a canal  has  been  built  and  at 
The  Dalles,  a canal  8£  miles  in  length  is 
being  constructed.  From  Celilo  Falls  above 
The  Dalles  to  the  mouth  of  the  Snake  River, 
a distance  of  one  hundred  and  twenty-four 
miles,  the  river  has  been  improved.  The  Snake 
River  for  two  hundred  and  sixteen  miles  has 
been  made  navigable  and  works  now  in  pro- 
gress will  give  the  river  a low-water  depth  of 
five  feet. 

Mississippi  System. — The  Mississippi  River 
and  its  tributaries  furnish  nearly  14,000  miles 
of  river  navigation;  2,500  miles  of  this  distance 
now  provide  channels  six  feet  or  more  in  depth 
during  low  stages  of  water.  At  and  above 
The  Passes,  for  320  miles,  the  river  is  30  or 
more  feet  deep.  For  the  remaining  790  miles 
to  the  mouth  of  the  Ohio,  there  is  a minimum 


channel  depth  of  nine  feet.  The  river  during 
most  of  the  year  now  has  a depth  of  eight 
feet  throughout  the  182  miles  from  Cairo 
to  St.  Louis.  Above  St.  Louis,  during  some 
portion  of  each  year  it  is  less  than  six  feet. 
The  United  States  Government  is  now  improv- 
ing the  river  with  a view  to  establishing  an 
all-the-year-round  channel  with  a minimum 
depth  of  six  feet  from  St.  Paul  to  St.  Louis, 
of  eight  feet  from  St.  Louis  to  Cairo,  and  of 
nine  feet  below  that  point  ( see  Lakes-to- 
Gulf- Waterway  ; Mississippi  and  Missouri 
River  Commissions).  , 

The  engineering  problems  connected  with  the 
control  of  the  Mississippi  River  are  exception- 
ally difficult.  In  many  portions,  depth  of 
channel  can  be  secured  only  by  narrowing  the 
river;  in  many  sections  the  banks  must  be 
protected  by  revetment,  from  erosions  while 
in  the  lower  portions  of  the  river  expensive 
levees  must  be  constructed  and  maintained. 
Fortunately  the  revetment  and  levee  works 
have  been  so  successful  during  recent  years  as 
to  afford  much  encouragement.  The  river  is 
subject  to  great  variations  in  volume.  With 
a view  to  reducing  floods,  at  least  slightly, 
and  increasing  the  flow  of  water  during  the 
dry  season,  five  dams  have  been  constructed 
in  the  upper  part  of  the  river  in  northern 
Minnesota,  but  it  is  probable  that  the  volume 
of  water  thus  far  impounded  has  had  little 
or  no  effect  in  the  regulation  of  floods  or 
in  the  maintenance  of  a navigable  channel. 

An  effort  is  now  being  made  to  regulate  the 
Missouri  effectively  for  navigation  from  Kansas 
City  to  St.  Louis.  The  River  and  Harbor  Act 
of  1911  appropriated  $600,000  to  begin  work 
“with  a view  to  securing  a permanent  six- 
foot  channel  between  Kansas  City  and  the 
mouth  of  the  river.” 

Ohio  System. — The  United  States  is  now  at 
work  upon  a project  that  will  give  the  Ohio 
a minimum  channel  from  Pittsburg  to  Cairo 
of  nine  feet  in  lowest  stages  of  water.  Fifty- 
four  dams  and  locks  are  being  constructed  at 
a cost  of  $63,000,000  ( see  Canals  and  Other 
Artificial  Waterways).  The  Monongahela 
River  by  means  of  dams  and  locks  has  been 
converted  into  a slack  water  channel  as  far 
as  Fairmount,  W'est  Virginia,  one  hundred  and 
twenty-eight  miles  from  Pittsburg.  The  Alle- 
gheny River  has  been  made  a slack  water 
stream  of  eight  feet  depth  for  twenty-five 
miles  from  its  mouth. 

The  Great  Kanawha  has  been  converted  into 
a slack  water  stream  six  feet  deep  for  ninety 
miles.  The  Little  Kanawha  has  been  similarly 
treated  for  forty-eight  miles;  the  Muskingum 
River  for  ninety-one  miles.  The  Cumberland 
River,  during  eight  months  of  the  year  has 
a navigable  channel  three  feet  deep  as  far 
as  Nashville;  light  draft  vessels  ascend  as  far 
as  Burnside,  Ky.  The  Tennessee  River  has  a 
channel  five  feet  in  depth  from  Chattanooga  to 
Riverton,  Alabama,  and  of  six  feet  from  River- 


663 


WATSON,  THOMAS  EDWARD— WEALTH,  NATIONAL 


ton  to  its  mouth.  Serious  obstructions  to  the 
river  at  shoal  places  in  northern  Alabama  have 
been  overcome  by  lateral  canals. 

Great  Lakes. — The  navigation  of  the  Great 
Lakes  has  been  improved  by  constructing  and 
deepening  harbors,  by  constructing  a canal 
with  locks  on  each  side  of  the  St.  Mary’s 
River,  and  by  deepening  the  channel  through 
the  St.  Clair  flats  and  the  Detroit  River  ( see 
Lakes,  Jurisdiction  and  Navigation  of). 

Difficulties. — The  effectiveness  of  waterway 
improvements  in  the  LTnited  States  has  suffered 
because  of  the  absence  of  a general  system  or 
plan  in  their  development  of  our  waterways^ 
The  number  of  works  undertaken  is  too  large 
to  permit  of  the  speedy  completion  of  the  pro- 
jects of  greatest  importance.  Thus  far  there 
has  been  but  little  cooperation  between  the 
Federal  Government  and  the  states  in  carry- 
ing out  a program  of  waterway  development. 
There  should  be  a distribution  of  the  burdens 
among  the  nation,  the  states,  the  cities  and 
the  beneficiary  private  organizations.  If  this 
can  be  brought  about,  the  work  may  be  car- 
ried on  much  more  rapidly. 

See  Canals  and  Other  Artificial  Water- 
ways; Discrimination  in  Railroad  Rates; 
Elkins  Act;  Erie  Canal;  Interstate  Com- 
merce Commission;  Monopolies;  New  York; 
Public  Service  Corporations;  Transporta- 
tion, Regulation  of. 

References:  U.  S.  Chief  of  Engineers,  Annual 
Reports;  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Corporations, 
Report  on  General  Conditions  of  Transpor- 
tation by  Waters,  Transportation  by  Water  in 
the  U.  S.  (1908),  Pt.  II;  E.  R.  Johnson, 
Ocean  and  Inland  Water  Transportation 
(1906),  Inland  Waterivays,  Their  Relation  to 
Transportation  ( 1893 ) . 

Emory  R.  Johnson. 

WATSON,  THOMAS  EDWARD.  Thomas 
E Watson  ( 1856-  ) was  born  in  Co- 

lumbia (now  McDuffie)  county,  Ga.,  Septem- 
ber 5,  1856.  In  1875  he  was  admitted  to 
the  bar.  He  was  a member  of  the  Georgia 
house  of  representatives  in  1882-83,  and  in 
1888  a Democratic  presidential  elector  at 
large.  He  shortly  joined  the  Populist  party, 
and  in  the  Fifty-second  Congress,  1891-93, 
was  a member  of  the  House.  He  failed  of 
reelection  in  1892,  and  again  in  1894,  though 
claiming  in  each  case  to  have  been  rejected 
because  of  a fraudulent  count.  From  1891  to 
1894  he  edited  the  People’s  Party  Paper,  pub- 
lished weekly  at  Atlanta.  In  1896  the  Popu- 
list national  convention  at  St.  Louis  nominated 
him  for  Vice-President.  In  1904,  when  an 
effort  was  made  to  revive  the  Populist  move- 
ment, he  was  nominated  by  the  People’s  party 
for  President,  and  received  114,753  votes.  In 
1905  he  established  in  New  York  City  Tom 
Watson’s  Magazine,  and  later  published  Wat- 
son’s Jeffersonian  Magazine  and  the  Weekly 
Jeffersonian.  He  has  written  a Life  of  Thomas 


Jefferson  (1900)  and  Life  and  Times  of 
Thomas  Jefferson  (1903).  See  Populist 
Party.  W.  MacD. 

WEALTH,  NATIONAL.  Income  Tax  Meth- 
od.— Three  methods  of  statistically  measuring 
the  wealth  of  a country  have  been  experi- 
mented with.  The  first  is  that  of  the  late 
Sir  Robert  Giffen  who  estimated  the  income 
and  wealth  of  Great  Britain  on  the  basis  of 
the  income  tax  returns  for  each  kind  of  prop- 
erty, which  he  capitalized  at  a given  rate. 
Land  was  taken  as  worth  twenty-six  times  its 
annual  value,  houses  fifteen  times,  quarries, 
mines,  etc.,  four  times,  gas  works,  twenty-five 
times,  railroads,  twenty-eight  times,  etc.  The 
capitalized  value  in  Great  Britain  in  1885,  of 
tlie  incomes  then  returned,  was  fixed  at  £7,619,- 

751.000,  to  which  was  added  certain  other  sums 
which  escaped  taxation,  making  the  total  in- 
come bearing  capital  £8,577,436,000.  Property 
not  bearing  income,  such  as  furniture,  art 
works,  etc.,  and  government  and  local  property, 
were  added  to  bring  the  total  to  £10,037,- 

646.000.  Many  elements  of  uncertainty  which 
enter  into  the  calculation  Giffen  admitted  and 
explained. 

Inheritance  Tax  Method. — The  second  method 
was  used  by  M.  de  Foville  who  estimated  the 
wealth  of  France  on  the  basis  of  the  inherit- 
ance taxes  (article  “Ricliesse”  in  Dictionnaire 
des  Finances ) , calculating  that  the  mean  inter- 
val between  generations  is  about  thirty-six 
years.  This  would  mean  that  one  thirty-sixth 
of  the  total  wealth  of  France  passes  by  suc- 
cession or  donation  each  year;  and  on  this 
basis  225,000,000,000  francs  was  figured  as  the 
total  private  wealth  of  France.  This  basis 
obviously  omits  many  items  which  go  to  make 
up  the  wealth  of  the  country. 

General  Taxation  Method. — In  the  absence 
of  uniform  income  or  inheritance  taxes,  neither 
of  these  methods  of  estimating  the  national 
wealth  is  applicable  to  the  United  States.  The 
first  official  attempt  to  estimate  the  wealth 
of  the  United  States  was  made  in  connection 
with  the  census  of  1850.  The  estimate  has 
since  been  continued  with  each  census,  and 
again  in  1904.  The  results  of  these  estimates 
may  roughly  be  summarized  as  follows : 


Year 

Wealth 

Per 

Capita 

1850 

8 7,135,780.228  (taxable) 

$ 308 

1860 

16.159,616,068  (taxable) 

514 

1870 

24.054.S14.S06  (taxable)  Iqold  basis ) 

624 

18S0 

43.642,000,000  (taxable  and  exempt) 

S70 

1890 

65.037.091,197  (taxable) 

1.036 

1900 

SS.517, 306.775  (taxable) 

1.165 

1904 

107,104.211.917  (taxable) 

1.234 

In  other  words,  while  the  population  of  the 
United  States  increased  a little  more  than 
threefold  in  the  fifty  years  from  1S50  to 
1900,  the  wealth  is  shown  to  have  increased 
something  over  thirteenfold;  while  the  in- 
crease on  the  per  capita  basis  was  fourfold. 


664 


WEALTH,  NATIONAL 


The  actual  wealth  of  the  country,  meaning 
the  tangible  value  of  its  assets  and  immedi- 
ately available  resources,  has  increased  in  the 
half  century  to  a much  greater  extent  than 
these  figures  indicate. 

The  elements  entering  into  the  calculations 
of  the  earlier  censuses  are  not  definitely  known, 
although  they  are  supposed  to  be  about  the 
same  as  those  used  in  the  later  censuses,  as 
indicated  in  the  following  tables  from  reports 
of  the  Census  Office: 


sented  in  any  of  the  items  cited  as  a lien 
upon  them.  The  capital  stock  of  the  banks 
and  trust  companies  of  the  United  States,  and 
their  accumulated  surplus  may  be  cited  as  an 
illustration.  This  capital  was  $1,957,138,888 
in  1910,  with  a surplus  of  $1,980,822,386 
(Comptroller’s  Report,  1910).  There  were  de- 
posits of  $15,859,583,644,  of  which  sum 
$4,070,486,246  were  deposits  in  savings  banks. 
More  or  less  of  these  great  sums  represent 
amounts  duplicated  in  the  above  analysis,  but 


Form  of  Wealth 

1900 

1904 

Total  

Real  property  taxed  

Real  property  exempt  --  - 

$8S, 517, 306, 775 

$107,104,211,917 

46,324,839,234 

6,212,788.930 

3,300.473,278 

749.775.970 

1,677,379,825 

2,541,046,639 

9,035,732,000 

3.495.228.359 
15,174,042,540 

3.495.228.359 

55,510,247,564 

6.831,244,570 

4,073,791,736 

844,989,863 

1.998,603,303 

3.297,754.180 

11,244,752,000 

4,840,546,909 

18,462,281,792 

4,840,546,909 

Farm  implements  and  machinery  __  — _ 

Gold  and  silver  coin  and  bullion  — - _ ..  

Manufacturing  machinery,  tools,  etc.  

Railroads  and  their  equipments  -- 

Street  railways,  etc.  (A)  

All  other  (B)  

(A)  Street  railways,  etc.  

1,576,197.160 

211.650.000 

400.324.000 
98,836,600 

537,849,478 

267,752,468 

402,618,653 

15,174,042,540 

2,219,966.000 

227.400.000 

585.840.000 

123.000. 000 
846,489.804 

275.000. 000 
562,851,105 

18,462,281,792 

Telegraph  systems 

Telephone  systems  ..  . 

Pullman  and  private  cars  

Shipping  and  canals __  

Privately  owned  waterworks  

Privately  owned  electric  light  and  power  stations 

(B)  All  other  

Agricultural  products  - 

Manufacturing  products  — - — 

Imported  merchandise  

1,455,069,323 

6,0S7,151,10S 

424,970,592 

326,851,517 

2,000,000,000 

4,880,000,000 

1.899,379,652 

7,409.291.668 

495,543,685 

408.066.7S7 

2.500.000. 000 

5.750.000. 000 

Clothing'  and  personal  ornaments  - --  

Furniture,  carriages,  etc.  

Michael  Mulhall,  in  his  Industry  and  Wealth 
of  Rations,  estimating  the  wealth  of  the  United 
States,  and  including  practically  the  same 
items,  places  the  total  value  of  property  at 
$79,567,275,000  in  1900,  a per  capita  wealth 
of  $1,125.  For  the  same  year  Mulhall’s  esti- 
mates place  the  wealth  of  Great  Britain  at 
$57,453,899,000 — per  capita,  $1,455;  France,, 
$47,156,385,000 — per  capita,  $1,228;  and  Ger- 
many, $39,185,058,000 — per  capita,  $751.  He 
suggests  that  the  only  satisfactory  method  of 
arriving  at  the  actual  and  comparative  wealth 
of  the  principal  nations  would  be  by  a cooper- 
ative or  collective  undertaking,  to  which  four 
or  five  of  the  nations  should  appoint  commis- 
sioners, who  would  agree  upon  a uniform 
basis  of  valuation.  Mulhall’s  figures  do  not 
agree  with  those  commonly  accepted,  which 
give  to  France  the  highest  per  capita  wealth 
of  any  nation. 

Defects  of  the  Calculations. — Neither  of 
the  three  methods  above  outlined  can  be  re- 
garded as  satisfactory  or  conclusive.  They  are 
all  based  upon  the  physical  and  tangible  evi- 
dences of  wealth,  and  do  not  include  all  of 
these.  From  the  wealth  of  the  United  States, 
as  above  indicated,  are  omitted  such  tangible 
items  as  forest  products,  the  fisheries,  and  the 
accumulations  of  personal  property  not  repre- 


by  no  means  all  of  them.  The  profits  on  im- 
ported merchandise  are  not  represented; 
neither  are  the  profits  on  the  manufactured 
goods  and  agricultural  products  sold — the 
values  given  being  those  at  the  factory  and  on 
the  farm.  Indeed,  all  the  earnings  of  industrial 
enterprises  are  omitted,  including  railroads, 
the  latter  representing  dividends  of  $275,289,- 
000  in  1910.  There  is  no  estimate  of  the  value 
of  accumulated  stocks  of  goods  and  products. 
So  also  with  individual  earnings,  which  repre- 
sent an  enormous  sum,  some  of  it  elsewhere 
included  and  much  of  it  consumed  as  it  is 
earned,  but  not  all  of  it  by  any  means.  No 
estimate  of  the  wealth  of  a nation  can  ap- 
proach completeness  which  fails  to  take  cogni- 
zance of  the  earning  capacity  of  the  people. 
Indeed  the  individual  energy  of  the  people,  as 
represented  in  wages,  salaries  and  profits,  is 
the  source  of  all  wealth,  outside  of  natural 
resources.  There  are  also  potential  values 
existing  in  forests,  mines,  quarries  and  water 
powers,  difficult  to  estimate,  but  none  the  less 
real,  and  constituting  a large  part  of  the  tangi- 
ble wealth  of  the  country  and  in  many  in- 
stances held  as  such  with  a view  to  future 
development.  It  is  difficult  to  understand  why 
the  shipping  and  canals  of  the  country  should 
be  included  in  such  an  estimate,  while  the 


WEATHER  BUREAU— WEBSTER,  DANIEL 

WEATHER  BUREAU.  The  Weather  Bureau, 


value  of  the  docks  and  wharves  is  omitted. 
Improvements  on  rivers  and  harbors,  represent- 
ing the  expenditures  of  large  sums  of  money, 
add  to  the  wealth  of  the  country,  and  none 
the  less  so  because  they  are  as  a rule  con- 
ducted and  paid  for  by  the  Government.  But 
government  property,  which  appears  to  be 
wholly  omitted  from  the  estimate,  except  in 
the  case  of  coin  and  bullion,  is  just  as  much  a 
part  of  the  nation’s  wealth  as  though  it  was 
privately  owned.  It  is  not  income-earning 
property  as  a rule;  hut  the  same  is  true  of  a 
large  proportion  of  the  privately  owned  prop- 
erty. Other  omitted  items  are  the  value  of 
patents,  of  copyrights,  of  public  franchises, 
and  the  good  will  of  business — representing  an 
enormous  total,  but  beyond  the  power  of  the 
statistician  satisfactorily  to  estimate.  There 
are  held  in  this  country  foreign  government 
bonds  and  stocks  of  foreign  corporations,  ag- 
gregating great  sums.  A lack  of  proper  classi- 
fication in  the  reports  renders  it  impossible 
to  discover  whether  other  forms  of  wealth, 
which  suggest  themselves,  such  as  the  endow- 
ment of  colleges  and  universities,  are  included 
or  omitted.  One  great  source  of  wealth,  which, 
since  it  earns  wealth,  must  be  defined  as 
wealth,  is  credit,  upon  which  a large  pro- 
portion of  the  business  of  the  country  is  car- 
ried on.  Finally,  there  remains  what  is  com- 
monly described  as  the  unearned  increment  of 
real  property,  which  largely  escapes  taxation, 
and  which  is  not  included  in  the  value  of 
real  property,  as  stated  in  the  above  table. 
The  value  of  real  property,  as  given  is  based 
upon  the  assessed  values  prevailing  in  different 
sections,  corrected  and  increased  as  the  result 
of  special  inquiries.  These  corrected  values 
are  far  below  the  potential  and  actual  values 
which  exist  in  most  of  the  larger  municipalities 
of  the  country,  and  which  are  increasing  in  a 
much  faster  ratio  than  that  indicated  in  the 
census  reports  for  1900  and  1904.  The  con- 
clusion is  inevitable  that  the  wealth  of  the 
United  States,  actual  and  potential,  has  been 
very  greatly  understated  in  the  census  reports. 

See  Assessment  of  Taxes;  Banking 
Methods  ; Bankruptcy  and  Commercial 
Failures;  Conservation;  Debt,  Public, 
Principles  of;  Labor  and  Wages;  Money, 
Theory  of  ; Public  Property  ; Repudiation 
of  Public  Debts;  Statistics;  Statistics, 
Official  Collection  of;  Taxation,  Prin- 
ciples of. 

References:  R.  Giffen,  Growth  of  Capital 
(1897)  ; M.  G.  Mulhall,  Industries  and  'Wealth 
of  Nations  (1899)  ; U.  S.  Census  Bureau,  Re- 
port of  Tenth  Census  on  Valuation,  Taxation, 
and  Public  Indebtedness  (1884),  Report  of 
Eleventh  Census  on  Wealth,  Debt,  and  Taxation 
(1892-1895),  Report  of  Twelfth  Census  on 
Wealth,  Debt,  and  Taxation  (1907);  Am. 
Year  Rook,  1911,  20-32,  271,  327,  ibid,  1912, 
311-363. 


one  of  the  bureaus  of  the  Department  of 
Agriculture  (see  Agriculture,  Department 
of),  is  under  the  direction  of  a Bureau  Chief. 
The  main  work  of  the  Bureau  falls  into  two 
divisions:  the  prosecution  of  scientific  research 
into  the  problems  of  weather  and  weather- 
forecasting; and  the  Weather  Signal  Service. 
The  Weather  Bureau  also  conducts  special  cli- 
matological and  meteorological  investigations 
into  such  matters  as  the  flow  of  water  in 
streams,  irrigation  (see)  and  reclamation 
(see)  projects,  and  problems  of  forest  and 
plant  growth.  The  scientific  research  of  recent 
years  has  dealt  with  the  exploration  of  the 
upper  atmosphere  by  means  of  kites  and 
balloons,  with  the  study  of  atmospheric  elec- 
tricity and  magnetism,  solar  radiation  and 
evaporation,  and  the  preparation  and  publica- 
tion of  pilot  and  meteorological  charts  of  the 
oceans  and  great  lakes.  The  Weather  Signal 
service  attempts  to  forecast  changes  in  the 
weather,  and  especially  to  forecast  the  ap- 
proach of  hurricanes,  and  to  give  due  notice 
to  mariners  and  other  interested  members  of 
the  public.  Daily  forecasts  are  prepared  and 
published  both  independently  by  the  Bureau 
in  the  form  of  station  weather  maps,  and  by 
the  newspapers  in  the  form  of  “commercial 
weather  maps.”  Since  March,  1910,  regular 
weekly  forecasts  have  also  been  published, 
which  have  proved  valuable,  particularly  in 
connection  with  the  breaking-up  of  continued 
drought  or  the  approach  of  cold  waves  or 
heavy  snows.  Special  storm  signals  are  dis- 
played to  warn  mariners  of  impending  storms 
along  the  coast  and  at  sea,  and  special  flood- 
warnings  are  sent  out  to  persons  liable  to 
damage  by  impending  river  floods.  The  basis 
of  the  work  of  weather-forecasting  consists  of 
over  fifty  official  weather  stations  scattered 
over  the  United  States  at  which  regular  obser- 
vations are  taken  and  telegraphed  to  the  head 
office  of  the  Bureau  at  Washington. 

The  publications  of  the  Weather  Bureau 
comprise  the  daily  weather  maps  issued  at 
Washington,  and  at  stations  throughout  the 
country;  the  National  Weather  Bulletin,  issued 
monthly  from  October  to  March,  and  weekly 
during  the  remainder  of  the  year,  at  Wash- 
ington; the  Snow  and  Ice  Bulletin,  issued 
weekly  during  the  winter;  the  monthly 
Weather  Remew;  the  quarterly  Bulletin  of  the 
Marine  Weather  Observatory;  the  Annual  Re- 
ports, and  occasional  bulletins  dealing  with 
miscellaneous  topics. 

See  Agriculture,  Relations  of  Govern- 
ment to;  Navigation,  Regulation  of. 

References:  Department  of  Agriculture,  An- 
nual Reports;  Chief  of  the  U.  S.  Weather 
Bureau,  Annual  Reports.  A.  N.  H. 

WEBSTER,  DANIEL.  Daniel  Webster 
(1782-1852)  was  born  at  Salisbury,  N.  H., 
January  18,  1782.  In  1805  he  was  admitted 


606 


S.  N.  D.  North. 


WEED  THURLOW— WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES,  STANDARDS  OF 


to  the  bar  at  Boston,  but  in  1807  removed  to 
Portsmouth,  N.  H.  From  1813  to  1817  he  was 
a member  of  Congress,  opposing  the  War  of 
1812.  Returning  to  Boston,  he  sat  in  the 
Massachusetts  constitutional  convention  of 
1820,  and  from  1823  to  1827  represented  the 
Boston  district  in  Congress.  He  opposed  the 
tariff  of  1824,  and  supported  Crawford  for 
the  presidency.  In  1827  he  was  elected  to  the 
Senate,  retaining  his  seat  until  1841.  Follow- 
ing a change  of  public  opinion  in  New  Eng- 
land, he  supported  the  tariff  of  1828.  His 
arguments  in  the  Dartmouth  College  case  (see), 
1818-19,  and  in  numerous  other  leading  cases 
in  which  he  appeared,  and  his  Bunker  Hill 
address  of  1825,  together  with  his  reply  to 
Hayne,  in  1830,  stamped  him  as  the  greatest 
American  orator  and  constitutional  lawyer  of 
his  time.  He  was  a Whig  aspirant  for 
the  presidency  in  1836,  but  received  only 
the  electoral  vote  of  Massachusetts;  and 
he  failed  of  renomination  in  1840.  From 
1841  to  1843  he  was  Secretary  of  State, 
and  concluded  the  Ashburton  treaty  of  1842 
with  Great  Britain,  thus  settling  the  Maine 
boundary  controversy.  From  1845  to  1850 
he  was  again  in  the  Senate,  before  which,  on 
March  7,  he  made  his  memorable  speech  on 
behalf  of  the  compromise  • measures.  In  the 
same  year  he  again  became  Secretary  of  State, 
and  died  in  office,  October  24,  1852,  at  Marsh- 
field, Massachusetts.  See  Compromise  of 
1820;  Great  Britain,  Diplomatic  Relations 
With;  Whig  Party.  References:  G.  T.  Cur- 
tis, Life  of  Daniel  Webster  (1870);  J.  W. 
McIntyre,  Ed.,  Writings  and  Speeches  of  Dan- 
iel Webster  (1903)  ; P.  Harvey,  Reminiscences 
and  Anecdotes  of  Daniel  Webster  (1877); 
H.  C.  Lodge,  Daniel  Webster  (rev.  ed.,  1898)  ; 
J.  B.  McMaster,  Darnel  Webster  (1902). 

W.  MacD. 

WEED,  THURLOW.  Thurlow  Weed  (1797- 
1882)  was  born  at  Cairo,  N.  Y.,  November  15, 
1797.  He  served  as  a private  in  the  War  of 
1812.  In  1817  he  became  assistant  editor  of 
the  Albany  Register.  After  further  newspaper 
experience  he  entered  the  office  of  the  Rochester 
Telegraph,  which  supported  DeWitt  Clinton 
and  John  Quincy  Adams,  and  in  1825  bought 
the  paper.  The  next  year  he  established  the 
Anti-Mason  Enquirer,  and  presently  became  a 
leader  of  the  Anti-Masonic  movement  (see). 
In  1830  he  founded  the  Albany  Evening  Jour- 
nal, of  which  he  retained  the  editorship  and 
control  until  1865.  Opposing  both  Jackson 
and  the  nullification  Democrats,  he  contri- 
buted powerfully  to  the  establishment  of  the 
Whig  party,  and  was  for  many  years  one  of 
its  most  influential  leaders.  He  was  a master 
in  party  argument.  With  the  help  of 
Seward  and  Greeley,  he  broke  the  power  of 
the  Albany  Regency  (see),  but  severed  his 
relations  with  Greeley  on  a question  of  office. 
He  aided  in  the  establishment  of  the  Republi- 
140 


can  party,  and  in  1860  urged  the  candidacy  of 
Seward;  but  he  supported  Lincoln  after  the 
latter’s  nomination,  and  again  in  1864.  In 
1861  he  was  sent  to  Europe  as  an  unofficial 
agent  in  the  interest  of  the  Union  cause.  He 
died  in  New  York  City,  November  22,  1882. 
See  Boss  and  Boss  Rule;  New  York;  Repub- 
lican Party.  References:  Thurlow  Weed,  Au- 
tobiography (1883)  ; T.  W.  Barnes,  Memoir  of 
Thurlow  Weed  (1884)  ; A.  S.  Alexander,  Pol. 
Hist,  of  the  State  of  New  York  (1906). 

W.  MacD. 

WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES,  STANDARDS 

OF.  The  people  gave  Congress  power  to  “fix 
the  standard  of  weights  and  measures”  and 
“to  make  all  laws  which  shall  be  necessary  and 
proper  for  carrying  into  execution  the  fore- 
going powers”  (Const.  Art.  I.  Sec.  viii,  Hf  5, 
18),  thus  making  plenary  the  federal  control  of 
weights  and  measures.  Congress  has  never 
fixed  the  national  standards  by  law  in  a man- 
ner satisfactory  to  metrologists  (compare  the 
model  laws  of  Denmark  or  Switzerland)  but 
has  taken  several  steps  in  that  direction. 

(1)  A statute  of  Mar.  2,  1799,  required  the 
surveyor  of  each  port  to  standardize  his  mea- 
sures to  comply  with  the  customs  clause  “all 
duties,  imposts,  and  excises  shall  be  uniform 
throughout  the  United  States”  (Art.  I,  Sec. 
viii,  If  1). 

(2)  A statute  of  May  19,  1828,  adopted  the 
troy  pound  brought  from  London  by  Gallatin 
as  the  standard  for  coinage  (now  superseded 
by  an  act  of  Mar.  4,  1911,  by  the  troy  pound 
of  the  Bureau  of  Standards). 

(3)  A statute  of  June  14,  1836,  ordered  that 
all  states  and  custom  houses  be  supplied  with 
sets  of  standards  made  and  adjusted  by  the 
Office  of  Standard  Weights  and  Measures  of 
the  Treasury  Department. 

(4)  A statute  of  July  28,  1866,  legalized  the 
metric  system  for  all  purposes;  and  under 
resolution  of  July  27,  1866,  all  the  states  were 
provided  with  standards  of  the  international 
metric  system  (like  provision  was  later  made 
Mar.  3,  1881,  for  the  so-called  “land  grant  col- 
leges” ) . 

(5)  A statute  of  March  3,  1901,  established 
the  National  Bureau  of  Standards  for  the  con- 
struction, custody,  and  verification  of  standards 
and  for  investigations  involving  precise  mea- 
surements. 

As  Congress  had  not  adopted  a single  “uni- 
versal standard  to  which  the  wise  and  the 
honest  can  repair”  a chaos  of  weights  and 
measures  resulted  from  the  assimilation  with- 
in our  domain  of  local  standards — the  Spanish 
vara,  French  toise,  English  yard,  and  inter- 
national meter.  Many  laws,  state  and  nation- 
al, fixed  units  and  standards  for  local  or 
special  uses  and  diversity  arose,  especially  as 
to  capacity  measures.  Even  the  common 
weights  and  measures  of  colonial  times,  sup- 
posedly British,  showed  confusing  differences. 


667 


WELFARE  SYSTEMS— WEST  AS  A FACTOR  IN  AMERICAN  POLITICS 


In  1824,  the  English  Standards — deposited 
in  the  Houses  of  Parliament — were  destroyed 
by  fire.  An  approximate  restoration  has  been 
effected.  England,  however,  abandoned  the 
old  bushel  and  the  troy  pound,  and  adopted  a 
larger  gallon  so  that  all  American  capacity 
measures  now  differ  from  those  of  England 
and  Canada.  The  act  of  1866  gave  rise  also  to 
a value  for  the  American  yard  slightly  dif- 
ferent from  that  of  England  and  changes  were 
detected  in  the  old  bronze  standard  of  the 
American  yard.  Hence  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment decided  (April  5,  1893)  to  derive  the 
yard  and  pound — and  necessarily  all  other 
units — from  the  newly  received  international 
meter  and  kilogram — the  world’s  most  perfect 
standards  of  length  and  mass.  Hence  these 
are  now  the  fundamental  standards  of  measure- 
ment for  the  United  States. 

The  standard  weights  and  measures  of  the 
United  States  are  those  of  the  metric  system 
and  the  pound,  yard,  gallon,  bushel  and  their 
derivatives.  The  exact  values  of  the  older 
units  were  left  by  Congress  to  be  fixed  by  the 
Treasury  Department.  The  legal  length  of  the 
American  yard  is  exactly  3600/3937  interna- 
tional meter,  and  the  inch,  100/3937  meter. 
The  American  standard  gallon  is  231  cubic 
inches  thus  derived,  and  the  standard  bushel  is 
2150.42  cubic  inches.  The  avoirdupois  pound 
is  .45359243  kilogram  and  the  troy  pound 
5760/7000  of  this  value.  The  tables  based  on 
these  units  are  given  in  textbooks  and  in 
their  complexity  sharply  contrast  with  the 
simple  decimal  units  of  the  metric  system. 

From  the  units  having  exact  values  fixed 
by  the  national  Government  are  derived  many 
groups  of  units  accepted  only  by  local  us- 
age. Many  of  these  are  ambiguous  and  ob- 
scure, others  vary  with  the  industry  or  local- 
ity. Of  still  less  sanction  are  the  colloquial 
units  having  only  the  homely  uses  of  the  rule 
of  thumb  such  as  the  “hands  high.”  While  the 
Government  tolerates  any  useful  measures  in 
industry  and  trade  if  not  conducive  to  fraud 
or  confusion,  usage  tends  to  become  restricted 
to  a few  legally  defined  units  based  upon  in- 
ternational standards. 

The  fundamental  standards  of  the  United 
States  are  deposited  in  the  National  Bureau 


of  Standards.  They  are  made  available  to 
the  public  through  the  standards  supplied  to 
the  states  by  the  Federal  Government.  For 
more  precise  uses,  the  Bureau  of  Standards 
also  directly  calibrates  manufacturers’  stand- 
ards of  all  kinds,  thus  ensuring  accuracy  of 
products  at  the  outset  in  the  factory  and  the 
laboratory.  Commercial  and  trade  standards 
are  regulated  through  state,  county,  and  city 
laws  and  ordinances,  enforced  more  or  less  ef- 
ficiently by  local  officials. 

In  all  phases  of  the  subject  the  National 
Bureau  of  Standards  cooperates  to  maintain 
the  highest  efficiency  whether  in  local  inspec- 
tion of  trade  measures  or  the  most  refined 
measurements  known  to  science. 

See  Business,  Government  Restriction 
of;  Coinage  and  Specie  Currency  in  the 
United  States.  Henry  D.  Hubbard. 

WELFARE  SYSTEMS.  Welfare  systems 
comprise  the  organized  efforts  of  employers  to 
render  services  to  their  employees  over  and 
above  the  payment  of  wages.  All  large  estab- 
lishments now  have  some  such  efforts  organized, 
as  for  example  lunch  rooms,  rest  rooms,  swim- 
ming baths,  training  schools  for  promotion  in 
the  service,  sick  and  retirement  funds,  funds 
for  small  loans,  vacation  homes,  medical  serv- 
ice and  a great  variety  of  other  services.  The 
object  is  somewhat  analogous  to  profit  shar- 
ing, namely,  to  hold  and  develop  efficiency  and 
loyalty  in  a body  of  workers  firmly  attached 
to  the  business.  The  National  Cash  Register 
Co.  (Dayton,  Ohio)  has  been  a pioneer  in 
expanding  such  work,  and  the  National  Elec- 
tric Light  Association  and  the  American  Iron 
and  Steel  Institute  represent  newer  develop- 
ments in  extensive  plans  for  welfare  work  for 
groups  of  federated  industries.  Department 
stores  and  some  large  manufacturers  employ 
highly  paid  superintendents  of  welfare  de- 
partments who  are  charged  with  full  responsi- 
bility and  given  large  discretionary  powers  in 
hiring,  discharging,  and  providing  for  the  wel- 
fare of  all  employees.  References:  W.  H.  Tol- 
man,  Social  Engineering  (1909);  National 
Civic  Federation,  Conference  on  Welfare  Work 
(1904);  E.  L.  Earp,  The  Social  Engineer 
(1911).  S.  McC.  L. 


WEST  AS  A FACTOR  IN  AMERICAN  POLITICS 


Colonial  West. — The  West  as  a factor  in 
politics  may  be  said  to  have  appeared  with  the 
contests  between  the  interior  rural  element 
and  the  coastal  settlements  as  the  colonies 
progressed.  It  became  more  obvious  after 
the  occupation  of  the  region  beyond  the  head 
of  tide-water  which  was  cut  off  from  the 
coast  by  the  falls  of  the  rivers  and  by  the 
southern  line  of  pine  barrens.  This  region 


between  the  Alleghanies  and  the  coastal  plain 
was  occupied  in  the  course  of  the  eighteenth 
century  by  a society  radically  different  from 
that  of  the  merchants  and  planters  of  the 
coast.  It  included  a large  fraction  of  Scotch- 
Irish  Presbyterians  and  Germans  of  many  sects 
(see  Race  Elements),  and  was  a democracy 
of  pioneer  farmers  and  cattle  raisers  without 
slaves. 


668 


WEST  AS  A FACTOR  IN  AMERICAN  POLITICS 


Social  and  economic  contrasts  and  physical 
separation  produced  their  natural  results  in 
political  differences.  In  practically  all  of  the 
colonies  the  eastern  settlements  retained  pre- 
dominance in  government  by  declining  to  ap- 
portion their  legislatures  according  to  free 
population  as  the  back  country  was  settled; 
by  monopolizing  the  principal  colonial  offices, 
by  imposing  taxes  which  operated  to  the  dis- 
advantage of  the  interior  counties;  and  by 
tardily  extending  the  judiciary  to  the  back 
country.  These  political  grievances,  as  well 
as  the  engrossing  of  the  better  lands  by  the 
leading  men  in  the  East,  resulted,  in  practic- 
ally every  colony,  in  political  contests.  The 
“up  country”  expressed  its  opposition  by  the 
Regulator  movement  in  the  Carolinas  from 
1769  to  1771.  In  Virginia  prolonged  disputes 
arose  between  the  tidewater  and  upland  coun- 
ties, which  found  their  most  noteworthy  ex- 
pression in  the  Virginia  Convention  of  1829, 
and  finally  resulted  in  the  separate  state  of 
West  Virginia  (see)  in  1863.  Pennsylvania’s 
local  political  history  was  chiefly  that  of  the 
conflicts  between  the  three  old  Quaker  coun- 
ties about  Philadelphia  with  the  back  country. 
The  so-called  Presbyterian  constitution  of  1776 
marked  the  political  ascendency  of  the  inter- 
ior. Even  in  New  England  there  were  contests 
between  the  eastern  and  western  elements  such 
as  the  attempt  of  the  western,  or  river,  coun- 
ties of  New  Hampshire  to  join  with  the  revo- 
lutionary state  of  Vermont,  and  finally  the 
outbreak  known  as  the  Shays’  Rebellion  of 
1786  (see) . 

Although  the  gradual  assimilation  of  the 
cis-Alleghany  interior  to  the  coast  reduced 
these  antagonisms,  it  is  possible  to  trace  a 
real  political  section,  which  may  be  called  the 
Old  West.  This  subdivision  tended  to  support 
the  national  and  western  policies  well  down 
into  the  nineteenth  century.  It  was  the  strong- 
hold of  the  movement  for  separation  of  church 
and  state,  and  in  general  the  support  of  demo- 
cratic tendencies. 

In  the  Revolution. — The  passage  of  the  West 
across  to  the  Mississippi  Valley  in  the  Revo- 
lutionary era  brought  still  more  pronounced 
western  influences  to  politics.  Grievances  of 
lack  of  specie,  the  legal  medium  in  which  to 
pay  taxes  and  buy  lands,  dissatisfaction  over 
the  indifference  of  the  East  to  protection 
from  the  Indians,  and  failure  to  provide  satis- 
factory local  governments,  as  well  as  opposition 
to  the  speculative  engrossment  of  western 
lands  by  eastern  capitalists,  were  among  the 
grounds  of  complaint  by  western  pioneer  so- 
ciety against  the  conservative  eastern  control. 
The  most  significant  expressions  of  western 
political  interests  at  this  time  were  the  efforts 
of  the  transmontane  counties  of  various  sea- 
board states  to  acquire  political  autonomy 
(see  Kentucky;  Franklin,  Self-Constituted 
State  of;  Transylvania)  ; the  liberal  pro- 
visions for  admitting  new  states  in  the  Fed- 


eral Constitution;  and  the  separatist  tend- 
encies exhibited  in  the  controversy  over  the 
free  navigation  of  the  Mississippi.  To  the 
ratification  of  the  Constitution  the  agricul- 
tural communities  were  in  general  opposed, 
but  there  were  notable  exceptions  to  this  in 
parts  of  Kentucky,  Tennessee,  and  western 
Virginia.  Federalist  leaders  like  Gouverneur 
Morris  voiced  in  the  Constitutional  Conven- 
tion the  eastern  fears  of  western  political 
power  and  made  various  unsuccessful  prop- 
ositions for  limiting  the  admission  and  repre- 
sentation of  new  states  with  a view  to  retain- 
ing the  control  in  the  seaboard  ( see  Federal 
Convention). 

Under  the  Federalists. — In  the  federalist 
period  the  West  was  an  important  influence 
in  foreign  relations  during  the  intrigues  of 
France,  England,  and  Spain  to  separate  our 
western  borders  and  to  acquire  the  control 
of  the  Mississippi  Valley  and  the  Great  Lakes. 
In  the  debates  over  the  public  land  policy 
(see),  the  East  had  held  back  because  cheap 
western  lands  in  small  offerings  would  draw 
off  her  labor  population  and  decrease  land 
values.  Partly  a separatist  tendency  and  part- 
ly a western  distrust  of  the  Federalist  policy 
led  to  the  support  by  Kentucky  of  the  Vir- 
ginia state  rights  policy  in  the  form  of  the 
Kentucky  Resolutions  of  1798  and  1799  (see). 
The  Federalists  steadily  lost  what  western 
following  they  had  possessed. 

Alliance  of  West  and  South. — The  triumph 
of  the  Democratic  party  under  Jefferson 
marked  the  ascendency  of  allied  southern  and 
western  interests  to  the  disadvantage  of  New 
England,  resulting  in  the  Louisiana  Purchase 
(see),  the  embargo  (see),  and  the  War  of  1812, 
all  of  which  were  made  possibly  by  the  growth 
of  settlement  and  political  power  in  the  West 
and  were  accompanied  by  urgent  protests  from 
New  England.  But  all  were  satisfactory  to 
the  agricultural  and  expansionist  West,  eager 
to  hold  both  flanks  of  the  Mississippi  Valley,  in- 
cluding the  Gulf  and  Canada,  and  indifferent 
to  the  navigating  and  shipping  interest.  West- 
ern political  influence  in  the  War  of  1812  (see 
Wars  of  the  United  States)  under  leaders 
like  Clay  and  Grundy,  and  western  military 
victories  under  Harrison  in  the  north  and  Jack- 
son  in  the  south,  still  further  increased  the 
influence  of  the  trans-Alleghany  section. 

Alliance  of  West  and  North. — The  stimulus 
to  western  settlement  under  the  influence  of 
improved  transportation  by  means  of  the  newly 
invented  steamboat,  and  the  growth  of  the 
cotton  industry  in  the  Gulf  region,  which  pro- 
duced an  additional  market  for  the  foodstuffs 
raised  by  the  old  Northwest,  resulted  in  an 
increasing  western  surplus  production.  The 
loss  of  the  former  European  markets  by  the 
close  of  the  Napoleonic  wars,  and  by  the  Eng- 
lish corn  laws,  led  to  efforts  on  the  part  of 
western  statesmen,  especially  of  Henry  Clay, 
to  develop  a system  of  internal  improvements 


669 


WEST  AS  A FACTOR  IN  AMERICAN  POLITICS 


in  order  to  break  down  the  Alleghany  barrier, 
and  a protective  tariff  to  develop  a home  mar- 
ket. The  American  system  (see),  as  it  was 
called,  resulted  in  producing  a concert  of 
political  action  between  the  manufacturing 
areas  of  New  England  and  the  Middle  States 
on  the  one  hand  and  the  Ohio  Valley,  on  the 
other.  The  votes  of  the  Ohio  Valley  were 
sufficient  to  turn  the  scale  in  favor  of  protec- 
tive tariff  bills  from  1816  to  1832. 

The  West  Dominant.  — Western  political 
power  grew  rapidly  in  this  era.  The  admis- 
sion of  Ohio,  Louisiana,  Indiana,  Mississippi, 
Illinois,  Alabama,  and  Missouri  between  1802 
and  1821  greatly  increased  the  relative  in- 
fluence of  the  Mississippi  Valley.  Up  to  the 
War  of  1812  this  valley  had  six  Senators, 
against  ten  from  New  England,  six  from  the 
Middle  States,  and  twelve  from  the  South 
Atlantic.  By  1840  the  Mississippi  Valley  sent 
twenty-two  Senators,  which  was  a larger  num- 
ber than  that  of  any  other  single  section, 
more  than  the  Senators  from  all  the  North 
Atlantic  states  and  nearly  twice  the  number 
of  those  from  the  South  Atlantic.  In  the 
House  it  had  more  representatives  than  had 
any  other  section,  more  than  those  of  the 
entire  North  Atlantic  group  and  more  than 
New  England  and  the  South  Atlantic  states 
combined. 

This  trans-Alleghany  democracy,  still  deeply 
marked  by  frontier  traits,  eagerly  seeking  its 
advantage  by  the  most  direct  methods,  less 
concerned  over  refinements  of  law  and  the 
Constitution  than  in  promoting  the  liberty  and 
equality  of  the  common  man,  and  indifferent 
to  old  traditions  and  vested  interests  had  come 
to  power  in  the  presidency  of  its  typical  man, 
Andrew:  Jackson  (see  Jacksonian  Democracy). 

His  triumph  represented,  however,  not  only 
the  rural  western  democracy  that  found  its 
center  in  Tennessee,  but  also  the  increasing 
influence  of  the  working  classes  in  the  East. 
Men  of  Tennessee  origin,  like  Benton,  Grundy, 
Bell,  White  and  Polk  ruled  the  nation.  Old 
forces  of  conservative  political  control  gave 
way  before  the  western  tide  of  nationalistic 
democracy.  The  attitude  of  the  debtor  West 
(which  confused  the  need  of  capital  with  the 
need  of  an  inflated  currency)  toward  the 
control  exercised  by  the  United  States  Bank 
(see  Bank,  United  States)  resulted  in  the 
“Jackson’s  War  on  the  Bank.”  His  success 
revealed  not  only  the  antipathy  of  the  West 
in  general  toward  the  bank  as  an  “engine  of 
aristocracy,”  but  also  the  suspicion  of  the 
monied  centers  of  the  East  which  pervaded 
the  West,  and  which  has  been  a persistent 
characteristic  of  western  politics  (see  Silver 
Coinage  Controversy;  Grangers).  When  the 
crisis  of  1837  revealed  the  weakness  of  the 
state  banks,  the  rural  classes  of  the  West,  be- 
lieving with  their  leader  that  they  were  being 
made  “hewers  of  wood  and  drawers  of  water  for 
the  monied  aristocracy,”  turned  to  support 


hard  money  and  government  divorce  from 
banks,  under  a suspicion  of  the  entire  credit 
system.  In  this,  however,  they  met  the  oppo- 
sition of  the  commercial  centers  of  the  West. 

Rivalry  for  Commerce  with  the  West. — 
Meantime  the  industrial  and  political  growth 
of  the  West  occasioned  rivalries  among  the 
eastern  sections  for  the  support  of  this  new 
sectional  power.  As  seaboard  cities  like  Bos- 
ton, New  York,  Philadelphia,  Baltimore  and 
Charleston  turned  their  attention  from  the 
European  market  to  that  of  the  interior,  they 
began  to  struggle  for  respective  spheres  of 
influence  in  that  great  region,  and  each  sec- 
tion tributary  to  these  commercial  cities  began 
to  press  for  transportation  systems  to  the  West 
that  would  bind  that  region  to  itself  by  ties 
of  interest.  Diplomatic  issues  were  subordi- 
nated to  sectional  domestic  politics  in  which 
the  development  of  the  interior  played  the 
leading  role. 

This  was  illustrated  in  the  great  debate  in 
the  Senate  in  1830  over  Foot’s  land  resolution, 
when  Hayne  for  the  South  and  Benton  for 
the  West  denounced  New  England’s  opposition 
to  western  interests,  and  Webster  defended  his 
section.  Usually  cited  only  as  a landmark  in 
the  constitutional  struggle  between  state  sov- 
ereignty and  nationalism,  it  is  evident  that 
the  underlying  contest  in  this  debate  was  a 
sectional  one,  and  that  the  West  was  the  bone 
of  contention. 

A similar  condition  is  exhibited  in  Calhoun’s 
attempts  to  win  the  West  to  southern  policies. 
Having  failed  in  his  attempt  in  1828  and  1832 
to  defeat  the  protective  tariff  system  by  bring- 
ing southern  votes  to  the  aid  of  western  in- 
terests, thus  destroying  New  England’s  ad- 
vantage, he  finally  proposed  his  nullification 
policy  as  a means  of  checking  the  growing 
national  majority  against  Southern  interests. 
But  he  realized  that  it  was  more  important 
to  effect  substantial  connections  between  the 
West  as  the  growing  part  of  the  nation  and 
the  South. 

Land  Question. — This  led  him  to  attempt  to 
extend  South  Carolina’s  economic  influence  into 
the  West  by  securing  funds  for  the  Cincinnati 
and  Charleston  railroad  by  the  distribu- 
tion of  the  surplus  revenue,  while  he  also  made 
his  bid  for  a southern  and  western  alliance 
by  renewed  offer  of  the  cession  of  the  public 
lands  to  the  states  within  which  they  lay. 
The  West  itself  was  divided  between  the  policy 
of  preemption,  graduation  and  donation  of  the 
public  lands  favored  by  Benton  and  the  newer 
states  (see  Public  Lands),  and  the  policy  of 
the  older  western  states,  urged  by  Henry  Clay 
in  alliance  with  northeastern  forces,  for  the 
distribution  of  the  net  proceeds  of  the  sales 
of  the  public  lands  among  all  the  states. 

Already  incipient  eastern  labor  forces  were 
pressing  forward  the  ideas  of  free  homesteads 
and  land  limitation  in  the  interest  of  higher 
wages  and  greater  industrial  freedom  of  labor 


WEST  AS  A FACTOR  IN  AMERICAN  POLITICS 


to  be  produced  by  the  option  of  occupying 
free  lands  in  the  West. 

It  is  because  the  land  question  was  deeply 
connected  with  the  whole  social  and  industrial 
structure  of  the  American  democracy  that  this 
western  question  became  so  important  a sec- 
tional and  national  question.  Manufacturing 
New  England  and  Pennsylvania  were  attached 
to  their  tariff  interests  and  desired  the  sup- 
port of  the  West.  The  South  was  desirous  of 
procuring  western  support  for  reduction  of 
the  tariff  and  for  slavery.  The  West  was 
seeking  cheaper  lands  for  its  settlers,  more 
easy  access  to  markets,  and  an  expansion  of 
credit  in  support  of  its  undertakings.  Politics 
involved  sectional  bidding  to  procure  these 
various  objects  by  alliance  and  concession. 

Finance  and  Banking. — Meantime  the  West 
was  undergoing  various  transformations  which 
affected  its  political  attitude.  The  develop- 
ment of  industrial  towns  and  denser  settle- 
ment along  the  Ohio  Valley  and  in  the  more 
fertile  parts  of  Tennessee  and  the  lower  South 
increased  the  power  of  commercial  forces  and 
banks  in  those  regions,  and  attracted  them  to 
the  Whig  policy.  The  old  Jacksonian  democ- 
racy, resting  on  the  basis  of  the  pioneer  farm- 
ers, found  its  support  in  the  sparsely  settled 
farming  regions.  These  political  divisions  were 
clearly  seen  in  the  divided  attitude  of  the  West 
on  the  question  of  the  recharter  of  the  na- 
tional bank,  and  on  the  independent  treasury 
issue. 

The  Whigs  abandoned  the  avowed  support  of 
the  national  bank  and  appealed  to  the  former 
Jacksonian  democracy  in  1840,  through  the 
nomination  of  William  Henry  Harrison,  as 
another  western  military  hero  and  man  of 
the  people,  favorable  to  simplicity  and  econo- 
my in  government,  and  to  subordination  of  the 
executive.  Aided  by  the  effects  of  the  panic  of 
1837,  they  added  to  their  western  following  and 
elected  their  candidate. 

Slavery. — On  the  question  of  the  extension 
of  slavery  the  West  had  been  divided  from 
the  beginning.  The  national  habit  of  expan- 
sion was  as  old  as  the  beginnings  of  our  his- 
tory. This  habit,  especially  congenial  to  the 
westerners,  now  came  into  collision  with  the 
divergent  interests  of  the  rival  free  and  slave 
sections  which  were  advancing  across  the  con- 
tinent. Both  North  and  South  realized  that 
the  contest  was  one  for  sectional  power  in  the 
Union,  and  that  its  outcome  depended  upon  the 
form  of  society  which  should  be  imposed  upon 
the  West.  The  annexation  of  Texas  ( see 
Texas,  Annexation  of)  in  the  forties,  the 
Mexican  War,  as  well  as  the  acquisition  of 
Oregon  under  the  Tennesseean,  President  Polk, 
were  expressions  of  the  continued  movement 
of  western  expansion  and  western  political  in- 
fluence rather  than  primarily  a southern  slave- 
holding policy. 

By  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century,  the 
forces  of  interstate  migration  and  economic 


conditions  had  brought  about  a horizontal  di- 
vision of  the  West  into  zones  ( see  Section- 
alism in  American  Government)  : (1) 

A zone  settled  chiefly  by  New  York-New 
England  people  became  increasingly  op- 
posed to  slavery  expansion  because  by  its  so- 
cial and  industrial  life  it  became  bound  to  the 
Northeast.  (2)  A compromise  zone  embracing 
both  banks  of  the  Ohio,  settled  chiefly  by  south- 
ern upland  people,  felt  less  antagonism  to  sla- 
very. (3)  Lower  down  the  Mississippi  Valley 
was  another  zone  of  southern  uplanders,  which 
held  few  slaves  and  was  keenly  alive  to  south- 
ern sectional  interests.  (4)  In  the  Black  Belt, 
an  aristocracy  of  great  planters,  largely  of  low- 
land origin,  was  based  on  slavery. 

Parties  and  Slavery. — This  situation  explains 
western  politics  in  the  era  between  1850  and 
the  Civil  War.  The  southern  Mississippi  Val- 
ley increasingly  lost  its  western  quality  and 
turned  to  common  action  with  the  cotton 
states.  It  became  the  “Lower  South,”  the  seat 
of  the  power  of  the  southern  Democrats,  and 
for  a time  the  most  important  political  group 
in  the  nation. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  New  York -New  Eng- 
land zone  of  settlement  about  the  Great  Lakes, 
with  its  idealistic  German  element  became  in- 
creasingly restive  under  these  conditions.  The 
campaign  of  1848  showed  western  political  in- 
fluence in  the  Democratic  nomination  of  Lewis 
Cass  for  the  presidency,  on  his  support  of 
squatter  sovereignty,  which  was  the  application 
of  a well-seasoned  western  doctrine  to  the 
slavery  issue.  Western  influence  was  exhibit- 
ed, also,  in  the  alliance  between  western  anti- 
slavery men  and  the  New  York  “Barnburners” 
(see)  in  the  nomination  of  Van  Buren  by  the 
newly  formed  Free  Soil  party. 

The  compromise  of  1850  fashioned  by  Clay, 
who  remained  the  leader  of  the  Ohio  Valley 
Whigs,  was  followed  by  the  reopening  of  the 
question  in  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Bill  (see) 
by  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  of  Illinois,  leader  of 
the  western  democracy;  which  found  its  sup- 
port largely  among  the  upland  southern  set- 
tlers of  the  Ohio  Valley  zone.  Douglas  with 
his  characteristically  western  policies  of  ex- 
pansion, political  development  of  the  new  terri- 
tories, and  squatter  sovereignty,  was  unable  to 
attract  the  support  of  the  lower  Mississippi 
Valley  for  his  presidential  aspirations.  After 
the  Republican  party  had  superseded  the  Free 
Soil  party  as  the  exponent  of  the  alliance  be- 
tween the  Northeast  and  its  colonies  in  the 
West;  and  when  the  events  in  Kansas  and  the 
Dred  Scott  decision  had  awakened  the  West 
to  the  real  significance  of  the  contest,  Doug- 
las’ debates  with  Abraham  Lincoln  of  Illi- 
nois brought  a new  leader  to  national  promi- 
nence as  an  exponent  of  western  antislavery 
ideas. 

Crisis  of  1860. — Shortly  before  1860  rail- 
road trunk  lines  had  connected  the  Great 
Lakes  and  the  upper  Mississippi  with  New 


671 


WEST  AS  A FACTOR  IN  AMERICAN  POLITICS 


York  and  Boston,  ensuring  the  decline  of  New 
Orleans  as  the  commercial  metropolis  of  the 
Mississippi  Valley.  The  leaders  of  the  cotton 
kingdom  failed  to  perceive  the  full  strength 
of  the  ties  of  invested  capital,  transportation 
systems,  markets,  and  racial  and  social  con- 
nections between  the  Northwest  and  the  North- 
east. Some  of  them  claimed  ultimate  southern 
ascendency  over  the  Mississippi  Valley  and 
found  in  it  the  guaranty  of  southern  success; 
while  Seward,  of  New  York  declared  to  the 
voters  of  the  northwest,  “We  resign  to  you  the 
banner  of  human  rights  and  liberty  on  this 
continent.” 

In  the  presidential  campaign  of  1860  the 
West  had  two  candidates.  Abraham  Lincoln’s 
strength  lay  in  the  northern  zone,  but  his 
career  and  family  history  were  the  embodiment 
of  the  western  movement  from  New  England 
through  Pennsylvania,  along  the  Piedmont,  into 
Kentucky  and  across  the  Ohio  to  Indiana  and 
Illinois.  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  of  Illinois,  a 
migrated  Vermonter,  found  his  support  more 
directly  in  the  border  zone.  When  the  Con- 
federacy was  organized,  Jefferson  Davis  of  Mis- 
sissippi was  called  to  its  presidency.  His  career 
is  the  complement  to  that  of  Lincoln,  for  he 
also  was  born  in  Kentucky,  but  settled  in  the 
Lower  South  where  he  represented  the  aggres- 
sive combination  of  its  western  and  southern 
elements. 

Post  Bellum  Parties. — In  its  western  aspects 
the  Civil  War  was  a contest  between  the  men 
of  the  lake  and  prairie  plains  of  the  North- 
west against  the  men  of  the  Gulf  plains.  The 
freeing  of  the  Mississippi  under  General  Grant 
of  Illinois  and  Sherman  of  Ohio  determined 
the  outcome  of  the  war,  in  the  opinion  of  the 
latter  general,  who  declared,  “Whatever 
power  holds  that  river  can  govern  this  con- 
tinent.” 

In  national  councils  the  influence  of  the  West 
was  exercised  through  an  administration, 
which,  besides  the  President  included  in  the 
Cabinet  a group  of  western  statesmen,  of 
whom  Chase  was  the  most  famous.  The  grow- 
ing economic  and  political  power  of  the  North- 
west during  and  after  the  War  made  that  sec- 
tion especially  powerful,  as  is  illustrated  bv 
the  selection  as  President  in  close  succession 
of  Grant,  Hayes,  Garfield,  Harrison  of  Indiana 
and  McKinley  of  Ohio.  The  Republican  party 
was  composed  of  an  allied  capitalistic  North- 
east and  an  agricultural  Northwest,  saturated 
with  the  nationalistic  feeling  of  the  war,  and 
expanding  its  influence  under  the  political 
leadership  of  the  returned  soldiers  and  officers 
into  the  new  prairie  states  of  the  trans-Mis- 
sissippi region.  This  combination  kept  the 
Republican  party  in  power  until  the  election 
of  Cleveland  as  Democratic  President  in  1884. 

Western  Agrarian  Movements.  — In  the 
meantime  the  West  began  to  show  dissatis- 
faction with  this  eastern  alliance.  There  ap- 
peared a growing  distrust  of  the  banking,  cur- 


rency, and  transportation  influences  upon  the 
Republican  party.  This  was  expressed  in  two 
noteworthy  political  movements  especially 
strong  in  the  agricultural  and  debtor  regions 
of  the  West.  The  Greenback  (see)  movement, 
while  influential  among  the  laboring  classes 
and  debtor  farmers  of  the  East,  found  especial- 
ly congenial  soil  in  the  western  regions  of 
mortgaged  farms.  It  was  antagonistic  to  the 
bondholders,  bankers  and  stockholders  of  the 
Northeast.  The  Granger  (see)  movement, 
characteristically  western,  reached  its  height 
about  1874.  This  resulted  in  independent  par- 
ties in  various  states  of  the  Middle  West  and 
Pacific  coast,  and  led  to  state  regulative  com- 
missions and  state  laws  fixing  maximum  rail- 
road rates,  as  well  as  to  propositions  in  Con- 
gress for  federal  regulation  of  interstate  com- 
merce. The  courts  supported  the  right  of  gov- 
ernment to  regulate  common  carriers  and  these 
decisions  later  became  the  legal  basis  for  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission.  The  farm- 
ers’ movement  also  strengthened  the  anti-tariff 
sentiment  in  the  West,  and  tended  to  support 
the  opposition  to  restriction  of  the  volume  of 
the  currency. 

The  decline  of  agricultural  prices  (largely 
the  result  of  the  overproduction  which  fol- 
lowed the  rush  to  the  new  wheat  fields  of  the 
prairie  states),  and  the  alleged  appreciation  of 
money  under  the  gold  standard,  were  contem- 
poraneous with  the  opening  up  of  great  silver 
deposits  in  the  Rocky  Mountain  region.  In 
these  facts  lies  the  explanation  of  another  im- 
portant era  of  western  political  influence. 

Silver  Currency. — The  visible  sufferings  of 
the  railroads  in  the  panic  of  1873  put  a stop 
to  the  Granger  attacks  upon  western  trans- 
portation system;  their  cooperative  associa- 
tions also  failed.  But  a new  farmers’  move- 
ment, chiefly  western  and  southwestern,  grad- 
ually took  shape.  This  made  an  appeal  for 
legislation  to  redress  agricultural  depression, 
and  a protest  against  payment  of  mortgages 
in  what  was  believed  to  be  an  appreciating 
currency  which  worked  to  the  advantage  of 
the  eastern  centers  of  capital.  With  four  ex- 
ceptions all  Senators  west  of  the  Alleghanies 
voted  for  the  Bland-Allison  silver  purchase 
compromise  in  1878;  and  only  one  of  the 
New  England,  New  York,  and  New  Jersey  Sen- 
ators was  in  active  opposition  to  it.  The  House 
of  Representatives  passed  the  Bland  bill  (see) 
for  free  coinage  of  silver  by  a vote  of  163 
to  34.  Much  the  same  alignment  was  exhibited 
in  the  vote  forbidding  the  further  retirement 
of  greenbacks  in  1878.  For  over  a decade 
thereafter  sectional  voting  was  more  signifi- 
cant than  party  voting,  in  view  of  the  internal 
party  divisions  on  currency  and  tariff.  Be- 
tween 1880  and  1890  west  of  the  Alleghanies 
more  than  eight  million  souls  were  added,  while 
the  old  eastern  states  increased  by  but  half 
that  number.  The  political  power  of  the  West 
was  formally  recruited  by  the  addition  of 


WEST  AS  A FACTOR  IN  AMERICAN  POLITICS 


seven  new  agricultural  and  mining  states,  Colo- 
rado (1876),  North  Dakota,  South  Dakota, 
Washington  and  Montana  (1889),  and  Idaho 
and  Wyoming  (1890).  The  free  silver  forces 
were  thus  greatly  increased  in  the  Senate,  at 
the  same  time  that  there  was  overproduction  in 
agriculture  and  silver  and  low  prices  for  all 
commodities  prevailed. 

Signs  of  the  new  political  influence  of  the 
West  were  soon  evident.  The  Interstate  Com- 
merce Act  of  1887  was  due  in  large  part  to 
western  votes,  as  were  the  Anti-Trust  Act  of 
1890,  and  the  Sherman  Silver  Purchase  Act 
of  the  same  year;  indeed  a free  coinage  meas- 
ure passed  the  Senate  by  the  votes  of  western 
members. 

Populism. — The  silver  convention  at  St. 
Louis  in  the  fall  of  1889  and  the  convention 
at  Omaha  of  the  Populist  party  in  1892  gave 
evidence  of  the  same  western  temper.  The 
Omaha  platform  illustrated  the  growing  ten- 
dency of  the  former  individualistic  West  to 
appeal  to  legislative  remedies  for  social  and 
economic  ills,  as  the  free  land  era  came  to  its 
close.  It  denounced  the  “conspiracy”  of  east- 
ern capitalists,  the  tendency  to  “breed  tramps 
and  millionaires,”  and  demanded  the  free  and 
unlimited  coinage  of  silver;  the  expansion  of 
the  currency,  to  be  issued  directly  to  the  peo- 
ple, postal  savings  banks;  government  owner- 
ship of  railroads,  telegraphs  and  telephones;  a 
graduated  income  tax;  and  commended  the 
initiative  and  referendum.  The  effective  power 
of  the  Populists  lay,  however,  rather  in  their 
effect  upon  public  opinion  and  in  spreading 
alarm  and  dissension  within  the  older  parties 
than  in  their  actual  votes. 

Split  in  the  Democratic  Party. — The  panic 
of  1893  increased  the  general  unrest  and  fos- 
tered the  tendency  of  the  growing  eastern  labor 
movement  to  unite  with  these  other  forces  of 
discontent.  The  Democratic  administration 
failed  to  pass  remedial  tariff  legislation  in 
1894  ( see  Wilson-Gorman  Tariff),  owing  to 
the  bipartisan  combination  chiefly  of  eastern 
protected  interests  in  the  Senate.  The  “gold 
purchases”  made  by  Cleveland  to  protect  the 
treasury  still  further  alienated  the  western 
wing  of  his  party,  and  the  income  tax  of  1894 
was  declared  unconstitutional  by  the  Supreme 
Court  ( see  Pollock  vs.  Farmers’  Loan  and 
Trust  Co.,  158  V.  S.  618.) 

The  campaign  of  1896  marked  a realignment 
of  parties;  the  Republicans  standing  firmly 
for  the  gold  standard  and  a protective  tariff, 
were  met  by  the  Democratic  party  revolution- 
ized by  the  triumph  of  western  and  southern 
forces  under  Bryan  of  Nebraska.  His  cam- 
paign of  1896  was  waged  in  behalf  of  free 
silver  and  he  rallied  to  his  cause  the  silver 
producing  states  of  the  far  West  as  well  as 
the  Populists  of  the  prairie  states.  The  older 
states  of  the  Middle  West,  however,  refused 
to  accept  free  silver,  and  thus  this  western 
revolution  failed. 


Prosperity. — A tide  of  prosperity  set  in 
about  1898  which  allayed  western  discontent 
and  increased  the  political  influence  of  the 
East.  Thanks  to  the  newly  opened  mines  of 
Alaska,  new  processes  in  ore  extraction,  and 
the  new  mines  of  Africa,  the  world  production 
of  gold  vastly  increased  and  calmed  the  com- 
plaint that  there  was  an  inadequate  standard 
for  the  currency.  Agriculture  becoming  better 
organized  and  prosperous,  many  farms  were 
freed  from  mortgage.  The  business  revolution 
which  resulted  from  combinations  of  capital, 
“high  financiering,”  and  the  exploitation  of 
new  sources  of  iron  and  coal  by  improved 
methods  all  tended  to  turn  attention  from  poli- 
tical ills  to  economic  gains.  At  the  same  time 
the  Spanish  American  War  captured  the  popu- 
lar imagination.  This  era  of  prosperity  lasted 
nearly  a decade  before  new  western  political 
movements  made  manifest  the  reaction. 

Progressivism.  — In  various  western  states 
and  cities  reform  movements,  characterized  by 
an  attempt  to  check  the  influence  of  public 
service  corporations  and  professional  politi- 
cians of  the  “regular”  organizations,  were  in 
action  at  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  cen- 
tury. Governors  like  La  Follette,  of  Wisconsin, 
Folk,  of  Missouri,  and  Cummins  of  Iowa  won 
fights  for  better  railway  regulations,  destruc- 
tion of  corrupt  politics  and  more  equitable  tax- 
ation. The  movement  for  direct  primaries, 
followed  by  the  “Oregon  system”  of  initiative, 
referendum  and  recall,  and  the  demand  for 
popular  government  in  general,  were  growing. 
In  the  period  of  Roosevelt’s  presidency  (1901- 
1909)  these  demands  took  on  a national  aspect 
and  were  accompanied  by  efforts,  strongest  in 
the  West,  to  destroy  the  power  of  the  trusts; 
to  give  more  effective  control  to  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  (see)  ; to  lower  the 
tariff ; and  to  break  down  the  conservative 
control  in  the  Senate  through  popular  election 
of  Senator;  and  in  the  House  by  overturning 
the  power  of  the  speaker.  A group  of  western- 
ers, especially  La  Follette  and  Cummins,  came 
into  the  Senate  with  startling  disregard  for 
the  traditions  of  that  body,  according  to  which 
the  seniors  in  office,  chiefly  from  the  East, 
controlled  the  machinery  and  dictated  the 
policy. 

President  Roosevelt  who  had  lived  for  some 
time  in  the  cattle  country  of  the  West,  and 
had  a sympathetic  understanding  of  its  atti- 
tude, lent  a qualified  aid  to  those  tendencies 
and  in  his  conservation  policy  raised  a new 
western  issue  to  primary  importance.  Alarmed 
by  the  diminution  or  monopolization  of  the 
supplies  of  public  lands,  minerals,  forests,  water 
power,  and  irrigation  opportunities  by  eastern 
capital,  the  Middle  West  emphasized  its  col- 
lective attitude.  The  general  radical  poli- 
cies once  held  by  Grangers,  Populists  and 
Bryan  Democrats  now  spread  in  more  or  less 
modified  form  among  the  regions  where  these 
forces  had  been  strong,  and  also  appealed  to 


673 


WEST  AS  A FACTOR  IN  AMERICAN  POLITICS 


eastern  labor  for  support.  The  movement  for 
woman  suffrage  gained  an  increasing  follow- 
ing in  the  same  regions. 

Out  of  these  conditions  came  the  Insurgent 
Republican  (see),  and  then  the  Progressive 
(see),  movements,  the  strongholds  of  which 
were  in  the  Middle  West  and  the  Pacific  slope. 
The  mountain  states  and  the  Northeast,  aflili- 
ated  by  invested  capital,  were  the  reliance  of 
the  conservative  elements.  The  dissenting  Re- 
publicans holding  the  balance  of  power  in 
President  Taft’s  administration,  combined  with 
the  radical  Democrats  to  destroy  the  “rule” 
of  Speaker  Cannon  (see  Insurgents  in  Con- 
gress; Speaker  of  the  House),  the  ascend- 
ency of  the  East  in  the  Senate,  and  to  shape 
legislation  in  respect  to  large  business  interests 
in  accord  with  western  ideas.  The  attempt  to 
reduce  protective  duties  was  checked  in  the 
Payne- Aldrich  (see)  tariff  of  1909;  but  the 
elections  of  1910  marked  a western  landslide 
against  the  regular  Republicans. 

Third  Party  Movement  of  1912. — The  candi- 
dacy of  La  Follette,  of  Wisconsin,  the  cham- 
pion of  these  forces  in  the  Senate,  for  the  Re- 
publican nomination  for  President  gained  a 
notable  western  following  until  in  the  midst 
of  the  campaign  he  fell  ill  for  a time  and  ex- 
President  Roosevelt,  who  had  already  been 
proclaiming  a “new  nationalism”  (see)  that 
should  control  trusts,  improve  the  social  con- 
dition of  the  masses,  and  restrain  the  judiciary 
from  blocking  popular  movements  for  social 
reform,  announced  his  candidacy  and  drew  the 
following  of  masses  of  the  Progressive  Re- 
publicans. In  the  disruptive  contest  of  the 
Republican  convention  at  Chicago,  western 
leaders  were  most  active  in  combatting  the 
forces  of  the  Republican  organization,  under 
its  old  time  eastern  leaders,  who  supported 
the  administration  and  in  the  later  Chicago 
Convention  of  the  Progressive  party  the  West 
was  particularly  influential,  although  as  in 
the  days  of  Jackson  the  popular  movement 
acquired  a national  aspect  by  the  following 
which  it  secured  among  eastern  radicals  and 
politicians. 

In  the  Democratic  convention,  likewise,  Mr. 
Bryan  championed  western  interests  in  a de- 
fiant attack  upon  the  New  York  wing  of  the 
party  and  by  his  strategy  rendered  possible 
the  nomination  of  Wilson  on  a platform  ac- 
ceptable to  western  Democrats. 

Summary. — Thus  in  successive  stages  the 
West  has  been  highly  influential  upon  American 
diplomacy,  economic  policy  and  political  insti- 
tutions. In  diplomacy  it  has  tended  steadily 
to  expansion;  in  economic  matters  it  has  ex- 
hibited successive  uprisings  in  favor  of  debtor 
as  against  creditor  classes,  and  an  inflated  as 
against  a contracted  currency,  and  a desire 
to  control  the  large  financial  interests;  in 
political  activity  its  aim  has  been  to  promote 
democracy  and  provide  the  machinery  for  popu- 
lar participation  in  government.  The  most 


noteworthy  change  in  western  political  senti- 
ment has  been  the  tendency  to  pass  from  a tra- 
ditional devotion  to  individualism  and  dis- 
trust of  governmental  agency  to  a reliance  up- 
on government  to  promote  its  social  aims  and 
preserve  its  social  ideals.  This  has  taken  place 
almost  at  equal  pace  with  the  realization  that 
the  era  of  free  lands  was  terminating.  As  in 
earlier  periods  also,  the  West  tends  to  divide 
within  itself  on  urban  and  agricultural  lines, 
the  cities  becoming  increasingly  reflective  of 
eastern  conditions. 

See  Boundaries  of  the  United  States, 
Interior;  Conservation;  Far  West;  Farm- 
ers’ Auliance  ; Frontier  in  American  De- 
velopment; Greenback  Party;  Grangers; 
Indian  Policy  of  United  States;  Initiative; 
Jeffersonian  Democracy;  Middle  West;  Pa- 
cific Slope;  Party  Organization  in  Cali- 
fornia; Physics  and  Politics;  Populist 
Party;  Primary;  Progressives;  Public 
Lands  and  Public  Land  Policy;  Referen- 
dum ; Sectionalism  in  American  Govern- 
ment. 

References:  F.  J.  Turner,  Significance  of  the 
Frontier  (1899),  “Old  West”  in  Wis.  Hist.  Soc., 
Proceedings  (1908),  184,  Rise  of  the  New  West 
(1906);  “Contributions  of  the  West  to  Am. 
Democracy”  in  Atlantic  Monthly,  XCL  (1903), 
“Problem  of  the  West”  in  ibid,  LXXYIII 
(1896),  “Western  State-Making  in  the  Revolu- 
tionary Era,”  in  Am.  Hist.  Rev.,  I (1895),  70, 
251;  W.  Wilson  “Making  of  the  Nation”  in  At- 
lantic, LXXX  (1897),  1;  M.  Farranad,  “West 
and  the  Principles  of  the  Revolution”  in  Yale 
Review  (May,  1908),  44;  C.  H.  Lincoln,  Revo- 
lutionary Movement  in  Pennsylvania  (1901); 
W.  R.  Smith,  “Sectionalism  in  Pennsylvania 
during  the  Revolution”  in  Pol.  Sci.  Quart., 
XXIV  (1909),  208;  O.  G.  Libby,  Distribution 
of  the  Vote  on  the  Ratification  of  the  Consti- 
tution (1894);  H.  B.  Adams,  Maryland’s  In- 
fluence on  the  Land  Cessions  (1885);  P.  J. 
Treat,  National  Land  System  (1910);  R.  T. 
Hill,  Public  Domain  and  Democracy  (1910)  ; 
J.  C.  Welling,  “State  Rights  Conflict  over  the 
Public  Lands”  in  Am.  Hist.  Assoc.,  Papers 
(1889),  III,  409;  P.  O.  Ray,  Repeal  of  the 
Missouri  Compromise  ( 1909 ) ; J.  B.  Sanborn, 
Congressional  Grants  of  Land  in  Aid  of  Rail- 
ways (1899),  “Political  Aspects  of  Homestead 
Legislation”  in  Am.  Hist.  Riev.,  VI  (1900),  19; 
D.  R.  Dewey,  Financial  Hist,  of  U.  S.,  (1909), 
passim ; C.  W.  Wright,  Wool  Growing  and  the 
Tariff  (1910),  passim-,  R.  C.  Catteral,  Second 
Rank  of  U.  S.,  (1903),  passim-,  M.  S.  Wild- 
man,  Money  Inflation  (1905)  ; T.  C.  Smith, 
Liberty  and  Free  Soil  Party  (1897)  ; F.  H. 
Hodder,  “Genesis  of  Kansas-Nebraska  Act”  in 
West.  Hist.  Soc.,  Proceedings  (1912);  T.  E. 
Powell,  Democratic  Party  of  Ohio  (1913)  ; W. 
C.  Woodward,  Political  Parties  in  Oregon 
(1913);  F.  J.  Turner,  List  of  References  on 
the  History  of  the  West  (1913)  ; W.  J.  Bryan, 
Tale  of  Two  Conventions  ( 1912 ) ; C.  McCarthy, 


WEST  FLORIDA 


Wisconsin  Idea  (1912)  ; F.  A.  Howe,  Wiscon- 
sin, an  Experiment  in  Democracy  (1912)  ; A. 
H.  Eaton,  The  Oregon  System  (1912)  ; H.  C. 
Ilockett,  “Independent  Parties  in  the  Western 
States,  1873-1876,”  and  S.  J.  Buck,  “Federal- 
ism and  the  West”  in  Turner  Essays  (1910), 
ehs.  v,  vi;  S.  J.  Buck,  Granger  Movement 
(1913);  F.  L.  McVey,  Populist  Movement 
(1896)  ; F.  E.  Haynes,  “New  Sectionalism”  in 
Quar.  Jour,  of  Econ.,  X (1896)  269;  W.  B. 
Munro,  Initiative,  Referendum  and  Recall 
(1912)  ; E.  M.  Bacon  and  M.  Wyman,  Direct 
Elections  (1912)  ; E.  A.  Ross,  Changing  Amer- 
ica (1912)  ; H.  Croly,  Promise  of  American  Life 
(1910)  ; W.  A.  White,  The  Old  Order  Changetli 
(1910)  ; E.  S.  Fite,  Campaign  of  1860  (1911)  ; 
Wm.  E.  Dodd,  “Fight  for  the  Northwest, 
1860”  in  Am.  Hist.  Rev.  XVI,  774;  G.  H. 
Porter,  Ohio  Politics  during  the  Civil 
War  Period  (1911);  J.  A.  Woodburn,  “Party 
Politics  in  Indiana  during  the  Civil  War”  in 
Am.  Hist.  Assoc.,  Report,  I (1902),  223;  E. 
B.  Greene,  “Some  Aspects  of  Politics  in  the 
Middle  West,”  in  Wis.  Hist.  Society,  Proceed- 
ings (1911),  60;  O.  B.  Clarke,  Politics  of  Iowa 
during  the  Civil  War  and  Reconstruction 
(1911);  works,  biographies  and  autobiogra- 
phies of  leading  western  statesmen ; bibliog- 
raphy in  Channing,  Hart  and  Turner,  Guide  to 
Am.  Hist.  (1912). 

Frederick  Jackson  Turner. 

WEST  FLORIDA.  In  1763,  England  for 
purposes  of  administration  divided  her  newly 
acquired  Florida  possessions  by  the  Apalachi- 
cola River.  That  section  west  of  the  river  was 
called  West  Florida.  This  province  was 
bounded  on  the  west  by  Lake  Pontcliartrain, 
Lake  Maurepas  and  the  Mississippi,  and  north 
by  the  thirty-first  parallel  of  latitude.  In  Feb- 
ruary, 1764,  the  parallel  of  32°,  28',  from  the 
mouth  of  the  Yazoo  River  east  to  the  Chat- 
tahoochee was  fixed  as  the  northern  boundary. 
Under  England’s  rule  liberal  offers  were  made 
to  colonists,  roads  were  built,  a large  export 
trade  was  founded  and  prosperity  abounded. 
The  governor  of  West  Florida  was  authorized 
to  summon  general  assemblies  as  in  the  north- 
ern colonies.  Laws  were  to  be  enacted  by  the 
governor  with  the  approval  of  his  council  and 
the  popular  representatives.  Until  satisfied 
that  the  province  was  capable  of  self-govern- 
ment, the  governor  exercised  the  power  of 
law  making  in  conjunction  with  his  council. 
In  1773  Governor  Chester,  concluding  to  call 
an  assembly,  issued  notices  setting  forth  the 
qualifications  of  voters  and  representatives 
and  the  method  of  holding  the  election  as  well 
as  the  date  for  convening  the  assembly  at 
Pensacola.  The  term  of  office  for  legislators 
was  fixed  at  three  years  but  the  majority 
voted  in  favor  of  a one  year  term.  Since  they 
adhered  to  this  objection  and  the  governor 
refused  to  compromise  no  general  assembly 
ever  met  in  West  Florida.  The  province  re- 


mained loyal  to  the  British  Crown  during  the 
American  Revolution,  but  in  1780  was  attacked 
by  the  Spanish  who  within  two  years  expelled 
the  British. 

When  England,  by  the  Treaty  of  1783,  ac- 
knowledged the  independence  of  the  United 
States  she  agreed  to  the  retention  of  Florida 
by  Spain,  but  in  a secret  clause  provided  that 
the  southern  boundary  of  the  new  nation  should 
be  the  thirty-first  parallel.  Spain  refused  to 
evacuate  that  portion  of  West  Florida  between 
31°  and  32°,  28'  on  the  ground  that  since  she 
had  driven  the  British  from  that  province 
before  the  conclusion  of  the  treaty  England 
had  no  right  to  cede  this  district.  This  re- 
sulted in  a bitter  dispute  between  Spain  and 
the  United  States  which  threatened  hostilities. 
In  1795  Thomas  Pinckney  negotiated  a treaty 
with  Spain  by  which,  in  consideration  of  the 
settlement  of  all  spoliation  claims,  the  thirty- 
first  parallel  was  acknowledged  as  the  north- 
ern boundary  of  West  Florida. 

In  1803  the  United  States  insisted  that  that 
portion  of  West  Florida  west  of  the  Perdido 
River  was  included  in  the  newly  purchased 
Louisiana  territory.  Spain  declared,  and 
France  upheld  her,  that  since  she  had  not  re- 
ceived the  district  from  France  but  had  con- 
quered it  from  England,  it  was  not  a part  of 
Louisiana  and  could  not  have  been  purchased 
by  the  United  States.  In  1810,  while  Spain 
was  prostrated  by  European  wars,  that  part 
of  West  Florida  located  between  the  Perdido 
and  Mississippi  Rivers  revolted  and  declared 
itself  an  independent  nation  under  the  name 
of  the  Republic  of  West  Florida.  A president 
was  elected,  a constitution  adopted  and  a 
miniature  standing  army  raised.  This  so- 
called  republic  was  seized  by  the  United  States 
after  a short  and  decisive  campaign  against 
the  revolutionists.  The  region  west  of  the 
Pearl  River  was  organized  as  a part  of  the 
territory  of  Orleans  (see).  By  acts  of  Con- 
gress of  April  8 and  April  14,  1812,  the  terri- 
tory embraced  in  this  short-lived  republic  was 
added  to  the  new  state  of  Louisiana  and  the 
territory  between  the  Pearl  and  the  Perdido 
was  annexed  to  the  Mississippi  Territory,  al- 
though at  that  time  the  city  of  Mobile  was 
held  by  Spanish  troops. 

During  the  War  of  1812  the  English  used 
the  Floridas  as  a base  of  operations  against 
the  United  States.  General  Wilkinson  was 
ordered  to  Mobile  and  April  13,  1813,  the 
Spanish  commandant  surrendered.  In  1814 
General  Jackson  invaded  the  balance  of  the 
original  Spanish  province  of  West  Florida, 
drove  out  the  British  and  captured  the  town 
of  Pensacola.  After  the  cessation  of  hostitlities 
the  territory  lying  east  of  the  Perdido  was 
evacuated  pending  diplomatic  negotiations  with 
Spain.  In  the  Seminole  War  Jackson  again 
invaded  this  district  in  pursuit  of  the  hostile 
Indians,  occupied  Pensacola  where  they  were 
sheltered,  and  received  the  surrender  of  this 


675 


WEST  INDIA  TRADE— WEST  INDIES,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS  WITH 


portion  of  the  original  Spanish  province  of 
West  Florida.  Jackson  appointed  a civil  and 
military  governor,  named  a collector  of  the 
port  of  Pensacola  and  extended  the  civil  laws 
of  the  United  States  over  the  country  “until 
Spain  could  furnish  a sufficient  military  force 
to  properly  administer  its  affairs.”  In  Septem- 
ber, 1819,  this  portion  of  West  Florida  was 
again  delivered  to  the  Spanish. 

Meanwhile  negotiations  for  the  purchase  of 
both  Floridas  were  successfully  terminated 
and  July  17,  1821,  Spain  formally  ceded  to  the 
United  States  all  her  claims  to  West  Florida. 
In  1822  an  act  of  Congress  created  civil  au- 
thority and  established  the  territory  of  Flori- 
da embracing  within  its  limits  that  portion  of 
the  original  province  east  of  the  Perdido. 

See  East  Florida;  Florida;  Louisiana 
Annexation;  Orleans,  Territory  of. 

References:  G.  R.  Fairbanks,  Hist,  of  Florida 
(1871);  H.  B.  Fuller,  Purchase  of  Florida 
(1906)  ; E.  L.  Green,  Hist,  of  Florida  (1898)  ; 
H.  Adams,  Hist,  of  U.  8.  (1890). 

Hubert  Bruce  Fuller. 

WEST  INDIA  TRADE,  1783-1833.  In  de- 
claring their  independence  the  states  of  the 
American  Union  sacrificed  the  unrestricted 
trade  with  the  British  West  Indies.  The 
treaty  of  1782  contained  no  stipulations  on 
commerce;  and  in  1783,  by  Orders  in  Council, 
trade  in  and  out  of  the  British  West  Indies 
was  declared  restricted  to  the  British  flag. 
Therefore  all  Spanish  and  British  ports  on  this 
continent  were  closed  to  American  trade.  A 
slight  concession  obtained  by  Jay  in  the  treaty 
of  1794  ( see  Jay  Treaty)  was  stricken  out  by 
the  Senate. 

After  the  War  of  1812  efforts  to  secure  con- 
cessions were  renewed,  but  without  success. 
Congress  then  adopted  a policy  of  “counter- 
vailing legislation,”  and  by  the  acts  of  April 
18,  1818,  and  May  15,  1820,  closed  American 
ports  to  British  ships  coming  from  the  West 
Indies.  This  caused  Parliament,  in  1822,  to 
open  West  Indian  ports  to  foreign  vessels 
under  certain  restrictions,  but  with  a differen- 
tial duty  in  favor  of  the  products  of  British 
North  America.  The  United  States  then  de- 
manded to  be  put  on  the  same  footing  in  the 
West  India  trade  as  the  British  colonies  of 
North  America.  This  demand  was  refused  and 
both  countries  continued  the  policy  of  retalia- 
tion until  all  direct  trade  of  a lawful  character 
came  to  an  end.  The  Americans,  however, 
resorted  again  to  smuggling. 

Jackson’s  followers  made  political  capital 
out  of  the  diplomatic  deadlock,  and  when  he 
became  President  he  receded  from  the  extreme 
position  taken  by  the  Adams  administration. 
The  British  Government  expressed  its  willing- 
ness to  come  to  terms,  and  on  May  29,  18.30, 
Congress  authorized  the  President  to  declare 
the  retaliatory  acts  repealed,  and  to  admit 
British  vessels  from  the  colonies  on  the  same 


terms  as  American  vessels  from  the  same 
quarter.  The  British  Government  then  extend- 
ed reciprocal  privileges  to  American  vessels 
in  her  West  Indian  ports. 

See  Colonies,  International  Relations  of  ; 
Cuba  and  Cuban  Relations  ; Great  Britain  ; 
Piracy;  Spain;  West  Indies,  Diplomatic 
Relations  with. 

References:  W.  G.  Sumner,  Andrew  Jackson 
(1896),  164—170;  J.  B.  Moore,  Am.  Diplo- 
macy (1905),  105-119;  J.  B.  McMaster,  Hist, 
of  the  U.  8.  (1907),  V,  483-487. 

John  H.  Latan£. 

WEST  INDIES,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS 
WITH.  At  the  close  of  the  American  Revo- 
lution Spain  was  still  dominant  in  the  West 
Indies;  she  held  Cuba,  Porto  Rico,  San  Domin- 
go, and  Trinidad,  as  well  as  all  the  continental 
shores  of  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  and  the  Caribbean 
Sea.  Her  power  was,  however,  on  the  point 
of  decline.  She  soon  lost  through  revolution 
her  continental  colonies,  out  of  which  the 
United  States  gained  Louisiana  in  1803,  the 
Floridas  in  1819,  and  Texas  in  1845.  Thus 
American  relations  with  the  West  Indies  be- 
came closer.  During  the  same  period,  however, 
the  influence  of  Great  Britain  steadily  increased 
and  she  secured  practical  naval  control  of  the 
West  Indies.  The  United  States  naturally 
opposed  the  transfer  of  territory  in  the  West 
Indies  from  one  European  power  to  another, 
and  its  policy  was  practically  to  guarantee 
to  Spain  her  existing  possessions.  Ater  the 
acquisition  of  Texas  the  United  States  was 
eager  to  purchase  Cuba,  but  Spain  refused  to 
sell. 

About  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century 
the  United  States  and  England  began  the  long 
controversy  over  the  control  of  the  isthmian 
canal.  After  the  Civil  War  Secretary  Seward 
sought  to  strengthen  the  position  of  the  United 
States  in  the  West  Indies  by  the  acquisition  of 
San  Domingo  and  the  Danish  West  Indies. 
October  24,  1867,  a treaty  was  concluded  with 
Denmark  providing  for  the  cession  of  St. 
Thomas  and  St.  John  for  $7,500,000  on  condi- 
tion that  the  inhabitants  should  by  popular 
vote  give  their  consent.  This  was  obtained 
and  in  1868  the  treaty  was  ratified  by  the 
Danish  Government,  but  the  consent  of  the 
United  States  Senate  could  not  be  obtained. 
In  1892  and  1896  a renewal  of  the  offer  to 
sell  was  made  by  the  Danish  Government  and 
in  1902  a new  treaty  was  signed,  but  this  time 
the  upper  house  of  the  Danish  Rigsdag  with- 
held its  consent. 

West  Indian  diplomacy  has  always  been 
particularly  trying  to  the  United  States  be- 
cause a case  arising  in  one  of  the  islands  af- 
fecting the  interests  of  American  citizens  would 
be  referred  to  Washington,  then  transferred  to 
one  of  the  European  capitals,  then  referred 
back  to  the  island  for  information  or  explan- 
ation, necessitating  exasperating  delays. 


676 


WEST  INDIES,  DIPLOMATIC  RELATIONS  WITH 


677 


WEST  JERSEY— WEST  VIRGINIA 


After  a century  of  great  forbearance  in  re- 
gard to  Cuba  came  the  Spanish  War  of  1898, 
resulting  in  the  withdrawal  of  Spain.  Porto 
Rico  was  annexed  by  the  United  States  and 
Cuba  became  a protectorate.  San  Domingo 
(see)  has  since  come  under  the  financial  su- 
pervision of  the  United  States,  and  the  same 
fate  in  all  probability  awaits  Hayti.  By  the 
Hay-Pauncefote  treaty  of  1901  England  gave 
up  all  claim  to  an  equal  voice  with  the  United 
States  in  the  control  of  the  isthmian  canal, 
This  treaty  was  followed  by  a reduction  of 
British  armaments  in  the  West  Indies.  Amer- 
ican naval  supremacy  in  the  Carribean  Sea 
is  now  firmly  established.  In  their  trade  re- 
lations the  West  Indies  are  growing  more  and 
more  dependent  on  the  American  market. 

See  Commebcial  Policy  and  Relations  of 
the  United  States;  Cuba  and  Cuban  Re- 
lations; West  India  Trade;  and  Great 
Britain,  Hayti,  San  Domingo,  Diplomatic 
Relations  with. 

References:  J.  B.  Moore,  Dig.  of  Int.  Law 
(1906),  I,  601-610;  F.  Bancroft,  Wrtv.  Seward 
(1900),  II,  479-491;  A.  C.  Coolidge,  U.  S.  as 
A World  Power  (1908),  112,  113,  190,  267- 
280.  J.  H.  Latan£. 

WEST  JERSEY.  See  New  Jersey. 

WEST  POINT.  See  Military  Academy 
at  West  Point. 

WEST  VIRGINIA.  Settlement  and  Early 
Conditions. — The  trans- Allegheny  territory  in- 
cluded in  West  Virginia,  the  home  of  few 
civilized  men  before  1750,  after  1763  furnished 
new  inducements  to  settlement  which  were 
followed  at  the  beginning  and  the  close  of  the 
Revolution  by  a rapid  expansion  movement 
resulting  by  1790  in  a total  trans-Allegheny 
population  of  100,000 — widely  separated  into 
many  isolated  local  groups,  intensely  individ- 
ualistic in  spirit  and  with  frontier  conditions 
which,  retarding  the  development  of  its  vast 
resources,  largely  continued  to  exist  until  the 
formation  of  the  new  state. 

Sectionalism  in  Virginia. — Considering  the 
differences  in  population,  physiography  and  in- 
terests, the  formation  of  the  new  state  by 
separation  from  the  mother  state  was  the 
logical  result  of  the  half-century  of  sectional 
controversy  between  East  and  West  in  regard 
to  inequalities  under  the  constitution  of  1776 
which  were  only  partially  remedied  by  the 
constitutional  conventions  of  1829-30  and 
1850-51.  The  secession  of  Virginia  only  fur- 
nished the  occasion  and  the  opportunity  to  ac- 
complish separation  by  legal  fiction  and  revolu- 
tionary process. 

Separation  from  Virginia. — The  first  irregu- 
lar Wheeling  convention  of  May  13,  1861,  ini- 
tiated steps  toward  separation.  A second 
which  met  June  11  formed  the  “reorganized” 
government  of  Virginia.  After  a popular  vote 


on  October  24  in  favor  of  the  new  state  ( 18,489 
against  781),  a third  convention  (41  counties 
represented)  met  at  Wheeling  on  November  26 
and  on  February  18,  1862,  completed  a consti- 
tution which  was  ratified  early  in  April  by 
a vote  of  18,162  to  514.  The  new  state,  erected 
by  consent  of  the  “reorganized”  government 
and  the  consent  of  Congress,  revised  its  con- 
stitution (February,  1863)  to  meet  the  condi- 
tion of  Congress  requiring  gradual  abolition  of 
slavery,  and  was  admitted  to  the  Union  on 
June  20,  1863.  In  1866  it  rejected  the  over- 
tures of  Virginia  for  reunion. 

Constitution  of  1863. — The  first  constitution 
provided  for  white  male  suffrage,  a ballot 
system  to  replace  the  aristocratic  system  of 
viva  voce  voting,  annual  legislatures,  popular 
election  of  governor  and  judiciary,  change  of 
election  from  May  to  October,  a township 
system  of  local  government,  and  a system  of 
free  schools.  Amendments  before  they  could 
be  submitted  to  the  people  required  the  ap- 
proval of  two  legislatures.  The  governor  still 
had  no  veto,  and  the  office  of  lieutenant  gov- 
ernor was  abolished. 

Constitution  of  1872. — The  second  constitu- 
tion, which  is  still  in  force  (1913),  was  adopted 
in  1872  and  exhibits  marks  of  the  post-bellum 
period  of  partisanship  which  preceded  it. 
Among  its  most  important  changes  were  in- 
crease of  gubernatorial  term  from  two  to 
four  years,  authorization  of  the  executive  veto, 
biennial  legislatures,  increase  in  the  size  of 
each  house  and  in  the  term  of  office  of  members, 
abolition  of  the  township  system,  and  rein- 
statement of  the  old  Virginia  county  system 
of  government  by  justices  of  the  peace,  and  the 
prohibition  of  registration  laws  and  of  special 
legislation  in  a long  list  of  specified  cases. 
It  contained  some  antiquated  or  imperfect  pro- 
visions which  have  retarded  or  prevented  gov- 
ernmental adjustments  necessary  to  meet  new 
conditions.  Among  these  is  the  clause — 
peculiar  to  this  state — which  provides  that 
“the  voter  shall  be  left  free  to  vote  by  either 
open,  sealed  or  secret  ballot.” 

The  constitution  provides  for  amendment 
either  by  popular  vote  ( at  the  general  election ) 
on  proposed  changes  submitted  by  a two-thirds 
majority  of  each  house  for  ratification,  or 
by  a constitutional  convention  which  may  be 
called  after  proposal  by  a majority  vote  of 
each  house  ratified  by  popular  majority.  By 
the  first  method,  amendments  were  secured 
in  1881,  1883,  1902  and  1912.  Every  executive 
since  1900  has  suggested  the  need  of  a consti- 
tutional convention,  the  chief  objection  to 
which  is  the  expense. 

State  Government. — The  executive  depart- 
ment consists  of  the  governor  and  six  other 
officials  elected  at  the  presidential  election  for 
a term  of  four  years  beginning  March  4 fol- 
lowing. The  governor  is  ineligible  for  re- 
election  for  the  four  years  next  succeeding  the 
term  for  which  he  was  elected.  In  case  of  his 


678 


WEST  VIRGINIA 


disability  in  the  fourth  year  of  his  term,  the 
president  of  the  senate  acts  as  governor,  and 
after  him  the  speaker  of  the  house.  Although 
he  may  veto  the  separate  items  of  an  appropria- 
tion bill,  any  bill  may  be  passed  over  his  veto 
by  a majority  of  the  total  membership  of 
each  house.  He  has  no  pocket  veto. 

Among  the  state  officials  and  administrative 
boards  appointed  by  the  governor  that  of  the 
first  importance  is  the  rotary  board  of  control 
(created  in  1909)  consisting  of  three  persons 
($5000  each)  serving  for  six  years,  to  super- 
vise and  approve  the  expenditures  of  appro- 
priations to  state  institutions  and  to  various 
boards  and  bureaus.  Its  creation  illustrates 
the  recent  tendency  toward  centralization  of 
administration.  The  office  of  tax  commissioner 
was  created  in  1904  and  a public  service  com- 
mission in  1913. 


the  county  court,  and  the  clerk  of  the  county 
court,  who  also  acts  as  recorder,  are  elected  for 
six  years.  The  county  court  is  no  longer  com- 
posed of  trial  justices  (since  1881)  but  is 
largely  an  administrative  board  for  county 
business  affairs,  chiefly  police  and  fiscal. 
Each  county  is  divided  into  magisterial  dis- 
tricts varying  from  3 to  10  corresponding  to 
the  township  which  was  adopted  in  1863  and 
abolished  in  1872.  Each  district  elects  mag- 
istrates (justices  of  the  peace)  and  constables, 
and  a board  of  education. 

Present  Political  Conditions. — A majority  of 
the  voters  in  the  new  state  until  1870  were 
Republicans.  In  that  year  control  passed  to 
the  Democrats  (“Conservatives”)  who  retained 
it  for  a quarter  century,  although  their  ma- 
jority steadily  declined  after  1880.  The  Re- 
publicans, who  by  1882  almost  ceased  oppo- 


Bodndaries  of  the  State  of  West  Virginia,  Showing  Territorial  Changes 


The  legislature  (30  senators  and  86  members 
of  the  house  of  delegates)  meets  in  January 
of  odd  years.  Its  sessions  of  45  days  may  be 
extended  by  a vote  of  two-thirds  of  the  mem- 
bers elected  to  each  house.  After  its  adjourn- 
ment an  appropriation  bill  cannot  be  vetoed. 

The  judiciary  is  composed  of  a supreme  court 
of  appeals,  22  circuit  courts,  several  courts  of 
limited  jurisdiction  (generally  criminal),  the 
county  court  of  three  commissioners  (whose 
judicial  powers  are  confined  to  such  business 
as  probate),  justices  of  the  peace;  and  city 
courts.  There  are  no  chancery  courts,  but 
courts  of  record  have  equity  jurisdiction. 

County  Government. — The  county  is  the  unit 
of  local  government.  The  sheriff,  elected  for 
four  years,  also  acts  as  tax  collector  and 
treasurer.  Three  commissioners,  constituting 


sition,  won  the  legislature  a decade  later,  and 
obtained  complete  control  by  the  election  of 
the  entire  ticket  in  1896.  In  the  face  of  their 
increasing  strength  they  endangered  their  pros- 
pect of  success  at  the  polls  in  1908  by  party 
dissensions.  Although  Taft  (1908)  received  a 
plurality  of  26,450,  and  the  Republican  gov- 
ernor and  state  officers  were  elected  by  a 
smaller  majority,  the  Democrats  won  the 
legislature.  In  1912,  Woodrow  Wilson,  the 
Democratic  candidate,  received  all  the  elec- 
toral votes;  but  the  Republicans  elected  the 
governor  and  a majority  of  the  legislature. 
An  equal  division  in  the  senate  resulted  in  a 
long  contest  for  election  of  a presiding  officer. 

Since  1900  the  largest  political  questions  re- 
late to  tax  reforms,  the  extension  of  state 
regulation  or  supervision  (especially  to  prob- 


679 


WESTERN  RESERVE— WHIG  PARTY 


lems  of  health  and  safety  and  industrial  in- 
terests), greater  efficiency  of  administrative  or- 
ganization, methods  of  party  organization  and 
control,  the  growing  demands  for  a primary 
election  law,  a prohibition  amendment  (rati- 
fied in  1912),  and  the  Virginia  debt  case. 

Population. — In  1900  and  1910  West  Virginia 
ranked  in  population  as  the  twenty-eighth 
state.  The  population  was  376,688  in  1860, 
442,014  in  1870,  762,794  in  1890,  1,221,119  in 
1910. 

See  Constitutions,  States,  Characteris- 
tics of;  State  Governments,  Characteris- 
tics of;  Virginia. 

References:  C.  H.  Ambler,  Sectionalism  in 
Virginia  (1910);  Appleton’s  Annual  Cyclo- 
pedia (1861-1902);  M.  F.  Callahan,  Evolution 
of  the  Constitution  of  West  Virginia  (1909)  ; 
R.  E.  Fast  and  H.  Maxwell,  Hist,  and  Gov. 
of  West  Virginia  (1908);  Auditor  of  West 
Virginia,  Report , 1909-10  (biennial)  ; State 
Board  of  Control,  Report,  1910  (biennial). 
F.  N.  Thorpe,  Federal  and  State  Constitu- 
tions (1909),  VII,  4011-4064;  J.  M.  Callahan, 
Semi-Centennial  History  of  West  Virginia 
(1913).  James  Morton  Callahan. 

WESTERN  RESERVE.  The  state  of  Con- 
necticut, by  an  act  of  May  11,  1786,  ceded  to 
Congress  its  claim  to  the  western  lands  (see 
Cessions  by  States).  It  reserved,  however, 
a strip  running  along  the  southern  shore  of 
Lake  Erie,  bounded  by  the  international  bound- 
ary, on  the  east  by  Pennsylvania,  on  the  south 
by  parallel  41°,  and  on  the  west  by  a meridian 
one  hundred  twenty  miles  west  of  Pennsyl- 
vania’s western  boundary.  This  cession  was 
accepted  by  Congress.  In  the  latter  part  of 
the  century  Connecticut  disposed  of  the  land. 
An  act  of  1792  granted  500,000  acres  to  the 
inhabitants  of  the  Connecticut  towns  whose 
property  had  been  destroyed  by  the  British 
troops  in  the  Revolutionary  war,  or  to  their 
legal  representatives  if  the  original  sufferers 
were  no  longer  living,  and  to  their  heirs  and 
assigns.  These  are  known  as  the  “Fire  Lands.” 
In  1795  the  legislature  sold  the  lands  undis- 
posed of  to  thirty-five  purchasers.  This  grant 
purported  to  convey  all  rights,  titles,  and 
interest,  “juridical  and  territorial.”  The  gran- 
tees might  well  have  thought  themselves  pro- 
prietors possessed  of  full  rights  of  self-govern- 
ment; they  actually  appear  to  have  thought 
that  they  could  become  a new  state.  Natural- 
ly, difficulties  arose  with  the  administration  of 


the  Northwest  Territory.  Before  long,  how- 
ever, the  settlers  were  willing  to  surrender 
their  claim  to  jurisdiction.  In  1800  an  act 
was  passed  by  Congress  providing  that,  to 
quiet  title  and  thus  protect  the  actual  owners, 
the  President  of  the  United  States  should  re- 
lease and  convey  to  Connecticut  all  claim  to 
the  land,  provided  that  the  state  give  up  claims 
to  land  west  of  the  boundary  between  Connec- 
ticut and  New  York  except  the  Reserve,  and 
should  give  the  United  States  jurisdictional 
rights  in  the  Reserve.  Connecticut  acted  ac- 
cordingly and  the  Western  Reserve  was  merged 
in  the  Northwest  Territory.  See  Cessions  by 
States;  Northwest  Territory;  Ohio. 
References:  B.  A.  Hinsdale,  Old  Northwest, 
(1888),  ch.  xix;  T.  Donaldson,  Public  Domain 
(1884),  72-75;  J.  Winsor,  Westward  Move- 
ment (1897),  265-266,  500-504;  State  Papers, 
Public  Lands,  I,  94.  A.  C.  McL. 

WET.  A term  applied  both  to  those  opposed 
to  the  prohibition  of  the  manufacture  and  sale 
of  intoxicating  liquor  and  to  the  territory  in 
which  it  is  manufactured  or  sold.  See  Prohi- 
bition. O.  C.  H. 

WHARTON,  FRANCIS.  Francis  Wharton 
(1820-1889)  was  born  at  Philadelphia,  March 
1,  1820.  In  1843  he  was  admitted  to  the  bar, 
and  practiced  until  1856,  when  he  became 
professor  in  the  Episcopal  Theological  School 
lege.  In  1863  he  resigned  his  professorship 
to  become  rector  of  St.  Paul’s  Episcopal 
Church  at  Brookline,  Mass.,  where  he  remained 
until  1866.  In  the  latter  year  he  became  a 
professor  in  the  Episcopal  Theological  School 
at  Cambridge,  and  at  the  same  time  professor 
of  international  law  in  the  Boston  law  school. 
His  fame  as  a jurist  and  publicist  led,  in  1885, 
to  his  appointment  as  solicitor  of  the  depart- 
ment of  state,  which  office  he  retained  until  his 
death  in  1889.  His  publications,  all  of  them 
standard  authorities  in  their  several  fields,  in- 
clude State  Trials  of  the  United  States  during 
the  Administrations  of  Washington  and  Adams 
(1849)  ; Conflict  of  Laws  (1872)  ; Digest  of  the 
International  Law  of  the  United  States 
(1886,  rev.  ed.  by  J.  B.  Moore,  1906)  ; and 
Revolutionary  Diplomatic  Correspondence 
(1889).  He  died  at  Washington,  February  21, 
1889.  See  Law,  Constitutional,  American. 
References:  J.  B.  Moore,  “Sketch  of  the  Life 
of  Francis  Wharton”  in  Rev.  Dipl.  Corresp. 
(1889),  I,  chs.  xi-xxvii.  W.  MacD. 


WHIG  PARTY 


Origin. — The  Whigs,  a party  composed  of 
elements  in  opposition  to  the  “Democrats,” 
as  the  followers  of  Andrew  Jackson  became 
fully  known  by  1832,  with  their  own  consent, 
came  into  being  about  1833,  following  the 


680 


final  downfall  of  the  “National  Republicans” 
(see)  in  the  presidential  election  of  1832. 
Whigs  and  Democrats  contended  thencefor- 
ward in  national  polities  until,  in  the  campaign 
of  1852,  the  Whigs,  as  a national  party,  went 


WHIG  PARTY 


down  to  disastrous  defeat,  and  new  and  un- 
expected issues  led,  two  years  later,  to  a new 
political  alignment. 

Daniel  Webster,  whose  influence  in  New 
England  was  potent,  had  urged  Henry  Clay  in 
1830  to  form  national  parties  anew  on  the 
issues  of  tariff  and  internal  improvements. 
Clay  and  Jackson  had  been  personally  antago- 
nistic, under  President  Monroe,  long  before 
their  political  differences  had  developed  at  all. 
There  was  little  opportunity  for  a newly  or- 
ganized opposition  until,  in  1833,  Jackson’s 
daring  removal  of  the  deposits  (see)  from  the 
United  States  Bank  revealed  the  depth  of  his 
hostility  to  the  institution  and  gave  to  politics 
a new  and  exciting  issue. 

The  Name. — The  name  ‘AVhig”  thus  came 
into  our  politics,  as  symbolizing  an  opposition 
to  the  high  prerogative  or  toryism  of  Pres- 
ident Jackson — “King  Andrew,”  as  his  enemies 
now  called  him — in  absorbing  the  functions  of 
state  in  his  own  person.  His  free  exercise  of 
the  veto  power,  too,  was  resented.  A new 
party  name,  coined  in  the  1834  elections 
of  Connecticut  and  New  York  City,  was  quickly 
and  spontaneously  adopted  throughout  the 
Union.  Old  families  of  New  England,  never 
partial  to  Jeffersonian  traditions,  hailed  the 
style  of  Whig.  Even  state  rights  men  at  the 
South  were  attracted;  for  Hayne’s  famous 
speech  had  praised  the  Revolutionary  Whigs, 
and  so  had  Jefferson  in  one  of  the  last 
letters  he  ever  wrote.  Into  this  new  fold 
were  gathered  the  National  Republicans  (see) 
whom  Clay  had  led  to  a last  defeat;  Anti- 
Masons  ( see  Anti -Masonic  Party),  whose 
party  was  already  in  the  throes  of  death;  and 
southern  men  who,  for  one  cause  or  another 
broke  away  from  Jackson’s  leadership,  as  his 
political  plans  developed.  Into  this  chaos 
of  opposition  Calhoun  and  his  nullifiers  might 
have  entered  as  a final  ingredient;  but  Cal- 
houn maintained  a personal  independence,  for 
the  most  part,  after  his  breach  with  Jackson ; 
and  South  Carolina  was  slow  to  affiliate  with 
any  national  party.  Yet  in  most  of  the 
border  slave  states  the  Whigs  gathered 
strength,  and  elsewhere  in  the  South  had  a 
large  and  respectable  following;  thus  vindicat- 
ing claims  to  be  considered  a party  of  the  whole 
Union,  knowing  no  sectional  differences.  Yet 
notwithstanding  the  justice  of  this  claim, 
the  stronghold  of  Whig  power  was  at  the  North 
and  among  the  free  states. 

Campaigns  of  1836  and  1840. — Jackson’s  im- 
mense popularity  towards  the  close  of  his  ad- 
ministration convinced  the  Whigs  that  op- 
position would  be  useless  to  the  election  of 
Van  Buren,  the  warrior’s  designated  successor. 
Hence  no  Whig  national  convention  was  called 
in  1836,  as  an  offset  to  that  of  the  Democrats. 
But  various  states  put  forward  Whig  candi- 
dates of  their  own.  William  H.  Harrison  of 
Ohio,  Hugh  L.  White  of  Tennessee,  Daniel 
Webster  of  Massachusetts  were  thus  presented: 


Willie  P.  Mangum  of  North  Carolina  receiving 
the  vote  of  South  Carolina.  Van  Buren’s  total 
vote  in  the  electoral  college  was  170  and  he  be- 
came President;  but  no  one  having  a majority 
of  the  votes  cast  for  Vice-President,  the  Senate 
chose  Richard  M.  Johnson  of  Kentucky,  who 
had  received  the  largest  number  of  electoral 
votes. 

Van  Buren’s  administration  ushered  in  com- 
mercial disaster,  following  a feverish  specu- 
lation which  the  financial  errors  of  his  prede- 
cessor had  promoted.  Ruin  was  wide  spread. 
No  regulation  of  exchanges  or  the  currency 
existed.  Jackson’s  pet  state  banks  went  into 
insolvency  with  the  rest;  and  for  these  and 
other  abuses  of  the  patronage,  now  fully  re- 
vealed, the  party  in  power  bore  the  blame. 
With  the  nation  once  more  in  debt  and  the 
people  suffering  distress  and  depression,  the 
Whigs  held  a national  convention  at  Harris- 
burg, December  4-7,  1839,  to  prepare  for  the 
presidential  contest  of  1840.  Henry  Clay  was 
the  favorite;  but  the  incessant  warfare  he  had 
waged  in  the  Senate  made  political  managers 
uneasy,  and,  under  a peculiar  rule  which  sifted 
secretly  the  preferences  of  the  delegates,  the 
chief  nomination  went  to  Harrison.  John 
Tyler,  who  was  at  this  convention  and  wept 
at  Clay’s  defeat  for  presidential  nominee,  was 
readily  given  the  second  place  on  the  ticket, 
locality,  the  wish  to  attach  southern  Democrats 
already  alienated  from  Jacksonism,  and  his 
warm  advocacy  of  Clay,  all  operating  in  his 
favor.  The  convention  dissolved  with  harmo- 
nious, expression  but  no  platform.  The  Demo- 
cratic convention  named  Van  Buren  and  John- 
son for  reelection. 

The  presidential  campaign  of  1840  was  a 
remarkable  one  for  picturesqueness  and  en- 
thusiasm (see  Log  Cabin  Campaign).  From 
March  to  November  returns  from  the  several 
states  gave  presage  of  a Whig  victory;  yet 
the  sum  total  of  success  astonished  the  most 
sanguine  of  this  new  opposition  party.  The  peo- 
ple, with  contagious  emphasis,  pronounced  for 
an  entire  change  in  rulers  and  a ruling  policy. 
Harrison  and  Tyler  swept  the  whole  Union, 
except  for  seven  states,  mostly  southern.  They 
had  234  electoral  votes  in  all,  against  60  for 
Van  Buren,  notwithstanding  the  loss  of  Vir- 
ginia, which  went  Democratic.  The  Whig 
popular  majorities  in  the  states  were  immense 
beyond  precedent,  being  increased  by  the  com- 
posite and  diverse  character  of  the  forces  op- 
posed to  them. 

Whig  Administration,  1841-45. — But  with 
this  great  national  victory  the  misfortunes 
of  the  national  Whig  party  commenced.  Gen- 
eral Harrison,  the  kindly  military  hero  and 
civilian,  thus  promoted  to  the  presidency  was 
sixtv-eight  years  of  age  when  he  came  to  Wash- 
ington, to  assume  the  honors  and  responsi- 
bilities of  supreme  station.  His  inaugural 
address  manifested  an  honest  purpose  to  do 
right  and  to  correct  existing  evils.  He  chose 


681 


WHIG  PARTY 


a Cabinet  in  which  the  various  Whig  elements, 
North  and  South,  were  fairly  represented; 
with  Daniel  Webster  for  Secretary  of  State  and 
Thomas  Ewing  Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 
Francis  E.  Granger  of  the  Anti-Masons  was 
made  Postmaster  General.  Clay  had  declined 
Cabinet  honors  for  himself,  but  named  Ewing 
and  John  J.  Crittenden  as  his  friends.  Dur- 
ing the  ensuing  strife  for  the  lesser  patron- 
age the  President,  March  17,  called  an  extra 
session  of  Congress  for  May  31,  -reciting  rev- 
enue and  finance  as  the  special  subjects  for 
legislation.  On  the  fourth  of  April  Harrison 
died  at  the  White  House,  after  a brief  illness, 
having  served  a month  and  Tyler  immediately 
took  office. 

It  was  the  first  time  in  our  history  that 
a presidential  incumbent  had  failed  to  live 
out  his  term  of  office ; and  a bereaved  people 
were  yet  to  learn  what  the  successorship  of 
a Vice-President  actually  meant.  A states- 
man but  little  known  or  considered  in  the  free 
states  hitherto,  John  Tyler,  with  a good  sena- 
torial experience  and  agreeable  manners,  was 
well  equipped  for  the  usual  dignified  but  ir- 
responsible functions  of  Vice-President.  He  was 
a man  of  the  best  Virginia  pedigree,  courteous 
in  manner,  happy  in  compliment,  cheerful  and 
even  hilarious  among  intimates,  and  suscep- 
tible at  all  times  to  the  influences  prevalent 
among  gentlemen  of  polite  breeding.  In  feel- 
ing he  was  a southerner,  wedded  to  the  social 
and  economic  systems  of  his  own  section,  a 
state  rights  rather  than  a national  man  in 
association  and  sympathy,  an  independent 
Democrat  who  had  broken  with  Jackson  on 
certain  points  of  policy,  and  yet  with  respect 
to  the  common  people  a democrat  in  no  sense 
of  the  word. 

Tyler  began  his  presidency  with  a harmo- 
nizing disposition  and,  like  Harrison,  he  was 
pledged  to  let  a Whig  Congress  work  out  its 
own  legislation  without  interposing  the  veto 
power,  as  Jackson  had  done.  But,  as  his  sons 
and  biographers  have  later  shown  us,  a clique 
of  intimates  of  his  own  state  persuaded  him 
presently  to  lead  the  Whig  party  with  a new 
programme,  become  his  own  successor,  ousting 
rivals,  and  restore  Virginia  to  the  lead  in  af- 
fairs, as  in  earlier  days.  His  clash  with  Clay 
came  just  as  Congress  met,  and  Clay  left  the 
White  House  divining  his  purpose.  Webster 
was  to  be  kept  as  a possible  ally  of  Tyler’s 
ambition,  or  else  disposed  of  diplomatically. 
Congress  assembled  in  extra  session  with  a 
Whig  majority  in  both  branches;  and  Clay,  as 
Whig  leader  in  that  body,  produced  a pro- 
gramme whose  chief  purport,  after  abolishing 
Van  Buren’s  subtreasury,  was  to  reestablish  a 
United  States  Bank  of  some  kind.  Such  had 
been  the  general  expectation ; but  after  the 
subtreasury  repeal  President  Tyler’s  state 
rights  scruples  became  manifest  and  Clay’s 
plan  was  modified  to  meet  them.  The  bill  first 
passed  located  the  new  bank  in  the  District  of 


Columbia,  but  compromised  as  to  requiring 
state  assent  for  the  operation  of  branches. 
Tyler  vetoed  the  bill  and  it  was  lost.  A second 
bill  was  prepared,  upon  full  consultation  and 
what  seemed  a clear  approval  by  President  and 
the  whole  Cabinet.  This  bill  Tyler  also 
vetoed,  killing  the  measure,  and  his  rupture 
with  the  Whig  party  was  manifest. 

Harrison’s  Cabinet,  with  the  exception  of 
Webster,  resigned,  and  their  testimony  to 
Tyler’s  bad  faith  was  convincing.  But  the  hope 
of  forcing  this  President  to  resign  by  leaving 
him  without  a Cabinet  failed.  With  Webster’s 
aid  a full  list  to  fill  vacancies  was  sent  to 
the  Senate,  which  consistency  compelled  that 
body  to  confirm  just  before  the  adjournment 
on  September  13.  Webster’s  own  rivalry  with 
Clay  had  influenced  him  in  remaining;  but  im- 
portant negotiations  with  Great  Britain  fur- 
nished the  controlling  reason.  Meanwhile  the 
Whigs  of  Congress  had  appealed  to  the  country 
denouncing  their  promoted  Vice-President. 
Clay  was  widely  proclaimed  the  standard  bear- 
er of  the  party  for  1844,  and  Tyler  was  burned 
in  effigy  and  execrated.  Henry  Clay’s  prompt 
and  courageous  leadership  in  this  exigency 
saved  the  Whig  party  from  disintegration, 
but  the  progress  was  toilsome  and  self-sacrific- 
ing, with  the  patronage  left  in  the  hands  of  a 
recreant  President,  who  used  it  to  the  utmost 
for  his  own  political  advantage. 

Though  left  with  no  real  following  but  that 
of  the  national  office-holders — for  Tyler  was  no 
organizer  in  politics — the  President  fought  his 
own  cause  with  coolness  and  intrepidity.  A 
Whig  revision  of  the  tariff  became  needful  for 
revenue;  and  here  the  presidential  veto  com- 
pelled a loss  of  land  distribution  to  the  states 
— another  Whig  measure  on  which  Clay  had 
set  his  heart.  This  was  a Congress  of  much 
wasted  energy;  and  Clay  himself  had  resigned 
from  it  in  March,  1842,  partly  from  disgust 
and  disappointment  and  partly  so  as  to  con- 
duct his  new  canvass  more  advantageously. 
Tyler  with  his  Virginian  clique  took  up  Texas 
annexation  secretly,  to  make  a diverting  issue. 
Upon  the  assembling  of  the  Twenty-eighth  Con- 
gress, whose  Senate  was  still  controlled  by 
the  Whigs,  though  the  new  House  was  Demo- 
cratic, President  Tyler  sprang  his  surprise.  In 
April,  1844,  a completed  treaty  for  the  im- 
mediate annexation  of  Texas  was  sent  to  the 
Senate  and  published.  Army  and  Navy  orders 
being  called  for,  the  President  was  shown 
ready  to  guaranty  the  safety  of  Texas  by  a 
hostile  array  against  Mexico  ( see  Annexations 
to  the  U.  S.). 

Campaign  of  1844. — Both  parties  in  Con- 
gress resolved  that  Tyler  should  not  win  the 
stakes  for  himself.  The  Senate  rejected  his 
treaty  and  the  House  discountenanced  this 
whole  project.  But  Tyler  succeeded  in  play- 
ing his  trump  card  on  the  very  eve  of  the 
presidential  contest.  The  whole  country  was 
aroused  on  the  subject.  Both  Clay  and  Van 


682 


WHIG  PARTY 


Buren,  the  recognized  adversaries,  pronounced 
against  Texas  annexation.  Clay  carried  the 
Whig  convention  readily,  but  when  the  Demo- 
crats met,  Van  Buren  lost,  and  James  K.  Polk 
of  Tennessee  was  made  the  candidate  with  a 
platform  demanding  both  Texas  and  Oregon. 
Unfortunately  for  Clay’s  candidacy,  the  “Lib- 
erty” or  anti-slavery  party  ( see  Liberty 
Party)  had  been  revived,  the  year  before, 
and  nominated  James  G.  Birney  (see)  for 
President.  And  now,  with  the  Texas  furor 
wild  in  the  South,  Andrew  Jackson  strongly 
favoring  annexation,  while  the  moral  sense  of 
the  North  recoiled  at  the  thought  of  more  slave 
soil,  the  contest  became  close.  Clay,  eager  in 
his  quest,  trimmed  on  this  new  issue  to  make 
votes  in  a section  sure  to  go  against  him, 
and  in  two  “Alabama”  letters  weakened  his 
first  anti-Texas  position.  This  course,  in  con- 
trast to  Polk’s  reticence,  cost  Clay  the  elec- 
tion; for  enough  of  Birney’s  strength  in  New 
York  went  against  him  to  give  that  state  to 
the  Democrats,  and  New  York’s  vote  decided 
the  election.  Some  Whig  states  voted  later 
than  New  York,  knowing  that  the  field  was 
lost  already.  Polk’s  electoral  total  was  170 
to  Clay’s  105. 

When  Congress  reassembled,  a uniform  day 
throughout  the  Union  was  fixed  for  future  elec- 
tions. As  to  Texas,  a joint  resolution  gave 
the  President  an  option  either  to  propose  im- 
mediate union  or  to  negotiate  and  submit  a 
new  treaty.  Tyler  himself  took  quickly  the 
option  which  was  meant  for  his  successor,  and 
in  March,  just  as  his  term  was  closing,  de- 
spatched a messenger  to  Texas  under  the  first 
alternative.  Polk  allowed  him  the  odium  of 
an  initiative;  and  Tyler,  in  return,  placed  upon 
Polk  the  odium  of  a war  with  Mexico,  which 
speedily  followed. 

Campaign  of  1848.- — The  Whig  party,  and  es- 
pecially northern  Whigs,  opposed  as  a minor- 
ity the  war  with  Mexico,  which,  though  success- 
fully waged,  brought  into  the  Union  a great 
expanse  of  new  territory,  besides  Texas,  by 
which  slavery  hoped  to  profit.  The  antagonism 
of  sections  entered  into  the  presidential  cam- 
paign of  1848.  The  Democratic  convention 
nominated  Lewis  Cass  (see)  of  Michigan;  but 
a secession  of  “Barnburners”  (see),  or  Wilmot 
Proviso  (see)  men,  among  the  New  York  dele- 
gates presaged  trouble.  The  Whigs  met  at 
Philadelphia,  and  nominated  Zachary  Tay- 
lor (see),  a Whig  commander  of  the  Mexican 
War,  on  the  fourth  ballot.  Millard  Fillmore 
(see)  of  New  York  was  named  for  second 
place;  his  choice  gave  the  only  Whig  assurance 
to  the  ticket.  For  won  by  Taylor’s  great 
popularity,  notwithstanding  he  was  a warrior 
with  no  civilian  experience,  a Louisiana  man 
and  a slaveholder,  this  convention  adjourned 
in  great  confusion,  adopting  no  platform  what- 
ever, resolution  after  resolution  having  been 
voted  down.  Two  things  favored  Taylor’s  can- 
didacy as  the  campaign  progressed:  his  per- 
141 


sonal  character — bluff,  honest,  manly  and  pa- 
triotic— and  the  outcome  of  northern  revolt 
against  him.  Whigs  like  Webster,  who  de- 
clared the  nomination  “not  fit  to  be  made,” 
lent  their  reluctant  support  at  the  last;  while 
bolting  Whig  delegates  who  joined  Democrats 
in  a Free  Soil  (see)  convention  at  Buffalo  in 
August  made  ex-President  Van  Buren  their 
nominee;  and  he,  with  a score  of  his  own  to 
settle  with  Cass,  divided  the  Democracy  and 
gave  the  empire  state  to  the  Whigs.  As  in 
1844,  New  York  state  decided  results,  and 
Taylor  and  Filmore  won  by  163  electoral  votes 
to  127. 

Whig  Administration,  1849-1853. — The  ter- 
ritories wrested  from  Mexico  were  under  the 
new  President’s  control  from  his  inauguration, 
March,  1849,  until  Congress  met  in  December. 
Of  these,  California  (see)  had  suddenly  be- 
come a full-fledged  state  in  population,  because 
of  the  gold  discovery  in  1848.  Taylor  loved 
his  country  and,  although  brought  up  a slave- 
holder, had  no  wish  to  see  slavery  extended. 
With  his  official  sanction  a California  conven- 
tion met  at  Sacramento,  in  early  autumn,  and 
framed  a free  state  constitution  which  the 
people  adopted.  With  less  occasion  the  new 
administration  encouraged  the  people  of  New 
Mexico  to  take  a similar  course.  Southerners 
who  had  sustained  the  war  with  Mexico  for 
extending  the  area  of  slavery  viewed  the  un- 
expected situation  with  alarm.  Though  four 
slave  states  might  yet  be  made  of  Texas  under 
her  compact  of  annexation,  free  California 
would  at  once  disturb  the  equilibrium  of  sec- 
tions and  make  freedom  dominant  in  the  Sen- 
ate. 

The  Thirty-first  Congress  met  in  angry  turb- 
ulence, December  3,  sectional  dissension  on  the 
increase.  With  southern  Whigs  insolent  and 
northern  Whigs  insistent,  that  party  lost  con- 
trol of  the  House,  and  after  a three  weeks’  bal- 
loting for  speaker,  it  was  agreed  that  the 
sixty-third  ballot  should  decide  by  a plu- 
rality. And  thus  was  Howell  Cobb  of 
Georgia  barely  chosen  against  Robert  C.  Win- 
throp  of  Massachusetts,  the  speaker  of  the 
previous  House.  President  Taylor  pressed 
sensibly  to  have  California  admitted  without 
conditions.  Courteous  but  not  confidential  with 
Clay  and  Webster,  he  made  a younger  Whig, 
William  H.  Seward,  his  chief  counsellor. 

Clay,  in  disregard  of  the  President’s  wishes 
but  with  patriotic  ends  in  view,  proposed, 
January,  1850,  a grand  compromise  scheme  for 
pacifying  the  sections  and  settling  forever  the 
moral  rivalries  of  the  Union.  Historical 
speeches  were  made  in  March ; that  of  Web- 
ster, on  the  fourth  after  a silence,  deliberate 
and  profound,  approving  in  essence;  Calhoun 
voiced  southern  discontent,  and  Seward  pleaded 
for  California’s  admission  without  extraneous 
conditions.  Seward’s  appeal  to  a “higher  law” 
(see)  displeased  Calhoun,  who  died  that  same 
month.  A grand  committee  of  the  Senate  took 


683 


WHIG  PARTY 


Clay’s  plan  into  consideration  and  reported 
in  May  an  “omnibus  bill”  to  give  it  effect. 

Worried  over  the  difficulties  of  his  adminis- 
tration, Taylor  succumbed  to  a fever,  caused 
by  exposure  to  the  sun«it  a Fourth  of  July  cele- 
bration at  the  capital,  and  died  the  ninth. 
A second  time  were  the  Whigs  baffled  and 
divided  by  the  death  of  their  President  at  a 
critical  time  and  the  succession  of  their  Vice- 
President.  Millard  Fillmore  was  no  renegade, 
but  a man  of  the  full  party  faith,  honest  and 
sound.  Conservative,  however,  by  temperament 
and,  withal,  a jealous  rival  of  his  fellow  Whig 
of  western  New  York,  Seward,  his  preferences 
tended  to  Clay’s  pacification.  He  made  up  a 
Cabinet  of  his  own  with  Webster  at  the  head, 
repelled  Seward’s  advice,  palliated  Texas, 
and  showed  himself  not  unwilling  to  saddle 
the  other  territories  upon  California,  to  block 
or  delay  her  admission  as  a state.  Something 
of  the  dead  warrior’s  stubborn  courage  stirred 
for  the  moment.  Clay’s  “omnibus  bill”  was 
set  aside,  July  31,  and  by  a large  majority 
the  Senate,  next  day,  took  up  the  California 
admission  bill  by  itself.  Clay  still  appealed 
for  “reunion  of  the  Union,”  with  kind  be- 
seeching, but  denounced  all  attempts  in  his 
section  to  try  military  strength  against  the 
government.  He  left  for  the  seashore  to  re- 
cuperate; and  presently,  with  no  lead  but  that 
from  the  White  House,  Congress  carried  the 
Clay  measures  in  separate  bills  which  reached 
the  President  for  signature  as  a sort  of  mu- 
tual compact  ( see  Compromise  of  1850). 

Congress  adjourned  September  30.  Neither 
in  this  nor  the  final  session,  nor,  indeed,  dur- 
ing the  succeeding  Congress,  was  any  other 
legislation  of  historical  consequence  carried. 
Sectional  passions  yielded  gradually  to  this 
Compromise  of  1850,  soon  assumed  and  as- 
serted to  be  final  and  immutable,  through  mere 
legislation.  Disunion  elements  in  the  South 
were  appeased.  But  the  North  had  two  ob- 
jections to  this  sectional  compact:  that  op- 
tion “with  or  without  slavery”  in  the  new 
territorial  bills  as  a precedent;  and  the  strin- 
gent fugitive-slave  act.  The  former  deferred 
its  mischief  until  1853 ; but  that  of  the  other 
was  felt  at  once.  Riots  arose  in  New  York 
City,  Detroit,  Boston  and  elsewhere  when 
peaceful  black  citizens  were  torn  from  home 
and  family  by  the  deputy  marshals  of  the 
Union.  Public  meetings  protested  against 
the  kidnapping  features  of  this  new  act,  and 
many  states,  as  time  went  on,  made  counter 
legislation  in  “personal  liberty  laws”  (sec). 
Yet  it  is  fair  to  say  that  slave  holders  rare- 
ly, if  ever,  caused  a false  arrest,  but  sought 
real  fugitives,  many  of  whom  had  long  breathed 
the  air  of  freedom  (see  Fugitive  Slaves). 

Effort  was  made  by  the  Whig  leaders  to  se- 
cure acquiescence  in  the  compromise.  Despite 
all  turbulence  they  presently  succeeded.  Large 
public  meetings  were  called  in  leading  cities,  in 
favor  of  the  “peace  measures,”  in  which  lead- 


ing men  of  both  Whig  and  Democratic  ante- 
cedents took  part  together,  as  speakers  or 
writers  of  letters,  and  northern  conservatives 
joined  hands  to  put  down  radicals  and  agi- 
tators. Meanwhile  the  fall  elections  of  1850 
generated  great  bitterness,  and  by  the  dissen- 
sions of  “cotton”  and  “conscience”  Whigs  the 
Democrats  profited.  A Whig  convention  in  New 
York  developed  bitter  feud  between  the  Seward 
and  Fillmore  Whigs  ( see  Silver  Grays).  In 
Massachusetts  a coaliton  of  Democrats  and 
Free  Soilers  prevailed  against  George  N. 
Briggs,  who  for  seven  placid  Whig  years  had 
held  the  office  of  governor.  New  Jersey,  Penn- 
sylvania and  Ohio  showed  Whig  losses.  Slow- 
ly, however,  the  sober  second  thought  of  the 
people,  both  North  and  South,  came  to  sustain 
the  compromise  measures,  as  a settlement 
final  and  comprehensive.  A congressional 
manifest  headed  by  Clay,  the  next  January, 
counselled  strict  adherence  as  the  only  pledge 
of  national  harmony.  In  the  fall  elections  of 
1851  tranquility  succeeded  turbulence,  and  in- 
tegrity of  this  Union  was  the  accepted  watch- 
word of  the  two  great  parties. 

Campaign  of  1852. — The  national  party  con- 
ventions were  both  held  at  Baltimore  in  June, 
1852.  In  that  of  the  Democrats,  June  1-5, 
the  two-tliirds  rule  cut  off  chief  competitors, 
and  Franklin  Pierce  of  New  Hampshire  was 
nominated  on  the  forty-ninth  ballot.  He 
was  a man  of  amiable  manners  who  had  a fair 
record  in  the  House  and  had  served  as  a sub- 
ordinate general  in  the  Mexican  War.  With 
no  two-thirds  rule  at  all,  the  Whig  convention, 
June  16-21,  showed  a fierce  struggle  of  candi- 
dates. Clay,  near  to  death’s  door,  was  strong 
enough  to  give  preference  for  Fillmore,  as 
one  true  and  tried.  But  Seward  Whigs  and 
such  as  believed  less  in  the  settlement  were 
for  General  Winfield  Scott,  while  Webster  im- 
proved his  last  opportunity  for  a reward  due 
to  his  long  and  immeasurable  services.  Upon 
a first  balloting  Fillmore  had  133,  Scott  131 
and  Webster  29 ; and  so  the  relative  strength 
fairly  continued.  The  friends  of  President 
and  premier  awaited  the  withdrawal  of  one  in 
the  other’s  favor.  But  no  such  courtesy  came, 
and  the  exhausted  convention,  true  to  Whig 
prepossession,  yielded  to  the  military  candidate 
on  the  fifty-third  and  decisive  ballot.  William 
A.  Graham  of  North  Carolina  was  nominated 
Vice-President. 

But  while  both  parties  had  voted  to  sustain 
the  Compromise  of  1850,  only  the  Democratic 
platform  was  explicit.  The  Whigs  had  equi- 
vocated by  an  admission  that  time  and  ex- 
perience might  show  the  necessity  of  fur- 
ther legislation.  Scott,  moreover,  made  a non- 
committal acceptance  of  his  nomination  “with 
the  resolutions  annexed.”  All  this  called  forth 
an  angry  protest  from  southern  Whigs,  repu- 
diating the  ticket.  Northern  Free  Soilers,  a 
hopeless  minority,  prefered  assertion  under  a 
presidential  candidate  of  their  own.  Clay  and 


684 


WHIGS 


Webster,  the  ablest  men  of  the  party,  died  dur- 
ing the  campaign.  The  Whig  party,  or  rather 
its  remnant,  marched  in  November  to  a Water- 
loo defeat.  Pierce  polled  254  electoral  votes 
against  42  for  the  Whigs,  and  the  covenant  of 
1850  was  confided  by  the  people  for  keeping 
to  others  than  its  party  originators. 

Conclusion. — The  Whig  party  could  not  sur- 
vive its  two  greatest  leaders  and  orators.  It 
inspired  national  fraternity  while  it  lasted.  It 
drew  to  its  standard  the  conservative  and  res- 
pectable; broad-minded  men,  those  of  the  pro- 
fessions, scholars,  merchants,  bankers,  manu- 
facturers, men  of  capital  and  such  as  projected 
great  enterprises  or  thrived  by  them;  leaders 
in  society  and  those  of  social  aspiration.  But 
radical  zealots,  manual  toilers,  or  the  down- 
trodden from  abroad,  were  little  attracted.  In 
details  of  government,  state  or  national,  Whigs 
administered  ably,  with  wise  and  honest  men 
in  authority,  taking  pride  in  good  results.  But 
in  comprehensive  policies  they  sought  concil- 
iation too  much  for  definiteness  of  principle. 
Unlike  Federalists,  the  ancestors  of  so  many 
of  them,  Whigs,  though  patrician,  were  fairly 
trustful  of  the  people.  But  the  Federalists  in 
their  day  had  been  constructive  in  politics, 
while  the  Whigs  left  nothing  permanent  in 
history,  except  for  one  or  two  treaties.  The 
early  death  of  each  of  their  two  Presidents, 
with  a vice-presidential  succession,  frustrated 
the  policies  intended.  Even  the  Compromise 
of  1850,  as  a compact  of  North  and  South,  was 
a glorious  illusion,  lasting  less  than  four 
years.  In  fine,  the  drift  of  American  politics 
had  been,  while  this  great  party  lasted,  with 
its  splendid  rank  and  file,  toward  sectional 
strife  over  slavery ; and  for  guidance  through 
such  perils  WThig  leaders  proved  too  humane 
to  steer  in  the  one  direction  and  too  faint- 
hearted to  take  the  other.  The  party  fell  by 
dissension  and  by  its  terrible  propensity  to 
misfortunes;  but  it  loved  the  Union  as  it  was 
and  sought  sincerely  to  uphold  it. 

See  Democratic  Party;  Republican  Party; 
Slavery  Controversy. 

References:  A.  Johnston,  Hist,  of  Am.  Poli- 
tics (rev.  ed.,  1911);  J.  A.  Woodburn,  Po- 
litical Parties  and  Party  Problems  (1903)  ; 
C.  Schurz,  Henry  Clay  (1899)  ; H.  C.  Lodge, 
Daniel  Webster  (1899);  F.  Bancroft,  Life  of 
William  H.  Seioard  (1900),  I;  W.  MacDon- 
ald, Jacksonian  Democracy  (1906),  passim; 
G.  P.  Garrison,  Westward  Extension  (1906), 
passim;  J.  Schouler,  Hist,  of  U.  8.  (1889), 
IV  (1891),  V,  passim ; J.  B.  McMaster,  Hist, 
of  People  of  U.  8.  (1906),  VI  (1910),  VII, 
passim.  James  Schouler. 

WHIGS.  The  Whig  party  was  the  popular 
party  in  the  American  Revolution.  As  a Revo- 
lutionary party  it  had  different  antecedents  in 
different  colonies.  In  New  York  for  example 
the  Livingston  faction  in  the  local  politics 
embraced  the  Revolutionary  principles,  though 


its  leader  was  as  aristocratic  as  the  lead- 
er of  the  opposition,  the  DeLancey  party. 
In  the  royal  colonies  in  general,  it  was  the 
party  which  had  all  along  opposed  the  measures 
of  the  royal  governors,  which  in  the  pre-Revo- 
lutionary  controversies  with  the  British  min- 
istry opposed  it  most  vigorously.  The  num- 
erical strength  of  the  party  varied  greatly  ac- 
cording to  the  measures  which  it-  embraced  or 
opposed.  In  its  opposition  to  the  Stamp  Act 
it  had  the  support  of  the  vast  majority  of  the 
people.  In  its  opposition  to  the  Townshend 
Act,  it  encountered  few  enemies  outside  of  the 
royal  colonial  officers,  their  immediate  friends 
and  adherents,  and  the  conservative  aristocracy 
which  did  not  like  resistance  to  established 
authority.  When  Whig  resistance  went  so  far 
as  to  summon  a Continental  Congress,  the 
number  of  the  party  opponents  greatly  in- 
creased, and  the  maximum  of  opposition  was 
reached  when  the  leaders  of  the  Whig  party 
proposed  independence.  Therefore,  when  the 
party  was  at  the  height  of  its  accomplishment 
— if  we  except  the  actual  treaty  of  peace  and 
the  securing  of  independence — it  was  numeri- 
cally the  weakest,  and  encountered  the  greatest 
number  of  active  opponents. 

As  soon  as  the  principles  of  the  party  became 
defined,  it  appeared  as  a weak  government 
party  opposed  to  a strong  imperial  system.  It 
favored  the  principle  of  local  self-government, 
and  it  showed,  in  the  state  constitutions  made 
under  its  auspices  the  strong  emphasis 
it  placed  on  the  rights  of  the  individual.  It 
should  be  remembered,  however,  that  many 
men  who  were  leaders  in  the  movement  for 
independence  were  not  so  sympathetic  with  the 
democratic  political  reform  carried  out  in  the 
heyday  of  revolution.  Neither  Washington  nor 
Hamilton  was  in  full  sympathy  with  the  move- 
ment to  put  all  political  power  in  the  hands 
of  the  masses. 

An  incomplete  statistical  study  of  some  three 
hundred  leaders  of  the  Revolution  in  the  sev- 
eral colonies  discovers  some  interesting  facts 
as  to  the  character  of  individuals.  Over  75 
per  cent  of  them  seem  to  have  been  young  men, 
under  45  years  at  the  beginning  of  the  war. 
About  50  per  cent  came  of  the  middle  or  lower 
classes  in  colonial  society,  as  far  as  we  may 
determine  bv  their  vocation  or  that  of  their 
fathers.  Fully  75  per  cent  belonged  to  some 
dissenting  sect  in  religion,  the  remaining  25 
per  cent  coming  for  the  most  part  from  soutli 
of  the  Mason  and  Dixon  line.  Over  33  per 
cent  were  college  graduates,  the  great  major- 
ity from  Yale,  Princeton,  William  and  Mary 
and  Harvard.  These  percentages  must  be  read 
in  the  light  of  the  fact  that  it  was  the  colonial 
custom  to  leave  political  management  to  men 
of  established  social  position,  and,  more  impor- 
tant still,  that  only  the  men  who  attained  the 
greatest  prominence  in  the  Revolution  are  in- 
cluded in  the  data  used.  No  little  significance 
must  be  attached  to  the  fact  that  the  Loyalist 


WHIGS,  BRITISH— WHISKEY  FRAUDS  ON  THE  REVENUE 


literature  is  full  of  assertions  that  the  Whigs 
are  recruited  from  the  lower  classes,  from  the 
mob,  while  the  Patriot  literature  is  just  as  in- 
sistent that  the  Loyalists  are  aristocrats,  un- 
sympathetic with  the  people. 

See  Loyalists  ; Revolution,  American, 
Causes  of. 

References:  G.  E.  Howard,  Preliminaries  of 
the  Am.  Revolution  (1905);  C.  H.  Van  Tyne, 
“Loyalists”  in  Am.  Rev.  (1902)  ; C.  L.  Becker 
“Hist,  of  Pol.  Parties  in  Province  of  N.  Y., 
1760-1776”  in  Univ.  of  Wisconsin,  History 
Series,  Bulletin  (1909).  G.  H.  Van  Tyne. 

WHIGS,  BRITISH.  Whig  traditions  and  in- 
fluence still  survive  in  the  Liberal  party,  par- 
ticularly when  Liberals  are  in  office.  It  can- 
not be  said  that  there  is  today  a Whig  party, 
or  a well-defined  Whig  group  in  the  House  of 
Commons;  for  there  is  no  Whig  organization, 
no  Whig  press,  and  it  would  be  impossible  to 
discover  voters  who  would  describe  themselves 
as  Whigs.  The  term  gradually  ceased  to  be 
used  in  the  parliamentary  poll  books  after  1832 
— after  the  terms  Liberal  and  Conservative 
came  into  service.  It  survived  in  Parliament, 
on  the  platform  and  in  the  newspapers  until 
the  general  election  of  1874.  But  except  when 
used  by  Radicals,  Nationalists  and  Labor  poli- 
ticians as  an  expression  of  distrust  or  con- 
tempt applied  to  moderate  Liberals,  Whig  is  a 
term  that  fell  into  desuetude  after  the  exten- 
sion of  the  franchise  in  1885  and  the  realign- 
ment of  political  parties  that  resulted  from 
Gladstone’s  Home  Rule  bill  of  1886.  With  few 
exceptions  the  Whigs  then  grouped  themselves 
with  the  Liberal  Unionists,  and  by  1895  there 
had  ceased  to  be  any  distinction  between  Lib- 
eral Unionists  and  Conservatives.  The  mi- 
gration of  the  Whigs  from  the  Liberal  to  the 
Conservative  party  in  1886  and  the  disappear- 
ance since  1886  of  nearly  all  the  few  Whigs 
who  adhered  to  Gladstone,  has  had  a marked 
effect  on  the  Liberal  party.  It  has  made  it 
more  Liberal,  and  made  Liberal  cabinets  less 
exclusive  and  less  aristocratic  than  they  were 
from  the  time  the  cabinet  system  was  estab- 
lished until  Gladstone’s  last  administration  in 
1892;  for  until  1886  WTiigs  who  were  of  the 
House  of  Lords  had  dominated  administrations. 

The  Whigs  represented  the  section  of  the 
governing  class  that  was  not  Tory  or  Con- 
servative— chiefly  territorial  families  identified 
with  the  revolution  of  1688.  To  the  last, 
Whigs  were  a cult  rather  than  a political 
party.  They  were  ever  mindful  of  their  order ; 
seldom  actuated  by  democratic  sympathies;  and 
seldom  inclined  to  propaganda  to  increase 
the  numbers  of  their  order  in  the  constitu- 
encies or  in  Parliament.  After  1832,  when 
nomination  boroughs  became  fewer  and  the 
control  of  county  elections  less  easy,  the 
Whigs,  to  some  degree,  associated  themselves 
with  popular  causes  advocated  by  Liberals  and 
Radicals,  not  to  bring  new  men  into  the  Whij 


cult,  for  it  was  one  into  which  men  had  to 
be  born,  but  to  add  to  the  House  of  Commons 
strength  of  a Whig  government  or  opposition. 
Liberal  and  Radical  support  was  desired  by  the 
Whigs,  provided  that  no  representation  in  the 
ministry  was  demanded,  and  that  the  Liberals 
were  content  to  accept  Whig  measures  and  to 
wait  until  the  Whigs  were  ready  to  make  con- 
cesions  to  democracy.  Nevertheless  English 
political  development  owes  much  to  the  Whigs. 
They  established  parliamentary  government  on 
its  present  basis  at  the  Revolution  of  1688. 
They  contributed  much  between  1688  and  1760 
to  the  formation  of  the  cabinet  system.  They 
kept  the  established  church  in  check  in  the 
first  half  of  the  eighteenth  century.  They 
stood  for  freedom  of  speech  and  of  print  dur- 
ing the  era  of  the  countermovement  to  Parlia- 
mentary reform  between  1793  and  1820.  They 
advocated  the  repeal  of  the  Test  Act  and  the 
removal  of  Catholic  disabilities;  and  led  by 
Grey,  Russell,  Durham,  Graham,  and  Althorp, 
they  carried  the  country  through  the  crisis  of 
1831-32,  and  enacted  the  Reform  Bill. 

See  Conservative  Party;  House  of  Com- 
mons; Liberals;  Party  Government  in 
Great  Britain. 

References:  T.  E.  May,  Constitutional  Hist, 
of  Eng.  ( 1899 ) . Edward  Porritt. 

WHIP,  PARTY.  Though  but  recently  in- 
troduced into  Congress,  the  party  whipper-in, 
or  whip,  is  essential  to  the  English  Parliament. 
The  whip  is  chosen  by  the  party  leader,  whose 
henchman  he  is.  His  duties  are:  (1)  to  in- 
form the  leader  of  the  state  of  party  opinion ; 
(2)  to  count  the  vote  in  every  division  and  re- 
port the  results  to  the  Speaker;  (3)  to  inform 
members  when  important  divisions  are  ex- 
pected and  detain  them  until  the  division  oc- 
curs; (4)  to  obtain  pairs  for  those  who  must 
be  absent;  (5)  to  tell  members  how  to  vote. 
The  government  whip  must  also  “keep  a house,” 
or  a quorum,  when  government  business  is  be- 
ing transacted.  In  Congress  the  caucus  com- 
mittee usually  gives  the  entire  party  a “call” 
to  vote  on  an  important  measure.  But  in  1900 
the  congressional  caucus  (see  Caucus,  Legis- 
lative) of  each  party  chose  a whip  whose 
duties  are  to  canvass  the  party  on  all  doubt- 
ful issues  and  to  inform  the  leader  how  many 
votes  may  be  depended  on.  This  office  of  the 
tactful  persuader  has  been  adopted  to  meet 
the  needs  of  more  personal  party  leadership 
in  Congress.  References:  J.  Bryce,  Am.  Com- 
monwealth (4th  ed.,  1910),  I,  203,  note  3, 
204;  A.  L.  Lowell,  Government  of  England 
(1908),  I,  254,  297,  322,  448-457.  J.  M. 

WHISKEY  FRAUDS  ON  THE  REVENUE. 

Immediately  following  the  Civil  War  there 
were  extensive  frauds  in  the  evasion  of  inter- 
nal revenue  duties  on  whiskey.  The  high  rate 
of  duty,  $1.50  per  gallon  in  1864-1865,  and 
$2.00  per  gallon,  or  800  per  cent  on  the  cost, 
686 


WHISKEY  INSURRECTION— WHITE,  JOHN 


in  1866-1867,  proved  too  strong  a temptation. 
Administrative  regulation  also  was  careless 
and  crude.  According  to  David  A.  Wells, 
revenue  commissioner  for  several  years  after 
the  war,  and  historian  of  the  whiskey  fraud 
episode,  there  were  repeated  instances  where 
distillers  manufactured  and  fraudulently  sold 
spirits  varying  in  quantity  from  20,000  to 
80,000  gallons.  The  filling  of  barrels  was  done 
without  supervision,  and  sometimes  distillers 
were  made  inspectors  of  their  own  products. 
Later,  government  officials  were  involved;  un- 
til there  was  organized  a formidable  Whiskey 
Ring  which  for  a time  controlled  elections  in 
some  parts  of  the  country,  and  openly  defied 
the  government.  In  1875  Secretary  Bristow  of 
the  Treasury  Department  collected  evidence 
which  led  to  the  exposure  of  the  frauds.  See 
Revenue,  Internal.  References:  D.  A.  Wells, 
Practical  Economics  (1885),  194-234;  J.  Mc- 
Donald, Secrets  of  the  Great  Whiskey  Ring 
(1880).  D.  R.  D. 

WHISKEY  INSURRECTION.  An  outbreak 
in  western  Pennsylvania  in  1794  against  the 
enforcement  of  a federal  excise  law  on  domes- 
tic spirits  is  commonly  called  the  Whiskey 
Insurrection.  Excise  had  always  been  an 
odious  tax  in  the  United  Kingdom;  and  its 
introduction  into  the  colonies  met  with  bitter 
opposition. 

The  legislatures  of  Maryland,  Virginia, 
North  Carolina,  and  Pennsylvania  exhibited 
strong  dislike  to  the  excise  when  enacted  by 
Congress  in  1791;  but  it  was  in  western  Penn- 
sylvania that  opposition  was  most  violent. 
Soon  after  the  passage  of  the  act,  began  the 
circulation  of  threats  calculated  to  discour- 
age citizens  from  accepting  any  offices  connected 
with  the  enforcement  of  the  excise,  and  from 
complying  in  any  way  with  its  provisions.  The 
next  step  was  a pretense  of  discontinuing  the 
operation  of  registered  stills.  Then  followed 
neighborhood  meetings  and  conventions,  in 
which  intemperate  resolutions  were  frequently 
passed,  resulting  in  violent  acts  against  the 
revenue  officers.  In  1792  the  President  ap- 
proved “an  act  to  provide  for  calling  forth  the 
militia  to  execute  the  laws  of  the  Union,  sup- 
press insurrections  and  repel  invasions,”  a 
measure  directed  in  part  against  the  lawless 
spirit. 

The  grievances  of  the  protestors  west  of  the 
Alleghenies  were:  (1)  no  action  at  law  could 
be  brought  in  their  own  local  courts  for  of- 
fenses committed  against  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment, but  that  they  had  to  go  to  Philadelphia 
for  trial;  (2)  whiskey  was  the  only  valuable 
article  in  small  bulk  with  which  they  could 
purchase  commodities;  (3)  the  law  afforded 
them  neither  redress  nor  protection.  June  5, 
1794,  the  President  approved  an  act  intended 
to  remedy  some  of  the  complaints.  Mean- 
while disturbances  of  a riotous  nature  oc- 
curred in  several  localities,  and  writs  were 


issued  against  non-complying  distillers.  This 
led  to  the  burning  of  the  house  of  Gen- 
eral Neville,  the  inspector,  on  July  17 
and  other  outrages.  Proclamations  were 
speedily  issued  by  the  President  and  the  gov- 
ernor of  Pennsylvania  and  federal  and  state 
commissioners  in  vain  tried  to  secure  the  yield- 
ing of  disaffected  people.  The  President  there- 
upon called  out  15,000  militia;  notwithstand- 
ing mass  meetings,  and  resolutions  that  the 
civil  authority  could  enforce  the  law,  he  ordered 
the  army  to  advance.  The  insurgents  offered 
no  resistance,  and  the  troops,  after  making  a 
few  arrests,  withdrew.  The  effect  of  the  whole 
movement  was  to  strengthen  the  national  Gov- 
ernment. See  Excise  Tax;  Insurrections, 
History  of.  References:  Pittsburg  Carnegie 
Library,  Monthly  Bulletin  (July,  1906)  ; Pa. 
Archives  (1876),  2d  Ser.,  IV;  H.  H.  Bracken- 
ridge,  Incidents  of  the  Insurrection  (1795)  ; 
W.  Findley,  Hist,  of  the  Insurrection  (1796)  ; 
H.  Adams,  Writings  of  Gallatin  (1879),  III, 
1-67.  J.  K.  Lacock. 

WHISKEY  RING.  A group  of  conspirators 
composed  of  internal  revenue  officers  and  dis- 
tillers— principally  in  St.  Louis — and  certain 
federal  officials,  at  Washington  which,  from 
about  1870  to  1875,  defrauded  the  Government 
of  the  excise  tax  on  a large  amount  of  whis- 
key. It  was  broken  up  by  the  investigation 
instituted  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
Benjamin  H.  Bristow.  See  Whiskey  Frauds. 

O.  C.  H. 

WHITE  HOUSE.  The  popular  name  for  the 
executive  mansion  in  Washington.  Roosevelt 
while  President  substituted  White  House  for 
Executive  Mansion  as  the  official  name  of  the 
presidential  residence.  O.  C.  H. 

WHITE,  JOHN.  John  White  (1805-1845) 
was  born  in  Carter  county,  Tenn.,  February 
14,  1805.  The  family  removed  to  Kentucky, 
where  he  became  manager  of  valuable  salt 
works  owned  by  his  father.  In  1823  he  was 
admitted  to  the  bar,  practising  at  Richmond, 
and  by  1825  was  a leader  in  his  profession  in 
the  state.  From  1835  to  1845  he  was  a Whig 
member  of  the  national  House  of  Representa- 
tives, and  in  the  Twenty-seventh  Congress, 
1841-43,  was  speaker.  His  most  notable  rul- 
ing was  on  March  23,  1842,  when  his  decision 
established  the  rule: 

That  when  a committee  of  the  whole  house  shall 
rise  and  report  that  it  finds  itself  without  a 
quorum,  and  upon  a vote  or  count  of  the  house 
immediately  thereafter  it  shall  be  ascertained  that 
a quorum  is  present,  it  is  not  then  in  order  to 
move  a call  of  the  house,  but  that  the  committee 
of  the  whole  must  be  immediately  resumed. 

On  his  retirement  from  Congress  he  was  ap- 
pointed judge  of  the  nineteenth  judicial  dis- 
trict of  Kentucky.  He  committed  suicide  at 
Richmond,  September  22,  1845.  See  Speaker 
of  the  House.  References:  A.  C.  Hinds, 


687 


WHITEWASH— VVILSON-GORMAN  TARIFF 


Precedents  of  the  House  of  Representatives 
(1909),  IV,  § 2968;  M.  R.  Follett,  Speaker 
of  the  House  (1896).  W.  MacD. 

WHITEWASH.  A farcial  investigation  of 
official  corruption  or  wrong  doing  in  which 
facts  are  disregarded  or  so  colored  that  a re- 
port of  exoneration  results.  0.  C.  H. 

WIGWAM.  An  appellation  given  to  a large 
building  in  which  political  gatherings  are  held, 
particularly  to  the  structure  in  which  national 
nominating  conventions  meet.  Also  a Tam- 
many (see)  gathering  place.  O.  C.  H. 

WILD  CAT  BANKS.  See  Banks,  Wild- 
Cat. 

WILLIAMS,  JOHN  SHARP.  John  Sharp 
Williams  was  born  July  30,  1854,  at  Memphis, 
Tennessee;  he  was  educated  in  private  schools 
and  at  the  Kentucky  Military  Institute,  the 
University  of  the  South,  University  of  Vir- 
ginia and  at  Heidelberg,  Germany.  He  began 
the  practice  of  law  in  Tennessee  in  1877  but 
moved  to  Yazoo  City,  Mississippi,  in  1878 
where  he  became  a lawyer-planter  after  the 
old  Southern  fashion.  He  was  a delegate  to 
the  Democratic  national  convention  in  1892 
and  was  a representative  in  Congress  from  Mis- 
sissippi from  1893  to  1909  and  leader  of  the 
Democratic  minority  in  the  house  from  1903  to 
1909  in  which  position  he  was  distinguished 
for  keenness  of  debate  and  the  greatest  alert- 
ness as  a parliamentarian.  He  was  elected  to 
the  United  States  Senate  in  1908  but  did  not 
take  his  seat  until  1911;  he  is  already  a lead- 
er in  that  body  (1913).  See  Democratic 
Party;  Mississippi. 

W.  E.  D. 

WILLIAMS,  ROGER.  Roger  Williams  (c. 
1603-1863)  was  born  in  London  about  1603. 
He  graduated  from  Pembroke  College,  Cam- 
bridge, in  1626,  and  presently  took  episcopal 
orders.  In  1631  he  arrived  in  Massachusetts, 
and  was  chosen  minister  of  the  church  at 
Salem.  From  the  first  his  views  regarding 
liberty  of  conscience  and  separation  of  church 
and  state  brought  him  into  sharp  antagonism 
to  the  colonial  leaders.  In  1632  he  went  to 
Plymouth,  but  in  1634  was  invited  back  to 
Salem,  where  he  reasserted  his  religious  views 
and  attacked  the  validity  of  the  charter.  In 
October,  1635,  he  was  tried  as  a seditious 
person,  and  sentenced  to  leave  the  colony  with- 
in six  weeks;  the  time  being  later  extended 
until  spring.  As  he  continued  to  express  his 
opinions,  he  was  in  January,  1636,  ordered  to 
be  arrested  and  sent  to  England.  He  fled  to 
Rhode  Island  and  founded  Providence.  In  1643 
he  went  to  England,  and  through  the  inffuence 
of  the  Earl  of  Warwick  obtained  a patent  for 
Providence  Plantations.  He  was  one  of  the 
grantees  of  the  Rhode  Island  charter  of  1663, 


and  one  of  the  assistants  of  the  colony.  He 
died  at  Providence  in  1683.  See  Religious 
Liberty;  Rhode  Island.  References:  R.  Wil- 
liams, “Collected  Writings”  in  Narragansett 
Club,  Publications  (1866-74);  H.  M.  Dexter, 
As  to  Roger  Williams  (1876);  0.  S.  Straus, 
Roger  Williams,  the  Pioneer  of  Religious  Lib- 
erty (1894)  ; J.  B.  Richman,  Rhode  Island:  a 
Study  in  Separatism  (1905),  ch.  ii. 

W.  MacD. 

WILMOT  PROVISO.  President  Polk  (see 
Polk,  James  K.)  began  the  Mexican  War 
with  the  expectation  of  acquiring  a consider- 
able cession  of  territory  from  Mexico.  This 
intention  was  publicly  avowed  in  his  message 
of  August  8,  1846,  requesting  of  Congress 
an  appropriation  of  $2,000,000  to  be  used 
in  acquiring  the  territory  desired.  The  ques- 
tion at  once  arose  whether  it  should  become 
slave  or  free.  The  Wilmot  Proviso  was  an 
amendment  to  the  bill  making  the  desired  ap- 
propriation, providing,  in  effect,  that  slavery 
should  never  exist  in  the  territory  to  be  ac- 
quired. Broadly  stated,  the  issue  was  whether 
slavery  should  permanently  be  confined  to  its 
existing  limits,  or  whether  it  should  begin  a 
career  of  expansion  over  the  territories  belong- 
ing to  the  United  States.  In  1847  Congress 
passed  the  appropriation  bill  without  the  pro- 
viso, and  the  following  year  California  was  ac- 
quired with  no  restriction  upon  slavery.  By 
the  Compromise  of  1850  (see)  part  of  this 
territory  became  the  free  state  of  California, 
and  from  the  remainder  the  territories  of  Utah 
(see)  and  New  Mexico  (see)  were  organized, 
with  no  determination  of  the  status  of  slavery 
therein.  The  final  decision  of  the  broader  issue 
raised  by  the  Wilmot  Proviso  was  reached  only 
through  the  Civil  War.  See  Slavery  Contro- 
versy. Reference:  J.  Schouler,  Hist,  of  U.  S., 
IV  (1889),  543;  V (1891),  66,  95  et  seq. 

M.  M.  Q. 

WILSON-GORMAN  TARIFF.  This  tariff 
was  enacted  in  1894,  receiving  its  name  from 
William  L.  Wilson,  Democratic  Representative 
from  West  Virginia,  and  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee on  ways  and  means;  and  from  Arthur 
P.  Gorman,  chairman  of  the  Senate  committee 
on  finance.  The  Democrats,  owing  to  the  revolt 
against  the  high  duties  of  the  McKinley  tariff, 
were  successful  in  the  elections  of  1890  and 
1892.  The  panic  of  1893  delayed  immediate 
legislation;  and  as  finally  enacted,  the  tariff 
was  by  no  means  what  the  electorate  expected; 
the  House  bill  showed  an  honest  purpose  to 
remove  some  of  the  burdensome  charges  of  the 
McKinley  tariff,  but  the  protective  sentiment 
of  the  Senate,  with  which  Gorman  and  a few 
Democratic  followers  were  in  full  sympathy,  de- 
stroyed all  hopes  of  tariff  reform.  President 
Cleveland  refused  to  sign  the  bill,  and  allowed 
it  to  become  a law  only  by  passive  neglect, 
saying,  “Senators  have  stolen  and  worn  the 


688 


WILSON,  JAMES— WINTHROP,  ROBERT  CHARLES 


livery  of  Democratic  tariff  reform  in  the  serv- 
ice of  Republican  protection.”  Wool  was  placed 
on  the  free  list,  and  duties  reimposed  on  sugar. 
More  important  was  the  inclusion  of  an  income 
tax  (see),  a provision  which  proved  fruitless, 
as  it  was  speedily  declared  unconstitutional 
by  the  Supreme  Court.  See  Sixteenth  Amend- 
ment; Tariff  Policy  of  the  United  States; 
Tariff  Reform.  References:  F.  W.  Taussig, 
Tariff  History  of  the  V.  S.  (1910),  284—320; 
E.  Stanwood,  Am.  Tariff  Controversies  ( 1903 ) , 
II,  296-359;  J.  L.  Laughlin  and  H.  P.  Willis, 
Reciprocity  (1903),  230—269.  D.  R.  D. 

WILSON,  JAMES.  James  Wilson  was  born 
in  Scotland  September  14,  1742.  Having 

studied  at  Scotch  universities  he  came  to 
America  in  1763.  Here  he  studied  law.  In 
1775  he  was  chosen  a member  of  the  Conti- 
nental Congress.  Wilson  and  some  of  the 
other  members  from  the  middle  states,  appre- 
ciative of  the  divided  opinions  of  the  people 
of  that  region,  naturally  were  less  eager  for 
an  announcement  of  the  independence  than  were 
the  leaders  from  Virginia  and  New  England. 
When  the  time  came,  however,  and  a vote  was 
finally  necessary,  Wilson  voted  for  independ- 
ence; without  his  vote  the  Pennsylvania  dele- 
gation would  have  been  evenly  divided  ( see 
Declaration  of  Independence).  He  was  a 
member  of  Congress,  1775-1777,  and  again  a 
member  in  1783  and  1785-86.  He  was  one  of 
the  great  leaders  in  the  Federal  Convention  of 
1787.  No  man  saw  more  clearly  what  was 
needed  or  strove  more  valiantly  for  a strong 
constitution  and  a real  national  government. 
He  worked  diligently  for  the  adoption  of  the 
Constitution  by  Pennsylvania.  In  1789  he  be- 
came associate  justice  of  the  federal  Supreme 
Court.  He  was  a learned  lawyer  and  writer; 
he  died  in  1798.  See  Federal  Convention; 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States. 
References:  J.  DeW.  Andrews,  Works  of 
Wilson  (1896)  ; A.  C.  McLaughlin,  “James  Wil- 
son in  the  Philadelphia  Convention”  in  Pol. 
Sci.  Quart.,  XII  (1897),  1-20;  J.  M.  Harlan, 
“James  Wilson  and  the  Formation  of  the 
Const.”  in  Am.  Law  Rev.,  XXXIV  ( 1900 ) , 
481-504;  B.  A.  Konkle  and  others  in  Am.  Law 
Register,  LV  ( 1907 ) . A.  C.  McL. 

WILSON,  WOODROW.  Woodrow  Wilson 
(1856-  ),  twenty-eighth  President  of  the 

United  States,  was  born  at  Staunton,  Va.,  De- 
cember 28,  1856.  From  1882  to  1883  he  prac- 
tised law  at  Atlanta,  Ga.  He  was  professor 
of  history  and  political  economy  at  Bryn  Mawr, 
1885-88,  and  of  the  same  subjects  at  Wesleyan, 
1888-90.  He  was  then  called  to  Princeton, 
where  he  was  successively  professor  of  juris- 
prudence and  political  economy,  1890-95,  of 
jurisprudence,  1895-97,  and  of  jurisprudence 
and  politics,  1897-1902.  From  1902  to  1910  he 
was  president  of  Princeton,  resigning  to  be- 
come governor  of  New  Jersey.  As  governor  he 


secured  the  passage  of  corrupt  practices  and 
direct  primaries  acts,  a workmen’s  compen- 
sation act,  and  an  act  for  state  control  of  pub- 
lic service  corporations.  He  successfully  op- 
posed the  candidacy  of  James  Smith,  Jr.,  for 
the  United  States  Senate  on  a high  tariff  plat- 
form. In  1912  he  was  nominated  for  President 
by  the  Democrats  on  the  forty-sixth  ballot,  and 
elected,  receiving  435  electoral  votes  against 
88  for  Roosevelt  and  8 for  Taft,  but  his  popu- 
lar vote  was  only  6,286,214  in  a total  of 
15,031,169.  His  writings  include : Congressional 
Government  (1885),  The  State  (1889),  Di- 
vision and  Reunion  (1893),  History  of  the 
American  People  (1902),  and  Constitutional 
Government  in  the  United  States  (1908). 
References:  Am.  Year  Book,  1911,  1912, 
Cong.  Directory,  63  Cong.,  1 Sess. 

W.  MacD. 

WINTHROP,  JOHN.  John  Winthrop  was 
born  in  Groton,  England,  January  12,  1587,  and 
died  March  26,  1649.  In  1629  he  was  made 
governor  of  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Company 
and  the  following  year  came  to  America  as  the 
leader  of  the  “Puritan  Migration,”  settling  at 
Boston.  He  was  reelected  governor  until  1634 
and  served  in  that  office  1637-40;  1641-43; 
1646-49.  His  influence  was  dominant  in  es- 
tablishing the  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony.  He 
advocated  the  establishment  of  government 
which  would  protect  the  state  church.  The 
form  of  aristocratic  republic  which  he  favored 
was  portrayed  in  the  well-known  letter,  to 
Thomas  Hooker,  1638,  in  which  he  spoke  of 
“the  unwarrantableness  * * of  referring 

matters  of  Counsel  or  judicature  to  the  body 
of  the  people  of  which  the  best  part  is  always 
the  least,  and  of  that  best  part  the  wiser  part 
is  always  the  lesser.”  According  to  his  plan 
officers  once  chosen  were  really  not  responsible 
to  the  people.  See  Colonial  Corporation; 
Massachusetts.  References:  J.  Winthrop, 
Hist,  of  New  England  (1908),  “Winthrop 
Papers”  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.,  Collections  (1863), 
4th  Set.,  Ill,  VII;  5th  Ser.,  I (1871); 
J.  Twichell,  John  Winthrop  (1891);  R.  C. 
Winthrop,  Life  and  Letters  of  John  Winthrop 
(1864-1867).  J.  A.  J. 

WINTHROP,  ROBERT  CHARLES.  Robert 
C.  Winthrop  (1809—1894)  was  born  at  Bos- 
ton, May  12,  1809.  He  was  a lineal  descend- 
ant of  Governor  John  Winthrop  (see).  He 
studied  law  with  Daniel  Webster,  and  in  1831 
was  admitted  to  the  bar.  From  1834  to  1840 
he  was  a member  of  the  Massachusetts  general 
court,  serving  as  speaker  from  1838  to  1840. 
He  was  then  elected  to  Congress,  where  he  sat, 
save  for  a brief  interval  in  1842,  until  1850. 
In  1847,  the  Whigs  having  a majority  in  the 
House,  he  was  chosen  Speaker.  He  was  again 
a candidate  for  Speaker  in  1849;  but  after  62 
ballots,  there  being  no  party  majority,  owing 
to  the  defection  of  Giddings,  Howell  Cobb,  a 


689 


WIRELESS  TELEGRAPHY— WISCONSIN 


Democrat,  was  chosen  by  plurality  vote.  On 
the  resignation  of  Webster,  in  1850,  he  was  ap- 
pointed Senator  for  the  remainder  of  the  term; 
but  a combination  of  Democrats  and  Free- 
Soilers  prevented  him  from  obtaining  an  elec- 
tion in  1851.  In  the  same  year  he  was  un- 
successful as  the  Whig  candidate  for  governor, 
and  thereafter  took  no  active  part  in  public 
affairs.  He  was  for  thirty  years  president 
of  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society,  and 
published  a number  of  addresses  and  historical 
works,  the  most  important  being  Life  and  Let- 
ters of  John  Winthrop  (1869).  He  died  at 
Boston,  November  16,  1894.  See  Speaker  of 
the  House;  Whig  Party.  References:  R.  C. 
Winthrop,  Jr.,  Memoir  of  Robert  C.  Winthrop 
(1897);  Mass.  Hist.  Society,  Tributes  to  the 
Memory  of  Robert  C.  Winthrop  (1894)  ; T.  C. 
Smith,  Parties  and  Slavery  (1906). 

W,  MacD. 

WIRELESS  TELEGRAPHY.  The  Wireless 
Ship  Act  of  June  24,  1910,  enacted  by  Con- 
gress provides  that  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any 
ocean-going  steamer  carrying  passengers  and 
carrying  fifty  or  more  persons,  including  pas- 
sengers and  crew,  to  leave  or  attempt  to  leave 
any  port  of  the  United  States  unless  such 
steamer  shall  be  equipped  with  an  efficient 
apparatus  for  radio-communication,  in  good 
working  order,  in  charge  of  a person  skilled  in 
the  use  of  such  apparatus,  which  apparatus 
shall  be  capable  of  transmitting  and  receiving 
messages  over  a distance  of  at  least  one.  hun- 
dred miles,  night  or  day.  This  does  not  ap- 
ply to  steamers  plying  between  ports  less 
than  two  hundred  miles  apart.  As  a direct 


result  of  the  Titanic  disaster  ( see  Accidents, 
Railroad  and  Steamship),  a bill  was  signed 
by  President  Taft,  July  23,  1912,  amending 
the  act  of  June  24,  1910.  In  addition  to  the 
provisions  of  the  original  act,  this  bill  provided 

The  radio  equipment  must  be  in  charge  of  two 
or  more  persons  skilled  in  the  use  of  such  ap- 
paratus, one  or  the  other  of  whom  shall  be  on 
duty  at  all  times  while  the  vessel  is  being  navi- 
gated. 

The  obvious  relation  of  government  to  wire- 
less telegraphy,  first  of:  all,  concerns  the 
establishment  of  foreign  wireless  telegraph 
stations  in  the  United  States.  The  Attorney 
General  ruled  (XXIV  Op.  A.  G.  101)  : that 

Apart  from  this  specific  clause  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, I may  refer  you  to  the  carefully  considered 
opinion  of  this  Department  (22  Op.  13),  in  which 
the  inherent  authority  of  the  President  to  control 
the  landing  of  foreign  submarine  cables  on  the 
shores  of  the  United  States  was  set  forth.  The 
conclusions  therein  reached  are  not  affected  by  the 
means  employed  to  transmit  the  messages,  for 
whether  transmitted  by  the  ordinary  telegraph 
wires,  by  submarine  cables,  or  by  any  of  the  wire- 
less systems,  the  power  of  Government  to  regulate 
commerce  and  to  preserve  the  territorial  integrity 
of  this  country  depends  not  upon  the  means  em- 
ployed but  upon  the  end  attained. 

See  Accidents,  Railroad  and  Steamship; 
Telegraph,  Regulation  of;  Submarine 
Cables,  Regulation  of. 

References:  Gong.  Record,  61  Cong.,  2 Seas. 
(1910)  ; International  Wireless  Telegraph  Con- 
vention, Proceedings  (1909). 

G.  W.  Pierce. 

WIRE-PULLING.  Underhand  management 
and  intrigue  made  use  of  by  political  leaders 
in  guiding,  controlling  and  manipulating  a 
political  party  organization.  0.  C.  H. 


WISCONSIN 


Early  History. — Nicolet,  in  1634,  was  the 
first  European  to  visit  the  territory  now  known 
as  Wisconsin.  Temporary  French  settlements 
date  back  to  1660;  permanent,  from  1717. 
Immigration  of  Americans  began  to  be  impor- 
tant about  1820,  of  Germans  in  the  forties,  of 
Norwegians  in  the  fifties,  and  later  that  of 
Bohemians  and  Poles,  and  an  unusual  number 
of  other  nationalities.  This  territory  belonged 
to  France  until  1763.  From  1763  to  1774  it 
was  under  the  British  Crown,  but  without 
organized  government.  From  1774  to  1783  it 
was  officially  a part  of  the  province  of  Que- 
bec. Ceded  to  the  United  States  in  1783,  it 
remained  under  British  control  until  1796, 
and  was  not  effectively  occupied  by  the  Ameri- 
can government  until  after  the  War  of  1812. 
In  the  meantime,  it  was  claimed  by  Virginia 
until  1784,  and  by  Massachusetts  until  1785. 
In  1787  it  fell  under  the  provisions  of  the 
Northwest  Ordinance  ( see  Ordinance  of 
1787).  On  May  7,  1800,  it  became  part  of 
Indiana  Territory,  and  in  1803  the  first  justices 


of  the  peace  were  appointed.  On  February  3, 
1809,  it  became  part  of  Illinois  territory, 
and  on  April  18,  1818,  of  Michigan  territory. 
In  1818,  by  Michigan  authority,  county  govern- 
ment was  established,  and  in  1821  the  Michi- 
gan code  succeeded  the  coutume  de  Paris,  which 
had  prevailed.  On  April  20,  1836,  it  became 
an  organized  territory,  including  at  first  Iowa 
and  other  areas  beyond  the  Mississippi. 

Constitution  and  Amendments. — The  Wiscon- 
sin Enabling  Act  was  passed  August  10,  1846. 
The  constitution  first  drawn  up  was  rejected 
in  1847.  The  second  was  adopted  March  13, 
1848,  accepted  by  Congress,  May  29,  1848,  and 
is  still  in  force.  Article  I consists  of  a “Decla- 
ration of  Rights,”  containing,  in  addition 
to  the  customary  provisions,  the  following: 
the  truth  is  a defense  in  cases  of  li- 
bel; leases  of  agricultural  land  may  not  ex- 
tend to  over  fifteen  years;  debtors  may  have 
a “reasonable”  amount  of  property  exempted 
from  seizure;  and  no  public  money  may  be 
granted  to  religious  institutions.  By  a judi- 


WISCONSIN 


eial  interpretation  of  a certain  section  of  this 
article,  the  supreme  court  decided,  1890,  that 
the  reading  of  the  Bible  in  the  public  schools 
is  unconstitutional. 

Article  III,  gives  the  suffrage  to  all  white 
citizens  of  the  United  States,  to  foreigners 
who  have  declared  their  intention  of  becoming 
such,  and  to  civilized  Indians;  all  subject 
to  the  limitations  of  being  over  twenty-one 
years,  and  having  one  year’s  tesidence  in  the 
state.  All  elections,  except  in  townships,  are 
to  be  by  ballot.  The  legislature  is  empowered 
to  extend  the  suffrage,  subject  to  popular  ap- 


days.  In  1899  women  were  given  the  privilege 
of  voting  at  all  elections  relating  to  schools. 

Article  IV  provides  for  a legislature  consist- 
ing of  a assembly,  to  number  between  54  and 
100;  and  a senate  to  be  between  a third  and  a 
fourth  as  numerous.  Districts  were  to  be 
arranged  in  accordance  with  population  as 
ascertained  by  the  national  decennial  censuses, 
and  by  state  censuses  taken  in  the  middle  of 
the  intervals.  By  amendment  in  1910  the 
quinquennial  census  and  apportionment  were 
abolished.  Districts  are  to  be  as  compact  as 
possible,  and  representatives  and  senators  are 


Boundaries  of  the  State  of  Wisconsin,  Showing  Territorial  Changes 


proval,  expressed  by  a majority  of  the  votes 
cast  in  the  election.  This  provision  was  the 
result  of  a vigorous  agitation  on  the  subject 
of  negro  suffrage,  and  in  1849  this  question 
was  submitted  at  the  general  election  to  the 
people.  The  bulk  of  the  voters  did  not  cast 
ballots  on  the  proposition,  believing  that  the 
“majority  of  votes  cast”  referred  to  the  total 
number  cast  at  the  time.  As  a result  a ma- 
jority of  the  votes  on  this  particular  proposal 
were  affirmative.  The  state  government,  fol- 
lowing the  popular  interpretation,  held  it  lost. 
In  1866,  however,  a court  decision  decided 
that  it  had  been  carried,  and  negro  suffrage 
became  a fact.  An  amendment  of  1882  allows 
the  legislature  to  fix  a residence  requirement 
for  the  election  district,  not  to  exceed  thirty 


to  be  qualified  electors  of  their  respective  dis- 
tricts. At  first  the  legislature  met  annually, 
representatives  being  elected  annually,  and 
senators  biennially,  one-half  retiring  each 
election.  By  amendment  in  1882,  sessions  and 
representative  terms  were  made  biennial,  and 
senators’  terms  four  years.  Counties  of  900 
square  miles  and  over,  can  be  divided  only  by 
a majority  of  all  legal  voters  therein;  private 
bills  may  treat  of  one  subject  only;  the  legis- 
lature may  not  authorize  a lottery,  nor  grant 
divorce.  By  amendments  in  1871  and  1902,  no 
private  laws  may  be  passed  making  private 
incorporations,  etc.  It  may  delegate  power  to 
county  supervisors. 

Article  V provides  for  a governor  and  lieu- 
tenant governor,  to  hold  office  two  years.  The 


691 


WISCONSIN 


governor  must  return  bills  lie  wishes  to  veto 
within  three  days.  To  pass  them  over  his  veto 
requires  a two-thirds  vote.  The  secretary  of 
state,  treasurer,  and  attorney  general,  are 
elected  biennially.  County  sheriffs  are  in- 
eligible for  reelection.  The  constitution  pro- 
vides for  supreme,  circuit,  and  probate  courts, 
and  justices  of  the  peace,  and  authorizes  muni- 
cipal and  inferior  county  courts.  No  special 
supreme  court  justices  were  provided  for  until 
an  amendment  in  1871.  In  1909,  the  court  was 
increased  from  five  to  seven.  By  amendment 
in  1889,  the  justice  with  the  longest  term  of 
service  is  made,  ex-officio,  chief  justice.  Mem- 
bers of  the  supreme  court  are  elected  for  ten 
year  terms.  Circuit  judges  hold  for  six  years, 
and  must  be  residents  of  their  districts.  Judges 
may  be  removed  by  a two-thirds  vote  of  both 
houses  of  the  legislature.  By  amendment  of 
1882,  clerks  of  court  are  chosen  by  election  bi- 
ennially. All  officials  may  be  impeached  by  a 
majority  vote  of  all  the  members  of  the  as- 
sembly, and  are  not  to  exercise  their  functions 
during  their  trial  by  the  senate. 

The  constitution  provides  for  an  elected  sup- 
erintendent of  public  instruction,  chosen,  by 
amendment  of  1904,  every  four  years.  A state 
university  must  be  maintained.  The  rejected 
constitution  of  1846  forbade  the  incorporation 
of  banks;  the  constitution  of  1848  contained 
a similiar  prohibition,  but  allowed  the  legisla- 
ture to  submit  the  question  to  the  people  under 
certain  restrictions.  In  1852,  a popular  vote 
authorized  banks,  and  in  1902  an  amendment 
was  adopted  allowing  the  establishment  of  a 
more  extended  banking  system,  subject  to  a 
two-thirds  vote  of  all  the  members  of  both 
houses.  Other  corporations  were  to  be  incor- 
porated under  general  laws,  unless  it  appeared 
that  special  charters  were  absolutely  necessary ; 
by  the  before  noted  amendment  they  cannot 
now  be  incorporated  by  special  law.  The  state 
can  contract  only  $100,000  debt,  except  for  war 
purposes,  and,  by  amendment  of  1908,  for  high- 
ways. To  create  such  debt  requires  a three- 
fifths  vote  of  all  members  of  the  legislature. 
The  credit  of  the  state  cannot  be  given  to  in- 
dividuals, associations  or  corporations.  Taxes 
are  to  be  uniform,  but  an  amendment  of  1908, 
permits  a graduated  income  tax  with  exemp- 
tions. Amendments  must  be  adopted  by  a ma- 
jority of  all  the  members  of  both  houses,  pub- 
lished three  months  before  the  next  legislative 
election,  passed  by  that  legislature,  and  sub- 
mitted to  the  people.  A constitutional  con- 
vention may  be  called  if  demanded  by  one  legis- 
lature and  a popular  vote,  but  none  has  ever 
met.  Local  government,  the  form  of  which 
is  only  to  be  inferred  from  the  constitution, 
consists  of  townships,  school  districts,  incor- 
porated villages,  cities,  and  counties.  By 
amendment  of  1874,  the  borrowing  capacity  of 
these  bodies  is  limited,  and  the  legislature 
is  empowered  to  limit  their  taxation.  A con- 
stitutional amendment  of  1902  forbade  the 


granting  of  passes  on  railroads,  and  in  1910 
another  authorized  the  legislature  to  undertake 
a policy  of  acquiring  a forest  reserve  for  the 
preservation  of  water  power. 

Constitutional  Interpretation  and  Admini- 
strative Expansion.— The  liquor  agitation  has 
always  been  of  importance,  the  net  result  being 
comparatively  high  license,  which  local  au- 
thorities can  raise  but  not  lower;  certain 
forms  of  local  option  (see),  and  certain  pro- 
hibited areas,  such  as  that  about  the  state 
university  (see  Liquor  Legislation). 

There  have  been  two  especially  interesting 
periods  of  legislative  activity.  The  first  was  in 
the  late  sixties  and  early  seventies.  This 
“Granger”  (see  Grangers)  agitation  culmi- 
nated in  1874  in  the  passage  of  the  “Potter 
Law”  which  created  a board  of  commissioners, 
with  power  of  regulating  railroad  rates.  This 
law  was  sustained  by  the  state  supreme  court, 
and  in  part  by  the  United  States  District 
Court.  It  was,  however  repealed  in  1876.  The 
second  period  began  about  1900  and  saw  almost 
a revolution  in  governmental  methods.  Its 
most  notable  feature  was  the  wide  extension  of 
the  commission  form  of  control  for  state  activi- 
ties. Boards  to  administer  public  property 
and  institutions  such  as  the  board  of  control, 
managing  the  charitable  and  penal  institutions, 
and  the  boards  of  regents  of  the  state  univer- 
sity and  normal  schools  had  long  been  in  exis- 
tence. The  characteristic  of  the  more  impor- 
tant of  the  new  commissions  is  the  power  of 
regulating  or  investigating  the  conduct  of  in- 
dividuals and  corporations,  both  public  and  pri- 
vate. In  1899  a tax  commission  was  created, 
and  in  1903  it  was  charged  with  the  physical 
valuation  of  railroads.  In  1903  the  banking 
department  was  reorganized  and  the  com- 
mission was  given  greatly  enlarged  powers. 
In  1905  a railroad  commission  was  created 
with  wide  powers,  to  which  in  1907  were  added 
powers  over  other  public  utilities  (see  Com- 
missions in  American  Government).  Great 
use  has  been  made  of  such  expert  service 
along  the  line  of  what  is  now  known  as  the 
“conservation”  (see)  movement.  In  1899  a 
fishery  commission  and  a geological  and  natural 
history  survey  were  provided;  in  1901,  a board 
of  health,  a board  of  agriculture  and  live  stock 
sanitary  board ; in  1905,  board  of  forestry,  and 
commissions  on  tuberculosis,  and  grain  and 
warehouses.  In  1909  a rigid  pure  food  (see) 
law  was  passed,  and  a commission  provided  to 
enforce  it.  Along  the  line  of  education,  a free 
library  commission  was  established  in  1899. 
The  establishment  of  a civil  service  commission 
is  but  one  of  a number  of  attempts  to  purify 
and  simplify  the  machinery  of  politics.  In 
1897  a rigorous  corrupt  practices  act  was 
passed  which  was  strengthened  in  1911;  in 
1899  an  act  for  the  registration  of  lobbyists, 
which  was  strengthened  in  1905;  in  1903  an 
elaborate  primary  election  law  was  adopted. 
In  1909  a commission  was  appointed  on  uni- 


692 


WITNESSES— WOLCOTT,  OLIVER 


form  legislation,  and  in  1911  one  on  “public 
affairs.” 

The  state  has  also  engaged  actively  in  foster- 
ing research  and  betterment,  both  upon  its 
own  initiative  and  by  subsidizing  institutions 
already  in  existence.  In  1899  appropriations 
were  made  to  associations  of  firemen,  and 
cheesemakers ; in  1901,  to  the  horticultural 
society  and  the  dairymen’s  association;  in 
1903,  aid  was  given  to  associations  of  butter- 
makers,  and  poultrymen,  and  an  agricultural 
experiment  station,  and  a bureau  of  labor  and 
industrial  statistics  were  established.  Appro- 
priations have  for  a long  time  been  made  to 
the  state  Historical  Society,  the  Wisconsin 
Academy  of  Arts  and  Sciences  is  assisted,  and 
in  1909  a state  history  commission  was  estab- 
lished. 

Parties. — The  Democratic  party  was  former- 
ly strong,  but  for  the  last  fifteen  years  in- 
terest has  centered  in  the  factional  conflicts 
within  the  Republican,  party,  between  the 
“Half  Breed”  or  “Progressive”  followers  of 
Senator  La  Follette  (see)  and  the  “Stalwarts” 
or  “Regulars.”  The  former  have  been  success- 
ful in  the  main.  The  Socialist  party  in  1910 
won  control  of  Milwaukee.  It  lost  the  city 
at  the  next  election,  but  is  still  influential  in 
the  legislature.  In  1912  the  Democrats  won 
the  electoral  vote ; the  Republicans  stood  sec- 
ond; the  Progressives  cast  about  fifteen  and 
one-half  per  cent  of  the  total  vote,  and  the 
Socialists  something  over  eight  per  cent. 

Population. — In  1850  the  population  was 
305,591;  in  1880,  1,315,477;  in  1900,  2,069,042; 
in  1910,  2,333,  860. 

References:  F.  E.  Baker,  “Bibliographical 
Hist,  of  the  Two  Wisconsin  Constitutional 
Conventions”  in  Wis.  Hist.  Soc.,  Proceedings 
(1898),  123-159,  “Brief  Hist,  of  the  Elective 
Franchise  in  Wisconsin”  in  ibid  (1894),  113— 
130;  M.  D.  Hammond,  “Financial  Hist,  of 
Wisconsin  Territory”  in  ibid  (1894),  131- 
167;  F.  L.  Holmes,  “First  Constitutional  Con- 
vention in  Wisconsin”  in  ibid  (1896),  227- 
251 ; L.  P.  Kellogg,  “Organization,  Boundaries, 
and  Names  of  Wisconsin  Counties,”  in  ibid 
(1904),  184-231;  V.  Mason,  “The  Fugitive 
Slave  Law  in  Wisconsin,  with  Reference  to 
Nullification  Sentiment”  in  ibid  (1896),  llf- 
144;  T.  C.  Smith,  “Free  Soil  Party  in  Wis- 
consin” in  ibid  (1895),  97-162;  J.  B.  San- 
born, “The  Impeachment  of  Levi  Hubbell” 
in  ibid  (1905),  194-213;  R.  G.  Thwaites, 
Wisconsin  (1908)  ; C.  R.  Fish,  “The  Public 
Archives  of  Wisconsin”  in  Am.  Hist.  Assoc., 
Report,  I (1905),  377-419;  G.  W.  Peck,  Ed., 
Cyclopedia  of  Wisconsin  (1906). 

Carl  Russell  Fish. 

WITNESSES.  In  judicial  procedure  a wit- 
ess  is  one  who  is  duly  called  upon  to  testify 
under  oath  as  to  matters  within  his  knowledge. 
By  rules  of  procedure  some  persons  are  dis- 
qualified from  testifying  on  account  of  want 


of  mental  capacity,  as,  for  instance,  idiots, 
insane  persons,  and  infants  who  have  not  at- 
tained the  age  of  discretion.  Others  who  are 
qualified  to  testify  may  be  of  such  character 
that  their  testimony  is  not  entitled  to  the 
weight  which  should  be  given  to  a fully  quali- 
fied witness.  Furthermore,  the  witness  may  be 
so  related  to  the  subject  matter  or  the  parties 
as  that  in  the  particular  case  his  testimony 
should  not  be  received  or  should  be  received 
under  limitations  as  to  its  credibility  and 
weight.  And  finally  the  competency  of  the 
testimony  given  or  offered  as  determining 
whether  it  shall  be  considered  as  evidence  is 
regulated  by  the  rules  of  evidence  fixed  by  law. 
Under  constitutional  guaranties  of  religious 
freedom  the  religious  belief  of  a witness  can 
not  be  made  a ground  for  his  disqualification 
to  testify  (see  Religious  Liberty).  As  to 
criminal  prosecutions,  it  is  usually  provided 
in  state  constitutions  as  it  is  in  the  Fifth  and 
Sixth  Amendments  to  the  Federal  Constitu- 
tion that  the  accused  shall  not  be  compelled 
to  be  a witness  against  himself  and  that  he 
has  a right  to  be  confronted  with  the  witnesses 
against  him  and  to  have  compulsory  process 
for  obtaining  witnesses  in  his  favor.  These 
are  privileges  which  the  accused  may  waive. 
See  Trials.  E McC. 

WIZARD  OF  KINDERHOOK.  A sobriquet 
of  Martin  Van  Buren  (see)  in  recognition  of 
his  political  adroitness;  Kinderhook,  N.  Y., 
was  his  birthplace  and  for  a time  his  place  of 
residence.  0.  C.  H. 

WOLCOTT,  OLIVER.  Oliver  Wolcott  (1760- 
1833)  was  born  at  Litchfield,  Conn.,  January 
11,  1760.  He  saw  minor  service  in  the  Revo- 
lutionary army,  was  admitted  to  the  bar  in 
1781,  and  for  the  next  few  years  held  financial 
offices  under  the  state.  In  1788  he  became 
state  comptroller  of  public  accounts.  On  the 
organization  of  the  federal  Treasury  Depart- 
ment, in  September,  1789,  he  was  made  audi- 
tor, and  in  1791  comptroller.  In  February, 
1795,  he  succeeded  Hamilton  as  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury,  and  acted  virtually  as  a lieuten- 
ant of  Hamilton.  A staunch  Federalist,  he 
was  charged  by  the  Republicans  with  pecula- 
tion, the  evidence  of  which  the  Federalists 
were  accused  of  destroying  by  burning  the 
treasury  building.  He  demanded  an  investi- 
gation, but  could  not  obtain  satisfaction,  and 
in  November,  1800,  resigned.  He  was  im- 
mediately appointed  judge  of  the  newly-created 
second  district,  and  held  the  place  until  legis- 
lated out  of  office  by  the  repeal  of  the  judiciary 
act,  in  1802.  In  1817  he  was  elected  governor 
of  Connecticut,  and  retained  the  office  by  suc- 
cessive elections  for  ten  years.  In  1818  he 
presided  over  the  Connecticut  constitutional 
convention.  He  died  at  New  York  City,  June 
1,  1833.  George  Gibbs’s  “Memoirs  of  the 
Administrations  of  Washington  and  John 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE 


Adams ” (1846)  is  based  upon  Wolcott’s 

papers  in  the  Connecticut  Historical  Society. 
See  Treasury  Department.  References:  D. 


R.  Dewey,  Financial  Hist,  of  the  U.  8.  ( 1907 ) , 
ch.  v;  R.  Hildreth,  Hist,  of  the  U.  8.  ( 1849— 
52),  IV-VI.  W.  MacD. 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE 


Present  Status. — The  most  general  statement 
concerning  the  basis  of  suffrage  is  thus  put 
in  the  American  and  English  Encyclopedia  of 
Law  (2d  ed.,  1899,  611)  : 

The  right  of  suffrage  may  be  regulated,  modified 
or  withdrawn  by  the  authority  which  conferred 
it.  It  is  not  a natural  right  of  which  a person 
cannot  be  deprived  but  a privilege  which  may  be 
granted  or  denied  by  the  people  or  by  the  depart- 
ment of  government  to  which  they  have  delegated 
power  in  the  matter,  as  general  policy  may  require. 
"In  nearly  all  countries  the  right  has  been  denied 
to  women,  minors,  aliens  and  persons  non  compos 
mentis"  ( American  and  English  Encyclopedia  of 
Law,  2d  ed.). 

Women  exercise  full  political  power  in  nine 
states  (1913):  Wyoming  (since  1869),  Col- 
orado (since  1893),  Utah  (since  1896),  Idaho 
(since  1896),  Washington  (since  1910),  Cali- 
fornia (since  1911),  Arizona  (since  1912), 
Kansas  (since  1912),  and  Oregon  (since  1912), 
and  in  the  territory  of  Alaska  (1912). 
They  possess  a limited  suffrage  in  twenty- 
two  other  states.  They  have  some  form 
of  school  suffrage  in  the  following  sixteen 
states:  Connecticut  (since  1893),  Illinois 
(since  1891),  Kentucky  (1838-1901),  Massa- 
chusetts (since  1879),  Michigan  (since  1875), 
Minnesota  (since  1875),  Nebraska  (since 
1883),  New  Hampshire  (since  1878),  New 
Mexico  (since  1910),  New  Jersey  (since  1887), 
North  Dakota  and  South  Dakota  (since  1887), 
Ohio  (since  1894),  Vermont  (since  1880),  Wis- 
consin (since  1900),  and  Oklahoma  (since 
1890)  ; a certain  tax-paying  suffrage  in  Iowa 
(since  1894)  and  in  Louisiana  (since  1898); 
while  in  three  other  states,  Michigan  (since 
1875  for  school  and  1908  for  municipal),  Mon- 
tana (since  1887),  and  New  York  (since  1880 
for  school  and  1901  for  municipal),  women 
enjoy  both  school  and  tax-paying  suffrage. . In 
Mississippi  and  Arkansas  they  have,  minor 
fragments  of  the  franchise.  In  Illinois  they 
have  been  granted  the  right  so  far  as  the  legis- 
lature can  confer  it;  they  are,  since  July  1, 
1913,  entitled  to  vote  for  presidential  electors, 
for  all  officers  of  cities,  villages  and  towns 
except  police  magistrates,  for  a number  of 
county  and  state  officers,  and  on  all  questions 
submitted  to  a vote  of  the  electors. 

Women  vote  for  all  officers  including  mem- 
bers of  Parliament  in  Bosnia,  Finland,  the 
Commonwealth  of  Australia,  Iceland,  the  Isle 
of  Man,  New  Zealand,  and  Norway.  More 
limited  rights,  including  municipal  suffrage, 
however,  have  been  extended  to  women  in  Den- 
mark, England,  Ireland,  Scotland,  Canada,  and 
Sweden.  In  Russia  women  householders  elect 


members  to  the  village  council;  in  Italy  and 
France  women  engaged  in  trade  may  vote  for 
the  tribunal  of  commerce;  and  similar  privi- 
leges are  enjoyed  by  women  in  Belgium,  women 
with  real  estate  in  Hungary,  women  farmers 
in  Wiirtemberg,  and  tax-paying  women  in 
several  other  European  countries. 

Early  Efforts  to  Secure  Woman’s  Suffrage. — 
The  effort  to  secure  the  right  of  suffrage  for 
women  in  the  United  States  may  be  said  to 
have  assumed  organized  form  with  the  holding 
of  the  Seneca  Falls  Convention  on  July  19  and 
20,  1848,  and  to  have  been  one  aspect  of  the 
movement  towards  the  more  general  recogni- 
tion of  human  rights,  which  characterized  the 
middle  of  the  nineteenth  century.  There  had 
been  prior  to  that  time  protests  by  individuals 
against  the  limitations  surrounding  the  activ- 
ities of  women.  During  the  revolutionary 
struggle,  Mercy  Otis  Warren  and  Abigail 
Adams,  among  others,  had  urged  the  recogni- 
tion of  women  in  the  establishment  of  the 
new  government;  Mary  Wollstonecraft’s  Vindi- 
cation of  the  Rights  of  Women,  published  in 
England  in  1790,  had  been  widely  read  in 
America;  the  limitations  placed  by  the  common 
law  about  the  acting  capacity  of  married 
women  with  reference  to  their  property,  their 
earnings,  and  their  children,  were  the  occa- 
sion of  many  protests  resulting  in  legislative 
enactment  in  a number  of  states,  notably  in 
New  York  in  1848.  The  lack  of  educational 
opportunity,  both  cultural  and  professional, 
had  called  forth  the  efforts  of  Emma  Willard, 
Mary  Lyon,  the  founders  of  Oberlin  College, 
Elizabeth  Blackwell,  and  others.  Lucy  Stone, 
after  1847,  lectured  eloquently  and  effectively 
on  woman’s  rights  throughout  a large  part  of 
the  United  States  and  in  Canada.  Foreign 
visitors,  especially  Frances  Wright  (1818- 
1820)  and  Harriet  Martineau  (1834-1836) 
directed  attention  to  the  obvious  inconsistency 
between  the  principles  enunciated  in  the  De- 
claration of  Independence  and  the  practice  fol- 
lowed by  the  government  supposedly  based 
upon  those  principles.  Indeed,  as  reform  in 
many  of  these  fields  of  women’s  interest  can 
be  accomplished  only  through  legislation,  the 
effort  to  secure  for  women  the  right  to  edu- 
cation, marital  equality,  professional  and  in- 
dustrial opportunity,  has  often  seemed  identi- 
cal with  the  effort  to  secure  political  equality; 
and  the  terms  “women’s  rights”  and  “women’s 
suffrage”  have  been  almost  interchangeable. 

The  early  efforts  in  behalf  of  women  were 
likewise  closely  associated  with  the  efforts  in 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE 


behalf  of  negro  emancipation.  Many  of  the 
ablest  and  most  zealous  abolitionists  (see) 
were  women,  and  in  many  instances  those 
whose  first  interest  was  in  the  negro  gave  a 
hearty  and  enthusiastic  support  to  the  claims 
put  forth  by  the  women.  Notable  among  these 
were  Wendell  Philips  (see),  who  pleaded  the 
cause  of  women  delegates  before  the  World’s 
Anti-Slavery  Convention  held  in  London  in 
1840,  which,  however,  resisted  his  appeal  and 
rejected  the  women;  William  Lloyd  Garri- 
son (sec),  who  refused  to  sit  in  that  conven- 
tion because  women  were  not  admitted;  Henry 
B.  Blackwell,  Robert  Purvis,  Frederick  Doug- 
lass, and  others. 

The  rejection  of  women  delegates  by  the 
Anti-Slavery  Convention  in  1840  was  the 
occasion  for  planning  a convention  devoted  to 
the  proclamation  of  women’s  rights;  and  such 
a convention  was  called,  though  not  until  eight 
years  later,  by  some  of  those  rejected  delegates, 
together  with  others  who  had  observed  their 
rejection.  In  July,  1848,  Lucretia  Mott,  Martha 
Wright,  Elizabeth  Cady  Stanton,  and  Mary 
Ann  McClintock  issued  a call  in  Seneca  Falls 
for  a convention  “to  discuss  the  social,  civil, 
and  religious  conditions  and  rights  of  women.” 
James  Mott  presided  over  the  convention,  which 
adopted  a Declaration  of  Sentiments  modeled 
in  form  after  the  Declaration  of  Independence, 
proclaiming  the  equality  of  men  and  women 
and  enumerating  many  of  the  wrongs  that 
women  were  alleged  to  have  suffered  at  the 
hands  of  men.  Among  those  grievances  were 
the  usurpation  of  all  governmental  power,  the 
refusal  to  grant  to  women  the  elective  fran- 
chise, the  subjection  of  women  to  laws  that 
they  had  no  part  in  making,  the  elevation  of 
ignorant  and  degraded  men  above  intelligent 
women,  the  marital  oppression  of  women,  tax- 
ation without  representation,  the  monopoly  of 
business  and  professional  employment,  the 
withholding  of  education  from  women,  the 
adherence  on  the  part  of  men  to  a different 
code  of  morals,  and  their  assumption  of  the 
right  to  assign  to  women  a “proper  sphere  of 
action.”  On  the  basis  of  these  grievances,  in 
anticipation  “of  misconception,  misrepresenta- 
tion and  ridicule,”  a demand  was  put  forth 
“for  immediate  admission  to  all  the  rights  and 
privileges  of  citizens  of  the  United  States,”  in- 
cluding the  elective  franchise. 

The  first  National  Woman’s  Rights  Conven- 
tion, which  marked  the  launching  of  the  na- 
tional movement,  was  held  two  years  later 
Oct.  23  and  24,  1850,  in  Worcester,  Mass.  The 
call  to  this  convention  was  issued  by  Lucy 
Stone  and  55  other  women  as  well  as  by  33 
men,  among  whom  were  Wendell  Phillips, 
Ralph  Waldo  Emerson,  William  Lloyd  Garri- 
son, Thomas  Wenthworth  Higginson,  William 
Henry  Channing,  Adin  Ballou,  Gerrit  Smith,  A. 
Bronson  Alcott,  Samuel  J.  May,  William  Elder 
and  Oliver  Johnston,  Lucretia  Mott,  Elizabeth 
Cady  Stanton,  Mary  Grew,  Elizabeth  Smith 


Miller,  Elizabeth  Buffum  Chase,  Jane  G.  Swiss- 
helm,  and  Harriot  K.  Hunt.  The  convention, 
at  which  Mrs.  Paulina  Wright  Davis  presided, 
was  attended  by  men  and  women  from  thirteen 
states.  The  call,  said  in  part: 

The  tyranny  which  degrades  and  crushes  wives 
and  mothers  sits  no  longer  lightly  on  the  world’s 
conscience — the  heart’s  home- worship  feels  the 
stain  of  stooping  at  a dishonored  altar.  Manhood 
begins  to  feel  the  shame  of  muddying  the  springs 
from  which  it  draws  its  highest  life;  and  woman- 
hood is  everywhere  awakening  to  assert  its  di- 
vinely charted  rights,  and  to  fulfill  its  noblest 
duties. 

Organizations. — There  are  now  a number  of 
different  organizations  whose  purpose  it  is  to 
secure  full  political  equality  for  women.  In 
most  communities  in  the  United  States  there 
are  found  more  or  less  vigorous  “equal  suf- 
frage” associations.  In  every  state  there  is  a 
state  association  in  which  the  local  groups 
find  representation.  In  addition  there  is  a 
National  American  Woman  Suffrage  Associ- 
ation, whose  organ  is  the  Woman’s  Journal, 
issued  weekly  in  Boston.  The  methods  adopted 
by  these  organizations  have  been  the  usual 
forms  of  propaganda,  educational  work  of 
various  kinds,  and  appearance  before  the  var- 
ious legislative  bodies.  Attention  should  be 
called  also  to  the  Equal  Suffrage  Party,  repre- 
sented by  state  organizations  in  at  least  eleven 
states  and  by  a national  organization,  which 
adopts  the  party  form  of  organization  and 
applies  its  energies  exclusively  to  influencing 
the  personnel  of  legislative  bodies. 

In  addition  to  such  organizations  as  these, 
devoted  exclusively  or  chiefly  to  obtaining 
equality  in  government  for  women,  many  or- 
ganizations having  other  purposes  endorse  the 
movement.  The  federation  of  women’s  clubs 
in  a number  of  states,  the  Progressive  (see), 
Socialist  (see),  and  Prohibition  (see),  parties, 
the  National  Women’s  Trade  Union  League, 
and  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  have  de- 
clared for  the  movement.  There  are  also  in 
several  states,  notably  Massachusetts  and  New 
York,  organizations  that  have  been  formed  to 
oppose  the  extension  of  the  franchise  to 
women. 

Arguments  For  and  Against. — Various  argu- 
ments are  advanced  by  those  who  seek  the 
enfranchisement  of  women.  It  is  argued  in  the 
first  place,  that  women  are  citizens,  bearing 
most  of  the  burdens  of  citizenship.  They  own 
property,  pay  taxes,  and  suffer  from  the  con- 
sequences of  corrupt  or  inefficient  government. 
They  do  not,  like  other  disfranchised  groups — 
infants,  idiots  and  criminals — lack  the  ability 
to  vote  honestly  and  intelligently;  and  they 
therefore  have  a natural  and  civil  right  to 
claim  this  political  right. 

It  is  also  argued  that,  for  certain  aspects 
of  governmental  service,  women  have  a pecu- 
liar ability  and  should  be  allowed  to  make 
their  peculiar  contribution.  Attention  is  called 
to  the  fact  that  the  care  of  the  young,  the 
aged,  the  poor,  the  dependent,  and  the  defective 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE 


lias  always  been  peculiarly  the  privilege  of 
women ; and  that  women,  notably,  of  course, 
but  not  exclusively  in  family  life,  have  been 
entrusted  with  the  safe-guarding  of  those  in- 
terests which  have  to  do  with  the  comfort  and 
well-being  of  the  community.  This  argument 
applies  especially  to  participation  in  municipal 
government,  the  maintenance  of  cleanliness  and 
decency  in  the  city  streets,  the  exercise  of 
proper  health  functions,  the  administration  of 
that  larger  housekeeping,  which  is  perhaps  the 
chief  function  of  the  modern  city.  It  is  not, 
however,  inapplicable  to  the  state  and  federal 
government  in  so  far  as  these  governments  are 
assuming  constantly  such  additional  functions 
as  control  over  the  working  conditions,  espe- 
cially of  women  and  children,  better  care  of  the 
dependent  and  defective  groups,  closer  watch 
over  child  and  adolescent  life,  regulation  of 
the  preparation  and  manufacture  of  food  and 
clothing,  education  adapted  to  the  actual  needs 
of  children,  provision  for  play  and  supervision 
of  play,  the  guardianship  of  young  persons 
in  early  working  life.  It  is  urged  that  for 
domestic  women,  especially,  who  have  under- 
taken to  administer  in  competent  ways  the 
affairs  of  any  family  in  a modern  community, 
the  ballot  lias  become  a domestic  necessity. 
In  so  far  as  women  have  become  wage-earners 
they  need  the  ballot,  it  is  said,  in  order  that 
they  may  express  directly  their  judgment  upon 
matters  which  affect  the  demand  for  their 
labor,  the  conditions  under  which  it  is  per- 
formed, and  possibly  the  wages  paid. 

It  is  claimed  too,  that  to  extend  the  bal- 
lot to  women  would  counteract  to  a consider- 
able extent  the  influence  of  the  recent  im- 
migrant vote,  since  more  men  than  women  are 
added  by  immigration  to  the  foreign  groups 
in  this  country.  And  it  is  moreover  asserted 
that  the  foreign  women,  especially,  feel  the  con- 
sequences of  corrupt  and  incompetent  munici- 
pal government,  and  from  them  may  be  ex- 
pected rational  and  sound  judgment  upon  such 
questions  as  housing,  disposal  of  waste,  the 
control  of  markets,  the  care  of  the  streets,  the 
abolition  of  dangerous  forms  of  recreation,  and 
other  questions  bearing  directly  upon  decent 
living  in  the  crowded  quarters  of  American 
cities. 

Attention  is  especially  called  to  the  alliance 
that  often  exists  between  the  political  “ma- 
chine” and  the  two  interests  most  hostile  to 
sound  physical  and  social  life,  the  liquor  in- 
terest and  the  interest  of  organized  vice.  It 
is  particularly  urged  that  decent  women  have 
always  been  especially  charged  with  the  main- 
tenance of  sound  family  life.  It  is  claimed 
that  probably  only  by  the  direct  influence  of 
women  can  government  be  reclaimed  as  the 
protector  of  the  home  and  of  sound  morals 
instead  of  remaining  the  protector  of  the  sa- 
loon and  the  disorderly  house. 

Those  who  are  opposed  to  the  extension  of 
full  political  power  to  women  belong  to  three 


groups:  (1)  those  who  oppose  extension  of  the 
suffrage  on  the  ground  that,  till  the  problem  of 
the  ignorant  and  of  the  immigrant  vote  and  of 
the  negro  and  the  corrupt  vote  of  the  degraded 
white  American,  has  been  more  nearly  solved, 
the  extension  of  the  ballot  to  any  untried  group 
is  a perilous  experiment;  (2)  those  who  claim 
that  women  are  unfitted  for  political  life  and 
governmental  action,  that  they  can  accomplish 
their  ends  by  influence  and  persuasion  better 
than  by  the  use  of  the  ballot,  and  that  politi- 
cal life  has  become  so  corrupt  and  degraded  as 
to  be  unfit  for  the  participation  of  decent 
women,  who  would  inevitably  suffer  loss  of 
charm  and  womanliness.  They  urge  that  to 
women  belongs  the  home;  to  men  the  state; 
and  that  to  add  political  duties  to  the  natural 
domestic  obligations  of  women  is  to  overbur- 
den them  in  ways  that  are  neither  normal  or 
fair;  (3)  in  addition  to  the  considerable  num- 
ber of  women  who  take  this  latter  position, 
there  are  a considerable  number  who  deny  the 
general  interest  of  women  in  governmental 
matters.  They  admit,  however,  the  interest  of 
special  groups  of  women,  such  as  tax-paying 
women  or  property-holding  women,  or  the 
interest  of  all  women  in  special  subjects,  such 
as  the  control  of  public  education. 

Constitutional  Difficulties  in  Securing  Wom- 
an’s Suffrage.  — The  difficulties  involved  in 
securing  to  women  the  right  to  vote  have  been 
very  great.  The  most  obvious  difficulties  are 
perhaps  those  of  a constitutional  nature.  The 
qualifications  of  electors  in  both  federal  and 
state  elections  were  determined  within  limits 
set  by  the  United  States  Constitution  (Art. 
V)  by  the  various  states.  Moreover,  the  right 
of  suffrage  is  held  to  be  not  a privilege  of 
citizenship  but  a governmental  right  expressly 
bestowed  by  the  sovereign  authority.  There- 
fore, although  women  have  always  been  citizens 
of  the  United  States,  they  can  enjoy  this  right 
only  by  express  grant.  And  no  such  grant 
resulted  from  the  adoption  of  the  Fourteenth 
and  Fifteenth  Amendments  to  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States  (Minor  vs.  Happer- 
sett,  21  Wallace  162;  U.  S.  vs.  Anthony,  11 
Blatchford  200;  Van  Valkenberg  vs.  Brown, 
43  California  43 ) . The  right,  except  so  far 
as  it  applies  to  offices  not  named  and  questions 
not  regulated  by  the  Constitution,  must  be 
obtained  therefor  either  by  amendment  to  the 
Federal  Constitution  expressly  granting  this 
right  to  women  or  by  obtaining  express  legis- 
lation in  each  of  the  separate  states.  And  in 
the  states,  in  so  far  as  suffrage  is  regulated 
by  the  state  constitution,  constitutional  amend- 
ment and  not  merely  legislative  action  is  neces- 
sary. This  necessity  of  securing  constitution- 
al amendment,  which  involves  action  either  on 
the  part  of  successive  legislatures  (Delaware 
Constitution,  1897,  Art.  XV)  or  submission  to 
the  lawful  voters  in  addition  to  legislative 
action  ( e . g.,  Kansas  Constitution.,  Art.  XIV), 
renders  the  undertaking  peculiarly  difficult. 


WOMAN  SUFFRAGE 


Under  recent  constitutional  amendments  in  cer- 
tain states,  c.  g.,  Wisconsin,  it  is  possible  to 
substitute  the  referendum  for  the  process  of 
the  constitutional  change. 

Political  Difficulties  in  Securing  Woman’s 
Suffrage. — In  many  cases  the  difficulties  are 
not  only  constitutional  but  political.  It  has 
been  pointed  out  that  the  brewing  and  distill- 
ing interests  are  strong  politically  in  most 
states.  Recent  investigations  have  shown  a 
similar  alliance  between  organized  vice  and  the 
governmental  machine.  The  liquor  interest, 
then,  brewers,  distillers,  saloon  proprietors, 
and  those  who  profit  from  the  organization 
and  control  of  the  immoral,  have  been  always 
opposed  to  every  effort  on  the  part  of  women  to 
secure  the  ballot.  This  has  meant  that  the 
women  have  had  at  every  point  to  confront  a 
persistent,  skillful,  practised,  and  wealthy 
lobby.  Moreover,  in  the  submission  of  the  ques- 
tion of  amendment  to  the  voters,  it  is  neces- 
sary in  some  states  to  obtain  a majority,  not 
of  all  votes  cast  on  the  particular  question, 
but  of  all  votes  cast  at  the  election.  This 
means  that,  if  the  movement  is  to  succeed,  it 
must  do  so  by  prevailing  not  only  against  cor- 
ruption but  against  inertia  and  against  pre- 
judice. The  result  has  sometimes  been  success 
in  one  house  of  the  legislature  with  defeat  in 
the  other,  or  success  in  both  houses  with  defeat 
at  the  polls.  For  example,  an  amend- 
ment has  twice  been  submitted  unsuccessfully 
in  Kansas  (1867  and  1894),  in  Oregon  five 
times  (1884,  1900,  1906,  1908,  and  1910),  and 
South  Dakota  three  times  (1890,  1898,  and 
1910).  In  Washington,  where  the  right  was 
exercised  by  the  women  under  territorial  or- 
ganization and  taken  away  by  questionable 
judicial  interpretation  (Bloomer  vs.  Todd,  3 
Wash.  T.  599)  the  question  was  twice  unsuc- 
cessfully submitted  to  the  voters  (1889  and 
1898)  before  the  right  was  reacquired  in  1910. 
The  question  has  likewise  been  unsuccessfully 
submitted  in  Michigan  (1874  and  1912), 
Nebraska  (1882),  New  Hampshire  (1903), 
Oklahoma  (1910),  and  Rhode  Island  (1887); 
and  municipal  suffrage  obtained  in  Michigan 
by  legislative  act  was  lost  by  judicial  inter- 
pretation. When  obtained  in  Colorado  ( 1893 ) 
and  in  Idaho  (1896)  the  effort  was  endorsed 
by  all  political  parties  and  secured  with  their 
permission. 

Use  of  the  Ballot  by  Women.— The  use  of 

the  ballot  by  women  should  be  briefly  discussed 
from  several  points  of  view:  (1)  the  extent  of 
which  they  have  become  office-holders;  (2)  the 
extent  to  which  they  have  controlled  office- 
holding by  men  according  to  peculiar  principles 
of  any  kind;  (3)  the  kind  of  legislation  if  any 
in  which  they  have  been  expecially  interested. 

(1)  Election  of  Women  to  Office. — A few 
women  have  been  elected  to  the  legislature  in 
Idaho,  Utah,  Wyoming  and  Colorado,  to  the 
office  of  mayor  in  Kansas,  and  to  many  posi- 
tions of  a municipal  character,  or  connected 


with  the  school  system,  not  only  in  the  states 
in  which  they  exercise  the  full  suffrage  but 
in  those  in  which  a fragmentary  right  has  been 
secured.  Women  have  likewise  sat  as  delegates 
in  the  national  party  conventions.  In  other 
countries,  women  office-holders  have  been  more 
frequently  chosen  than  in  the  United  States. 
In  Finland  a considerable  number  of  women 
have  been  elected  to  the  Parliament.  There 
have  been  women  mayors  in  England,  Aus- 
tralia, and  New  Zealand.  Women  city  coun- 
cilors have  been  elected  in  Denmark,  Sweden, 
Norway,  and  Iceland. 

(2)  Influence  on  the  Selection  and  Election  of 
Men  Candidates. — As  has  been  noted,  a so-called 
Women’s  Suffrage  party  has  been  organized  in 
eleven  states,  the  purpose  of  which  is  to  secure 
the  election  of  officers  who  favor  and  the 
defeat  of  those  who  oppose  the  admission 
of  women  to  political  equality.  But  in  the 
suffrage  states  the  women  have  acted  in  gen- 
eral with  the  two  great  political  parties.  In 
three  notable  instances,  however,  they  have 
acted  independently  of  party  and  in  a manner 
to  indicate  their  peculiar  interests.  In  Colo- 
rado they  are  responsible  for  the  election  in 
opposition  to  both  parties  of  a juvenile  court 
judge  in  whose  hands  the  interests  of  chil- 
dren were  believed  to  be  safe;  and  the  right 
of  recall  has  twice  been  exercised  in  Seattle, 
1911,  and  Tacoma,  1911,  to  remove  municipal 
executives  who  were  believed  to  be  dominated 
b the  organized  vice  of  the  community. 

(3)  Influence  upon  Legislation. — With  ref- 
erence to  the  legislation  in  which  women  voters 
have  been  especially  interested,  it  may  be 
noted  that  they  have  been  concerned  to  obtain 
or  to  improve  laws  bearing  on  the  marital 
equality  of  women  as  well  as  laws  giving 
larger  protection  to  girls,  especially  those  deal- 
ing with  the  so-called  age  of  consent  and  the 
care  of  illegitimate  children,  non-support  laws, 
child  labor  and  compulsory  school  laws,  and 
other  social  legislation. 

See  Ballot;  Election  System  in  U.  S.; 
Suffrage;  Women,  Legal  Rights  of. 

References:  E.  C.  Stanton,  S.  B.  Anthony, 
and  M.  J.  Gage,  Eds.,  History  of  Woman  Suf- 
frage (1887-1902)  ; H.  L.  Sumner,  Equal 
Suffrage;  Result  of  an  Investigation  in 
Colorado  ( 1909 ) ; F.  Kelley,  Some  Ethical 
Gains  through  Legislation  (1910),  ch.  v;  J. 
Addams,  Hewer  Ideals  of  Peace  (1907),  ch. 
vii;  B.  D.  Knabe,  “Recent  Strides  of 
Woman  Suffrage”  in  'World’s  Work,  XXII 
(1911),  14733-45;  Am.  and  English  Encyclo- 
pedia of  Law  (2d  ed.),  X,  591;  E.  M.  Phelps, 
Selected  Articles  on  Woman  Suffrage  (1910); 
National  Woman  Suffrage  Association,  Miscel- 
laneous Publications ; Woman’s  Journal  (1870 
to  date)  ; E.  A.  Hecker,  Short  Hist,  of  Women’s 
Rights  (1911);  K.  Schirmacher,  Modem 
Woman’s  Rights  Movement  (1912),  ch.  i; 
C.  A.  Beard,  Readings  in  Am.  Government  and 
Politics  (1911),  405-410;  C.  L.  Jones,  Read- 


697 


WOMAN’S  RIGHTS  PARTY— WOMEN,  LEGAL  RIGHTS  OF 


ings  on  Parties  and  Elections  (1912),  226-237 ; 
Ain.  Year  Book,  1910,  156,  ibid,  1911,  188, 
ibid,  1912  58,  71. 

SOPHONISBA  P.  BRECKINRIDGE. 

WOMAN’S  RIGHTS  PARTY.  This  party 
cannot  properly  be  called  a party,  probably,  if 
the  term  connotes  a fully  organized  body  of 
participants  in  elections  and  in  partisan  war- 
fare. But  it  put  forth  candidates  in  1884  and 
1888.  In  the  former  campaign  it  nominated 
Belva  A.  Lockwood  for  President  and  Marietta 
L.  Stow  for  Vice-President.  Its  platform,  be- 
sides a declaration  in  favor  of  woman’s  suf- 
frage, advocated  various  other  reforms.  In 
1888  Mrs.  Lockwood  was  again  presented  as  a 
candidate  for  the  presidency  and  Alfred  H. 
Love  for  the  vice-presidency.  See  Woman 
Suffrage.  Reference:  T.  H.  McKee,  National 
Conventions  and  Platforms  (1901),  226-229, 
256.  A.  C.  McL. 

WOMEN,  LEGAL  RIGHTS  OF.  In  respect 
of  legal  rights,  as  distinguished  from  political 
and  professional  rights,  there  has  never  been, 
in  the  English  system  of  law,  any  very  con- 
siderable discrimination  against  women  on  the 
ground  of  sex  alone.  The  privilege  of  voting 
and,  generally,  of  holding  office  has  been  denied 
to  women  till  recent  years  (see  Woman  Suf- 
frage), and  while  women  were  formerly  barred 
from  most  professions  and  trades,  the  present 
tendency  of  the  law  is  not  only  to  give  them 
equal  privileges  with  men,  but  to  extend  some 
privileges  and  protections  not  given  men  (see 
Labor,  Women’s,  Legislative  Control  of). 
Under  the  English  common  law,  an  unmarried 
woman  was  entitled  to  practically  the  same 
rights  and  privileges  as  a man ; she  could 
hold  and  convey  real  and  personal  property, 
she  could  contract  freely  and  effectively,  and, 
with  some  exceptions,  arising  generally  out  of 
her  inability  to  bear  arms,  she  stood  legally 
on  an  equal  footing  with  man.  The  rules  of 
male  heirship  and  of  benefit  of  clergy  were 
perhaps  the  most  important  exceptions  to  this 
general  rule  of  legal  equality. 

In  the  case  of  married  women,  however,  the 
common  law  strongly  discriminated  against 
them  and  in  favor  of  their  husbands,  both  as 
to  personal  status  and  as  to  property  rights. 
Equity  later  relieved  the  property  of  married 
women  from  their  husbands’  control  under  cer- 
tain circumstances,  and  modern  statutes  have 
now  practically  ended  the  inferior  legal  posi- 
tion of  married  women,  both  as  to  personal 
status  and  as  to  property  rights. 

At  Common  Law. — The  common  law  as  to 
husband  and  wife  arose  from  the  social  and 
political  circumstances  of  the  time,  which  re- 
quired that  the  family  and  its  resources  be 
governed  by  a powerful  and  responsible  head. 
The  husband  was  this  head,  and  the  wife’s 
legal  existence  was  practically  merged  in  his. 
He  had  the  sole  right  to  choose  the  family 


home,  to  regulate  the  affairs  of  the  household, 
and  to  direct  the  conduct  of  all  its  members  in- 
cluding the  wife.  The  services  of  the  wife,  as 
well  as  her  society,  were  at  the  command  of  the 
husband;  he  could  take  her  earnings  and  could 
sue  any  person  who,  by  injuring  her  or  by 
enticing  her  away,  deprived  him  of  her  serv- 
ices or  society.  In  converse  to  these  rights 
of  the  husband  were  certain  duties  on  his  part: 
he  must  support  her  in  proper  style,  and  if  he 
did  not,  she  could  buy  necessaries  on  his  credit; 
having  the  power  to  direct  her  actions,  he  alone 
was  liable  for  torts  and  crimes  committed  by 
her  in  his  presence,  the  law  presuming  that 
she  acted  under  his  coercion.  On  marriage, 
the  wife’s  property  or  the  effective  control  of 
it  passed  to  the  husband.  Her  choses  in  pos- 
session became  his  at  once,  and  he  had  the 
power  to  take  her  choses  in  action  and  her 
personal  estates  in  realty  (such  as  leases)  and 
make  them  his  by  reducing  them  to  his  pos- 
session. The  title  to  her  realty  regained  in 
her,  but  the  control  of  it,  and  the  right  to 
take  all  the  profits  arising  from  it,  passed  at 
once  to  the  husband,  and  continued  during  their 
joint  lives,  or,  if  a child  was  born,  the  husband’s 
right  (called  curtesy)  lasted  during  his  life. 
The  wife  got  no  right  in  the  husband’s  person- 
alty, but  on  his  death  she  received  her  dower — ■ 
an  interest  lasting  for  her  life — in  one-third 
in  value  of  all  the  lands  owned  by  him  at  any 
time  during  the  marriage.  As  the  husband 
thus  got  all  of  the  wife’s  property,  he  was 
held  liable  for  her  ante-nuptial  contracts  and 
for  her  torts.  She  was  held  to  have  no  power 
to  contract  in  her  own  behalf,  either  with  her 
husband  or  with  third  persons,  because  her 
legal  existence  was  merged  in  that  of  her  hus- 
band. For  the  same  reason  neither  husband 
nor  wife  could  sue  the  other  at  law,  nor  could 
either  testify  for  or  against  the  other. 

In  Equity. — With  the  passing  of  the  social 
and  political  conditions  which  had  brought 
forth  the  common  law  of  husband  and  wife,  the 
absolute  control  by  the  husband  became  un- 
necessary and  unjust.  The  courts  of  equity 
took  upon  themselves  the  protection  of  the 
wife  in  the  enjoyment  of  her  property,  and 
if  property  was  given  to  a woman  for  her  sepa- 
rate use,  equity  would  not  permit  the  husband 
to  exercise  his  common-law  rights  over  it  but 
would  allow  the  wife  to  control  it.  Equity  did 
not  entirely  remove  the  wife’s  common-law  dis- 
ability to  contract,  but  subjected  her  separate 
estate  to  contracts  regarding  it.  Equity  also 
protected  the  wife’s  property  in  another  way: 
if  a husband  found  it  necessary  to  go  into 
equity  to  obtain  his  marital  rights  in  any  of 
his  wife’s  property,  equity  would  assist  him 
only  on  condition  that  he  make  a suitable  pro- 
vision for  the  wife’s  separate  use  out  of  the 
property  thus  obtained.  Equity  also,  when 
necessary,  disregarded  the  common-law  unity 
of  husband  and  wife  which  prevented  contracts 
between  them,  and  would,  in  proper  cases,  en- 


698 


WOMEN’S  LABOR— WORCESTER  vs.  GEORGIA 


force  sucli  contracts  ( see  Law,  Common; 
Equity)  . 

Under  Modern  Statutes. — These  equitable 
principles  and  even  more  liberal  rules  have  now 
become  a part  of  the  statute  law  of  England 
and  the  United  States.  The  American  statutes 
differ  greatly  in  detail.  They  practically  every- 
where provide  that  a wife  shall  retain,  as  her 
separate  estate,  free  from  any  control  by  her 
husband,  all  property  she  owned  at  the  time  of 
the  marriage,  and  usually  all  that  comes  to 
her  after  marriage.  She  is  given  power  to 
contract  with  reference  to  this  separate  estate 
and  in  most  states  to  contract  generally  as  if 
she  were  unmarried,  though  in  many  states  she 
is  expressly  denied  the  power  to  become  a 
surety.  In  many  states  husband  and  wife  can 
now  contract  directly  with  each  other.  In 
some  states  the  husband  retains  his  right  of 
curtesy  in  his  wife’s  realty,  but  in  many  this 
right  has  been  abolished,  thus  depriving  the 
husband  absolutely  of  any  interest  in  any  of 
his  wife’s  property;  the  wife  almost  every- 
where retains  her  dower  interest  in  his  realty 
and  in  some  states  her  interest  has  been  in- 
creased. As  the  husband  no  longer  gets  his 
wife’s  property,  he  is  generally  relieved  from 
liability  for  her  ante-nuptial  contracts  and 
for  her  torts,  but  the  presumption  of  his  coer- 
cion (though  abolished  by  statute  in  some 
states)  generally  serves  still,  in  the  absence 
of  affirmative  proof  that  she  acted  of  her  own 
free  will,  to  make  him  liable  for  torts  and 
crimes  committed  by  her  in  his  presence, 
and  to  relieve  her  from  liability  for  them. 
The  wife  is  very  generally  given  the  right  to 
her  earnings,  but  the  husband  is  still  bound  to 
support  her,  and  she  can  therefore  still  buy 
necessaries  on  his  credit;  a few  states  make 
both  husband  and  wife  liable  for  necessaries 
purchased  for  the  family.  The  general  result 
of  the  statutory  changes  has  been  decidedly  to 
the  advantage  of  married  women ; the  husband’s 
rights  in  the  wife’s  property  have  been  largely 
obliterated,  while  her  rights  in  his  have  been 
retained  and  sometimes  increased,  and  many 
of  his  common-law  obligations  and  responsi- 
bilities are  still  binding  on  him. 

See  Labor,  Women’s;  Woman  Suffrage. 

References:  W.  Blackstone,  Commentaries , 

I,  442-445,  II,  213-216,  433-36,  IV,  367-369; 

J.  Schouler,  Domestic  Relations  ( 1895 ) , chs. 

ii-xi;  E.  Peck,  Domestic  Relations  (1913), 
chs.  ii-viii.  Evans  Holbrook. 

WOMEN’S  LABOR.  See  Labor,  Women’s. 

WOMEN’S  PRISONS.  See  Prisons  for 
Women. 

WOOD,  LEONARD.  Leonard  Wood  ( I860-'  ) 
was  born  at  Winchester,  N.  H.,  October  9, 
1860.  In  1886  he  was  appointed  assistant 
surgeon  in  the  United  States  Army,  with  the 
rank  of  lieutenant.  In  the  same  year  he  served 
142 


under  Lawton  in  an  expedition  against  the 
Apache  Indians.  He  was  made  a captain  in 
1891.  May  8,  1898,  he  was  commissioned  colo- 
nel of  the  First  United  States  Volunteer  Caval- 
ry, familiarly  known  as  the  “Rough  Riders”; 
was  made  brigadier  general,  July  8,  for  his 
services  at  Las  Guasimas  and  San  Juan  Hill; 
and  December  7 became  a major  general,  in 
1901  he  was  appointed  brigadier  general  in 
the  regular  army,  and  in  1903  major  general, 
with  the  position  of  chief  of  staff.  He  was 
military  governor  of  Santiago  in  1898-99,  and 
thereafter  of  Cuba  until  the  withdrawal  of  the 
American  troops  in  May,  1902.  He  was 
shortly  transferred  to  the  Philippines,  where 
he  was  governor  of  Moro  province  from  1903 
to  1906,  and  commander  of  the  Philippine  di- 
vision from  1906  to  1908.  He  became  Chief 
of  Staff  in  1910.  An  attempt  to  legislate  him 
out  of  office  in  1912  was  vetoed  by  President 
Taft.  See  Cuba  and  Cuban  Diplomacy; 
Philippine  Annexation.  References:  Secre- 
tary of  War,  Annual  Reports  (1898-1912); 
A.  G.  Robinson,  Cuba  and  The  Intervention 
(1905).  W.  MacD. 

WOOLSEY,  THEODORE  DWIGHT.  Theo- 
dore D.  Woolsey  (1801-1889)  was  born  at  New 
York  City,  October  31,  1801.  He  studied  law 
at  Philadelphia,  theology  at  Princeton,  N.  J., 
and  Greek  in  Germany.  From  1831  to  1846 
he  was  professor  of  Greek  at  Yale,  and  was 
then  elected  president,  a position  which  he  held 
until  1871,  when  he  resigned.  After  he  became 
president  he  turned  his  attention  to  political 
science  and  international  law,  in  the  latter 
field  becoming  the  leading  American  authority. 
His  numerous  publications  include  Intro- 
duction to  the  Study  of  International  Law 
(6th  ed.,  1891);  Political  Science,  or 
the  State  Theoretically  and  Practically  Con- 
sidered (2  vols.,  1878);  and  Communism  and 
Socialism  (1880).  He  edited  Francis  Lieber’s 
Civil  Liberty  and  Self-Government  (1875),  and 
the  same  author’s  Manual  of  Political  Ethics 
(2  vols.,  1881)  ; and  was  one  of  the  founders, 
and  for  a number  of  years  the  editor,  of  the 
New  Englander.  He  died  at  New  Haven,  July 
1,  1889.  See  Influence  in  Government; 
International  Law.  References:  J.  H. 
Thayer  in  Atlantic  Monthly,  LXIV  (1889), 
557-562;  T.  Dwight  in  New  Englander,  LIII 
(1890),  69-81.  W.  MacD 

WORCESTER  vs.  GEORGIA.  In  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  Georgia  it  was  determined  in 
a criminal  prosecution  that  Worcester  had 
violated  the  laws  of  the  state  by  residing  with- 
in the  territory  of  the  Cherokee  nation  which 
was  included  in  the  state  boundaries  without 
the  license  of  the  governor  of  the  state,  such 
residence  being  prohibited  by  statute.  On  his 
appeal  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  (1832,  6 Peters  515)  on  the  ground  that 
the  decision  of  the  state  court  was  in  deroga- 


699 


WORKERS,  POLITICAL— WORLD  POWER,  UNITED  STATES  AS  A 


tion  of  rights  and  privileges  claimed  by  him 
under  treaties  between  the  United  States  and 
the  Cherokee  Nation  and  that  the  state  stat- 
ute was  repugnant  to  the  treaties  and  laws  of 
the  United  States,  it  was  held,  first,  that  the 
Cherokee  nation  was  an  independent  nation, 
recognized  in  treaties  between  it  and  the 
United  States  as  having  the  sovereign  author- 
ity to  make  treaties  of  war  and  peace,  exer- 
cise the  powers  of  local  self-government,  and 
assert  exclusive  jurisdiction  over  its  territory, 
subject  only  to  the  protection  of  the  United 
States,  which  being  accepted,  prevented  inter- 
ference on  the  part  of  other  foreign  govern- 
ments; and,  second,  that  the  state  of  Georgia 
within  whose  limits  such  territory  was  situated 
had  no  power  to  legislate  as  to  the  rights  of 
white  persons  residing  within  such  territory; 
with  the  result  that  the  conviction  of  Wor- 
cester of  a crime  against  the  laws  of  the  state 
for  residing  in  such  territory  without  the 
license  of  the  governor  of  the  state,  was  with 
out  authority  and  void.  References:  W.  W. 
Willoughby,  Constitutional  Laio  (1910),  ch. 
xx;  G.  F.  Canfield,  in  Am.  Law  Rev.,  XV 
(1881),  21;  J.  B.  Thayer,  in  Atlantic  Monthly, 
LXVIII  (1891),  540,  676.  E.  McC. 

WORKERS,  POLITICAL.  A term  used  to 
designate  the  immediate  subordinates  of  the 
boss  (see)  in  the  political  ring  (see),  who 
“work  the  political  machine”  in  their  several 
localities,  manipulate  primaries,  and  carry  out 
the  orders  of  the  leaders;  also  used,  without 
derogatory  significance,  of  those  who  work 
at  elections  or  during  campaigns.  0.  C.  H. 

WORKHOUSES.  See  Houses  of  Correc- 
tion. 

WORKINGMEN’S  INSURANCE.  This  term 
is  used  to  cover  what  is  now  more  generally 
called  “social  insurance”  and  comprises  the 
various  plans  for  insurance  against  the  losses 
or  misfortunes  befalling  workingmen  through 
industrial  accidents,  occupational  diseases, 
sickness,  disablement  whether  temporary  or 
permanent,  total  or  partial;  and  involuntary 
unemployment.  Germany  has  led  the  way 
and  tried  the  most  extensive  experiments  in 
this  field  for  a quarter  of  a century,  though  all 
industrial  states  have  now  adopted  some  part 
of  the  programme  of  social  insurance,  and 
are  making  rapid  progress  in  its  extension. 
See  Insurance  and  Social  W7elfare;  Insur- 
ance, Industrial;  Insurance,  Legal  Basis 
and  Regulation  of;  Old  Age  Pensions  and 
Old  Age  Insurance;  Savings  Bank  Insur- 
ance; Unemployment.  References:  L.  K. 
Frankel  and  M.  M.  Dawson,  Workingmen's  In- 
surance in  Europe  (1910)  ; F.  W.  Lewis,  State 
Insurance  ( 1909 ) ; H.  R.  Seager,  Social  Insur- 
ance (1910);  C.  R.  Henderson,  Industrial 
Insurance  in  the  United  States  (1909). 

S.  McC.  L. 


WORKMEN’S  COMPENSATION.  That  the 
cost  of  protection  against  industrial  injuries 
should  be  a charge  upon  industry  and  be  borne 
by  the  consumer  like  other  costs  of  produc- 
tion, has  been  fully  accepted  in  most  countries 
of  the  civilized  world  save  the  United  States; 
and  the  common  law  of  employers’  liability  has 
been  superseded  by  workmen’s  compensation 
acts  which  compel  the  employer  to  idemnify  his 
workmen  for  injuries  not  caused  by  wilful 
misconduct  of  the  victim  himself. 

No  stronger  movement  of  constructive  legis- 
lation has  taken  place  in  recent  years  than 
that  toward  a radical  reform  of  the  law  of 
employers’  liability.  Commissions  appointed  by 
the  legislatures  of  the  leading  industrial 
states  have  made  careful  and  extended  studies 
into  the  legal,  economic,  and  social  problems 
involved,  and  have  recommended  radical  de- 
partures from  the  preexisting  common  law 
principle  of  employers’  liability  based  on  fault. 
The  principle  of  compensation,  which  has  been 
substituted  therefore  involves : ( 1 ) payments 
for  injuries  or  death,  irrespective  of  fault  or 
negligence,  except  where  caused  by  wilful  mis- 
conduct; (2)  a benefit  payable,  bearing  a direct 
relation  to  the  former  earning  capacity,  sub- 
ject to  minimum  and  maximum  amounts,  and 
not  intended  to  give  full  indemnity;  (3)  pay- 
ment of  the  benefit  in  periodical  instalments; 
(4)  denial  of  compensation  during  a brief 
initial  period,  in  order  to  eliminate  the  great 
mass  of  insignificant  injuries,  but  liberal  pro- 
vision for  medical  treatment;  (5)  encourage- 
ment of  arbitration;  (6)  abrogation  of  the 
right  of  action  at  common  law,  except  where 
the  fault  of  the  employer  is  aggravated.  The 
compensation  may  be  provided  for  either 
through  an  obligation  falling  on  the  employer 
of  the  injured  person  or  through  insurance. 

See  Employers’  Liability;  Factory  Legis- 
lation; Industrial  Injuries;  Labor,  Pro- 
tection to;  Labor,  Relation  of  the  State 
to;  Occupational  Diseases. 

References:  A.  T.  Saunders,  Comp.,  Con- 
ference of  Commissions  on  Compensation  for 
Industrial  Accidents  (1910)  ; L.  K.  Frankel 
and  M.  Dawson,  Workmen’s  Insurance  in 
Europe  (1910)  ; Sclnvedtman  and  Emery,  Am. 
Labor  Legislation  Rev.,  I (1911),  No.  3,  96- 
114,  II  (1912),  No.  3,  467-475,  No.  4,  III 
(1913),  No.  2;  A.  Shadwell,  Industrial  Ef- 
ficiency (1906),  II,  147-170;  L.  D.  Clark,  Law 
of  the  Employment  of  Labor  (1911),  187-204; 
C.  R.  Henderson,  Industrial  Insurance  in 
the  U.  S.  (1909)  ; U.  S.  Commissioner  of 
Labor,  “Workmen’s  Insurance  and  Compen- 
sation Systems  in  Europe”  in  2^th  An- 
nual Report  (1909)  ; G.  Zacher,  Die  Arbeiter 
Versicherung  im  Ausland  (1900-1907). 

C.  F.  Gettemy. 

WORLD  POWER,  UNITED  STATES  AS  A. 
General  Application. — Literally  speaking,  every 
nation  is  a world  power  in  so  far  as  it  under- 
700 


WORLD  POWER,  UNITED  STATES  AS  A 


takes  to  protect  its  citizens  and  to  further 
their  commercial  interests  in  all  parts  of  the 
world.  This  the  United  States  has  done  from 
the  beginning.  For  instance,  from  its  earliest 
days  it  has  been  interested  in  the  Far  East; 
it  has  negotiated  treaties  there;  it  has  exact- 
ed reparation  for  outrages  committed  against 
Americans;  and,  when  need  be,  it  has  sup- 
ported its  demands  by  a show  of  force.  In 
Africa  it  has  had  what  Secretary  Freyling- 
huysen,  in  1884,  called  “a  quasi-parental  re- 
lationship” to  the  negro  republic  of  Liberia. 
In  South  America  it  has  not  only  exercised  a 
well  known  friendly  and  protecting  influence, 
but  when  it  has  had  grievances  to  be  redressed 
it  has  actually  sent  military  expeditions,  as 
to  the  Falkland  Islands  in  1831,  and  to  the 
Paraguay  River  in  1850. 

The  term  “world  power”  as  currently  ap- 
plied today  means  not  merely  a state  possess- 
ing wide  interests,  but  more  especially  one 
that  claims,  and  is  strong  enough  to  enforce 
its  claim,  to  be  consulted  wherever  those  inter- 
ests may  be  affected  directly  or  indirectly.  As 
the  world  gets  more  closely  knit  together  into 
a single  community  of  nations,  what  touches 
one  touches  all,  and  international  politics 
inevitably  tend  to  become  world  politics,  in 
which  every  great  state  takes  part. 

In  this  sense  the  United  States  has  only  re- 
cently grown  to  be  a world  power;  indeed,  a 
cardinal  feature  of  its  foreign  policy,  the  Mon- 
roe Doctrine  (see),  is  based  on  the  opposite 
conception,  namely  that  America  and  Europe 
are  separate  continents  whose  political  affairs 
are  distinct  and  should  be  kept  so.  The  United 
States  has  remained  faithful  to  this  theory  on 
its  negative  as  well  as  on  its  positive  side; 
and  has  up  to  the  present  day  kept  carefully 
out  of  immediate  European  politics  and  compli- 
cations. Asia  was  not  mentioned  in  the  Mon- 
roe Doctrine,  the  question  whether  the  doctrine 
applied  to  that  continent  was  not  raised  until 
the  annexation  of  the  Philippines,  and  was 
then  promptly  answered  in  the  negative  by  the 
American  people. 

Effect  of  Spanish  War. — It  is  not  too  much 
to  say  that  the  United  States  assumed  the 
position  of  a world  power  as  a consequence 
of  the  war  with  Spain  in  1898.  Although 
that  was  not  the  primary  reason  for  a 
development  which  rested  on  fundamental 
causes,  and  must  have  been  asserted  in  any 
case  within  a short  time.  What  the  war  did 
was  to  reveal  to  other  nations  the  resources 
for  offense  as  well  as  defense  possessed  by  the 
American  people;  still  more  it  awakened  the 
Americans  themselves  to  a livelier  sense  of 
their  own  strength.  It  gave  them  colonial  pos- 
sessions in  another  hemisphere;  it  broadened 
their  outlook  and  enlarged  their  ambitions.  At 
the  same  time  the  rapid  development  of  their 
industries  stirred  up  a desire  for  new  com- 
mercial outlets,  and  the  tremendous  political 
changes  occurring  in  the  Far  East  forced  them, 


now  that  they  held  territory  there,  to  assume 
a decided  attitude.  Secretary  Hay’s  “Open 
Door”  (see)  Circular  of  September  6,  1899, 
may  be  taken  as  a first  assertion  that  the 
United  States  intended  henceforth  to  occupy  a 
prominent  place  in  the  politics  of  the  Far  East. 
It  has  maintained  that  place  ever  since. 
Whether  in  connection  with  the  Boxer  troubles 
or  the  Russo-Japanese  War,  the  development 
of  China  or  the  Manchurian  question,  no  one 
has  disputed  the  claims  of  America  to  speak 
with  authority. 

Relations  with  Europe. — In  other  parts  of 
the  globe  the  present  attitude  of  the  United 
States,  if  somewhat  illogical  in  itself,  tends 
none  the  less  to  confirm  its  position  as  a world 
power.  While  favoring  Pan-Americanism  and 
resenting  everything  that  looks  like  intrusion 
on  the  part  of  Europe  in  the  western  hemi- 
sphere, the  American  people  reluctantly,  and 
to  a great  extent  unconsciously,  are  taking  a 
more  active  part  in  European  and  African  af- 
fairs. Secretary  Hay’s  circular  to  the  powers 
concerning  the  treatment  of  the  Jews  in  Rou- 
mania  (1902),  and  his  despatch  to  the  Rus- 
sian government  in  regard  to  the  Jews  in 
Russia  (1903),  however  justified  by  humanity, 
were  acts  of  interference  in  the  affairs  of 
European  powers.  As  for  Africa,  as  early  as 
1880  the  United  States  participated  in  the 
Madrid  conference  about  Morocco,  and  there- 
fore, naturally,  did  so  at  the  far  more  impor- 
tant one  at  Algeciras  in  1900,  where  its  reore- 
sentative  played  a considerable  role  in  the 
final  settlement.  Also  in  1885  it  shared  in  the 
Berlin  conference  respecting  the  partition  of 
Africa;  and  in  its  benevolent  intervention  in 
Liberia  (see)  in  1909,  it  has  assumed  what 
looks  suspiciously  like  the  beginning  of  a pro- 
tectorate over  African  territory — territory,  too, 
where  naval  officers  have  recommended  the 
establishment  of  an  American  coaling  station. 
These  acts  may  not  have  been  of  great  impor- 
ance  in  themselves,  and  most  Americans  realize 
that  active  interference  on  their  part  in  the 
affairs  of  the  old  world  would  weaken  the 
moral  strength  of  the  Monroe  Doctrine.  Never- 
theless, the  United  States  finds  it  increasingly 
difficult  to  keep  as  clear  of  European  politics 
as  it  has  in  the  past,  and  some  day  abstention 
may  become  impossible.  The  position  of  a 
world  power  means  not  only  profit  and  great- 
ness— it  also  implies  new  responsibilities  and 
perhaps  the  necessity  for  painful  sacrifices. 

See  Arbitration  and  Peace;  Drago  Doc- 
trine; Commercial  Policy  and  Relations 
of  the  United  States;  Foreign  Policy  of 
the  United  States;  Influence  in  Govern- 
ment; International  Law;  International 
Unions;  Monroe  Doctrine;  Open  Door; 
Treaties  of  the  United  States. 

References:  A.  C.  Coolidge,  TJ.  8.  as  a World 
Power  (1908);  A.  B.  Hart,  Foundations  of 
Am.  Foreign  Policy  (1901),  ch.  i;  J.  B.  Moore, 
Am.  Diplomacy  (1905),  passim;  Digest  of  In- 


WRIT  OF  ASSISTANCE— WYOMING 


tervational  Law  (1000);  J.  H.  Latan£,  Am. 
as  a World  Power  (1007)  ; A.  T.  Mahan, 
“Growth  of  Our  National  Feeling”  in  World’s 
Work,  III,  Feb.,  1902,  1703;  Foreign  Relations 
of  the  U.  8.  (annual),  'passim. 

A.  C.  Coolidge. 

WRIT  OF  ASSISTANCE.  A writ  provided 
for  by  a statute  of  Charles  II  and  confirmed  by 
later  statutes.  In  England  it  issued  from  the 
court  of  exchequer.  In  America  during  the 
French  war  (1755-1703)  such  writs  were  is- 
sued as  means  of  enforcing  the  revenue  law. 
They  gave  authority  to  board  a ship  in  port 
and  to  search  for  smuggled  goods,  and  also  to 
enter  vaults,  warehouses,  and  other  places. 
Directed  to  the  “Justices  of  the  Peace,  Sheriffs, 
Constables  and  all  other  our  Officers  and  Sub- 
jects,” the  writ  directed  them  to  “be  aiding, 
assisting,  and  helping”  the  customs  officer  in 
the  execution  of  his  duty.  On  application  for 
a writ,  in  1761,  a great  discussion  arose  before 
the  Massachusetts  superior  court.  Oxenbridge 
Tliacher  and  James  Otis  appeared  in  opposition 
to  the  writ.  Otis,  John  Adams  tells  us,  was 
“a  flame  of  fire.”  He  eloquently  declaimed 
against  the  legality  of  the  writ,  declaring  that 
an  act  against  the  Constitution  and  natural 
equity  was  void.  After  some  delay  the  writ 
was  issued.  Otis’s  declamation  against  general 
warrants — -warrants  which  do  not  specify  the 
place  to  be  searched  or  the  person  or  thing 
sought — -was  in  part  doubtless  a foundation 
for  the  later  constitutional  provision  against 
them.  See  Warrants.  References:  J.  Quincy, 
Reports  ( 1865 ) , Appendix  I ; W.  MacDonald, 
Select  Charters  (1899),  258.  A.  C.  McL. 

WRIT  OF  ERROR.  A writ  by  which  a su- 
perior court  commands  an  inferior  court  of 
record  to  transmit  to  it  for  review,  the  record 
of  a suit,  which  has  reached  final  determination 
in  the  court  below.  In  this  country  it  may 
also  be  issued  under  some  circumstances,  as 
when  a question  concerning  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution or  laws  is  invalid.  It  lies  only  to 
correct  errors  of  law.  See  Appeals  from 
Legal  Decisions;  Certiorari.  IT.  M.  B. 

WRITS,  COMMON  LAW.  A written  precept 
or  command  directed  to  the  sheriff  or  other 
public  officer,  or  directly  to  the  person  whose 
action  it  is  desired  to  command,  directing  the 
doing  or  refraining  from  doing  some  act. 
Originally  it  issued  in  the  name  of  the  king  or 
of  some  one  for  him;  but  in  modern  practice 
many  officers  are  authorized  to  issue  writs. 
Those  issued  in  the  name  of  the  Crown  or  gov- 
ernment are  original  writs.  Judicial  writs  are 
issued  under  the  seal  of  the  court,  and  relate 
to  some  step  or  proceeding  in  a case  at  law  or 
in  equity.  H.  M.  B. 

WYANDOTTE  CONSTITUTION.  A consti- 
tution of  Kansas  under  which  she  was  ad- 


mitted to  the  Union,  so  called  from  the  fact 
that  it  was  adopted  (1859)  at  Wyandotte. 
See  Kansas.  0.  C.  H. 

WYOMING.  Wyoming’s  territory  was  visit- 
ed by  fur  traders  as  early  as  1743-44,  when 
Verendrye  and  his  sons  traversed  the  region. 
John  Colter,  one  of  the  members  of  the  Lewis 
and  Clark  expedition,  discovered  the  Yellow- 
stone Park  and  crossed  the  Rocky  Mountains 
in  1807.  In  1811  the  overland  party  of  the 
Pacific  Fur  Company  crossed  the  region. 
Thereafter,  trappers,  traders,  and  explorers 
followed  the  natural  trails  of  its  valleys  and 
passes,  making  the  Oregon  Trail  a great 
pioneer  highway  to  the  Pacific.  Hostility  of 
Indians  led  to  appropriations  by  Congress,  be- 
ginning in  1846,  for  posts  to  succor  and  pro- 
tect the  traveling  immigrants.  Fort  Kearny 
was  built  in  1848  and  Fort  Laramie  was  pur- 
chased in  1859.  A Mormon  settlement  was 
made  in  1853  on  Green  River  but  abandoned 
in  1855.  Settlements  of  any  significance  were 
delayed  until  the  discovery  of  gold  in  1867. 
A population  of  20,789  in  1880  had  increased  to 
145,905  in  1910. 


Boundaries  of  the  State  of  Wyoming 


The  greater  part  of  Wyoming  was  acquired 
by  the  United  States  with  the  purchase  of 
Louisiana  in  1803.  It  was  successively  includ- 
ed in  the  District  and  Teritory  of  Louisiana, 
the  Territory  of  Missouri,  the  Indian  Country, 
the  Territory  of  Dakota.  Tliat  smaller  portion 
of  Wyoming  lying  west  of  the  Rocky  Moun- 
tains was  partly  acquired  with  the  Oregon 
Country  and  partly  by  war  with  Mexico.  The 
Territory  of  Wyoming  was  organized  in  1868. 
The  state  was  admitted  to  the  Union  on  July 
11,  1890,  under  a constitution  adopted  Novem- 
ber 5,  1889. 

The  constitution  divides  the  powers  of  gov- 
ernment into  three  “distinct”  departments, 
legislative,  executive,  and  judicial.  The  legis- 
lature is  composed  of  a senate  and  house  of 
representatives  and  meets  in  regular  session 
biennially  and  not  exceeding  forty  days.  Sen- 


702 


X Y Z 


ators  are  elected  for  terms  of  four  years,  in 
such  manner  that  one-half  are  holdovers.  Rep- 
resentatives are  elected  for  terms  of  two  years. 
Each  county  is  both  a senatorial  and  a repre- 
sentative district,  entitled  to  at  least  one  sena- 
tor and  one  representative.  The  entire  number 
of  representatives  shall  never  be  less  than  twice 
nor  more  than  three  times  the  total  number 
of  senators. 

The  executive  power  is  vested  in  a governor 
elected  for  a four  years’  term.  Other  elective 
state  officers  are  the  secretary  of  state,  auditor, 
treasurer,  superintendent  of  public  instruction, 
all  elected  for  terms  of  four  years.  The  gov- 
ernor is  commander-in-chief  of  the  militia. 
Under  regulations  made  by  law,  be  has  power 
to  remit  fines  and  forfeitures,  and  to  grant 
reprieves  and  pardons.  He  has  a suspensive 
veto  on  legislation,  including  items  of  appro- 
priation bills,  which  may  be  overcome  by  a 
two-thirds  vote  of  all  members.  The  governor, 
secretary  of  state,  state  treasurer,  and  superin- 
tendent of  public  instruction  constitute  a 
board  of  land  commissioners  to  administer 
public  lands.  The  state  auditor,  treasurer, 
and  secretary  of  state  constitute  a board  of 
tax  equalization. 

The  judicial  power  is  vested  in  the  senate  as 
a court  of  impeachment,  a supreme  court,  dis- 
trict courts,  justices  of  the  peace,  courts  of 
arbitration,  and  municipal  courts.  The  su- 
preme court  has  general  appellate  power,  and 
a general  superintending  power  over  all  in- 
ferior courts.  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court 
number  three,  and  are  elected  for  terms  of 
eight  years.  District  judges  are  elected  for 
terms  of  six  years. 

The  legislature  provides  by  general  law  for 
the  organization  of  counties,  and  for  township 
organization  and  government.  The  organiza- 
tion and  classification  of  municipal  corpora- 


tions is  also  provided  for  by  general  law's. 
Sheridan  and  Cheyenne  have  adopted  (1913) 
commission  governments. 

Political  rights  and  privileges  are  exercised 
without  distinction  of  race,  color,  or  sex. 
Women  have  voted  in  the  territory  since  1809. 
No  person  is  entitled  to  vote  unless  able  to 
read  the  state  constitution. 

The  system  of  public  education  includes  free 
schools  of  every  grade  and  a university.  The 
university  is  governed  by  a board  of  trustees 
appointed  by  the  governor,  with  the  superin- 
tendent of  public  instruction  and  the  president 
of  the  university  as  members  ex  officio.  Funds 
derived  from  public  lands  largely  support 
the  educational  system. 

In  national  politics  the  state  voted  for  Re- 
publicans in  1892,  1900,  1904,  and  1908,  and 
for  the  Democrats  in  189G  and  1912.  The  state 
administration  has  been  controlled  by  Repub- 
licans from  1890  to  1892,  by  Democrats  and 
Populists  from  1892  to  1895,  and  by  Repub- 
licans from  1895  to  the  present.  But  the 
governor  in  1913  W'as  elected  by  a fusion  of 
Democrats  with  independent  Republicans,  and 
he  afterwards  joined  the  Progressives. 

Political  issues  in  recent  years  have  included 
regulation  of  the  liquor  traffic,  corrupt  prac- 
tices acts  (see),  reforms  of  assessment  and 
taxation,  commission  government  for  cities 
(see  Commission  System  of  City  Govern- 
ment), initiative  (see),  referendum  (see), 
and  recall  (see),  and  the  direct  primary  (see 
Primary,  Direct). 

See  Constitutions,  State,  Characteristics 
of;  State  Governments,  Characteristics  of. 

References:  H.  II.  Bancroft,  Nevada,  Colo- 
rado, and  Wyoming  (1890),  659-806;  G.  R. 
Ilebard,  Government  of  Wyoming  (1904);  F, 
N.  Thorpe,  Federal  and  State  Constitutions 
( 1909 ) , VII,  4105-4155.  C.  A.  Duniway. 


X 


X Y Z.  In  1797  three  commissioners, 
Charles  C.  Pinckney,  John  Marshall,  and  El- 
bridge  Gerry,  were  sent  from  the  United  States 
to  France  to  seek  to  arrange  the  difficulties 
between  the  two  countries.  Soon  after  reach- 
ing Paris  they  were  approached  unofficially  by 
several  persons  from  the  French  foreign  of- 
fice. These  messengers  made  various  proposals, 
saying  that  France  would  expect  a loan  from 
America,  and  suggesting  that  a gift  of  some 
$240,000  to  the  Directory  would  be  of  material 
service  in  the  negotiations.  They  said  they 
wanted  money;  “It  is  expected  that  you  will 
offer  money.”  The  American  commissioners 
replied  “No,  no;  not  a sixpence.”  The 


Americans  soon  left  Paris,  Gerry  unwisely  re- 
maining behind  for  a time.  When  the  des- 
patches of  the  commissioners  were  published  in 
America,  three  of  the  emissaries  were  desig- 
nated as  X,  Y,  and  Z.  On  the  publication  of 
the  despatches  containing  information  of 
these  unworthy  demands,  there  was  much 
excitement  in  America  and  strong  feeling 
against  France.  The  names  of  three  emis- 
saries were  Hottinguer,  Bellamy,  and  Hautral. 
See  France,  Diplomatic  Relations  with; 
Marshall,  John;  Pinckney,  Charles  G. 
References:  J.  S.  Bassett,  Federalist  System 
(1906),  ch.  xvi;  Am.  State  Papers,  Foreign 
Relations,  II,  158.  A.  C.  McL. 


YANKEE— YUKON 


Y 


YANKEE.  A term  with  the  following  ap- 
plication in  United  States  history:  (1)  in- 
habitants of  New  England;  (2)  natives  of  the 
United  States,  so  called  by  Europeans;  (3) 
soldiers  of  the  Union  army,  so  called  by  the 
inhabitants  of  the  seceded  states  during  the 
Civil  War.  It  is  of  uncertain  origin,  but 
commonly  said  to  have  been  given  to  the  Eng- 
lish colonists  by  the  Massachusetts  Indians. 

0.  C.  H. 

YARDS  AND  DOCKS,  BUREAU  OF.  The 

Bureau  of  Yards  and  Docks  is  one  of  the 
bureaus  of  the  United  States  Navy  Depart- 
ment (see).  It  is  charged  with  the  construc- 
tion and  maintenance  of  navy  yards  (see), 
naval  stations  and  floating  dry  docks.  It  is 
also  charged  with  the  preparation  of  plans  for, 
and  the  supervision  of,  the  construction  of 
naval  hospitals  and  marine  barracks. 
References:  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  Annual 
Report-,  J.  A.  Fairlie,  National  Administration 
of  the  U.  8.  (1905),  159.  A.  N.  H. 

YAZOO  FRAUDS.  In  1789  Georgia  sold 
25.400,000  acres  of  western  lands,  in  the  region 
of  the  Yazoo  River,  to  three  companies  for 
$207,580.  The  contracts  were  not  carried  out. 
In  1795  some  35,000,000  acres  in  the  same  gen- 
eral region  were  sold  to  four  companies  for 
$500,000.  Charges  of  fraud  caused  the  rescind- 
ing of  the  contract  by  the  next  legislature. 
After  Georgia  ceded  her  western  lands  to  the 
United  States,  in  1802,  the  above  mentioned 
companies  sought  relief  from  Congress,  and 
under  the  act  of  Mar.  31,  1814,  a board  of  com- 
missioners apportioned  $5,000,000  among  the 
claimants  of  1795.  See  Public  Land  and  Pub- 
lic Land  Policy;  Public  Lands,  State. 
Reference:  C.  H.  Haskins,  “Yazoo  Land  Com- 
panies” in  Am.  Hist.  Assoc.,  Papers,  V ( 1901 ) . 

P.  J.  T. 

YEAS  AND  NAYS.  See  Voting  in  Legis- 
lative Bodies. 

YOUNG,  BRIGHAM.  Brigham  Young  (1801- 
1877),  chief  apostle  and  prophet  of  the  Mormon 
church  in  the  United  States,  was  born  atWliit- 
ingham,  Vt.,  June  1,  1801.  In  1832  he  be- 
came a convert  to  Mormonism,  was  ordained 


an  elder,  and  sent  as  a missionary  to  Canada. 
In  1834  he  went  with  the  “Zion’s  Camp”  expe- 
dition to  Missouri,  and  the  next  year  became 
one  of  the  twelve  apostles  of  the  sect.  On  the 
death  of  Joseph  Smith,  in  1844,  he  was  chosen 
prophet.  In  1846,  after  the  expulsion  of  the 
Mormons  from  Nauvoo,  111.,  he  led  his  followers 
across  the  plains  to  Utah  (see),  and  founded 
Salt  Lake  City.  He  was  chosen  governor  of 
the  so-called  State  of  Deseret  in  1849,  and  in 
1851  was  appointed  governor  of  the  territory 
of  Utah,  holding  that  office  until  1857,  when 
he  was  removed.  He  was  twice  arrested  for 
bigamy,  but  on  each  occasion  the  case  was  dis- 
missed. Under  his  leadership  much  of  the 
desert  was  reclaimed,  but  he  resisted  the  at- 
tempts of  the  Federal  Government  to  influ- 
ence affairs  in  Utah,  and  his  long  rule  was  at- 
tended by  incidents  of  violence  and  terrorism. 
He  died  in  Salt  Lake  City,  August  29,  1877. 
See  Polygamy;  Utah.  References:  E.  YY.  Tull- 
bridge,  Life  of  Brigham,  Young  (1876);  H. 
Bancroft,  Hist,  of  Utah  (1889).  W.  MacD. 

YOUNG  HICKORY.  A sobriquet  given  Mar- 
tin Van  Buren  (see)  about  1836  when  as  Demo- 
cratic presidential  candidate  he  became  the 
political  heir  to  “Old  Hickory,”  Andrew  Jack- 
son.  Also  said  to  have  been  applied  to  James 
K.  Polk  (see). 

YUKON.  An  administrative  district  of  the 
Dominion  of  Canada  comprising  the  territory 
lying  northward  of  British  Columbia,  westward 
of  the  district  of  Mackenzie,  and  eastward  of 
Alaska.  It  has  an  area  of  196,976  square  miles, 
and  a population  of  about  50,000.  The  politi- 
cal history  of  the  district  began  with  the  in- 
flux which  followed  the  discovery  of  the  Klon- 
dike gold-fields  during  the  closing  years  of 
the  nineteenth  century,  and  the  establishment 
of  a separate  civil  government  for  the  district 
by  act  of  the  Canadian  Parliament  in  1903 
(2  Edio.  Y1I,  c.  34).  The  territory  of  Yukon 
is  represented  in  the  federal  parliament  by  one 
member  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Its  local 
government  consists  of  a commissioner  ap- 
pointed by  the  governor  general,  and  an  execu- 
tive council  of  ten  members  of  whom  five  are 
appointed  and  five  elected.  The  seat  of  gov- 
ernment is  at  Dawson  City.  YV.  B.  M. 


704 


INDEX 


Abattoirs,  i,  1 

Abatement  of  nuisances,  ii,  5G4 
Abe,  Honest  Old,  ii,  127 

Ableman  vs.  Booth  (fugitive  slaves),  i,  239,  68o 
Abolition  in  Democratic  Party,  i,  566 
Abolitionist  Republicans,  iii,  190 
Abolitionists,  i,  1 

— American  Convention  of,  i,  34 

— Convention,  i,  2 

— - and  slavery  controversy,  iii,  320 
Abominations,  Tariff  of,  iii,  476 
Aborigines,  American,  i,  2 
AbrasioD  of  coinage,  i,  310 

Abrasives  in  resources  of  North  America,  iii,  205 
Absinthe,  restriction  upon,  in  Switzerland,  iii,  466 
Absolute  monarchy,  ii,  459 
Absolutism,  i,  2 

— -arbitrary  government  as,  i,  64 
Abstension  from  voting,  i,  3 

Abtheilungen,  legislative  system  in  Europe,  ii,  341 
Abyssinia,  diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  14 
Academic  degrees,  i,  559 
Acadia  and  New  France,  ii,  526 

— and  Nova  Scotia,  ii,  564 
Acceptance  in  banking  methods,  i,  112 

— letter  of,  ii,  344 

Accessory  after  the  fact,  ii,  318 

— before  the  fact,  ii,  318 

Accidents,  automobile,  liability  for,  i,  98 

— and  child  labor,  i,  255 

— to  employees.  See  Employers’  liability  ; Indus- 

trial injuries. 

— public  service  commissions  and,  iii,  109 

— railroad  and  steamship,  i,  3 
Accretion,  in  international  law,  ii,  209 

— of  territory,  iii,  528 
Accountants,  certified  public,  i,  241 

— regulation  of  practice  of.  iii,  73 
Accounting  and  business  statistics,  iii,  422 
- — uniform,  iii,  592 

Accounts,  Bureau  of,  i,  4 

— public,  iii,  87 

— uniform,  and  Interstate  Commerce  Commission, 

ii,  223 

public  service  commissions  and,  iii,  109 

and  purchase  of  supplies,  iii,  121 

Achaean  leagues,  ii,  100 

Ackerman,  Amos  T.,  i.  95 

Acquisition  of  territory  by  a state,  iii,  528 

Act  of  Settlement,  i,  8,  404 

— courts  and,  i,  506 

Act  of  Union  (Canada),  iii,  207 
Acts  of  Congress,  i,  4 

— of  Trade,  i,  5 

— and  resolves,  state,  iii,  426 
Actions  in  personam,  i,  12 

— in  rem,  i,  12 

Adams,  Brooks,  on  jurisprudence,  ii,  265 

— Charles  Francis,  in  Alabama  controversy,  i,  23 

— — biography  of,  i,  6 

and  Free  Soil  party,  ii,  52 

in  Geneva  arbitration,  ii.  73 

— Henry  C.,  quoted  on  Jefferson,  i,  579 
quoted  on  public  debts,  i,  407 

quoted  on  functions  of  government,  i,  483 

— ■ Herbert  B.,  iii,  599 

— • John,  administration,  and  National  Republican 
party,  ii,  493 

biography  of,  i,  6 

on  Boston  massacre,  iii,  228 

quoted  on  caucuses,  i,  461 

and  Declaration  of  Independence,  i,  554 

quoted  on  the  Federal  Convention,  i,  721 

and  Federalist  party,  i,  721,  723 

-political  theories  of,  ii,  720 

Thoughts  on  Government,  iii,  392 

-Tripolitan  negotiations  with,  i,  13 

and  Twelfth  Amendment,  iii,  583 

-as  Vice-President,  iii,  616 

vote  for,  iii,  13,  14,  15,  16,  26 

— John  Quincy,  biography,  i,  6 

see  Blifil  and  Black  George,  i,  134 

cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

quoted  on  French  treaty,  ii,  35 

and  Monroe,  i,  580 

Doctrine,  ii,  466 

and  National  Republican  party,  ii,  493 


Adams,  John  Quincy,  and  Netherlands,  diplomatic 
relations  with,  ii,  519 

as  Old  Man  Eloquent,  ii,  579 

see  Scrub  race  for  the  presidency,  iii,  274 

Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— - — and  Straight  Democrats,  iii,  432 

and  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  478 

and  Tariff  of  Abominations,  iii,  476 

and  treaty  of  Ghent,  ii,  82 

third  term,  iii,  535 

— - — vote  for,  iii,  13,  18,  19,  20 

— Samuel,  as  American  Cato,  i,  34 
biography  of,  i,  6 

his  committees  of  correspondence,  i,  361 

— — -in  Continental  Congress,  i,  451 

and  Declaration  of  Independence,  i,  554 

— - — man  of  the  Revolution,  ii,  390 

political  theories  of,  ii,  719 

— - — vote  for,  iii,  1 5 

Adams  Express  Co.  vs.  Ohio  State  Auditor  (inter- 
state commerce),  ii,  221 
Adamson  act  (railroad  valuation),  iii,  141 
Ad  valorem  duties,  i,  617 
— - see  Tariff  rates,  iii,  482 
Adair  vs.  United  States  (contract),  i,  456 
“Address  on  the  relations  which  the  states  and 
general  government  bear  to  each  other”  (nul- 
lification controversy),  ii,  566 
Address  to  the  people  of  the  United  States,  Mc- 
Duffie. George,  ii.  382 
Addresses  of  public  officials,  i,  7 
Addyston  I’ipe  Case,  i,  7 
Adee,  A.  A.,  Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 
Adirondack  tract,  iii,  153 

Adjoints,  France,  and  mayor  in  European  cities, 
ii,  415 

— and  municipal  government  in  continental  Eu- 

rope, ii,  478 

Adjourn,  in  parlimentary  law,  ii,  619 
Adjournment,  i,  7 

Adjutant-General,  state,  i,  8 ; iii,  381 

— of  the  United  States,  i,  8 
“Administration,”  the,  i,  199 
Administration,  in  Europe,  i,  8 
Administrative  centralization,  and  removal  of  pub- 
lic officials,  iii,  179 

— courts  and  tribunals,  i,  505 
— -decisions,  i,  11 

— -economy,  Jefferson  and,  i,  579 

— and  international  law,  private,  ii,  211 
— -law,  ii,  310 

— officers,  functions  of,  i,  9 

legal  liabilities  of,  i,  507 

— - tribunals,  ii,  257 
Admiral  of  the  navy,  ii,  572 
Admiralty,  ii,  309 

— British,  i,  689 

— - and  maritime  jurisdiction,  i,  11 
federal,  i,  514 

— jurisdiction,  i,  36 

— — law,  civil,  ii,  313 

— high  seas,  ii,  122 

— and  law,  administrative,  ii,  310 

— See  also  under  War. 

Adoptions,  see  Textbook  laws,  iii,  533 
Adriatic.  Queen  of  the,  and  mare  clausum,  ii,  395 
Adulteration,  ii,  229 

— Agriculture,  Dept,  of,  i,  18 

— see  pure  food,  iii,  122 
Advisory  initiative,  iii.  629 
— - legislation,  direct,  ii,  332 
Advisory  council,  of  governor,  i.  486 

— opinions,  i,  12 

see  also  State  judiciary,  iii,  397 

— recall,  iii,  158 

Aeneas  Sylvius,  and  political  theories,  ii,  718 
Aerial  domain,  in  international  law,  ii,  209 ; iii, 
528 

— navigation,  regulation  of,  i,  13 
Aesthetic  interest,  and  police  power,  ii,  707 
Affairs,  board  of,  iii,  121 

Africa,  diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  13 

— • and  open  door,  ii,  582 

African  conference,  1884-1885,  i,  381 

— slave  trade  and  liquor  traffic,  ii,  216 
Agrarian  law,  i,  19 

— movements,  see  West  as  a factor  in  American 

politics,  iii,  672 


707 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Agana,  ii,  102 

Agassiz  school,  iii,  269 

Agawams,  the  cobbler  of,  iii,  253 

Agent,  diplomatic,  i,  591 

Agents,  colonial,  i,  315 

Agnew-Hart  bills  (racing),  iii,  130 

Agreement  of  the  people  (England),  i,  434,  562 

— and  right  of  revolution,  iii,  223 
Agreements  between  states.  See  States,  compacts 

between. 

Agricultural  colleges,  Morrill  grant  for,  ii,  471 

— credits,  and  Federal  Reserve  Act,  iii,  202 

— education,  i,  630 

— experiment  stations,  i,  15 

— fairs,  i,  709 

— law  i,  19 

Agriculture  Board  of  (British),  i,  689 

— colleges  for,  and  federal  expenditure,  i,  692 

— Department  of,  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry,  1, 

42 

Bureau  of  Biological  Survey,  i,  132 

Bureau  of  Chemistry,  i,  251 

Bureau  of  Entomology,  i,  671 

Bureau  of  Plant  Industry,  ii,  695 

Bureau  of  Soils,  iii.  350 

Weather  Bureau,  iii,  666 

experiment  stations,  office  of.  i,  698 

and  federal  expenditures,  i,  693 

and  public  health,  ii,  117 

-and  administrative  law,  ii,  311 

— • — organization  of,  i,  16 

and  pharmaceutical  legislation,  ii,  675 

public  roads,  office  of,  iii,  108 

see  also  Roads,  iii,  232 

see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  248 

— in  economic  development  of  United  States,  i, 

624 

— educational  statistics,  i,  649 

— federal  services  to,  i,  20 

— and  industrial  schools,  iii,  261 

— and  mechanical  colleges,  iii,  266 

— and  mines  and  mining,  relation  of  government 

to,  ii,  443 

— national  and  state,  ii,  25 

— relations  of  government  to,  i,  19 

— see  also  Resources  of  North  America,  iii,  205 

— Secretary  of,  report  of,  iii,  182 

— secretaries  of,  i,  20 
Aguinaldo,  and  imperialism,  ii,  152 
Airships,  regulation  of,  i,  13 

Air  zone,  in  international  law,  iii,  528 
Aix-la-Chapelle,  Congress  of,  i,  589 

— treaty  of,  ii,  203 

Akerman,  A.  T.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
Alabama,  boundaries  of  (map),  i,  21 

— see  Canals  and  other  artificial  waterways,  i,  220 

— Civil  War  and  reconstruction  in,  i,  21 

— Constitution  of  1875,  i,  22 
1901,  i,  22 

— constitutional  amendment  in,  i,  437 

— Creek  War  in,  i,  20 

— early  growth  and  development,  1,  21 

— early  history  of.  i,  20 

— first  constitution  of,  i,  21 

— industrial  development  of,  i,  22 

— intendant  in,  ii,  197 

— laws  of,  i,  21 

— letters,  see  Whig  party,  iii,  683 

— liquor  question  in,  i,  22 

— parties  in,  i.  22 

— River,  iii,  663 

— see  also  South,  iii,  353 

— and  neutrality,  principles  of,  ii,  521 
Alabama  Case,  as  an  international  claim,  i,  291 

— claims,  arbitration,  i,  68 

and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  692 

influence  of.  on  arbitration,  ii,  205 

— Controversy,  i,  23 

see  Geneva  arbitration,  ii,  73 

Alamance,  battle  of,  ii,  194  ; iii,  281 
Alaska,  i,  24 

— acquisition  of.  ii,  38 

— annexation  of,  i,  26,  46 

— boundary  controversy,  i,  27 

— — arbitration  of,  i,  68 

diplomatic  relations  as  to,  i,  176 

— coal  lands  in,  i,  25 

— codes  of.  i,  25 

— commissioner  of  education  and,  ii;  199 

— as  dependency  of  United  States,  i,  582 

— discovery  and  settlement  of,  i,  24 

— districts  of,  i,  166 

— early  neglect  by  United  States  of,  1,  24 

— education  in,  i,  26 

— fisheries  of,  ii,  21 

— fur  resources  of,  ii,  21 

— Great  Britain  and,  ii,  98 

— industrial  conditions  in,  i,  25 

— land  boundary,  i,  157 


Alaska  and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  467 

— as  an  organized  territory,  iii,  526 

— population  of,  i,  26 

— present  government  of,  i,  25 

— railroad,  public  ownership  of,  iii,  147 

— railroads  in,  i,  25 

— see  also  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  249 

— salmon  fishery,  ii,  23 

— see  Territory,  acquired,  status  of,  iii,  524 

— territory  or  district,  i,  25 

— treaty  for  purchase  of,  Senate  and  the,  iii.  288 

— Yukon  Pacific  Exposition,  i,  701 
Alaskan  commercial  company,  iii,  274 

— road  commission,  i,  26 
Albany,  eapitol  at,  iii,  91 

— plan  of  union,  i,  28,  320 

and  ordinance  of  1787,  ii,  585 

— - Regency,  i,  28 

Alberta,  Canadian  province,  i,  28,  214 
Albemarle,  Carolina  colony,  i,  230 
Alcalde,  in  Spain,  ii,  416 
Alcatraz  Island,  military  prison,  ii,  438 
Alcohol,  government  monopoly,  in  Switzerland, 
iii,  466 

— See  under  Liquor,  intoxicants 

— and  health,  public,  ii,  120 

Alcorn,  General,  and  Mississippi,  ii,  454 
Aldermen,  i,  29 

— and  corruption,  i,  477 

— board  of,  legislation  and  legislative  problems  in 

cities,  ii,  326 

— in.  county  council  in  Great  Britain,  i,  490 
Aldrich,  Nelson  W.,  biography,  i,  29 

— and  Republican  partv,  iii,  199 
Aldrich-Vreeland  Act  (banking),  i,  116,  536,  585 
Aleutian  Islands,  i,  125 

— and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  150 
Alexandria,  see  District  of  Columbia,  i,  601 
Algeciras  conference,  i,  14,  122 

— and  open  door,  ii,  582 

Alger,  Russel]  A.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 

Algiers,  diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  122 

— and  near  east,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  507 

— negotiations  with,  i,  13 
Algonkian  Indians,  i,  2 
Alien,  definition,  i,  29 

— Enemies  Act,  i,  30 
of  1798,  i.  703 

— Friends  Act,  1798,  i,  703 

— immigration,  ii,  30 

— labor,  ii,  284 

— paupers,  i,  246 

— and  Sedition  Acts,  i,  30 

— — and  Democratic-Republican  party,  i.  578 
see  Virginia  and  Kentucky  Resolutions,  iii, 

620 

Aliens,  constitutional  status  of,  i,  31 
— - in  Alaska  fisheries,  ii,  23 

— see  Citizenship  in  United  States,  i.  271 
— • see  Qualifications  for  office,  iii,  124 
Alimony,  and  international  law,  private,  ii,  212 
Allegiance,  i,  31 

— in  Am.  Insurance  Co.  vs.  Canter,  i,  36 

— in  Civil  War,  i,  288 

— see  Great  Britain,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii, 

96 

— indefeasible,  ii,  155 

and  “Once  an  Englishman,  always  an  Eng- 
lishman,” ii.  580 

— indelible,  i,  690 

— and  nationality,  ii,  495 
Allen,  and  Ohio  idea,  ii,  576 

— vs.  Pullman's  Palace  Car  Company  (interstate 

commerce),  ii,  221 

Allgeyer  vs.  State  of  Louisiana  (liberty,  civil), 
ii.  347 

Alliance  Holy,  ii,  125 
Alliances,  entangling,  i,  671 
Allison,  William  B.,  i,  32 
Allotment  of  land  to  Indians,  i,  32 
Almshouse  care,  i,  246 

Alsace-Lorraine,  and  diplomatic  relations  with 
Germany,  ii,  79 
Althusius,  Johannes,  ii,  729 

— quoted  on  sovereignty,  iii,  362 
Alternates,  i,  32  ; iii,  85 
Alternative,  counting  in  the,  i,  488 
Alto  Peru,  i,  141 

Alverstone.  Lord,  and  Alaskan  boundary,  Ii,  98 

— on  international  law,  ii,  207 
Amazon,  iii,  356 

— navigation  of,  ii,  502 
Ambassadors,  in  diplomacy,  i,  33,  589 

— and  extraterritoriality,  i.  705 

— proceedings  against,  i,  515 
Amendment  of  legislative  measures,  i,  33 
— ■ mode  of,  in  constitutions,  i,  432 


INDEX 


Amendments  to  Constitution  of  United  States  i, 
' 417 

America,  i,  34 

American  abolitionists,  convention  of,  1,  34 

— aborigines,  i,  2 

■—  Anti-Masonic  Society,  i,  37 

— Anti-slavery  Society,  iii,  320 

— Archteological  Commission,  ii,  603 

— archives,  iii,  117 

— Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science, 

iii,  423 

for  the  Extension  of  University  Teaching, 

iii.  599 

for  the  Prevention  of  Tuberculosis,  iii,  581 

— Bank  of  Orange  vs.  McComb,  iii,  591 

— Bar  Association,  and  uniform  legislation,  iii, 

589 

— Breeders’  Association,  and  eugenics,  iii,  331 

— Cato,  i,  34 

— character,  and  economic  history,  i,  622 

— cities  service  company,  ii,  124 

— Colonization  Society,  i,  34,  323  ; iii,  319,  346 

— Convention,  i,  34 
and  slavery,  iii,  317 

— Economic  Association,  iii,  423 

— and  Eng.  Enc.  of  Law,  quoted  on  suffrage,  iii, 

694 

— Ethnology,  Bureau  of,  iii,  323 

— Fabius,  i,  35 

— Federation  of  Catholic  Societies,  i,  268 

— Federation  of  Labor,  see  Gompers,  ii,  85 

— — labor  organizations,  ii,  291 

— and  foreign  anti-slavery  society,  iii,  320 

— Fraternal  Congress,  and  fraternal  orders,  ii,  584 

— government  and  geography,  i,  35 

— Historical  Association,  ii,  320 

— Humane  Association,  i,  530 

— Institute  of  Architects  and  building  laws,  i,  186 
and  city  planning,  i,  280 

— Insurance  Co.  vs  Canter  (admiralty),  i,  36 
< Indians ).  ii,  171 

(territorial  status),  iii,  523 

(territory,  constitutional  questions  of),  iii, 

525 

— — -(territorial  government),  iii,  526 

— International  Bureau,  ii,  603 

— Iron  and  Steel  Institute,  and  welfare  systems, 

iii,  668 

— labor  union,  ii,  217,  293 

— National  party,  i,  37 

— party,  see  Know-nothing  party,  ii,  281 
and  Democratic  party,  i,  568 

vote  of,  see  Tables,  iii,  35 

— Peace  Society,  i,  66 
and  militarism,  li.  433 

— Political  Science  Association,  iii,  423 
Review,  ii,  720 

— Protective  Association,  i.  51 
See  also  A.  P.  A.  Party. 

— -or  Protectionist  League,  ii,  711 

— Prohibition  party,  i,  37  ; iii,  77 

— race,  native,  ii.  495 
and  nationality,  i.  38 

— Railroad  Association,  iii,  131,  137 

— Railway  Engineering  Association,  iii,  137 

— registry  of  vessels,  iii,  305 

— republics,  the  general  assembly  of  the,  and 

Panama  congress,  ii.  602 

International  Bureau  of.  See  Pan-American 

Union. 

— science,  the  (sociology),  iii,  344 

— ship,  definition  of,  i.  340 

— Society  for  I.abor  Legislation,  iii.  423 

— Sociological  Association,  iii,  423 

— Statistical  Association,  iii.  423 

— Sugar  Refining  Co.  (trust),  iii,  580 

— Surety  Company  vs.  Nebraska  (insurance  rates), 

ii,  192 

— system,  i.  39 

Clay  and  the.  i,  293 

— as  a term  for  the  United  States,  i,  34 

— Tobacco  Co.,  dissolution  of,  i,  473 
and  night  riders,  ii.  547 

— — see  Restraint  of  trade,  iii,  208 
( trust) . iii,  580 

— type,  and  party'  government,  comparative,  ii, 

627 

Ames,  Adalbert,  and  Mississippi,  ii.  454 
Amity  and  commerce,  treaties  of,  iii,  567 
Amnesty,  i.  39 

— Act  of  1872,  and  the  Fourteenth  Amendment,  li, 

40 

— proclamation  of,  i.  39 

and  reconstruction,  iii,  165 

Amphyctionic  League,  ii.  207 
Amusements,  public,  i,  39 

— regulation  of.  i,  40 
Anarchism,  and  socialism,  iii,  334 
Anarchist-communists,  i.  364 


Anarchists,  exclusion  of,  i,  41 
Anarchy,  i,  41 

— and  communism,  distinguished,  1,  364 

— doctrines  of,  see  also  Police  power,  ii.  706 
Ancient  Order  of  United  Workmen,  ii,  584 
Andean  mountain  system,  iii,  354 
Anderson  school,  iii,  269 

— S.  J.,  Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 

— vs.  Dunn  (investigations,  legislative),  ii,  235 
Andrew,  John  Albion,  i,  41  ; iii,  644 

Andros,  Sir  Edmund,  and  New  England,  British 
province,  ii,  526 
Angell.  James  B.,  i,  42,  262 

Anglo-American  conventions  of  1818  and  1827,  iii, 
527 

Anglo-French  convention  of  1904,  and  Newfound- 
land, ii,  545 

Anglo-German  conference,  1889,  on  Samoa,  iii,  250 

Anglo-Indian  law,  codification  in,  i,  303 

Anglo-Saxon  America,  i,  34 

Anhalt,  ii,  80 

Animal  industry,  i,  18 

— Bureau  of,  i,  42 

public  health  and,  il,  117 

Animals,  bounties  for  destruction  of,  i,  168 

— cruelty  to,  i,  530 

— interstate  transportation  of,  ii,  221 

— see  Resources  of  North  America,  iii,  206 
Annals,  and  observatories,  public,  ii.  568 
Annapolis  Convention,  i,  42 

— see  Education,  military  and  naval,  i,  638 

— officers,  military  and  naval,  at,  ii,  570 

— Naval  Academy  at.  ii,  498 
Annexation  of  Canada,  i,  174 

— diplomatic  principles  of.  i,  42 
Annexations  to  United  States,  Alaska,  i,  46 

— California  and  New  Mexico,  i,  45 
— ■ chart  of.  i,  44 

— completion  of,  of  contiguous  territory,  1,  46 

— expansion,  an  early  American  policy,  i,  43 

— Florida,  i,  45 

— Gadsden  Purchase,  i.  46 

— Guam,  i,  46 

— Hawaii,  i,  46 

— Louisiana,  i.  43 

— of  non-contiguous  territory,  i,  46 

— Philippines,  i,  46 

— Porto  Rico,  i,  46 

— Texas  and  Oregon,  i,  45 

— Tutuila.  i.  46 

— Wake  Island,  i.  46 
Annual  franchise  tax,  ii,  47 

Anson,  W.  R.,  quoted  on  prerogative,  ii,  773 
Antelope.  The  (equality  of  states),  iii,  418 
Anthropology  and  political  science,  ii,  715 
Anti-cigarette  league,  iii,  538 
Anti-constitutionalists,  in  Pennsylvania,  ii,  663 
Anti-federal  Junto,  i.  48 
Anti-federalism.  I.  577 
Anti-federalists,  i.  47 

Anti-imperialism  and  Democratic  party,  i,  574 
Anti-imperialistic  League,  ii,  152 
Anti-imperialists,  i,  48 
Anti-Lecompton  Democrats,  i,  48 
Anti-Masonic  party,  i,  49 

Anti-militarist  movement,  and  militarism,  ii,  433 
Anti-monopoly  Convention,  i,  50 
Anti-Nebraska  Democrats  and  Republican  party, 
iii.  189 

— men,  i.  50 

— opposition  and  Democratic  party,  i,  568 

— Whigs,  and  Republican  party,  iii,  189 
Anti-rent  riots,  i,  50  : ii.  196 
Anti-saloon  League,  i,  50 

Anti-slavery  League,  see  Slavery  controversy 

Anti-snappers,  i,  50 

Anti  social  acts,  See  under  Crime 

Anti  trust  acts,  see  Corporations,  Bureau  of,  i,  474 

Anti-war  Democrats,  i,  50 

A.  P.  A.  party,  i,  51 

Apaches,  war  with,  iii.  652 

Apartment  hotel,  ii.  128 

Apartment  houses,  iii.  514 

"Apex”  mining  law,  ii.  443 

Appalachian  Highlands,  and  North  America,  li,  555 

— Valley,  ii,  685 

Appeal,  after  jury  trial,  ii,  270 
- — see  F))nctions  of  .iudge  and  jury,  ii,  270 
Appeal  to  the  World,  Adams,  ii,  719 
Appeals  in  law,  see  Removal  of  causes,  iii,  176 

— from  legal  decisions,  i,  51 
Appellate  court,  i,  498 

— courts,  in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 

— jurisdiction,  i,  51 

Appleton,  Nathaniel,  and  slavery,  iii,  317 
Appointment,  council  of,  i,  487 

— of  members  of  Congress  to  office,  i,  51 
Appointments,  Bureau  of,  i,  52 

— confirmation  of,  i,  380 

709 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Appointments,  Division  of,  i,  52 

— by  governor  of  the  state,  ii,  91 

— to  office,  i.  52 

act  of  appointment,  i,  52 

exercise  of  appointing  power,  i,  52 

federal  appointments,  i,  52 

— ■ — history  of  appointing  power,  i,  52 

municipal  appointments,  i,  54 

officers  and  employees,  distinguished,  i,  52 

period  of  reform,  i,  53 

spoils  system,  period  of,  i,  53 

• state  appointments,  i,  54 

Apportionment  acts,  i.  55 
• — • commission  system  and,  i,  57 

— of  congressmen,  i,  54 

• — gerrymandering  and,  i,  55 

— House  of  Representatives  and,  i,  50 

— municipal  legislators  and,  i,  57 

— negro  and.  i,  55 

— of  representation,  constitutional  amendment  as 

to,  i,  418 

— state  legislators,  i,  50 

Appraisal  of  imported  goods  for  duties,  i,  57 
Appraisement,  difficulties  of,  in  tariff  administra- 
tion, iii,  470 

Appraisers,  General  Board  of,  i,  58 

— of  duty,  i,  58 

— in  tariff  administration,  iii,  470 
Apprenticeship,  i,  58 
Appropriation,  permanent,  ii,  072 

— of  property,  i,  58 

Appropriations,  American  system  of,  i,  59 

annual  appropriations  under,  i,  59 

book  of  estimates  in,  i,  59 

coercive  appropriations  in,  i,  01 

Comptroller  of  the  Treasury  in,  1,  02 

conference  committee  in,  i,  01 

contracts  for  the  future  and,  i.  02 

Committee  of  Appropriations  in,  i,  59 

deficiency  bills  in,  i,  01 

deficiency  estimates  in,  i,  01 

economy  in,  i,  02 

lack  of  harmony  between  executive  and  legis- 
lative branches  in.  i,  02 
municipal  practice  as  to,  i,  03 

— — permanent  annual  appropriations,  i.  00 
permanent  specific  appropriations,  i,  00 

practice  as  to  new  legislation  under,  i,  00 

the  President  in,  i,  02 

relation  of  departmet  heads  to,  i,  01 

-state  practice  as  to,  i,  03 

subdivision  of  appropriation  bills,  i,  59 

— continuing,  i,  454 

— the  Senate  in,  i.  02 

— federal  system  till  1805,  i,  59 
Aqueducts,  i.  03 

Aquidneck,  iii,  224 

Aquinas,  and  economic  theory,  i,  620 

— political  theories,  ii,  717 
Arable  land,  iii,  95 
Arator.  iii.  509 

Arbitral  decisions,  and  international  law,  ii,  215 

— justice,  court  of,  ii,  100 
Arbitrary  government,  i,  04 
Arbitration,  American,  i,  08 

Alabama  claims,  i,  08 

Alaskan  boundary,  i,  08 

fur  seal  controversy,  i,  08 

Halifax  Fisheries  Commission,  i,  08 

North  Atlantic  coast  fisheries,  i,  08 

northeastern  boundary,  i.  08 

San  Juan  water  boundary,  i,  08 

see  Diplomatic  agreement,  i,  592 

— Geneva,  ii.  73 

— with  Great  Britain,  ii,  97.  99 

— influence  of  U.  S.  on,  ii,  205 

— in  interstate  commerce  legislation,  ii,  229 

— of  labor  disputes,  i.  66 

— and  peace,  i.  64 

• — Fuget  Sound,  i,  43 

— see  also  Treaties  of  United  States  iii,  508 

— of  labor  difficulties.  Canadian  system  of,  i,  67 
compulsory,  i,  07 

Erdman  Act  and.  i,  67 

extra-legal  governmental  arbitration,  i,  66 

federal  Board  of  Arbitration,  i,  67 

— — private  agreement,  i,  60 

state  boards  of  arbitration,  i.  60 

— and  peace,  anticipatory  agreements  in,  i,  05 

early  history  of.  i,  65 

essential  elements  in  arbitration,  i,  64 

history  of  peace,  i,  65 

law  in  arbitration,  i.  64 

mediation  and  mixed  commissions  in.  1,  64 

nineteenth  century  arbitration,  i,  65 

— — peace  movement,  i,  60 
Arbitrations,  see  Hague  Tribunal,  ii,  107 
Arbor  day,  i,  69 


Archbald.  Robert  W.,  judge  of  Commerce  Court, 
i,  499 

— impeachment  of,  ii,  150 
Architect,  public,  iii,  90 
Architects,  i,  099 

— regulation  of  practice  of,  iii,  73 
Architecture,  see  also  City  planning,  i,  279 
Archive  building,  iii,  108 

Archives,  federal,  i,  09 

Area  of  the  United  States,  i,  71 

Arena,  and  parks  and  boulevards,  ii,  011 

Argali's  expedition  against  Mt.  Desert,  i.  319 

Argentina,  i,  72 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  350 

— see  Drago  Doctrine,  i,  010 
Arguelles,  case  of,  i,  704 

Arid  America,  and  sectionalism  in  United  States, 
iii,  281 

Aristocratic  government,  i.  72 
Aristotle,  in  economic  theory,  i,  020 

— political  theories  of,  ii,  710 

— see  State,  theory  of,  iii,  407 
Arithmetic,  political,  ii,  710 
Arizona,  i.  73 

— boundaries  of,  i,  103 
Arkansas,  i,  74 

— see  also  South,  iii.  353 
Arm  in  Arm  Convention,  i.  77 
Armaments,  reduction  of,  ii,  203 
Armed  neutrality,  i,  75 

— declaration  of.  1780,  ii.  215 
Armies  and  navies,  foreign,  i,  70 

— Continental  Europe,  i.  70 

— Austria-Hungary,  i,  70 
- — France,  i,  76 

— Germany,  i,  70 

— ■ Great  Britain,  i,  76 

— Italy,  i.  76 

— Netherlands,  i,  76  , 

— Russia,  i,  76 

— Spain,  i,  76 

— Sweden,  i.  76 

— Switzerland,  i,  76 

— Turkey,  i,  70 
Armistice,  i,  77 
Armories,  public,  i,  77 

Armour  Packing  Co.  vs.  United  States  (preference 
to  ports),  ii,  701 
Arms,  right  to  bear,  i,  78 

Armstrong,  J.,  Secretary  of  War,  i,  195 ; iii, 
648 

— vote  for,  iii,  14 

— Insurance  Commission,  N.  Y.,  i,  351  ; ii,  236 
Army  act  (British),  i,  83 

— engineer  corps,  i,  070 

— and  extraterritoriality,  i,  700 

— hospitals,  ii,  127 

— judge  advocate  general,  ii.  254 

— and  navy,  enlistment,  i.  070 

leagues,  and  militarism,  ii,  432 

reserves,  iii,  204 

see  Service,  the.  iii,  298 

— see  Retired  list,  iii,  209 

— regulations,  i,  78 

— see  Signal  corps,  iii.  309 

— staff,  chief  of.  iii,  375 

— standing,  i,  78 

— state  adjutant  general,  i,  8 

— surgeon-general,  iii,  462 

— transport  service,  iii.  553 

— of  United  States,  authorized  strength  of,  i,  79 

— see  also  War.  Department  of,  iii,  041 
Aroostook  war,  ii.  98 

— and  northeastern  boundary  controversy,  ii,  500 
Arraignment  and  plea,  law,  criminal,  ii,  319 
Arrears  Act  (pensions),  ii,  670 

Arrest,  i,  80 

— and  commitment,  ii.  318 

— precautionary,  of  vagrants,  iii.  004 
Arrow  affair,  i.  201 

Arrowrock  (irrigation),  ii.  243 
Arsenals,  jurisdiction  of  United  States  over,  iii, 
518 

Art  commission,  and  monuments,  public,  ii,  471 

— commissions,  i,  80 
— - public,  i.  80 

— schools,  i.  81 
Artemus  Ward,  iii,  253 

Arthur.  Chester  A.,  biography  of.  i,  81 
— -on  Chinese  immigration,  i,  204 

— and  presidential  election,  iii.  8 

— and  river  and  harbor  bills,  iii.  229 

— Vice-President,  iii.  016 

— vote  for.  iii.  35 

Articles  of  Confederation,  i,  SI,  376 

— amendment  of,  i,  433 
Articles  of  war.  i.  83 

— and  military  law.  ii.  437 
Ashburton  Treaty,  i,  14 


710 


INDEX 


Ashburton  Treaty  and  northeastern  bundary  con- 
troversy, ii,  560 

— sec  New  Brunswick,  ii,  524 
Ashley  River,  Carolina  colony,  i,  230 
Ashton.  J.  Ilubley,  i,  95 

Asia,  diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  84 
- — and  open  door,  ii,  582 

Asiatic  immigration  in  British  Columbia,  i,  173 
— and  sectionalism  in  United  States,  iii,  284 
Asiento  Treaty,  i,  84  ; iii.  314 
Asptr.lt  pavements,  ii,  056 

Aspinwall,  William  H.,  and  Panama  railroad,  ii, 
602 

Assay  offices,  i,  S5 

Assaria  State  Bank  vs.  Dolley  (bank  guarantee 
law),  ii.  276 

Assembly,  legislative,  ii,  336 

— right  of.  i.  85 
Assemblies  and  Oregon,  ii,  590 

— and  their  organization,  and  parliamentary  law, 

ii,  617 

Assessed  valuation  in  state  systems  of  finance, 
ii.  5 

— valuations,  comparative,  i.  85 
Assessment  loans  in  public  debt,  i,  547 

— sec  Revenue,  public,  sources  of.  iii.  215 

— of  taxes,  national,  state  and  municipal,  i,  87 
Assessments,  special,  i.  89 

— see  Tax  Commissioner,  iii,  4S9 
- — for  betterments,  i.  126 

— party  purposes,  i,  89 

Assessor,  as  county  officer,  i,  4S9,  494 
Assessors  of  taxes,  i,  90 
Assistance,  writs  of,  iii.  702 
Assize,  law,  common,  ii,  314 

Associated  fraternities  of  America,  and  orders, 
fraternal,  ii,  584 
Associated  press,  i,  9'0 

Association,  the,  in  Continental  Congress,  i,  452 

— (1774),  i,  91 
Associations,  iii,  341 

— incorporation  of,  ii,  154 

— voluntary,  see  Persons,  ii,  673 

— of  American  universities,  iii,  410.  598 
Assumption  of  debts  upon  annexation,  i,  43 

— of  risk.  i.  91 

and  employers’  liability,  i,  668 

and  Interstate  Commerce  legislation,  ii,  229 

Astoria,  iii.  655 

— and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  157 

- — and  northwestern  boundary  controversy,  ii,  562 
Astrophysical  observatory,  iii,  323 
Asuncion,  Paraguay,  ii.  607 
Asylum,  international,  i,  91 

Atchison.  Topeka  and  Santa  Fe,  and  Pacific  rail- 
roads. ii,  597 
Athabascan  Indians,  i,  2 
Athenaeums,  libraries,  public,  II,  349 
Atkin  vs.  Kansas  (working  day),  ii,  2S9 
Atkinson,  Edward,  i,  48 
Atlanta  exposition,  i.  701 

— lighting,  electric,  ii.  353 
Atlantic  slope,  influence  of,  ii.  085 

— Coast  Fine  R.  R.  vs.  Riverside  Mills  (contract), 

i.  455 

(freight  losses),  i,  127 

— and  Pacific  and  Pacific  railroads,  ii,  596 
Attache,  i,  92 

Attaches,  in  diplomatic  service,  i,  594 
Attainder,  i,  92 

— bill  of.  i.  92  : ii.  17 

— confiscation  and.  i.  380 

— and  corruption  of  blood,  i,  479 

— and  treason,  iii,  559 
Attorney,  i,  92 

Attorney-General  of  the  United  States,  i,  93 

— justice,  department  of,  ii,  271 
Attorney-General  (state),  i.  93:  iii,  381 
Attorneys-Genernl  of  the  United  States,  list  of,  i,  95 
Auburn  system,  ii.  661 

Auctioneers,  license  taxes  on  occupations,  ii.  351 
Audit,  double,  in  Treasury  Department,  iii,  88 
Auditing,  see  Public  accounts,  iii,  87 

— as  function  of  government,  ii.  183 
Auditor  of  the  Treasury,  i,  95 

— county  and  town,  i,  95 

— as  county  officer,  i,  494 

— as  government  inspector,  ii,  182 

— state,  i,  95,  368:  iii.  381 

— in  state  accounts,  iii.  381 

— in  state  systems  of  finance,  ii.  5 
Auditors,  see  Accountants,  i.  241 

Audits,  certified,  and  crises,  economic,  i,  527 
Audubon  societies  nnd  game  laws,  ii,  70 
Aulnay.  d\  i.  319 
Auseleich  of  1867.  i,  97 
Austin.  John.  ii.  265 

— political  theories  of.  ii,  727 

— quoted  on  sovereignty,  theory  of,  iii,  365 


Austin.  S.  F..  iii,  529 

Australia,  federal  organization  of,  i.  96 

— arbitration  of  labor  disputes  in,  i,  67 

— see  Federal  state,  i.  ,719 
Australian  ballot,  i.  101 

— in  election  system,  i,  652 

— and  primary,  direct,  iii,  55 

Austria,  municipal  government  in,  ii,  479 

— party  system  in  Europe,  ii,  647 

— suffrage  in,  iii,  457 
Austria-Hungary,  army  and  navy,  i,  76 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  97 

— financial  system  of.  ii.  1 

— history  and  constitution  of,  i.  96 

— see  Huelsemann  episode,  ii,  136 

— Koszta  incident,  ii,  282 

— Kossuth  episode,  ii.  282 

— as  a real  union,  iii,  154 

Autocracy,  see  States,  classification  of,  iii,  416 
Automatic  sprinklers,  ii,  20 

— building  laws  as  to,  i.  185 
Automobile  conference,  ii,  216 

— regulation,  i,  98 

— traffic,  see  Roads,  iii,  232 
Automobiles  and  cost  of  living,  i,  485 
Averages  and  statistics,  iii,  423 

Avondale  disaster,  and  mine  legislation  for  la- 
borers, ii.  442 

Ayes  and  noes,  voting  by,  iii,  633 

Babcock,  Gen.,  iii,  250 
Bachelor  apartment,  ii,  128 
Back  from  Elba,  i,  99 

Back-haul  traffic,  and  transportation,  iii.  554 
Back  pay  steal,  iii,  249 

Backward  pupils  and  school  hygiene,  iii,  269 

Bacon,  R..  cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

— - Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

Bacon’s  Rebellion,  ii.  194 

Bacteria,  in  sewerage  disposal,  iii,  301 

— see  also  Water  supply,  iii,  660 
Baden,  ii,  80 

Badger,  G.  E.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 
"Bad  man  plank,”  the,  iii,  632 
Bagot,  Sir  C.,  iii,  207 

Bahia  Honda  (coaling  station),  i,  299 
Bail,  i,  99 
— • excessive,  i,  99 

— forfeiture  of,  ii,  39 

Bailey  vs.  Alabama  (Thirteenth  Amendment),  iii, 
536 

(peonage),  ii.  671 

Baker’s  Island,  annexed,  i,  46,  99,  153 
Bakunin,  and  nihilism,  ii,  548 
Balance  of  power,  i,  99  ; ii,  208,  234 

— and  nullification  controversy,  ii,  567 
Balance  of  trade,  i.  100 

— and  mercantilism,  ii,  418 

— theory  of,  i.  626 

Baldwin,  Abraham,  and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 

— Henry,  iii,  462 

— Robert  (Canadian),  iii,  207 

Baldwin  vs.  Smith  (abatement  of  nuisances),  ii, 
564 

Balkan  states,  and  near  east,  diplomatic  relations 
with,  ii,  507 

Ballinger,  Richard  A.,  ii,  199 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

— biography  of,  i,  100 
Balloons,  i.  13 
Ballot.  1,  100 

— -Act  of  1872,  and  nominations  in  Great  Brit- 
ain, ii,  552 

— Australian,  i,  101 

— box  stuffing.  105 

— see  Cut  ticket,  i,  537 

— in  election  system,  1,  652 

— legislation  and  legislative  problems  in  cities, 

ii.  327 

— and  nomination  papers,  ii,  552 

— and  party  circle,  ii.  622 

— and  party  labels,  ii.  629 

— see  Pasters,  ii,  650 

— - and  primary,  direct,  iii.  55 

— reform  and  primary,  direct,  iii,  55 
— - short,  i,  104 

and  offices,  multiplicity  of.  ii,  573 

and  public  opinion,  iii,  103 

Ballotage,  and  narty  system  in  Europe,  ii,  648 
Baltimore,  i.  105 

— budget  of,  i,  183 

B.  & O.  R.  R.  vs.  First  Nat.  Bk.  of  Alexandria, 

iii,  591 

— vs.  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  (inter- 

state commerce),  ii.  221 

— vs.  United  States  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  221 
Bancroft,  G„  cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 


711 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Bancroft,  G.,  in  diplomatic  relations  with  Ger- 
many, ii,  79 

— see  Treaties  of  United  States,  iii,  508 
Bank,  central,  100 

— circulation  and  bonds  deposited,  ii,  10 

— commissions  and  commissioners,  i,  108 

— deposits,  i,  108 
guaranty  of,  i,  109 

— guarantee  law,  in  Kansas,  ii.  275 

— the  immigrant,  ii,  145 

- — of  North  America,  i,  109 

— taxes,  i,  110 

— of  the  United  States  and  Democratic  party,  i,  565 
First,  i,  110 

Second,  i,  110 

Second,  see  Bonus  Bill,  i.  142 

Banking  branch,  i.  111 

— commissions,  powers  of,  i,  353 

— laws,  see  Constitution  making  in  United  States, 

i,  407 

— corporations,  constitutional  limitations  as  to, 

i,  442 

— and  crises,  economic,  i,  528 

— institutions  and  their  capital,  ii,  13 

— methods,  i.  111 

— public  regulation  of,  i,  113 

— system,  defects  of  American,  i,  107 
Banknotes,  and  paper  money  in  the  United  States, 

ii,  005,  GOO 

— taxes  on,  as  indirect  taxation,  ii,  9 
Bankruptcy  and  commercial  failures,  i,  114 

— concurrent  powers  as  to,  i,  309 

— constitutional  provisions  affecting,  i,  115 

— and  impairment  of  contract,  i.  458 

— and  international  law  private,  ii,  212 

— referee,  iii,  170 

Banks  and  Banking  acts,  national,  i,  115 
- — state,  i,  117 

Banks,  capitalization  of,  i,  226 

— cooperative  loan,  i,  119 

— examination  of.  i,  119 

— ■ government,  restrictions  as  to,  i,  190 

— national,  ii,  13 

— number  of,  in  United  States,  ii,  12 

— private,  i,  119 

— savings,  i,  120 

— state,  i,  114 

— see  Taxation,  subject  of,  iii,  506 

— see  Trust  companies,  iii.  575 

— of  the  United  States,  see  Treasury  department, 

iii,  503 

— wild-cat,  i,  121 
Banks,  N.  P.,  i,  119 

and  Republican  party,  iii,  189 

— — -speaker,  i.  391;  iii.  370 

vote  for,  iii,  31 

Bannon  vs.  United  States  (felony),  i,  728 
Bar  and  bottle  bill,  liquor  licenses,  ii,  359 
Barbary  Powers,  diplomatic  relations  with,  1,  13, 
121 

Barbour,  James,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii.  048 
Barbour,  P.  P.,  iii,  402 

as  speaker,  i.  389 

Barclay,  Thomas,  i.  13.  121 
Bargain,  political,  ii.  710 
Barge  canal  commission,  i,  075 

Barker,  Wharton,  and  Populist  party,  ii,  758 

— vote  for,  iii.  41 
Barlow,  Joel,  i,  13 

— and  Scioto  Co.,  iii,  273 
Barnard.  H..  i,  035 
Barnburners,  i,  122 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  507 

Barnes,  William,  and  middle  states,  ii,  428 
Bar'l,  i,  122 
Barrel,  pork,  ii,  758 
Barre,  and  Stamp  Act.  iii.  375 
Barron  vs.  Mayor  of  Baltimore  (constitutional 
amendment),  i,  419 
Barry,  W.  T , cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— Postmaster  General,  ii,  767 
Bartlett,  Josiah.  i.  554 

Bartram  vs'.  Robertson  (revenue  bills),  iii.  211 
Bass.  Robert  P..  and  New  Hampshire,  ii,  529 
Basse,  governor,  ii,  194 
Bastable,  quoted  on  debt,  public,  i,  550 

— quoted  on  stamp  taxes,  iii,  375 

— quoted  on  taxes,  direct,  iii,  507 
Batavian  Republic,  see  Netherlands,  ii.  519 
Bates,  Edward,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i.  197 
Bathing  in  schools,  iii.  209 

Baths,  and  municipal  trading,  ii,  488 

— public,  i,  122 

Battersea  Park,  and  parks  and  boulevards,  ii.  610 
Battlefields,  and  military  reservations,  ii,  438 
Battleships  and  naval  vessels,  ii,  500 
Bau-I’olizie,  ii,  700 


Bavaria,  ii,  80 

— treaty  with,  ii,  79 

Baxter,  Richard,  on  slavery,  iii.  317 

Bayard,  James  A.,  and  Treaty  of  Ghent,  ii,  82 

— Thomas  Francis,  biography,  i,  123 
cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

Bayard  vs.  Singleton  (unconstitutionality),  i,  509 
Bayonne  Decree,  i,  453 
Bays,  closed,  i,  150 

— jurisdiction  over,  ii,  264 
“Bear,”  i,  079 

Bear  Flag  in  California,  i,  203 

— — Republic,  i,  123 
Beaconsfield.  and  boss  system,  i,  145 
- — - quoted  on  jingoes,  ii,  252 

Beauregard,  P.  G.  T.,  as  Confederate  general,  i, 
373 

Bedford  prison  for  women,  iii,  64 

Beccaria,  ii,  730 

Beckham,  J.  C.  W„  ii,  279 

Bee,  presidential,  iii,  7 

Beef  trust  case,  immunity  bath  in.  ii,  148 

Beggars,  i,  123 

Belgian  blocks,  ii,  055 

Belgium,  party  system  in  Europe,  ii,  646 

— plural  voting,  legislative  system  in  Europe,  ii, 

340 

— proportional  representation  in,  iii,  81 

— suffrage  in,  iii,  457 
Belize,  colony  of,  i,  215 

Belknap,  W.  W.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— impeachment  of,  ii.  149 
— ■ Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 
Bell,  John,  i,  431 

— speaker,  i,  390 

— vote  for,  iii,  29 

— cabinet  officer.  1,  196 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii.  649 
Bellamy,  and  X Y Z.  iii.  703 
Bel!  Telephone  Co.,  iii.  512 
Belligerency,  i.  123 : iii.  645, 

— of  the  Confederate  States  of  America,  i,  124, 

371 

Benefactions,  sec  Gifts  for  public  purposes,  ii,  84 
Benezet,  and  slavery,  iii.  317 
Benicia,  capital  of  California,  i,  204 
Benjamin,  Judah  I'.,  biography,  i,  124 

— as  Confederate  cabinet  officer,  i.  372 
Bennet  law  (white  slave),  iii,  327 
Bennett  law  (schools),  i.  124,  633 
Bentham,  Jeremy,  political  theories  of.  Ii.  726 
Bentley,  Charles  E.,  and  Prohibition  party,  iii,  78 

— vote  for,  iii.  39 

— and  National  party,  ii.  493 
Benton,  Thomas  II..  biography,  i,  125 

— and  demos  krateo  principle,  i,  581 

— as  Old  Bullion,  ii,  579 

Benton's  Abridgement  of  Debates,  i.  395 
Bentzon  rs.  Boyle  (international  law),  ii,  214 
Benzoate  of  soda,  in  food,  iii,  ISO 
Berger,  Victor  L..  iii,  339 
Bering,  Vitus,  i,  24 

Bering  Sea  and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i, 
153 

— arbitration  of  1893,  ii,  396 
— - controversy,  i,  125 

— see  also  Seal  fisheries,  iii.  274 

Berkeley,  governor,  and  Bacon's  Rebellion,  ii,  194 
— -and  New  Jersey,  ii,  530 

— University  of,  i,  205 

Berlin  African  Conference,  i,  381 
— -Conference  of  1884-85  (navigation  of  inter- 
national rivers),  ii.  502 

(protectorates),  iii.  83 

and  open  door,  ii.  582 

— decree  (1806),  i,  125,  453 

orders  in  council,  ii,  584 

Napoleon’s,  and  paper  blockade,  ii.  605 

— Treaty  of,  and  prime  minister,  iii,  56 

Berne,  conference  on  well  being  of  the  working 
classes,  ii,  203 

— of,  on  postal  union,  ii.  203 
Bernard,  Gov.,  on  charters,  iii,  219 
Berrien,  John  M.,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i.  196 

Bertillon  system  of  measurement,  i.  125 
Bertram  et  al.  vs.  Robertson  (treaties),  iii,  571 
Betterment,  assessments  for,  i,  126 

— taxes,  i,  89 

Bibb,  G.  M.,  cahinet  officer,  i,  196 

— Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii.  566 
Bible  in  the  schools,  iii.  176 

— see  Wisconsin,  iii,  691 
Bicameral  system,  i.  126 

- — legislative  system  in  Europe,  ii.  340 
Bickley.  Dr.  George  L.,  see  Knights  of  the  Golden 
Circle,  ii.  281 

Biddle’s  (Nicholas)  United  States  Bank,  ii,  547 


712 


INDEX 


Bidwell,  John,  and  Prohibition  party,  lii,  78 

— vote  for,  iii.  38 

Biennial  sessions,  see  Constitution  making  in 
United  States,  i,  407 

— of  legislature,  iii.  299 
Big  stick,  i,  126 
Biglow  Papers,  ii.  379 

Bill  board  advertisements,  public  regulation  of, 
i,  126 

Bill.  Congress,  Acts  of,  1.  5 

— drafting,  legislative  reference  bureau,  ii.  338 
agencies,  reference  bureau  and,  ii,  342 

— of  lading,  i,  126 

— of  lading  Act,  iii,  590 
tax  on,  iii,  501 

— and  order  of  business  in  legislative  bodies,  ii, 

584 

— of  Rights,  i,  128,  442  : ii,  315 

civil  rights  in,  i,  282 

in  constitutions,  i.  432 

(1680),  i.  404 

(English)  on  free  speech,  iii,  66 

right  to  bear  arms,  i,  78 

Bills  of  attainder,  ii,  17 

— course  of,  i.  127 

— credit,  i.  127 

— — in  Craig  vs.  Missouri,  i.  517 
of  Kentucky  Bank,  i,  173 

and  paper  money  in  the  United  States,  ii, 

605 

— private,  iii.  64 

for  claims  against  states,  i,  291 

— titles  of.  i,  130 
Bimetallism,  i,  131 

— coinage  and.  i.  311 

— in  coinage  and  specie  currency  of  United  States, 

i,  309 

— and  monometallism,  ii.  463 

— see  Silver  coinage  controversy,  iii,  311 
Binns  rs.  United  States  (Alaska),  iii,  526 
Biological  Survey,  i.  18 

— Bureau  of,  i.  132 

Biology,  and  political  science,  ii.  715 
Bipartisan  boards,  i,  137 
— - municipal,  i.  132 

— police,  ii,  702 

Biparty  system,  legislative  system  In  Europe,  ii, 
339 

Bird  Reservations  of  Hawaiian  Islands,  i.  153 
Birds,  migratory.  Biological  Survey  and,  i,  18 
Birney,  James  G„  i,  133 

— vote  for,  iii,  24.  25 

Births,  in  vital  statistics,  iii,  624 
Bismarck,  iii.  360 

— and  German  suffrage,  i.  562 

Bissell.  Wilson  S„  Postmaster  General,  ii,  767 

— cabinet  officer,  i.  197 
Bitulithic  pavements,  ii,  656 
Black  belt,  i,  133 

— and  sectionalism  in  United  States,  iii,  283 

— cockade,  i.  133 

— code,  ii,  140.  515 

— division,  and  nihilism,  ii.  548 

— Horse  Cavalry,  i,  133,  478 

— Jack,  i.  133 

Black,  James,  and  Prohibition  party,  ii,  32,  77 

— Jeremiah  S..  i.  95 

cabinet  officer,  i.  196 

Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

Black  Hawk  War.  iii.  652 

— and  Tan  Republicans,  i,  133 
and  Lily  Whites,  ii.  354 

and  party  organization  in  the  South,  ii, 

639 

— Republicans,  i.  133;  iii.  190 

— S.  W„  and  Nebraska,  ii.  508 

— Warrior,  case  of  (Cuba),  i.  533;  iii,  367 
Blackamoors,  in  England,  iii,  316 
Blacklisting,  i,  133 

— in  interstate  commerce  legislation,  ii,  229 
Blackmail,  bribery  and.  i.  171 
Blackstone.  on  common  law,  ii,  314 

— on  sovereignty,  iii.  363 

P.land-Allison  Silver  Purchase  Act.  i.  32,  134 

— and  coinage  of  United  States,  i.  310 

— and  monetary  conferences,  international,  ii,  460 
Blanket  ballot,  i,  101 

Blaine.  James  G.,  biography  of,  i,  134 

— cabinet  officer,  i.  197 

— and  canal  diplomacy,  i,  216 

— magnetic  statesman,  ii.  386 

— and  Mulligan  letters,  ii,  474 

— as  the  Plumed  Knight,  ii,  698 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  197 

— see  ‘‘Rum,  romanism.  and  rebellion,”  iii,  241 

— and  seal  fisheries,  iii.  274 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii  402 

— as  speaker,  i.  391  ; iii,  370 

— as  Tattooed  man,  iii,  489 


Blaine,  James  G.,  vote  for,  iii,  13,  36 
Blaine-Bond  treaty  of  1890,  i,  177 
Blair.  F.  I\,  and  Hampton  Roads  Conference,  ii, 
109 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  570 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  191 

— vote  for.  iii,  31 

— John,  iii,  462 

— Montgomery,  i,  134.  197 ; ii,  767 
Blasphemous  matter,  ii,  57 
Blatehford.  Samuel,  iii,  462 
Blends,  see  Pure  food,  iii.  122 
Blifil  and  Black  George,  i,  134 
Blind,  education  of  the.  i,  639 

— institutions  for,  i,  542 

— public  care  of,  i,  557 

Bliss.  Cornelius  N..  i,  198  : ii.  199 
Bloch,  Jean  de,  and  militarism,  ii,  431 
Block  signal  systems,  i,  3 

— signal  and  train  control  board,  i,  3;  ii,  223 
Blocks  of  five,  i,  136 

Blockade,  i.  134 

— in  Civil  War.  i.  288 

— continuous  voyages  and,  i,  454 

— and  Declaration  of  Paris,  i,  556 

— pacific,  ii.  596 

— paper,  ii,  605 

— and  prize  cases,  lii.  70 

— proclamation,  i,  135 

— runners,  i,  136 

— see  War,  carrying  on,  iii,  639 
Blood,  corruption  of,  i,  478 
Bloody  shirt,  i.  136 

Bloody  Bill  (1833).  i.  136 
Bloomer  vs.  Todd  (woman  suffrage),  iii.  697 
Bloomfield  vs.  Charter  Oak  Bank  (local  govern- 
ment). ii.  364 
Blount.  James  H„  ii,  114 

— William,  impeachment  of,  ii,  149  ; iii,  290 

iii.  529 

Blue  laws,  see  Sunday  legislation,  iii,  459 
— ■ — of  Connecticut,  i,  136 

— Light  Federalists,  i,  136 

— lodges,  i,  136 

— Sky  Law,  i.  136  ; ii.  276 
Bluejackets,  i.  137 

Bluntsc^tli  quoted  on  international  law,  ii,  205 

— and  ochlocracy,  ii,  569 

— - political  theories  of.  ii.  731 

— see  State,  theory  of.  iii.  406 

Board  of  affairs,  and  purchase  of  supplies,  iii,  121 

— of  auditors,  iii,  546 

— and  commission,  and  executive,  i,  683 

— of  control,  iii.  575 

— — of  state  purchases,  ii,  183 
state,  i.  138.  368 

— - — see  also  State  executive,  iii.  383 
— - of  education.  New  York  City,  ii,  544 

— of  equalization,  iii,  509 

— of  Estimate,  1.  139 

and  apportionment,  i,  144 

New  York  City.  ii.  543 

— - of  freeholders.  I,  275 

— guardians,  poor  house,  ii,  734 

— municipal,  i,  137 

— of  Public  Works,  i,  139 

— — state,  iii,  381 

— of  Regents,  iii,  575 
New  York,  ii.  539 

— of  Review,  i,  139 

— State  Executive,  i,  140 

— system,  i,  187 

in  development  of  municipal  government,  ii, 

481 

— of  tax  commissioners,  i,  139 

— Trade,  i,  137,  139,  334.  689 

— Trustees,  chairman  of  (villages),  iii,  47 

— Visitors,  iii,  575 
"Bobbies.”  ii,  701 
Bodin,  Jean,  ii,  729 

— on  sovereignty,  iii.  363,  418 

Boilers,  accidents,  railroad  and  steamship,  i.  4 

— safe,  and  transportation,  regulation  of,  iii,  557 
Boise  River  (irrigation),  ii.  243 

Boistel,  jurisprudence,  ii,  266 
Boiag.  or  Gothenburg  system,  ii,  87 
Bolingbroke.  Viscount,  political  theories  of,  ii,  726 
Bolivia,  i,  141 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  356 

Bolin  rs.  Nebraska  (admission  of  states),  iii.  415 

— (United  States  as  federal  state),  iii,  597 
Bollman,  Ex  parte  (treason j,  iii,  559 

Biloxi,  old,  and  Mississippi,  ii,  452 
Bolters,  i,  141 
Bombs,  i.  700 

Bonaparte.  Charles  J.,  Attorney-General,  i,  95, 
198  ; ii.  506 

biography,  i.  141 

Bonaparte-Wyse  concession,  ii,  60 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Bonded  goods,  iii,  054 

— system  and  revenue,  internal,  iii,  213 

— warehouses,  i,  141 

and  free  ports,  ii,  51 

Bonding  of  public  officers,  i,  142 
Bonds,  i,  142 

— of  cities,  i,  548 
— - coupon,  i,  142 

— outstanding,  United  States,  ii,  16 

— in  public  debt,  i,  545 

— registered,  i,  142 

— and  stocks,  iii,  431 

— ■ — of  railroads,  iii,  135 

— see  also  Revenue,  surplus,  iii,  217 

— see  under  Treasury,  iii,  505 
Bonus  bill,  i,  142  ; ii,  202 
Boodle,  i,  143 

Book  of  estimates,  i.  59 

Bookkeeping  and  Warrants,  Division  of.  i,  143 
Boone,  Daniel,  see  Kentucky,  ii,  277 
Booth,  John  Wilkes,  ii,  355 
Border  Ruffians,  i.  143 
Law  and  Older  party,  ii,  312 

— states,  i.  143 

and  Confederate  States,  i,  371 

Borie.  Adolph  E.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  : ii,  506 
Borneo,  and  Pacific  islands,  diplomatic  relations 
with,  ii,  596 
Borough,  i,  143 

— Council  in  England,  i.  143 

— English  and  American  municipal  government, 

ii.  479 

— local  government  in  England,  ii,  365 

— president,  i,  144 

New  York  City,  ii,  543 

— see  Villages,  iii,  616 
Borrow,  federal  power  to.  ii,  9 

Borrowing  money,  constitutional  sense,  i,  144 

Bosnia,  under  Austria,  i,  97 

Boss,  and  boss  system  of  party  rule,  i,  145 

— influence,  in  government,  ii.  178 

— and  machine  political,  ii,  384 

— see  also  Political  ring,  iii.  228 

— state,  i,  208 

— system,  and  party  organization  in  Pennsylvania, 

ii.  636 

— see  Tammany,  iii,  469 
Bossuet,  ii.  730 

— quoted  on  divine  right  of  kings,  i,  605 

— theory  of,  on  state,  iii,  408 
Boston,  i.  147 

— city  council  of,  prior  to  1909,  i,  348 

— Corner,  i.  161 

— county  and  city  government,  concurrent  in,  i, 

488 

— dock  commission,  ii,  110 

— Massacre,  i.  149  ; iii,  228 

and  causes  of  American  Revolution,  iii.  220 

— Metropolitan  Improvement  Commission,  i,  279 

— navy  yard.  ii.  507 

— special  legislation  for,  i,  275 

— Tea  Party,  i.  149 

• and  causes  of  American  Revolution,  iii,  220 

Botts  John  M . i.  374 
Boule.  in  Greece,  ii,  735 
Boulevards,  i,  149 

— parks  and.  ii.  610 

Boundaries  of  the  United  States,  exterior,  i,  150 
interior,  i.  159 

— maps,  i,  160  et  seq. 

maps  of.  i,  150  et  seq. 

Boundary  claims,  iii.  416 

— disputes,  annexations  and.  i,  42 

— rivers,  in  international  law,  ii,  209 
Bounties,  i.  166 

— under  Acts  of  Trade,  i.  5 

— and  allowances  to  fishermen,  ii,  24 

— federal  and  state,  i.  167 

— land  grants,  ii.  305 

- — and  public  lands,  iii.  94 

— to  soldiers  and  sailors,  i,  168 
Bounty  .lumping,  i.  169 

— system,  and  political  science,  ii,  714 
Bourbons,  i.  169 

Bourinot.  Sir  G . quoted  on  privy  council,  iii,  206 
Bout  well.  George  S.,  cabinet  officer,  i.  197  ; iii,  566 

— and  Republican  party,  iii.  189 

Bovay.  A.  E..  and  Republican  party,  iii,  190 
Bowdoin,  James,  and  Massachusetts,  ii.  407 
Bowles.  Samuel,  and  Liberal  Republican  party, 
ii.  344 

Bowman  Act,  i.  12.  169 

Bowman  vs.  Chicago  (original  package!,  ii,  593 
Bowman  vs.  Chicago  and  Northwestern  R.  R.  Co. 

(interstate  commerce),  ii.  220 
Boy  scouts,  and  militarism,  ii,  432 
Boys’  reform,  i,  170 
Boycott,  i,  169 

— and  anti  trust  law,  iii,  304 


Boycott,  sec  also  Strikes,  iii,  437 
Boyd,  L.,  speaker,  i,  390 

Boyd  vs.  Nebraska  (law  of  naturalization),  ii. 
498 

Boyd  vs.  Thayer  (admission  of  states),  iii,  415 
Boyer,  Ex  parte  (maritime  law),  i,  12 
Boyle,  John.  Secretary  of  Navy,  ii.  500 
Boynton,  John,  iii,  260 
Boxer  rising,  i,  169,  262  ; ii,  234 
Braddock’s  road,  i,  535 
Bradford,  William,  i,  95.  170 
— - cabinet  officer,  i,  195 
Bradlaugb,  Charles,  i,  704 
Bradley,  J.  P.,  iii,  462 
Bragg,  Walter  L.,  ii,  225 
Braille  printing,  for  blind,  i,  640 
Bramlette,  vote  for,  iii,  31 
Branch,  John,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  : ii,  506 
Brandeis,  L.  D.,  and  savings  bank  insurance,  iii, 
253 

Brass  vs.  Stoeser  (prices  and  rates),  iii,  49 
Brave,  Tammany,  i,  170 

Braxton.  Carter,  and  Declaration  of  Independence, 
i,  554 

Brazil,  i,  170 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  356 

— on  equality  of  states,  iii,  419 

Brazilian  monarchy,  and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  466 

— republic,  and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii.  467 
Brearly,  David,  and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 
Breckonridge,  John  C..  i,  95.  195 

— as  Confederate  cabinet  officer,  i,  372 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  568 

— Vice-President,  iii.  616 

— vote  for,  iii,  28,  29 
Bremen,  ii,  80 

Brent,  Daniel.  Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 
Brewer,  David  J.,  iii,  462 

— quoted  on  police  power  over  morals,  iii,  100 
Brewster.  Benjamin  H..  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
Brewster  vs.  Schrader,  iii,  591 
Bribery,  i,  170 

— and  corrupt  practices  act,  i,  481 

— and  impeachment,  ii,  150 

— in  legislative  bodies,  i,  171 

— legislature  and  legislative  reform,  ii,  343 

— and  party  expenditures,  publicity  of,  ii,  623 
Bridewells,  ii,  134 

Bridges,  public,  i,  172 

— and  interstate  commerce,  ii,  219 

— see  also  Rivers,  iii,  230 

— see  also  War,  department  of,  iii.  641 
Brigands,  in  Turkey,  ii.  50S 

Briggs  vs.  LTnited  States  (war),  iii.  646 
Bright,  Senator,  expulsion  of,  iii,  290 
Brimmer  vs.  Rebman  (interstate  commerce),  ii, 
220 

Briscoe  vs.  Bank  of  Kentucky  (bills  of  credit), 
i,  173 

Bristow,  B.  FT.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  : iii,  566 
British  colonial  empire,  modern,  i,  322 

— constitution,  i,  403 

— Columbia,  i,  173 
formation  of,  i.  213 

Canadian  province  of,  i,  214 

— Guiana,  ii,  104  : iii.  356 

and  Venezuela  boundary  dispute,  and  Mon- 
roe Doctrine,  ii.  467 

— navigation  acts,  and  countervailing  legislation, 

i.  487 

— • North  America,  diplomatic  relations  with.  i.  174 

— North  American  Act,  and  parliament,  Canadian, 

ii.  615 

of  1867,  i.  212  : iii.  206 

— political  system,  crown  in,  i.  530 

— railroad  organization,  iii,  137 
— • system  of  legislation,  ii.  330 

— territorial  waters  jurisdiction  act,  ii,  122 

— town  planning  act.  i,  278 
Broadgaugers.  in  Prohibition  party,  iii,  7S 
Brokers'  offices,  open,  iii.  431 
Bromberg.  Frederick  G . iii.  589 
Bronson  vs.  Rodes  (legal  tender),  ii,  322 
Bronx,  and  New  York  City,  ii.  540 

Brook  Farm  Community,  i.  365 
Brooklyn,  i,  177 

— and  New  York  City,  ii.  540 

— plan  of  concentrating  administrative  power,  and 

New  York  City,  ii,  542 

— Rapid  Transit  Co.,  iii.  442 

Brooks,  Vice-President  candidate,  iii.  37 

— Islands,  and  Midway  Islands,  ii,  430 
Brophy  Grocery  Co.  vs.  Wilson  (uniform  legisla- 
tion). iii,  591 

Brother  Jonathan,  i,  178 
Brotherhoods,  railroad,  iii.  137 
Brough,  John,  war  governor,  iii,  641.  644 
Brown,  Aaron  V..  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; ii,  767 

714 


IXDEX 


Brown,  B.  Gratz,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  571 

and  Liberty  Republican  party,  ii,  344 

vote  for,  iii,  31,  32 

— College,  iii,  410 

— Elmer  E.,  i.  635 

— Henry  B..  iii.  462 

— John,  biography,  i,  178 
and  state  treason,  ii,  196 

Brown  vs.  Houston  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  221 

— Maryland  (police  power),  ii,  706 
(interstate  commerce),  ii.  219 

— Turner  (employees),  i,  667 

— Walker  (investigations,  legislative),  ii,  237 
Brown's  raid  at  Harper's  Ferry,  ii,  195 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  192 

— and  secession  controversy,  iii,  277 
Browning,  Orville  H„  i.  95  ; ii,  199 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

Brownlow,  William  G..  ii,  149  ; iii,  515 
Brunswick,  ii,  80 

Brussels  Conference  of  1890,  i.  14 
Bryan.  William  J„  biography  of,  i,  178 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

— as  a candidate,  i,  224 

— and  Democratic  party,  i.  574 

— in  political  convention,  i,  465 

— and  Populist  party,  ii,  757 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— and  Silver  party,  iii,  312 

— and  silver  coinage  controversy,  iii,  311 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  39.  41,  44 

— see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics,  iii, 

673 

Bryce.  James,  biography,  i.  178 

— quoted  on  constitution  making,  i,  405 

— and  House  of  Representatives,  iii,  187 

— and  newspapers,  iii.  102 

— quoted  on  reasons  for  inferiority  of  state  leg- 

islatures. ii.  343 
Bubble  act,  ii.  305 
Bubonic  plague,  ii.  118 

— in  Philippine  Islands,  ii.  683 

— Biological  Survey  and,  i.  18 

— and  public  health,  ii.  120 
Buchanan.  James,  biography  of,  i,  179 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— and  his  cabinet,  i.  200 

— and  Democratic  party,  i.  568 

- — as  “Old  Public  Functionary.”  i.  179 

— and  secession  controversy,  iii,  278 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— vote  for,  iii.  13.  28 

— see  also  War  Democrats,  iii,  640 

Bucher,  Jonathan,  political  theories  of,  ii,  719 

Buck  and  Breck.  i,  179 

Bucket  shops,  iii.  430 

Bucktails,  i.  179 

Buckshot  War.  i.  179 

Buckner,  Simon  B.,  vice-presidential  candidate, 
iii.  40 

Bucks  Stove  and  Range  Case,  ii,  88 

— see  Gompers,  Samuel,  ii,  85 

Budget  in  congressional  government,  i,  394 

— federal,  i.  181 

— in  House  of  Representatives,  ii.  132 

— legislative  system  in  Europe,  ii,  339 

— necessity  for.  ii,  9 

— and  public  accounts,  iii.  89 

— see  also  Revenue,  surplus,  iii.  217 

— Senate  committee  on  public  expenditures,  i,  387 

— state  and  local,  i.  182 

— see  also  State  governments,  characteristics  of. 

iii,  388 

— system.  European,  i.  179 

Buenos  Aires,  Pan  American  conference  at  (1910), 
ii.  203 

Buffer  state,  i.  184 
Building  associations,  i.  184 

— codes,  and  municipal  housing,  ii,  486 

— laws,  i.  185 

— lines,  in  city  planning,  i,  280 

— regulations,  fire  limits  in.  ii,  18 

— regulations,  and  municipal  government,  func- 

tions of.  ii.  476 

— stone,  in  resources  of  North  America,  iii,  204 
Buildings,  public,  iii.  106 

Rulbs,  distribution  of.  iii.  286 
Bulgaria,  as  a dependency,  iii,  527 

— see  Suzerainty,  iii,  463 
Bull  Moose,  i.  186 

Bull  on  the  market,  i.  679 
Bullion,  i,  186 

— report,  i.  187 

— value,  ratio  of  silver  to  gold,  ii,  13 
Bullitt  bill,  Philadelphia,  ii.  676 
Buncombe,  speaking  for.  i.  187 
Bundesgericht.  in  Switzerland,  iii.  465 
Bundespresident.  in  Switzerland,  iii,  465 
Bundesrat,  in  Switzerland,  iii,  465 

143 


Bundesrath,  German,  i,  433  : ii,  80 

— in  German  federal  organization,  ii.  81 

— in  legislative  system  in  Europe,  ii,  340 
Bundesstaat.  i,  187  ; iii,  375 
Bundestag,  ii,  110 

Bunker  Hill,  and  Declaration  of  Independence, 

i.  554 

Bunn  vs.  People  (public  officers),  iii,  101 
Bunyan,  and  muck-raking,  ii,  473 
Burchard.  Rev.  S.  D..  see  “Rum,  Romanism  and 
rebellion,”  iii,  241 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  573 

Bureau  of  Foreign  and  Domestic  Commerce,  Manu- 
factures, Bureau  of.  ii.  393 

— Refugees,  Freedmen  and  Abandoned  lands,  ii,  57 

— research  in  municipal  government  at  Harvard 

University,  ii,  488 
Bureaucracy,  i.  187 
Bureaus  in  French  Assembly,  i,  360 

— legislative  system  in  Europe,  ii,  341 
Biirgermeister,  Austrian,  and  mayor  in  European 

cities,  ii,  416 

— Germany,  and  mayor  in  European  cities,  ii.  415 
and  municipal  government  in  continental  Eu- 
rope, ii.  479 

Burghs,  convention  of,  and  mediaeval  city  leagues, 

ii.  417 

Burgomaster  of  German  cities,  ii.  412 
Burgess.  John  W..  political  theories  of.  ii,  721 

— quoted  on  double  citizenship,  i,  608 
Burgess,  of  a borough,  i,  143 

Burke.  Edmund,  quoted  on  compromise,  i,  366 

— political  theories  of,  ii,  726 

— Reflections,  ii,  719 

— theory  of  representation,  iii.  184 

Burke,  representative,  and  Indian  policy  of  the 
United  States,  ii,  164 

Burleson,  Albert  S.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  19S ; ii, 
767 

Burley  tobacco  association,  and  night  riders,  ii, 
547 

Burlinghame,  Anson,  in  Chinese  diplomacy,  i,  261 

— Treaty,  i,  264 

Burlington  and  Missouri  and  Pacific  Railroads, 
ii,  596 

Burnet,  and  party  government  in  Great  Britain, 

ii.  628 

Burr,  Aaron,  biography  of,  i,  187 

— case,  and  treason,  ii,  196 

— conspiracy,  i,  188 

— see  Twelfth  Amendment,  iii,  583 

— election  of.  as  Vice-President,  iii.  11,  616 

— insurrection,  proclamation  against,  ii,  197 
— - in  revolution  of  1800,  i,  579 

— and  spoils  system,  iii,  372 

— vote  for.  iii.  13,  15,  16 
Burrites.  i.  188 

Burt,  Francis,  and  Nebraska,  ii,  508 
Burton  vs.  United  States  (officials),  ii.  573 
Rushnell.  Horace,  on  patronage,  ii,  654 
Bushwhacker,  i,  188 

Business,  control  of.  and  the  police  power,  ii,  708 
— - exchanges,  i,  678 

— government  restriction  of.  i,  189 

— - licenses  in  state  systems  of  finance,  li,  5 

— manager,  state,  i.  684 

— men's  associations,  i,  334 

— ■ order  of,  in  legislative  bodies,  iii.  239 

— scientific  management  of.  iii.  273 

— statistics,  accounting  and.  iii.  422 

Butler.  Benjamin  F.,  Anti-monopoly  Convention, 
i.  50 

— biography  of.  i,  191 

— cabinet  officer,  i.  95.  196 

— and  contraband  negroes,  i.  455 
— -and  Democratic  party,  i,  573 

— and  Greenback  partv.  ii.  101 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 

— vote  for.  iii.  36 

Butler,  Nicholas  M.,  vice-presidential  candidate, 

iii,  46 

Butler.  William  O.,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  567 

— vote  for,  iii.  26 

Butler  vs.  Goreley  (bankruptcy),  i.  115 
Butt.  Isaac,  and  nationalists,  ii.  494 
Butter.  Department  of  Agriculture,  i.  18 
Butternuts,  i,  51,  191 
By-election,  i,  191 
By-laws,  i,  191 

— in  societies,  legal  status  of,  iii.  340 
Byllynge,  Edward,  and  New  Jersev.  ii,  530 
Bynkershoek.  Kornelis  van,  ii.  208 

— quoted  on  high  seas,  ii,  122 

— quoted  on  jurisdiction  over  waters,  ii,  263 

— quoted  on  principles  of  neutrality,  ii,  521 

— quoted  on  three-mile  limit,  iii,  536 

Cab  drivers,  license  taxes  on  occupations,  ii,  351 
Cabinet  and  constitutions,  i,  432 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Cabinet  custom  as  to  resignation,  iii,  517 

— and  executive  departments,  i,  086 

— government,  i,  192 

— government  in  England,  i,  193 

and  party  government,  comparative,  ii,  627 

see  also  Responsible  government  in  Canada, 

iii,  206 

— leadership,  i,  145 

— members,  i,  195 

— of  the  President,  i,  198 

— and  President's  administrative  powers,  iii,  3 

— rank,  and  party  organization  in  legislative 

bodies,  ii,  632 

- — and  royal  prerogative,  ii,  773 

— system  in  city  government,  i,  202 

see  also  State  executive,  iii,  384 

Cable  cars,  iii,  149 

Cables,  submarine,  regulation  of,  iii.  439 
Cabot,  George,  i,  202 

Cadastral  system  of  assessment  of  taxes,  i.  87 
Cadillac,  and  Michigan,  ii,  425 
Calder  vs.  P>ull  (ex  post  faclo  law),  i,  700 
Caldwell,  Ex  parte  (investigations,  legislative), 

ii,  237 

Caledonian  Bay.  Panama,  i,  215 
Calendar,  iii,  253 

— House  and  union,  i,  356 

— of  legislative  bodies,  i,  202 

— of  motions  to  discharge  committees,  i,  356 

— Wednesday,  i,  202 

-in  rules  of  Congress,  iii,  238 

Calendars  of  Congress,  iii,  237 
Calhoun,  John  C..  biography  of,  i,  202 
- — cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  565 

— President  Monroe  and,  i.  580 
- — Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 

— papers,  and  nullification  controversy,  ii,  565 

— political  theories  of,  ii,  720 

— public  office  is  a public  trust,  iii,  100 

— resignation  of,  iii,  379 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii.  648 

— on  sovereignty,  indivisibility  of,  iii,  365 

— and  state  sovereignty,  iii,  402 

— quoted  on  state  sovereignty,  iii,  403 

— territory,  acquired,  status  of,  iii,  523 

— Vice-President,  iii,  616 

— vote  for.  iii,  19,  21 

— see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics, 

iii,  670 

Calhoun,  William  J.,  ii,  225 
California,  i,  203 

— admission  of,  and  Whig  party,  iii.  683 

— for  Americans,  i,  263 

— see  Bear  Flag  Republic,  i,  123 

— See  under  Chinese  immigration,  etc. 

— constitutional  amendment  in,  i,  437 

— as  dependency  of  United  States,  i,  582 

— see  Forty-niners,  ii,  39 

— incorporation  of  territory,  ii.  154 

— and  New  Mexico,  annexation  of,  i,  206 

— vs.  Pacific  Ry.  Co.  (internal  improvements), 

ii.  202 

— party  organization  in.  ii,  631 

— University  of,  iii.  412 

— W'orkingmen’s  party  in,  ii,  296 
Cali  loans,  i.  112 

— to  order  in  legislative  debates,  i,  543 
Callender,  James  T„  ii.  149 

Callings,  licenses  for.  ii.  351 

— regulation  of  professions  and,  ii,  288 
Calvert,  George,  and  Maryland,  ii.  403 
Calvin.  John,  political  theories  of.  ii.  728 
Cambridge  agreement  of  1629,  and  Massachusetts 

Bay  colony,  ii.  410 

Camell,  vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  43 
Cameralists  and  theory  of  government,  ii,  90 
Cameron,  James  D..  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  649 

— Simon,  cabinet  officer,  i.  197 

and  middle  states,  ii,  428 

and  Republican  party,  iii.  196 

Secretary  of  War.  iii,  649 

Camillas,  see  King,  Rufus,  ii,  280 
Camp  meetings,  iii,  86 

Campaign  book,  and  legislation,  direct,  ii,  334 

— see  Voters,  canvass  of.  iii,  631 

— contributions  and  corrupt  practices  act,  i,  481 
see  Party  expenditures,  publicity  of,  ii,  623 

— political,  i.  208 

Campbell,  George  W.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  195 ; iii, 
566 

— James,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; ii,  767 

— John  A.,  iii,  462 

Campbpll  vs.  Fourth  National  Bank  (uniform  leg- 
islation), iii,  591 

— vs.  Floyd  (incorporation),  ii,  154 
Camphor,  and  monopolies,  ii,  463 
Campos,  Martinez,  iii,  368 


Camps,  ii,  767 

“Camps  of  discipline,”  and  militia,  ii,  439 
Canada,  Alberta,  i,  28 

— autonomy  of,  i,  584 

— - crops  reports  in.  i,  529 
— -diplomatic  relations,  i,  174 

— Dominion  of,  i,  210 

— and  emigration  from  United  States,  i,  664 

— see  Federal  state,  i,  719 

— Manitoba,  ii.  392 

— New  Brunswick,  ii,  524 

— and  New  France,  ii,  526 

— and  Nova  Scotia,  ii,  564 

— Prince  Edward  Island,  iii,  57 
— provinces  of,  i.  214 

— Quebec,  iii,  126 

— reciprocity  with,  i,  344;  iii,  159 
and  Insurgents  in  Congress,  ii,  193 

— responsible  government  in.  iii.  206 

— see  also  Resources  of  North  America,  iii.  205 

— as  a royal  province,  iii,  85 

— Saskatchewan,  iii,  253 

— see  States,  admission  of,  iii,  413 

— Union  Act  of  1840,  iii,  127 

— Upper  and  Lower,  i,  212  ; iii,  127 

— in  War  of  1812,  iii.  651 
Canadian  Alliance  Society,  iii,  207 

— Yukon,  iii,  704 

— colonization,  i,  322 

— northwest,  and  population  of  United  States,  ii, 

741 

— Industrial  Disputes  Investigation  Acts  of  1907, 

i,  67 

— Tacific,  and  Pacific  railroads,  ii.  597 
completion  of.  i,  213 

— provinces,  and  Ontario,  ii.  581 

— reciprocity  of  1911,  proposed,  iii,  160 
and  Republican  party,  iii.  200 

— trade  and  reciprocity  with  United  States,  i,  314 

— treaty.  1854-1866,  and  reciprocity  policy,  iii,  160 
Canal  Commission,  Isthmian,  i.  219 

— diplomacy,  see  Colombian  canal  treaty,  i,  315, 

215 

Clayton-Bulwer  treaty  in,  i,  294 

— policy,  Nicaragua,  ii.  546 

— Ring,  i,  218 

— traffic  in  United  States,  i,  333 

— zone,  i,  21 8 

public  health  in,  ii,  120 

Canals,  ii,  36 

— and  other  artificial  waterways,  i,  220 

— see  Bucktails.  i,  179 

— bounties  to,  i,  167 

— channels  and.  ii,  36 

— in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  36 

— and  municipal  trading,  ii,  488 

— neutralization  of,  ii.  522 

— public  ownership  of.  iii.  154 

— see  Public  works,  iii.  113 

— and  railroads  in  1840  (map),  iii,  142 
-I860  (map),  iii,  143 

— see  also  River  and  harbor  bills,  iii,  229 

— and  roads  in  1830  (map),  iii.  231 

— in  service  and  abandoned  (map),  i.  222 

— Ship,  and  National  Waterways  Commission,  ii, 

494 

Cancer  cure  case,  i,  613 
Candidate,  i.  224 
Canevaro  case,  ii,  107 

Canning,  George,  and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  466 

— quoted  on  neutrality,  ii,  210 
Cannon,  Joseph  G.,  biography  jof.  i,  225 

— and  Republican  party,  iii.  199 

— as  speaker,  i.  392;  iii,  370 
Cannonism.  i,  225 

Canon  law.  civil,  ii,  312 

— and  privileged  status  of  persons,  iii,  67 
Canteens,  ii.  767 

Canton,  China,  i,  260 

Canvass  in  election  system,  i,  653 

— preliminary,  ii.  772 

— of  voters,  i,  210 
Canvassers,  state  board  of,  5.  653 
Canyons  of  North  America,  ii,  690 
Cape  of  Good  Hope,  iii,  354 

Cape  Town,  iii,  354 

Capital  and  labor,  in  economics,  ii,  285 
— - and  capitalization,  i,  225 

— interest,  and  socialism,  iii,  333 

— punishment,  i,  226 

— stock  tax.  i,  475 

Capital  Traction  Co.  vs.  Hoff  (jury  trial),  ii,  270 

Capital  of  the  United  States,  i,  227 

Capitals  of  states,  i,  227 

Capitalization  of  earning  power,  iii,  428 

— of  profits,  iii,  576 

— railroad,  iii.  131 

— of  street  railroads,  iii.  149 
Capitation  tax,  ii,  732  ; iii,  505 


716 


INDEX 


Capitol  of  United  States,  iii.  90 

Capitols,  of  states,  i,  228 

Capitulations  and  extraterritoriality,  i,  706 

— Turkish,  i,  228  ; ii,  508 
Captain  of  election  district,  i,  229 
Capture,  court  of  appeals  in  cases  of,  i.  502 
— - of  private  property  at  sea,  ii,  204 

— see  War  power,  iii,  646 
Caracas,  iii,  608 

Cardoza,  and  Mississippi,  ii,  454 

Carey  act,  ii,  241 

Cargo,  see  under  Vessel,  iii,  610 

Caribbean  Sea,  American  dominion  in,  i,  216 

Carland,  John  E.,  judge  of  Commerce  Court,  i,  499 

Carieton  Club,  ii,  711 

Carleton,  Sir  Guy,  i.  212 

Carlisle,  James  G.,  biography  of,  i,  229 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 
— • as  speaker,  i,  392  ; iii,  370 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  theory  of  government,  ii,  90 

Carmack  Amendment,  i,  126 

Carnegie,  Andrew,  biography  of,  i,  229 

— gifts  for  public  purposes,  ii,  84 

— and  militarism,  ii,  433 

— and  Pan  American  congresses,  ii,  604 

— Foundation,  for  the  advancement  of  teaching, 

ii,  668  ; iii,  598 
Carolina  Colony,  i,  230 
Carolinas.  as  a royal  province,  iii,  85 
Caroline  affair,  i,  230 

— McLeod  case,  ii,  383 
Carpet  baggers,  i,  230 

— and  Republican  party,  iii.  196 
Carpets,  Brussels,  tariff  on,  iii,  483 
Carroll  of  Carrollton,  Charles,  i,  554 
Cartel,  i,  230 

Carter  bill  (post  office),  ii,  763 

— James  G.,  iii,  265 

thirteen  hour  speech  of,  iii,  290 

Carteret,  Sir  George,  and  New  Jersey,  ii,  530 

Carthage  case,  ii,  107 

Cartier,  Jacques,  i,  210 

Cary,  vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  34 

Cassation,  French  court  of,  ii.  257 

Cascade  Mountains,  ii,  690 

Cascades  of  Columbia  River,  iii,  663 

Case  law,  see  Jurisprudence,  ii,  267 

Cases  and  controversies,  distinguished,  i,  511 

— see  also  Separation  of  powers,  iii,  298 

— significance  of.  in  constitutional  law,  i,  230 
Cass.  Lewis,  i,  231 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  567 

— in  diplomatic  relations  with  France,  ii,  43 

— and  Michigan,  ii,  425 

— and  Middle  West,  ii,  430 

— and  popular  sovereignty,  ii.  738 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  26 

— see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics,  iii, 

671 

Casablanca  case,  ii,  107 
Castine,  Maine,  status  of,  iii,  523 
Casus  belli,  i,  232 
Catholic  protectory,  iii,  262 

— See  also  Roman  Catholic 
Cato,  American,  i,  34 
Catron,  John,  iii,  462 
Caucus,  congressional,  i,  233 

— in  House  of  Representatives,  ii.  131 

— legislative,  for  legislation,  i,  232 
for  nomination,  i,  233 

— local,  and  primary,  and  nominating  systems,  ii, 

549 

— see  Party,  place  and  significance  of,  ii,  642 

— party,  in  Congress  of  United  States,  i,  386 
- — and  primary,  distinguished,  iii.  49 
Caucuses,  and  political  conventions,  i,  461 
Caveat,  see  Patent,  ii,  651 

Cavite,  navy  yard,  ii,  507 
Cayenne,  ii,  104 

Cement,  in  resources  of  North  America,  iii,  204 
Cemeteries,  i,  234 

— exemption  from  taxation,  iii.  499 

— and  municipal  trading,  ii,  488 
Censor  (British),  i,  689 

Censors,  council  of.  in  Pennsylvania,  i,  425  ; ii,  663 

of  state  constitutions,  i.  441 

in  Vermont,  i,  426 

- — and  moving  pictures,  ii,  473 
Censorship,  ii,  57 

— of  amusements,  i,  40 

— National  Board  of,  i.  41 
- — and  social  reform,  iii,  330 
Census,  i.  234 
- — bureau  of  the.  i.  336 

— and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  692 


Census,  permanent,  i,  235 
— -Health  Bureau  and,  ii,  117 

— and  municipal  accounting,  ii,  183  : iii,  89,  592 

— see  Revenue,  public,  sources  of,  iii,  215 

— taxes,  classification  of.  iii,  506 

— de  facto  and  de  jure,  i,  235 

— -see  also  Foreign  elements  in  United  States, 

ii,  31 

— see  also  under  Population  of  United  States,  ii, 

739 

— see  also  Statistics,  iii,  421 

Censuses,  state,  i,  236 

Center  of  population,  ii,  741 

Centimeter-gram-second  system,  ii,  420 

Central  America,  i,  236 

— - International  Bureau,  i,  237 

— • settlement  of  boundaries  in  Mexico  and,  ii,  421 

— treaty  with  Confederation  of,  i,  341 

— American  Court  of  Justice,  i,  236 
diplomacy,  i,  236 

federation,  ii,  103 

Peace  Conference,  1907,  i,  237 

— Pacific  and  Pacific  railroads,  ii,  596 

— - — railroads,  aid  to,  iii,  145 

— plains,  ii,  689 

— standard  time,  iii.  376 
Centralization,  i,  238 

— in  administration  in  Europe,  i,  10 

— and  federal  state,  i.  720 

— growth  of,  in  United  States,  i,  238 
— • legislative,  ii,  364 

— necessity  for.  shown  in  Confederation  (1781- 

1789),  i,  378 

— and  removal  of  public  officials,  iii.  179 

— see  States,  classification  of,  iii,  416 
Century  Digest,  i,  302;  iii,  183 

Certificates  of  gold  coin,  and  paper  money  in  the 
United  States,  ii,  605 
— - in  professions  and  callings,  iii,  73 

— of  silver  coin,  and  paper  money  in  the  United 

States,  ii,  605 

— to  teachers,  i,  241 

— of  treasury  notes,  and  paper  money  in  the 

United  States,  ii,  605 
Certified  public  accountants,  i,  241 
Certiorari,  i,  241 
Cession  of  territory,  iii.  528 

Cessions  by  states  to  the  Federal  Government,  i, 
241 

Chafin,  Eugene  W.,  and  Prohibition  party,  iii.  78 

— vote  for,  iii,  44,  45 

Chagres  River,  and  Panama  Canal,  ii,  600 
Chairman  of  assembly,  and  parliamentary  law,  ii, 
617 

— permanent,  ii,  672 

Challenges  in  election  system,  i,  653 
Chamberlain-Bayard  treaty  (fisheries),  i,  174 
Chamberlain,  Daniel  H.,  iii,  358 

— George  E.,  iii,  54 

— and  Oregon,  ii,  590 

— Joseph,  quoted  on  municipal  socialism,  iii,  336 
Chambers,  John.  ii.  238 

— vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  35 
Champion  vs.  Ames  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  219; 

iii.  481 

Champlain.  Samuel  de.  i,  210 
— -and  Michigan,  ii,  425 

— and  Nova  Scotia,  ii.  564 
Chancellor  of  the  exchequer,  i,  243 

— (British),  salary  of,  iii,  247 

— imperial  (German),  ii,  81 
Chancery,  i,  243,  674 

— courts,  in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 

— English  court  of,  law,  civil,  ii.  313 

— injunction,  and  courts  of,  ii,  179 

Chandler,  Alfred  D.,  and  Newport  system  of  city 
government,  ii,  546 

Chandler,  William  E„  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 ; ii, 
506 

Chandler,  Zacbariah,  ii.  199  ; iii,  641 

— cabinet  officer,  i.  197 

Changuion,  and  Netherlands,  diplomatic  relations 
with,  ii,  519 
Channels,  ii,  36 
— • and  canals,  ii,  36 
Chaplains,  i.  268 

Chapman,  Ex  parte  (investigations,  legislative),  ii, 
235 

Charge  d’affaires,  i,  243,  589 
Charges  and  prices,  regulation  of,  iii,  48 
Charging  what  the  traffic  will  bear,  iii,  555 
Charities,  Associated,  i.  244 

— Board  of.  Centralization  of.  ii,  364 

— and  corrections,  state  boards  of,  i,  243 

— expenditures  for.  i,  694 

— overseers  of  the  poor,  ii,  595 

— outdoor  relief,  ii.  594 

— public  agencies  for,  i,  246 

Charity  Organization  Society,  i,  244,  247 ; ii,  769 

717 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Charles  River  Bridge  rs.  Warren  Bridge  (impair- 
ment of  contracts),  i,  247.  457 
Charlestown  navy  yard,  ii,  507 
Charlottetown,  iii,  57 
Charter  contracts,  impairment  of,  i.  458 

— of  democracy  of  Roosevelt,  iii,  200 

— law,  common,  ii,  3X4 
Charters,  colonial,  i,  315 

— see  also  Revolution.  American,  causes  of,  iii, 

219 

and  unconstitutional  legislation,  i,  510 

— corporation,  i,  470 

— municipal,  i,  248 

Chase,  Salmon  P.,  biography  of,  i,  249 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
— - chief  justice,  i,  255 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  570 

— and  finances  of  Civil  War,  i,  550 

— and  Middle  West,  ii,  430 

— and  negro  suffrage,  grant  of.  ii,  517 
■ — Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii.  506 

— quoted  on  unconstitutionality,  i,  508 
Chase,  Samuel,  i,  554 

biography,  i.  250 

impeachment  of,  ii.  149 

Supreme  Court  United  States,  iii,  462 

Chautauqua  literary  and  scientific  Circle,  iii,  258 

— summer  schools,  iii,  270 

— university  extension,  iii,  599 

Check  of  power,  and  nullification  controversy,  ii,  567 
Checks,  i.  112 

— and  balances,  i,  250  : iii.  295 

see  Boards.  State  Executive,  i,  140 

in  congressional  government,  i.  393 

elimination  of,  in  commission  government,  i, 

347  . o 

between  executive  and  Congress,  i,  680 

and  mayor  and  executive  power  in  American 

cities,  ii.  411 

— and  drafts  in  government  service,  i,  250 
Chemical  theory  of  society,  iii.  341 
Chemistry.  Bureau  of.  i.  18,  251 

see  Pure  food,  iii,  122 

Cherokee  Nation  vs.  Georgia  (Indians),  ii,  171 

— vs.  Kansas  Railroad  Co.  (eminent  domain),  l, 

Cherokees,  and  Indian  policy  of  the  United  States, 
ii.  163 

— in  Indian  territory,  ii.  168 
Chesapeake  and  Alhemarle  canal,  i.  227 

— Bay,  in  international  law,  iii,  528 
sea  boundary  of,  i,  150 

— and  Delaware  Canal,  i.  221 
Ohio  Canal,  i,  221 

Chesapeake,  see  Impressment,  ii,  96,  153 

— and  Leopard.  1807,  iii.  651 
Chester,  Governor,  iii,  675 
Cheves.  Langdon.  as  speaker,  i,  389 
Chiapas,  in  Guatemala,  ii,  103 
Chicago,  i.  251 

— B.  & Q.  Railroad  Co.  vs.  Iowa  (Granger  case), 

ii.  94 

vs.  United  States  (interstate  commerce),  it, 

221 

— boundaries  of  (map),  i,  252 

— budget  of,  i.  184 

— - city  planning  in,  i,  279 

— corporation  franchises  in,  ii,  45 

— countv  and  city  government,  concurrent  in,  i, 

489' 

— drainage  canal,  i,  222 

— institute  of  civics  and  philanthropy,  iii.  259 

— Milwaukee  and  Puget  Sound,  and  Pacific  Rail- 

roads. ii,  597 

— and  parties,  state  and  local,  ii,  622 

— river  and  harbor  convention,  i.  847  ; iii,  284 

— R.  I.  & P.  Ry.  Co.  vs.  Arkansas  (interstate 

commerce),  ii.  220 

— etc..  Ry.  Co.  vs.  Minnesota  (railway  commis- 

sion). i,  352 

— & Rv.  Co.  vs.  Fuller  (police  power),  ii,  707 

— street  railroad  franchises  in,  iii.  149 

. — University  and  correspondence  tuition,  iii,  258 

— World's  Fair,  i,  701 

Chickasaws,  and  Indian  policy  of  the  United 
States,  ii,  163 

— in  Indian  territory,  ii,  168 
Chief  .iustices,  i,  254 

— in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 
Child,  criminal,  i.  525 

— labor,  i,  255 

— — law,  see  Uniform  state  legislation,  iii,  591 
and  poverty,  ii.  769 

protection  to.  ii,  297 

see  also  Reform  movements,  iii,  171 

and  social  reform,  iii.  329 

and  truancy,  iii.  574 

— the.  and  social  justice,  i.  564 
Child-birth,  and  women's  work,  ii,  300,  302 


Children,  sec  Court,  juvenile,  i,  500 

— cruelty  to.  i.  531 

— dependent  and  delinquent,  i,  243 
public  care  of.  i,  257 

state  schools  for,  i,  259 

— in  law,  criminal,  ii,  318 

— special  legislation  as  to  women  and  labor,  ii, 

289 

— and  municipal  government,  functions  of,  ii,  477 

— and  the  police  power,  ii,  709 
— - see  also  Truancy,  iii,  573 

— women  and.  labor,  hours  of.  ii,  289 
Children's  Bureau,  federal,  i,  259 
-Labor,  Department  of,  ii,  288 

— courts  and  probation  of  prisoners,  iii,  63 

— guardians,  boards  of,  i.  258 

— National  Bureau,  i.  256 
Chile,  i.  260 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  356 

— and  Peru,  and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii.  467 
Chiltern  hundreds,  stewardship  of  the,  ii,  614 
China.  Boxer  rising  in.  i.  169 

— boycott  of  American  goods  in.  i,  169 

— commercial  policy  with,  i,  342 

— see  under  Coolies,  i.  467 

— see  Diplomatic  agreement,  i,  592 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  84,  260 

— expeditions  to.  iii.  652 

— extraterritoriality  in,  i,  706 

- — and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  468 

— United  States  court  for,  i,  706 
Chinese,  as  aliens,  i,  29 

— empire,  and  open  door,  ii,  582 

— see  Expulsion  from  United  States,  i,  703 

— exclusion  cases,  and  immigration,  ii,  146 

— as  foreign  element,  ii,  30 

— Geary  law  on.  ii.  72 

— immigration,  administrative  decisions  on,  i,  11 
and  exclusion,  i,  203 

— labor  in  California,  i,  262 

— revolution  of  1911.  see  Russia,  diplomatic  rela- 

tions with,  iii.  244 
Chiriqui.  colony  at.  i.  323 

Chisholm  vs.  Georgia  (Constitution  of  United 
States),  i.  206 

— -(and  Eleventh  Amendment),  i,  660 
— -(federal  jurisdiction),  ii,  77 

— (unconstitutionality),  ii.  249 
Choate.  Joseph  II..  biography  of.  i.  266 

— Rufus,  quoted  on  majority  rule.  ii.  390 
Choctaws,  and  Indian  policy  of  the  United  States, 

ii.  163 

— in  Indian  Territory,  ii.  168 
Cholera  in  Philippine  Islands,  ii.  683 
Chosen  freeholders,  i.  266 
Christian  socialism,  i.  266 
Christina,  and  New  Sweden,  ii,  535 
Christmas  Island,  i.  153 

Church  discipline  acts.  Great  Britain,  ii,  258 
Church  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Latter  Day  Saints,  i, 
473 

Church,  the.  and  political  theories,  ii,  717 

— and  state  in  Connecticut,  i.  398 
— -—in  political  theory,  ii,  728 
in  the  United  States,  i.  267 

— see  Towns  and  townships,  iii,  543 
Churchwardens,  iii.  654 

Churches,  exemption  from  taxation,  iii,  499 

— and  secession  controversy,  iii.  276 
Cicero,  and  political  theories,  ii.  717 
Cigarettes,  legislation  against,  iii.  100,  538 
Cincinnati,  steam  roads  of,  iii,  148 
Cinematograph,  ii.  473 

Cinque  Ports,  and  medifeval  city  leagues,  ii,  417 
Cinber  dispatches,  i.  269 
Circuit  court  of  appeals,  i,  513 

— jurisdiction  of.  i.  514 

— see  Salaries,  tables  of.  iii,  248 

— of  United  States,  i.  498 

— in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 

— judge,  i.  513 
Circuits,  federal,  i,  513 
Circular  Letter  of  1768.  i.  509 

Circulation,  per  capita.  1800-1910.  and  paper 
money  in  the  United  States,  ii,  605 
Circumstantial  evidence,  ii.  319 
Cities,  classification  of.  i.  269.  274 

— in  development  of  municipal  government,  ii,  481 

— colonial  authority  in,  ii,  480 

— congestion  in.  i.  380 

— per  capita  expenditures  of.  i.  696 

— foreign  element  in  principal,  ii,  34 

— growth  of.  i.  270 

— home  rule  for,  and  municipal  government  in 

the  United  States,  ii.  484 

— ten  largest,  in  the  world,  ii.  751 

— legislation  and  legislative  problems  in,  ii,  325 

— local  self-government,  ii.  367 

— See  also  under  Municipal. 


718 


INDEX 


Cities  of  United  States,  population  of,  ii,  751 

— revenues  of,  iii,  217 
— - tendency  to,  ii,  33 
Citizens,  natural  born,  ii,  496 

Citizens'  union,  and  uon-partizan  political  organ- 
izations, ii,  554 
Citizenship,  ii,  211 

— in  Am.  Ins.  Co.  vs.  Canter,  1,  36 

— Bureau  of,  i,  270 

— diversity  of.  in,  suits,  i,  514 
— - double,  i,  608 

— dual,  in  federal  state,  i,  719 

— and  expatriation,  i,  690 

— in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  37 

— in  Indian  policy  of  the  United  States,  ii,  163 
— -and  naturalization,  law  of,  ii,  497 

— in  the  United  States,  i,  270 

— see  also  United  States,  as  a federal  state,  iii, 

597 

City,  i,  273 

— attorney,  i,  276;  iii,  352 

— centrals,  labor  organizations,  ii,  290 

— chamberlain,  and  New  York  City,  ii,  543 

— clerk,  i,  277 

— Club  of  New  Y’ork  City,  ii,  342 

— committees,  party,  i,  363 

— councils,  corruption  in,  i,  477 

— engineer,  i,  177 

— government,  cabinet  system  in,  i,  202 
committees  in,  i,  359 

Newport  system  of,  ii,  546 

officers  in,  ii,  570 

— growth,  and  transit  problems,  iii,  550 

— halls,  iii,  90 

— improvements,  see  Real  estate,  public  owner- 

ship of,  iii,  154 

— leagues,  mediaeval,  ii,  417 

— local  government  in  England,  ii,  365 

— manager  idea  in  commission  government,  i,  346  ; 

iii,  360 

— ownership  of  steam  railroads,  iii.  148 

— parties,  and  parties,  state  and  local,  ii,  621 

— physicians,  i,  277 

— planning,  i,  277 

see  Comprehensive  plans,  Philadelphia,  ii, 

678 

— Record,  i.  281 

— of  Richmond  vs.  S.  Bell  Telephone  Co.  (tele- 

phones), iii,  512 

— and  state,  i,  273 

— see  also.  State  government,  characteristics  of, 

iii,  387 

— treasurer,  i,  281 

— Vigilance  League,  and  Farkhurst,  Charles  H,  ii, 

610 

City’s  plan,  and  municipal  government,  functions 
of,  ii,  476 

Civic  associations  in  committee  system  of  United 
States,  i,  360 

— center,  i,  281 

— sciences,  iii,  342 

Civics  and  Philanthropy,  Chicago  Institute  of,  iii, 
259 

Civil  districts  in  Tennessee,  i,  498;  iii,  242 
—law,  ii.  312 

in  America,  ii.  313 

modern,  ii,  312 

- — pensions,  ii.  666 

— rights,  i,  281 

Act.  and  Fourteenth  Amendment,  ii,  41 

and  negro  problem,  ii,  515 

— of  1866  and  reconstruction,  iii,  165 

bill,  i,  282 

-> and  Democratic  party,  i.  570 

and  Republican  party,  iii.  195 

cases,  and  Fourteenth  Amendment,  ii,  41 

constitutional  guaranties  of,  i,  282 

sec  Enforcement,  i.  670 

— Service  Act  of  1883  and  removals  by  President, 

iii.  2 

hoards,  i,  141 

classified  service  in.  i,  293 

Commission,  see  Pendleton  Act,  ii,  661 

federal,  i,  283 

and  contract  system  of  public  works,  i,  460 

-and  employees  of  government,  i,  667 

examinations,  i,  283 

federal,  i,  284 

Jackson  and  the,  i,  565 

laws,  city  and  state  in.  i.  274 

see  Merit  system,  ii,  418 

municipal,  i,  287 

and  New  York  City,  ii,  544 

relation  of,  to  parties,  i.  286 

promotions  in  the,  iii,  78 

Reform  League,  and  non-partizan  political 

organizations,  ii,  554 

appointments  to  office  and,  i,  53 

see  Patronage,  ii,  652 

police,  ii,  704 


Civil  Service  rules,  and  state  executive,  iii,  384 

and  the  spoils  system,  iii,  374 

-state,  i,  286 

— • township,  iii,  544 
Civil  War,  iii,  652 

— impossibility  of  compromise  in,  i,  366 

— compromises  proposed,  1860-1861,  i,  367 

— confiscation  acts  after,  i,  380 

— constitutional  questions  of,  i,  288 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 

— diplomatic  relations  with  France  during,  ii, 

43 

— draft  riots,  i,  609 

— - and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  691 

— influence  of,  on  American  government,  i,  289 

— and  military  and  naval  expenditures,  ii,  434 

— and  militia,  ii.  410 

— and  neutrality,  principles  of.  ii,  521 

— paper  money  during  the,  and  paper  money  in 

the  United  States,  ii,  606 

— pensions,  ii,  669 

— see  also  Reconstruction,  iii,  163 

— see  also  South,  iii,  353 

— -and  spoils  system,  iii.  373 

— in  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  479 

— and  treason,  convictions  for,  ii,  196 

— see  also  War,  carrying  on,  iii,  638 
Clark,  Abraham,  i,  554 

— Champ,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  576 
speaker,  i.  392:  iii,  371 

— Edgar  E.,  ii,  225 

— George  Rogers,  ii,  139;  iii,  649 
biography,  i,  293 

and  Indiana,  ii,  158 

see  Kentucky,  ii,  278 

and  Michigan,  ii,  425 

in  northwest  country,  i,  155 

— John,  iii,  224 

— • Governor,  and  Mississippi,  ii,  454 

— William  A.,  contested  election  of,  iii,  290 
Clarke,  James,  ii,  238 

— John,  ii,  77 

Claflin  vs.  Houseman  (federal  law),  ii,  309 
Claiborne,  Louisiana  annexation,  ii,  378 
Claim  associations,  ii,  62 

— for  public  lands,  i.  291 
Claims,  boards  of,  i,  291 

— Court  of.  see  also  States  as  parties  to  suits, 

iii.  415 

— examiner  of,  and  state  department  of,  iii, 

379 

— Federal  Court  of,  i,  502 

— international,  i,  291 
— -against  states,  i.  219 

Clarendon,  Lord,  in  Alabama  controversy,  i,  23 

— constitutions  of,  iii,  67 

Class  consciousness  and  socialism,  iii,  334 

— feeling  and  popular  opinion,  iii,  105 

— legislation,  i,  673 

— rule  and  democracy,  history  of,  1,  562 

— war,  and  socialism,  iii.  334 
"Classification,”  in  taxation,  iii,  498 
Classified  service,  i,  293 

— federal,  i,  284 

Claxton,  Philander  P.,  i.  635 

Clay  Henry,  and  American  system,  i,  39 

— biography,  i,  293 

— see  Blifil  and  Black  George,  i,  134 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— and  Compromise  of  1850.  i,  367 

— on  Cuban  occupation,  i,  532 

— as  the  great  commoner,  ii.  99 
— - and  Treaty  of  Ghent,  ii.  83 

— quoted  on  instructions  to  Senators,  iii,  288 
— - censure  of  Jackson,  ii,  246 

— and  Kentucky,  ii,  279 

— Mill-boy  of  the  slashes,  ii,  441 
— - and  Monroe,  i,  580 

— and  National  Republicans,  i.  581 

— and  Omnibus  Bill,  ii.  580 
— -as  peacemaker,  ii,  658 

— see  Scrub  race  for  the  presidency,  iii,  274 

— as  speaker,  i,  389:  iii.  370 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii.  402 

— and  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  478 

— vote  for,  iii.  13,  19.  21,  22,  25 

— and  Whig  party,  iii,  681 

— Whigs,  i.  293 

Clay's  Distribution  Bill,  iii.  95 
Clayton-Bulwer  treaty,  i,  294 

— and  canal  diplomacy,  i,  216 

— as  an  entangling  alliance,  i.  671 

— and  international  law,  ii,  208 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  467 

— and  Mosquito  protectorate,  i,  237 

— withdrawal  of,  i,  217 
Clayton,  John  M.,  i.  294 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; iii,  402 
Clean  sweep,  i,  294 
Clearing-house,  i,  294 


719 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Clearing-house  loan  certificates,  i,  295 
- — transactions  of  New  York,  ii,  14 
Clements,  Judson  C.,  ii,  225 
Clergy,  privileged  status  of,  iii,  67 
Clerk  of  bills,  i,  610 

— and  legislative  reform,  ii,  342 

— to  the  House  of  Representatives,  1,  295 
Cleveland,  Moses,  and  Ohio,  ii,  573 
Cleveland,  Stephen  Grover,  biography,  i,  297 

— and  Chicago  riots,  iii,  4 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  572 

— “innocuous  desuetude,”  ii,  182 

— “man  of  destiny,”  ii,  390 

— mayor  and  executive  power  in  American  cities, 

ii,  413 

— and  Mugwumps,  ii,  474 

— and  “offensive  partisans,”  ii,  569 

— on  pernicious  activity,  ii,  672 

— “public  office  is  a public  trust,”  iii,  100 

— and  railroad  strike  in  Illinois,  ii,  197 

— aud  request  of  Senate  for  information,  ii,  179 

— and  tariff  legislation,  iii,  475 

— on  tariff  reform,  iii,  484 

— on  tax  refund,  iii,  508 

— see  Third  term,  iii,  535 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  36,  37,  38 

— on  Wilson-Gorman  tariff,  iii,  688 
Cleveland,  Ohio,  i,  295 

— budget  of,  i,  183 

— civic  center,  i,  281 

— plan  of  proportional  representation,  iii,  81 

— street  railroad  franchise  in,  iii,  149 

— C.  C.  & St.  Louis  Railway  Co.  vs.  Illinois  (In- 

terstate commerce),  ii,  220 
Clifford,  Nathan,  i,  95  ; iii,  462 
— ■ cabinet  officer,  i,  196 
Climate,  i,  298 

— ■ see  also  Physics  and  politics,  iii,  686 
Clinton,  DeVVitt,  biography,  i,  298 

— and  the  Republican  schism,  i,  580 

— vote  for,  iii,  17 

Clinton,  George,  as  an  Anti-federalist,  i,  577 

biography,  i,  298 

-and  Federal  Republicans,  i,  717 

— - — and  first  Republican  administration,  1,  579 

and  the  Republican  schism,  i,  580 

vote  for,  iii,  13,  14,  15,  16,  17 

Vice-President,  iii,  616 

Clintonians,  i,  298 
Clinton’s  ditch,  i,  298 
Closed  primary,  iii,  50 

Closed  seas,  and  international  fisheries,  ii,  22 
Closed  shop,  ii,  291 

— open  and.  ii,  582 
Closure,  i,  298 

— by  compartments,  i,  299 

— in  House  of  Representatives,  ii,  134 
— • rule,  and  filibustering,  i,  730 
Clubs,  political,  ii,  710 

— and  social  reform,  iii,  330 

Clyatt  vs.  United  States  (peonage),  ii,  671 
Clyde  navigation,  ii,  110 
Clymer,  George,  1,  554 

Coal  deposits  on  the  public  domain,  ii,  443 
Coal  field,  canal  connections  with,  i,  221 
— - lands,  i,  299 

— mines,  ownership  of,  by  railroads,  iii,  156 
— - in  resources  of  North  America,  iii,  204 

— see  also  South,  iii,  353 
— - tariff  on,  iii,  483 
Coaling  stations,  i,  299 
Coast  artillery,  i,  301 

— defense,  strategic  principles  of.  I,  300 
— - and  geodetic  survey,  i,  299,  336 

— survey,  ii,  73 

— ■ — : see  American  government  and  geography,  i, 
36 

Coasting  trade,  i,  301  : iii,  305 
Coastal  waters,  see  Three-mile  limit,  ill,  536 
Cobb,  Howell,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196 ; iii,  566 
— ■ speaker,  i,  390 

Cobb,  Thomas  R.  R.  and  Confederates  States 
constitution,  i,  371 
Cobhett,  William,  iii,  253 
“Cobbler  of  Agawams,”  iii,  253 
Cockburn,  Sir  Alexander,  in  Geneva  arbitration, 
ii,  73 

Cockrell  Commission,  i,  354 

— Francis  M.,  ii,  225 
Coddington,  William,  iii,  224 
Code,  see  Revised  statutes,  iii,  218 
Codex  Theodosianus,  i,  302 
Codification,  i,  302 

— of  Acts  of  Congress,  i,  5 

Coe  vs.  Errol  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  221 
Coeducation  and  coordinate  education,  i,  305 

— sec  also  State  universities,  iii,  413 
Coercion  of  individuals,  i,  307 

— of  states,  i,  308 

— in  strikes,  iii,  438 


Coffee,  tariff  on,  iii,  483 

Coffin,  vs.  Coffin  (parliamentary  privileges),  iii,  67 
Coffin,  hand  bills,  i,  308 

Cohens  vs.  Virginia  (constitutional),  1,  308 

— (Eleventh  Amendment),  i,  660 

— (jurisdiction),  i,  512 

— (obiter  dictum),  ii,  568 
Cohong,  the,  i,  260 

Coinage,  economic  principles  of,  i,  311 

— free,  i,  311 

— gratuitous,  i,  312 

— - aud  mint  of  the  United  States,  ii,  451 

— subsidiary,  i,  312 

— and  specie  currency  in  the  United  States,  i, 

309 

— token,  iii,  539 
Coining  money,  i,  312 

Coin’s  Financial  School,  iii,  312 
Coins,  foreign,  value  of,  312 
Colbert,  aud  codification,  i,  303 
Coit,  Dr.  Stanton,  iii,  300 
Cold  storage  laws,  ii,  184 

Coleman,  Norman  J.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  20,  197 
Colfax,  Schuyler,  biography,  i,  313 

— speaker,  i,  391;  iii,  370 

— Vice-President,  iii,  616 

— vote  for,  iii,  31 

Collamer,  Jacob,  cabinet  officer,  1,  196  ; ii,  767 
Collateral  attack,  i,  471 

— and  deposits  of  public  funds,  i,  585 

— inheritances,  tax  on,  iii,  494 
Collection,  in  banking  methods,  i,  113 
— -at  the  source  (income  tax),  iii,  491 
Collective  bargaining  (labor  organizations),  ii, 

291 

Collectivism,  1,  313 
— ■ in  England,  iii,  104 
Collector  of  Customs,  i,  313 

— internal  revenue,  i,  314 

— the  port,  and  navigation,  regulation  of,  ii, 

503 

-in  tariff  administration,  iii,  470 

College,  i,  314 

— settlements,  iii,  300 

— towns,  suffrage  in,  i,  604 
Colleges,  iii,  598 

— colonial  public,  iii,  409 

— exemption  from  taxation,  iii,  499 
Collegial  system,  i,  187 

Collier  service,  iii,  553 

Colliers,  and  naval  vessels,  ii,  500 

Collins  vs.  New  Hampshire  (police  power),  ii,  707 

Cologne,  League  of,  ii,  110 

Colombia,  i,  314 

- — diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  356 
Colombian  canal  treaty,  i,  315 
— • treaty  of  1846,  and  Panama  railroad,  ii,  602 
Colon,  and  Panama  canal,  ii,  600 
Colonial  agents,  i,  315 

— charters,  i,  315 

— corporation,  i,  316 

— goods,  i,  5 

— government,  proprietary,  1,  317 

— international  relations,  i,  319 

— land  banks,  ii,  305 

— office  (British),  i,  689 

— policy  (British),  i,  621 

— protectorate,  iii,  83,  527 

— sectionalism,  iii,  282 

— status  of  Indians,  ii,  170 

— suffrage,  iii,  444 

— system,  breakdown  of,  iii,  221 

• -(British),  and  American  Revolution,  1,  339 

Colonies  and  dependencies,  in  international  law, 
iii,  527  . . „„„ 

Colonization  by  Great  Britain  in  America,  l,  320 

— of  negroes,  i,  323 

— principles  of,  i,  324 

— of  voters,  iii.  629 
Colorado,  i,  328 

— and  party  finance,  ii,  626 

— recall  of  judicial  decisions,  iii,  158 
— -River,  boundary  of  the,  i,  150 
Colquit,  Alfred  H.,  vote  for,  iii,  31 
Colter,  John,  iii,  702 

Columbia  bill,  and  commission  government,  I, 
346 

— College,  iii,  410 

— plateau,  see  Sectionalism  in  United  States,  iii, 

284 

— River,  iii,  663 

navigation  of,  ii.  502 

— territory  of.  iii,  656 

Columbian  institution  for  the  deaf  and  dumb,  ii, 
198 

— order,  iii,  467 

Columbus  memorial  library,  and  Pan  American  con- 
gresses, ii,  604 
Columbus.  Ohio,  ii,  574 
Colwell,  Stephen,  iii,  472 


INDEX 


Combines,  i,  330 
Comeouter,  i,  330 
Comitiae,  in  Rome,  ii,  735 
Comity,  federal,  i,  330 

— international  and  interstate,  i,  330 

— interstate,  ii,  230 

— in  private  international  law,  ii,  210 
Commander-in-chief,  i,  330 

Commerce,  American,  movement  of,  i,  331 

— against  agriculture,  sec  Sectionalism  in  United 

States,  iii,  282 

— Bureau  of  Foreign  and  Domestic,  Manufactures, 

Bureau  of,  ii,  303 

— chambers  of,  i,  334 

— - clause,  i,  334 

— Court,  i,  498 

as  aij  administrative  tribunal,  i,  506 

and  commissions  in  American  government,  i, 

352 

— - Department  of,  i,  334 

and  administrative  law,  ii,  311 

Bureau  of  Corporations,  i,  474 

Bureau  of  Fisheries,  ii,  20 

Bureau  of  Navigation,  ii,  501 

Bureau  of  Standards,  iii,  376 

chart  of  organization,  i,  335 

Coast  and  Geodetic  Survey,  i,  299 

and  public  health,  ii,  117 

see  Revenue  cutter  service,  iii,  212 

see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  248 

-solicitor  for,  ii,  271 

steamboat  inspection,  iii,  427 

— foreign,  ii,  35 

— governmental  control  of,  i,  336 

— international,  i,  338 

- — and  Labor,  Department  of,  i,  333 

and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  693 

Lighthouse  Bureau,  ii,  353 

secretaries  of,  i,  333 

— regulation  of,  and  tariff,  iii,  481 

— schools  of,  iii,  266 

— — and  technical  education,  i,  642 

— what  is,  i,  337 

Commercial  bureau  of  the  American  republics,  ii, 
603 

Commercial  domicil,  ii,  211 

— high  schools,  i,  641  ; iii,  259 

— paper,  registry  of,  i,  527 

see  Reserve  act,  federal,  iii,  202 

— policy  and  relations  of  the  United  States,  i,  339 

— relations  i,  446 
Commissary  general,  i,  344 
Commission  on  country  life,  i,  488 

— government  and  centralization,  i,  241 
civil  service  under,  i,  287 

and  democratic  government,  i,  564 

and  executive,  i,  684 

in  Kansas,  ii,  275 

and  the  primary,  iii,  50 

— — of  Washington,  L).  C.,  i,  227 

— — and  purchase  of  supplies,  iii,  121 

— and  office  distinguished,  iii,  101 

— plan,  in  development  of  municipal  government, 

ii,  482 

effect  of,  libraries,  public,  ii,  349 

and  apportionment,  i,  57 

of  city  government,  i,  344 

Commissioned  officers,  active  list : authorized 
number  and  relative  rank,  ii.  572 
Commissioner  of  schools,  iii,  270 

— system,  in  development  of  municipal  govern- 

ment, ii,  481 

Commissioners,  see  Boards,  municipal,  i,  137 

— county,  i,  496 

— delegated  by  Congress,  i,  512 

— and  officers  in  city  government,  ii,  570 

— special,  in  diplomacy,  i,  589 

— in  town-county  system,  iii,  541 
Commissions,  on  administrative  methods,  i,  351 

— in  American  government,  i,  350 

— to  recommend  constitutional  amendments,  i, 

438 

— jury,  ii,  268 

Committee  on  credentials,  i,  355 
in  political  conventions,  i,  463 

— the  Conduct  of  the  (Civil)  War,  i,  290;  iii,  638 

— of  Fifteen  (white  slave),  iii,  327 

— - House  of  Representatives,  and  party  organiza- 
tion in  legislative  bodies,  ii,  633 
— - on  rules,  in  Congress  of  United  States,  i,  386 

— of  Seventy,  1871.  iii,  468 
— -of  the  States,  i,  83 

— on  Style,  in  constitutional  conventions,  i,  428 

— system  and  growth  of  Constitution,  i,  421 
-in  the  United  States,  i,  355 

— of  Wavs  and  Means,  i,  387 

— of  the  Whole,  i,  355,  357 

— see  nls o Commissions  in  American  government, 

i,  351 

— in  constitutional  conventions,  i,  428 


Committees,  in  Continental  Congress,  i,  452 

— of  correspondence,  i,  361 

— in  European  legislative  bodies,  i,  360 

— House  of  Representatives,  ii,  132 
Committees,  in  legislative  investigations,  ii,  236 

— of  legislature,  in  state  government,  iii,  390 

— and  parliamentary  law,  ii,  618 

— party,  i,  261 

— - reports  of,  iii,  181 

— see  also  Rules  of  Congress,  iii,  237 

— of  Safety,  i,  361 

colonial,  i,  554 

Commitment,  arrest  and,  ii,  318 
Commodities  clause,  and  interstate  commerce  leg- 
islation, ii,  228 

and  rebates,  iii,  156 

statute,  in  interstate  commerce,  ii,  221 

— government  inspection  of,  ii,  183 
Commodity  rates,  ii,  60 
Common  carriers,  i,  363 

— sec  Prices  and  charges,  regulation  of,  iii,  48 

— regulation  of,  iii,  556 

— telephone  companies  as,  iii,  512 

— council,  i,  364 

— ■ legislation  and  legislative  problems  in  cities,  ii, 
326 

— lands,  i,  364 

— law,  ii,  314 

administration  of,  by  the  courts,  ii,  309 

marriage,  ii,  399 

— — and  marriage  and  divorce,  ii,  399 
see  also  State  judiciary,  iii,  397 

and  statutory  crimes,  law,  criminal,  ii,  318 

— Pleas,  Court  of,  i,  503 

— schools,  grading  in,  iii,  267 
Common  Sense,  Paine's,  ii,  599,  719 

and  Declaration  of  Independence,  i,  554 

Common  stock,  see  Trusts,  iii,  578 
Commoner,  great,  ii,  99 
Commons,  House  of,  ii,  128 

Commonwealth,  the,  and  applied  sociology,  iii, 
348 

Commonwealth  vs.  Boyd  (automobile),  1,  98 
— -vs.  Caton  (unconstitutionality),  i,  509 

— in  state,  theory  of,  iii,  409 

— see  also  States,  classification  of,  iii,  417 
Communal  registry,  France,  and  mayor  in  Eu- 
ropean cities,  ii,  415 

Communes,  in  France,  ii,  478 

— and  municipal  government  in  continental  Eu- 

rope, ii,  478 

Communications,  privileged,  iii,  67 
Communism,  i,  364 
— - and  political  theories,  ii,  723 
Communistic  experiments,  i,  623 
Communists,  in  political  theory,  ii,  730 
Commutation  of  sentence,  and  pardon,  constitu- 
tional principles  of,  ii,  608 
Compact,  and  political  theories,  ii,  717 

— and  sovereignty,  iii.  404 

— see'  Virginia  and  Kentucky  Resolutions,  iii,  621 
Compacts,  in  international  law,  iii.  570 

— between  states,  iii,  418 
Companies,  holding,  ii,  124 
Company  or  Gothenburg  system,  ii.  87 

— of  one  hundred  associates,  and  New  France, 

ii,  526 

— stores,  see  Wages,  regulation  of.  iii,  637 
Comparative  costs  in  international  trade,  ii,  53 
— ■ party  government,  ii,  626 

Compensating  duties,  see  Tariff  rates,  iii,  482 
Compensation  of  members  of  Congress,  i,  384 
Compensatory  duties,  i,  617 
Competition,  i.  365 

— economic  and  political,  and  socialism,  state,  iii, 

337 

— - interstate  commerce  decisions,  ii,  226 

— effects  of  immigrant,  ii,  144 

— limiting,  and  police  power,  ii,  708 

— and  prison  labor,  iii.  60 

— and  socialism,  iii,  332 

— - in  transportation,  iii.  555 

Competitive  system,  and  distribution,  economic,  i, 
598 

— tariff,  in  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  481 
Competitor,  the.  iii,  368 

Compiled  statutes,  iii,  218 
Composite  state,  i.  366 
— -and  personal  union,  ii,  674 
Compound  duties,  i.  617 
— -in  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  478 

— see  Tariff  rates,  iii,  482 
Compounds,  see  Pure  food,  iii.  122 
Comprehensive  Plans  Bureau,  ii,  678 
Compromis,  in  arbitration,  i,  65 
Compromise,  i,  366 

— - the  great,  i,  715 

— of  1820,  i,  366 


721 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Compromise,  1850,  i,  3G6 

and  Democratic  party,  i,  508 

and  Whig  party,  iii,  084 

- — tariff,  iii.  478 

Compromises,  in  Constitution  of  United  States, 
i,  419 

— proposed  1800-1801,  i,  307 
Comptroller  of  the  currency,  i,  307 

— and  New  York  City,  ii,  543 

— state,  i,  308 

— in  state  accounts,  iii,  89 

- — in  state  systems  of  finance,  ii,  5 

— of  the  treasury,  i.  368 
and  appropriations,  i,  02 

as  government  inspector,  ii,  183 

Compulsory  arbitration,  see  Reform  movements, 
iii,  171 

— education,  i,  636 
laws,  iii,  269 

— military  service,  ii.  438 

— voting,  iii,  631 

Comte,  August,  and  sociology,  iii,  341 
Conant,  Charles  F.,  Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 
Concert  of  powers,  i,  368 
Concerts,  and  music,  public,  ii,  490 
“Concessions,”  and  New  Jersey,  ii,  530 
Conciliation  with  America,  ii,  726 

— in  interstate  commerce  legislation,  ii,  229 
- — tribunals  of.  in  Indiana,  ii,  160 
Concord  school  of  philosophy,  iii,  269 
Concurrent  county  and  city  government,  i.  488 

— jurisdiction,  i,  368 
of  equity,  i,  674 

of  federal  and  state  courts,  i,  512 

— majority,  and  nullification  controversy,  ii,  567 

— powers,  i,  369 

— resolution,  i,  369  ; ii,  253 

in  Congress,  iii.  204 

Condemnation  of  land,  i,  369 
Condominium,  iii,  527 
Condorcet,  ii,  730 

Confederacy,  see  under  Civil  War,  i.  288 
Confederate  cabinet,  i,  372 

— Congress,  i,  372 

— pensions,  ii,  667 

— States,  i,  369 

of  America,  belligerency  of,  i,  124 

— - — recognition  of,  i,  375 
Confederation,  i,  375 

— Act,  Canada,  iii,  127 

— - — of  1867.  and  Ontario,  ii,  581 

— Articles  of,  i,  81 

Confederation  g£n£rale  du  travail,  and  syndical- 
ism. iii,  466 

Confederation,  1781-1789.  i.  376 

Conference  committee,  and  deadlocks  in  legislation, 

i.  541 

— committees,  i,  358 
i.  379 

- — as  a factor  in  government,  i,  379 
Conferences,  international  congresses  and,  ii,  202 
Confession,  law,  criminal,  ii,  319 
Confidential  circulars,  Bureau  of  Manufactures, 

ii,  393 

Confirmation  of  appointments,  state,  i,  380 

— by  the  Senate,  i,  380 
Confiscation  acts,  i,  380 

— of  1861-62.  and  rebellion,  ii,  17;  iii,  157 

— in  Civil  War,  i,  290 

Confiscation  and  due  process  of  law,  i,  616 
Conflict,  irrepressible,  ii,  239 

— of  laws,  i,  380  ; ii,  207,  210 
Congestion  in  cities,  i,  380  ; ii,  476 

— New  Y’ork  committee  on,  i,  280 
Congo  Free  State,  i,  318 
Congress,  Acts  of,  i,  4 

— under  Articles  of  Confederation,  i,  83 

— see  also  Caucus,  i.  233 

— concurrent  resolution  of,  i,  369 

— and  corruption,  legislation,  i,  477 
- — contested  elections  in,  i,  656 
— ■ in  electoral  count  for  President,  i,  658 

— executive  and,  i,  680 

— conference  committees  in,  i,  379 

— judiciary  and.  ii,  259 

— lands,  and  Ohio,  ii,  573 

— qualifications  for,  iii,  124 

— representatives  in,  iii.  186 

— resolutions  in,  iii,  204 

— rules  of,  iii.  236 

— separation  of  cabinet  from,  i,  199 

— of  the  United  States,  i,  382 

political  parties  in,  i,  388 

Congress  of  Vienna,  i,  33 

Congresses  and  convention  in  the  Revolution, 
392 

— international,  and  conferences,  ii,  202 

— provincial,  i,  424 


Congressional  campaign  committee  and  Republi- 
can party,  iii,  196 

— caucus,  and  nomination  of  the  President,  ii,  550 

— committee,  i,  362 
Congressional  Directory,  iii,  116 
Congressional  documents,  iii,  116 

— government,  i,  393 

cabinet  government  and,  i,  192 

committee  system  in,  i,  358 

— printing  office,  iii,  58 
— - reconstruction  acts,  iii.  166 
Congressional  Record,  i,  395 

for  House  of  Representatives,  ii,  133 

as  a public  record,  iii,  108 

see  Publications,  governmental,  iii,  116 

— township,  iii,  544 
Congressmen,  apportionment  of,  i,  54 

— election  of,  and  district  system,  i,  603 

— resignation  of,  iii,  204 
Conklin,  Roscoe,  and  boss  system,  i,  145 

— on  slavery,  iii,  195 

— quoted  on  Fourteenth  Amendment,  i,  239 

— and  Garfield,  ii,  70 
Connecticut,  i,  396 

— blue  laws  of,  i,  136 

— corporation  tax  in,  i,  475 
— - Fundamental  Orders  of,  on  caucuses,  i,  232 

— reserve,  i,  242 
— - — and  Ohio,  ii,  573 
— Toleration  party  in,  i.  397 

— see  Western  reserve,  iii,  680 
Connolly,  Richard,  iii,  468 

“Conquered  provinces”  theory  of  reconstruction, 
iii,  164 

Conquest,  right  of,  i,  398 
Conrad,  Charles  M„  cabinet  officer,  i,  196 
■ — Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 
— Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 
Conrad  vs.  Waples  (war),  iii,  646 
Conscript  law  of  1862,  in  Confederate  States,  i,  372 
Conscription  and  draft,  i,  398 
“Consequential  damages,”  i,  23 
Conservation,  i,  399  : ii,  64 
— - Agriculture,  Department  of,  i,  18 
- — at  conference  of  governors,  ii,  92 

— see  Desert  land,  i,  586 

— in  economic  history  of  United  States,  i,  624 

— in  far  west,  i,  710 

— in  financial  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  6 

— forest  service,  ii,  38 

— interior,  ii,  199 

— - policy  and  public  property,  iii,  106 

— and  public  lands,  reservation  of,  iii.  98 

— see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics,  iii, 
673 

Conservative  party  in  England,  i.  401 
— - and  party  government  in  Great  Britain,  ii,  629 
— British,  see  Tories,  iii,  540 

— 1834-35,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  566 

— in  United  States,  i.  402 
Consolato  del  mare,  ii,  213 

— and  maritime  war,  ii,  397 
Consols  of  1920,  i,  545 
Conspiracies,  commissioners  of,  iii,  393 
Conspiracy,  i,  402 

— and  mob  rule,  ii,  458 
Constable,  i.  402 

— deputy,  legal  authority  of,  i,  586 
Constabulary,  state,  i,  402 
Construction  Construed,  iii,  509 
Construction  and  interpretation,  1,  444 
— -and  Repair,  Bureau  of,  i.  445 
Constitutio  Criminalis  Carolina,  i.  303 
Constitution,  ambiguities  of  federal,  i.  508 

— amendments  to.  Department  of  State,  and,  iii, 
379 

— - in  the  British  sense,  i,  403 
— - controversies  under,  i,  461  _ 

— distribution  of  powers  in.  i,  600 

— essential  parts  of  a,  i,  439 
— Expounder  of,  i,  701 
— Father  of  the,  i,  712 

— follows  the  flag,  i,  403 
— - — see  Territories,  iii.  521 
Constitution  (frigate),  i,  403 

— and  Old  Ironsides,  ii,  579 
Constitution,  growth  of,  i,  420 

— law  and  custom  of,  i,  404 
— - making  in  United  States,  i,  404 

— the,  and  state  sovereignty,  iii,  405 
— - and  suffrage,  iii,  444 

— of  the  United  States,  text  of,  i,  408 

— — amendments  to.  i.  417 

see  Bill  of  Rights,  i.  129 

— - — compromises  of.  i,  419 

i, a covenant  with  death  and  an  agreement 

with  hell,  i,  420 

— — preamble  to,  i,  422 
prohibitions  in,  i,  422 


INDEX 


Constitution  of  the  United  States,  sources  of,  i,  423 

— written,  and  federal  state,  i,  718 
Constitutional  Act  (Canadian),  i,  212 

— amendment,  in  popular  government,  Ii,  738 
Constitutional  amendments  and  state  senate,  iil,  292 
- — basis  of  financial  powers,  ii,  8 

— Convention,  i,  424 

to  amend  Constitution,  i,  404,  435 

— conventions,  growth  in  importance  of,  iii,  389 
proceedings  of,  iii,  117 

during  the  Revolution,  iii,  391 

— law,  American,  ii,  315 

law,  administrative,  ii.  310 

See  also  cases  by  name. 

law,  fundamental,  ii,  319 

- — monarchy,  ii,  459 
■ — Reform  Society  (Canadian),  iii,  207 

— and  statutory  organization,  i,  432 

— Union  guards,  sec  Ku  Klux  Klan,  ii,  282 
party  in  Georgia,  1,  431  ; ii,  77 

— Unionist,  i,  402 

and  Republican  party,  iii,  194 

Constitutionality,  advisory  opinions  upon,  i,  12 
Constitutions,  classified,  i.  431 

— conventions  of  the.  i.  465 

— construction  and  interpretation  of,  I,  445 

— federal  or  unitary,  i,  433 

— growth  of,  i,  434 

— - monarchical  and  republican,  i,  434 

— see  Schedule,  iii.  254 

— state,  amendment  of,  i,  435 

characteristics  of,  i,  438 

limitations  in,  i,  441 

— submission  of,  to  popular  vote,  1,  428 

— written  and  unwritten,  i.  432 
Consul,  exequatur  of,  i.  689 

— general,  in  diplomacy,  1,  589 

in  London,  and  fee  system,  i,  728 

Consular  agents,  i,  450 

— Bureau,  i,  445 

— clerks,  i,  448 

— officers,  i,  449 

— Convention  of  1853,  ii.  43 

— regulations  of  United  States,  1,  446 

— reports,  i,  446 

— service  of  the  United  States,  i,  447 
Consulates,  asylum  in.  i,  91 

Consuls,  and  extraterritoriality,  i,  705  ; ii,  705 

— general,  i,  449 
at  large,  i,  449 

— judicial  powers  of,  i,  449 

— and  shipping  regulation,  iii,  306 
Consumer,  and  taxation,  iii,  504 
Consumptibles,  i,  626 
Contagious  diseases,  i,  450 

- — in  schools,  iii.  257 
Contempt,  i,  451 

— in  equity,  i,  674 

- — in  legislative  investigations,  ii,  236 
Contested  elections,  i,  655 
Continental  Congress,  i,  451 

— journals  of  the,  iii.  117 
Continental  police,  ii,  700 

— system.  1803-1815,  i.  453 

— Wall  Paper  Co.  vs.  Voight  (restraint  of  trade), 

iii.  155 

“Continentalist,”  ii,  719 
Contingent  debt  of  Massachusetts,  i.  547 
Continuation  schools,  i.  637  : iii,  258 
Continuing  appropriations,  i,  454 
Continuous  voyages,  i,  454 
Contraband,  i,  455 

— and  Declaration  of  Paris,  i,  556 

— money  as,  ii.  432 

— negroes,  1,  191,  455 

— and  neutral  trade,  principles  of,  ii,  520 

— and  private  property  at  sea,  iii.  65 

— of  war.  and  commerce,  international,  i.  338 
Contract  beds  in  sewage  disposal,  iii,  301 

- — freedom  of,  i,  456 

— impairment  of,  i,  456 

and  debt,  public,  repudiation  of,  i,  552 

see  Legal  aspects  of  corporation  franchises, 

ii.  45 

and  the  police  power,  ii.  708 

and  retrospective  legislation,  iii,  210 

— labor  law,  i.  459 

- — laborers,  and  immigration,  ii,  146 

— system  of  convict  labor.  1,  466  ; iii,  60 
of  public  works,  i.  459 

— theory  of  government,  ii,  90 
Contracting  out  of  labor  laws,  i,  461 
Contracts,  competitive,  for  public  supplies,  iii.  121 

— impairment  of.  Charles  River  Bridge  vs.  War- 

ren Bridge,  i,  247 

— and  international  law.  private,  ii,  212 
Contractual  rights,  iii.  227 
Contributory  negligence,  i,  461,  668 

— rule,  and  interstate  commerce  legislation,  ii,  229 


Control,  Board  of,  state,  i,  138 

— Boards  of,  i.  141 

Controller  as  government  inspector,  ii,  182 
Controversies  and  cases,  distinguished,  i,  511 
Controversies,  under  the  Constitution,  i,  461 
Conventions  of  burghs,  and  mediaeval  city  leagues, 

ii.  417 

— constitutional,  i,  424 

— the,  and  nomination  of  the  President,  ii,  550 

— political,  i,  461 

— system  and  primary,  iii,  49,  51 
Conventions,  city  and  county,  and  nominating 

systems,  ii.  549 

— of  the  Constitution,  i,  465 

— credentials  of  delegates  in,  i,  518 

— in  international  law,  Iii,  570 

— national,  i,  463 

— in  the  Revolution,  i,  392 

— see  also  Temporary  chairman,  iii,  513 
Convict  immigrants,  i,  465 

— labor,  i,  466 

relation  of  the  state  to,  ii,  301 

see  also  Prison  industries,  iii,  59 

on  roads,  iii,  232 

Convicts,  in  colonial  days,  i,  621 
Conway  cabal,  i,  467 

— and  Stamp  Act  agitattion,  iii,  375 
Coode’s  insurrection,  ii,  194 
Coodies,  i.  467 

Coody,  Abimaleck,  i,  467 

Cooke,  Jay,  and  Company,  and  Public  Debt,  i,  546 
Cooley,  Thomas  McL,  biography,  i.  467 

— quoted  on  constitutional  prohibitions,  i,  267 

— (interstate  commerce  commission),  ii,  225 

— quoted  on  liberty.  Ii,  348 

— quoted  on  minorities,  rights  of,  ii,  449 

— quoted  on  political  theories,  ii,  723 

— quoted  on  republican  form  of  government,  iii, 

188 

returning  boards,  iii,  211 

“Cooley-Adams”  method  in  taxation  of  railroads, 

iii,  501 

Cooley  vs.  Board  of  Wardens  (interstate  com- 
merce), ii,  219 
Coolie  immigration,  ii.  146 

— indentured,  and  colonization,  i,  326 

— system,  iii,  536 
— - trade,  i,  467 

Coon,  Charles  K,  Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 
Cooper,  Dr.,  and  nullification  controversy,  ii,  565 

— Peter,  and  Greenback  party,  ii,  101 

vote  for,  iii,  34 

— Samuel.  Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 
— • (satirist),  iii,  253 

Cooper  vs.  Telfair  (fines),  ii,  17 

— (unconstitutionality),  i,  508 
Cooperation,  i.  468 

— and  competition,  i,  365 

— labor  organizations,  ii.  291 
Cooperative  course,  in  education,  i,  638 

— societies  and  social  reform,  iii,  330 
Copper,  tariff  on.  iii,  482 
Copperheads,  i,  51,  468 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 
Copyright  i,  468 

— library  of  Congress  and,  ii,  350 
Copyrights,  and  monopolies,  ii,  463 

Corcoran  art  gallery,  and  museums,  public,  ii,  490 
Cordilleran  Highlands,  and  North  America,  ii,  555 
Corfield  vs.  Coryell  (privileges  and  immunities  of 
state  citizenship),  iii,  69 
Corinth  Canal,  and  neutralization  of  canals,  ii. 
522 

Corporal’s  guard,  i,  470 

Corporate  accounts,  publicity  of,  iii,  119 

— capital,  i,  225 

— earnings,  tax  on,  iii,  490 

— excess,  and  franchise  tax,  ii,  47 
Corporation  charters,  i,  470 

— and  dissolution,  i,  473 
Corporation  commissions,  iii,  109 

— and  railroad  commissions,  state,  iii,  134 
Corporation  counsel,  i,  276;  iii,  352 

— franchises,  financial  aspects  of,  ii,  44 

— see  Person,  legal  sense  of,  ii,  672 

— public,  i,  473 

— securities,  see  Blue  sky  law,  i.  136 

— - sole,  and  parish  vestry  in  England,  ii.  609 
— -tax,  see  also  Revenue,  internal,  iii,  213 

cases,  and  constitutional  basis  of  taxation, 

iii.  498 

law.  iii,  119 

— taxes  in  state  systems  of  finance,  ii,  4 
Corporations,  Bureau  of,  i,  334,  474 

— by-laws  of,  i.  191 

— constitutional  limitations  as  to,  i,  442 

— directors  of,  i,  595 

— foreign,  and  interstate  law,  ii,  231 

— franchise  tax,  ii,  46 


723 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Corporations,  government  restrictions  upon,  i,  189 

— see  Holding  companies,  ii,  124 

— influence  of,  ii,  177 

— and  international  law,  private,  ii,  212 

— and  the  police  power,  ii,  708 

— profits  of.  and  internal  revenue,  iii,  213 

— quasi,  i,  474 

— quasi-public,  iii,  125 

— see  also  Stock  issues,  regulation  of,  iii,  428 

— see  Taxation,  subject  of,  iii,  506 

— taxes  of,  i,  474 

on,  as  indirect  taxation,  ii,  9 

— see  Trust  companies,  iii,  575 

— see  Trusts,  iii,  576 

— see  Ultra  vires,  iii,  585 
Corpus  Juris  Civilis  i,  303 

— law,  civil,  ii,  312 

Corn  belt,  and  sectionalism  in  United  States,  iii, 
281 

— see  South,  iii,  353 

Cornbury  charter.  New  York  City,  ii,  541 

— Lord,  and  New  Jersey,  ii,  531 
Corn  crackers,  i,  469 

Corners  in  commodities,  i,  409,  679 
Coroner,  i,  469 

— as  county  officer,  i,  494 
Correction,  bouses  of,  ii,  134 
Correspondence  schools,  iii,  258 
Corrigan,  Charles  H.,  iii,  338 

— vote  for,  iii,  42 
Corrupt  bargain,  i,  581 

— see  Clay,  Henry,  i,  293 

— Practices  Acts,  i,  480 

— and  election  system,  i,  653 
Corruption  of  blood,  i,  478 

— see  Treason,  iii,  559 

Corruption,  see  Influence  in  government,  ii,  177 

— legislative,  i,  476 

— political,  i.  479 

— see  also  Publicity,  iii,  118 
Corsair  States,  i,  121 

Cortelyou,  George  B.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198,  333  ; 
ii,  767  ; iii,  566 

— as  Secretary  to  the  President,  iii.  280 
Corwin,  Thomas,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; iii,  566 
Corydon,  Indiana,  ii,  158 

Cost  accounting,  and  transportation,  iii,  554 

— economic,  i,  482 

— of  government  in  United  States,  i,  483 

— of  living,  i,  485 

and  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  480 

— of  reproduction  (of  railroads),  iii,  133 
Costa  Rica,  i,  4«5 

— independence  of,  i,  236 
Co-states,  the,  and  nullification  controversy,  ii, 
566 

Cotton  cloth,  tariff  on,  iii,  483 

— culture  in  Confederate  States,  i,  373 

— duties  on,  iii,  487 

— in  economic  history  of  United  States,  i,  622 

— seed  meal,  inspection  of,  ii,  184 

— and  the  slavery  controversy,  iii,  319 

— see  South,  iii,  353 

— states,  and  sectionalism  in  United  States,  iii, 

281 

— stockings,  iii,  483 

— in  Underwood  Tariff,  iii,  586 
Council  of  appointment,  i,  406,  487 

— committees  (legislative  problems  in  cities),  ii, 

328 

— - common,  i,  364 

— governor’s,  i,  486 

— municipal,  i,  486 

— in  municipal  government,  ii,  485 

— of  national  defence,  i,  301 
— ■ orders  in,  ii.  584 

— of  the  prefecture,  i,  505 

— of  revision,  i,  406,  487 

— of  state,  in  American  Revolution,  iii,  392 
— - — in  France,  i,  505 

Counsel,  right  to,  i,  487 

Counselman  vs.  Hitchcock  (investigations,  legisla- 
tive), ii,  237 

Count  in  election  system,  i,  653 
Count  out,  Maine,  ii,  388 
Counted  out,  i,  487 

Counterfeit  detectors,  and  paper  money  in  the 
United  States,  ii,  606 

Counterfeiters,  secret  service  and,  iii,  279 
Counterfeiting,  i,  487 
Countervailing  legislation,  i,  487 
Counties,  in  Great  Britain,  iii.  307 
Counting  in  the  alternative,  i,  488.  658 

— a quorum,  see  Reed.  T.  B.,  iii,  170 
Country  Life,  Commission  on,  i,  488 
County  assessor,  i,  489 

— board,  i,  497 

in  commission  government,  i,  344 

— camps,  ii,  134 

— and  city  government,  concurrent,  i,  488 


County  clerk,  i,  489,  494 

— commissioners,  i,  489 

see  Supervisors,  iii,  460 

— - council,  i,  490 
American,  i,  490 

— - — -in  Great  Britain,  i,  490;  iii,  307 
London,  ii,  370 

— court,  i,  499 ; ii,  273 
— - — -in  county  precinct  system,  i,  497 

in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 

— - democracy,  i,  491 

— expenditures,  i,  695 

— farms,  i,  491 
— - government,  i,  492 
— -infirmary,  i,  604 

— jails,  i,  497 
— -judge,  i,  494 
— -palatine  (British),  i,  689 

— penitentiaries,  ii,  134 

— seats,  i,  498 
— ■ precinct  system,  i,  497 

— seats,  i,  498 
— - shelter,  i,  587 

— and  state  governments,  characteristics  of,  iii, 
386 

— - surveyors,  iii,  463 
Courcel,  Baron  de,  iii,  275 
Court  of  appeals  in  cases  of  capture,  i,  502 

— in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 
Court,  appellate,  i,  498 

— of  arbitral  justice,  i.  04  ; ii,  106 

— circuit,  of  United  States,  i,  498 

— of  Claims,  i,  169,  291 

— — -as  an  administrative  court,  i,  506 

federal,  i,  502 

see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii.  248 

— - — in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 
— Commerce,  i,  498 

— of  Common  Pleas,  i,  503 

— county,  i,  499 

— of  Customs  Appeals,  i,  5S  ; i.  503 

see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  248 

— - — in  tariff  administration,  iii.  470 
— - of  customs  appraisers,  i,  537 
— - day  in,  i,  541 

— decisions,  in  international  law,  ii,  214 

— of  errors,  in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 
— -of  inquiry,  i,  503 
— - juvenile,  i,  500 

— night,  i,  502 
— - orphans’,  i,  504 

— of  Oyer  and  Terminer,  i,  503 
— - police,  i,  504 

— of  probate,  i,  504 
— - quarter  sessions,  i,  504 

— record,  i,  504 
— -surrogate’s,  i,  517 

Courtesv  of  the  Senate,  in  appointments  to  office, 
i,  53 

Courts,  appellate  jurisdiction  of.  i,  51 
— -of  conciliation,  in  state  judiciary,  iii.  395 

— constitutional  limitations  upon,  ii,  316 
— -effect  on,  of  fee  system,  i,  727 

— expenditures  for,  i,  694 
— - federal,  jurisdiction  of.  i,  511 

— federal  system,  i.  512 
— - leet  and  baron,  iii,  542 

— martial,  i,  516 
— - and  moot  questions,  ii,  298 

— superior,  i,  517 

— - and  tribunals,  administrative,  i.  505 

— and  unconstitutional  legislation,  i,  508 
Coutume  de  Paris,  in  Louisiana,  ii.  374 
Covenant  with  death  and  agreement  with  hell. 

Constitution  of  United  States  as  a,  i.  420 
Covode  investigation  and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 
Cowboy  president,  i,  517 

Cowdry,  R.  H„  and  United  Labor  Party,  iii.  594 

— vote  for,  iii,  37 
Cowen,  Benjamin  R..  ii,  199 
Cox,  Jacob  D.,  ii,  199 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— Liberal  Republican  party,  ii.  344 
Cox,  Samuel  S.,  biography,  i,  517 
— ■ (III.),  vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  43 
Coxe's  plan  of  union,  i,  320 
Coyle  vs.  Oklahoma  (admission  of  states),  iii,  415 

— (states,  restrictions  upon),  iii.  420 

— (United  States  as  federal  state),  iii,  597 
Crackers,  corn,  i,  469 
Craig,  Sir  .Tames,  ii.  121 

Craig  vs.  Missouri  (bills  of  creditl.  1.  128.  517 
Crandall  vs.  Nevada  (privileges  and  immunities  of 
citizens),  iii,  68 

— S.  R.,  quoted  on  : Senate  in  treaty  making,  iii, 
570 

Crawford  Countv  system  of  direct  primary,  iii, 
51 

— George  W..  cabinet  officer,  i.  196  ; iii,  649 

— President  Monroe  and,  i,  580 

724 


INDEX 


Crawford,  George  W.,  vote  for,  iii,  9,  20 
Crawford,  William  H.,  i,  518  ; ii,  77 
— - — -cabinet  officer,  i,  195 

see  Scrub  race  for  the  presidency,  iii,  274 

Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 

— — -Secretary  of  War,  iii,  648 
Credence,  letter  of,  in  diplomacy  in,  i,  590 
Credentials,  committee  on,  in  political  conven- 
tions, i,  463 

— of  delegates,  i,  518 
Credit,  bills  of,  i,  127 

— crises  and,  i,  527 

— economic,  i,  518 

— ■ information  and  crises,  economic,  i,  527 

— Mobilier,  i,  519 

— and  money,  theory  of,  ii,  462 

— public,  i,  519  , 

— societies,  i,  468 

— and  wealth,  national,  iii,  666 

Creeks,  and  Indian  policy  of  the  United  States,  ii, 
163 

— in  Indian  territory,  ii,  168 
Crematoria  and  municipal  trading,  ii,  488 
Creole,  i,  519 

Creole  case,  and  Giddiugs,  Joshua  R.,  ii,  83 

— (slavery),  i,  519 
Cremer,  Randal,  ii,  217 

Cresswell,  John  A.  J.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii, 
767 

Crime  i,  519 

— ■ Bertillon  system  of  measurement,  i,  12o 

— defined,  ii,  268 

— infamous,  ii,  176 

— - modern  conceptions  of,  I,  523 

— and  municipal  government,  functions  of,  ii, 

476 

— and  negro  problem,  ii,  516 
- — -penalties  for,  ii,  658 

— -sec.  also  under  Prisons,  iii,  58  et  scq. 

— statistics  of,  i,  519 

— of  ’73,  i,  519;  iii,  311 

Crimean  War  and  crises,  economic,  i,  528 
Crimes  committed  on  navigable  waters,  i,  12 

— prosecutions  for  federal.  1,  514 

— see  also  Statistics,  iii,  423 

Criminal  Appeal  Act.  Great  Rritain,  ii,  258 

— courts,  court  of  quarter  sessions,  i,  504 

— law,  ii,  318 

procedure,  proposed  reform  of,  ii,  321 

— proceedings  in  international  law,  private,  ii, 

211 

— reformation  of,  i,  521 
— - registry  i,  522 

Criminals,  habitual,  I,  521,  525 
Criminology,  i,  522 

— See  also  under  Prison. 

Crippled,  public  care  of,  i,  557 
Cripples,  public  institutions  for,  i,  558 
Crises,  American,  i,  527 

— economic,  i,  526 

Crisis,  The,  Paine's,  ii,  599,  719 
Crisp,  Charles  F.,  i,  528 

— as  speaker,  i,  392 
Crittenden,  John  J.,  i.  95,  529 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— amendments,  i,  367 

— compromise  and  Confederate  States,  i,  371 

— resolution  and  Republican  party,  iii,  192 
Croker,  Richard,  iii,  468 

— and  middle  states,  ii,  428 

— and  New  York  City,  ii,  542 
Croly,  Herbert,  i,  684 

Crop  reports,  i,  529 

— of  Department  of  Agriculture,  1,  18 
Cross  vs.  Harrison  (dependencies),  i.  583 

— (incorporation  of  territory),  ii,  154 

— (military  occupation),  ii.  437 

— (territorial  status),  i,  208;  iii,  523 
Crossman  vs.  United  States  (dependencies),  I,  583 
— • (territorial  status),  iii,  524 

Croton  aqueduct,  and  New  York  City,  ii,  542 
Crowd,  psychology  of  the,  iii,  86 
Crown  in  British  political  system,  i,  530 
Colony,  iii.  85 

Crowninshield,  Benjamin  W.,  Secretary  of  Navy, 
i,  195  ; ii.  506 

Crozat,  Antoine,  Louisiana,  ii,  374 

Cruel  and  unusual  punishments,  iii,  120 

Cruelty  to  animals,  i,  530 

— -to  children,  i,  531 

Cruisers  and  naval  vessels,  11,  500 

Cruising  convention,  i,  531 

— (slave  trade),  iii,  315 

Crutcher  vs.  Kentucky  (interstate  commerce),  ii, 
219 

Cuha,  i,  531 

— see  Annexations  of  United  States,  i,  46 

— and  Cuban  diplomacy,  i,  532 

— and  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  37 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  467,  468 


Cuba,  Ostend  Manifesto  and,  i,  46 

— see  Platt  Amendment,  ii,  697 
— ■ protectorate  of,  iii,  83 

— Republic  of,  i,  534 

— see  Spain,  diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  367 

— see  also  Territory,  acquired,  status  of,  iii,  524 

— see  also  Virginias  episode,  iii,  622 

Cuban  annexation  and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 

— insurrections,  1868-1898,  i,  534 

— treaty  of  1903  and  reciprocity,  iii,  160 
Culebra,  and  Panama  Canal,  ii,  600 
Culiou  Island,  ii,  683 

Cumberland  River,  iii,  663 

— Road,  i,  535  ; iii,  232 

bill,  and  internal  improvements,  ii,  202 

— - — sco  also  Public  works,  iii,  113 
Cumings,  Thomas  B.,  and  Nebraska,  ii,  509 
Cummings  vs.  Missouri  (fines),  ii,  17 

— (pardon,  constitutional  principles  of),  ii,  608 
— - (reconstruction),  iii,  168 

Cummins,  Albert  B.,  and  party  leadership,  ii,  630 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  200 

— see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics,  ill, 

673 

Cunningham,  C.  E.,  vice-presidential  candidate, 
iii,  37 

Curative  statute,  i,  535 

Curial  system,  of  suffrage,  iii,  457 

Currency,  i,  535 

— associations,  i,  536 
national,  ii,  492 

— certificates,  and  paper  money  in  the  United 

States,  ii,  606 

— comptroller  of  the,  1,  367 

and  Federal  Reserve  Act,  iii,  203 

— continental,  i,  536 

— in  economic  history  of  United  States,  i,  623 

— elasticity  of  the,  i,  650 

— emergency,  i,  527 

— fractional,  i,  536 

— government  restrictions  upon,  i,  190 

— and  notes.  United  States,  ii,  563 

— old  tenor  bills,  ii,  580 

— questions,  and  the  frontier  in  American  de- 

velopment, ii,  63 

— redemption  of,  iii,  169 
Curtin,  Andrew  G.,  iii,  644 
Curtis,  Benjamin  It.,  iii,  462 

— George  William,  and  appointments  to  office,  i, 

53 

and  civil  service  commission,  i,  283 

and  merit  system,  ii,  419 

and  Mugwumps,  ii,  474 

— James  Langdon,  American  Convention,  i,  34 

— —vote  for,  iii,  37 
Cushing,  Caleb,  i,  536 

— attorney  general,  i.  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— Chinese  treaty,  i,  261 

— quoted  on  parliamentary  practice,  ii.  617 

— see  Treaties  of  United  States,  iii,  567 
Cushing,  William,  iii,  462 

chief  justice,  i,  255 

Custer,  George  A.,  iii.  652 
Custom,  in  international  law,  ii,  213 

— and  law,  i,  302 

— as  the  origin  of  law.  ii,  265 
— -and  public  opinion,  iii.  102 
Customs  Appeals.  Court  of.  i.  58,  503 
— - as  an  administrative  tribunal,  i,  506 
Customs,  collector  of,  i,  313 

— - division  of.  i,  537 

— duties,  collection  of,  iii,  214 
rates  of,  i,  537 

— in  financial  systems  of  Europe,  ii,  2 

— receipts  from,  i,  181 

— service,  naval  officer  in,  ii,  499 

— surveyor  of.  iii,  462 
— - union,  i,  537 

Cutler,  Manasseh,  and  Ordinance  of  1787,  ii,  586 
Cut-ticket,  i.  537 

C.vgnaeus,  Otto,  manual  training,  ii.  392 
Cylatt  vs.  United  States  (Thirteenth  Amend- 
ment), iii,  536 

“Czar”  Reed,  i,  537  : iii,  170 

Czar  of  Russia  and  disarmament,  i,  596 

Dago,  i,  538 

Dakota,  i,  538 

Dallas,  Alexander  J.,  i.  538 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  195 

■ — • Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii.  566 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii,  648 

Dallas,  George  M.,  Vice-President,  iii,  616 
and  Democratic  party,  i,  566 

— — vote  for.  iii.  25 
Dalles,  The,  iii,  663 
Dana,  Francis,  iii,  243 

— see  Armed  neutrality,  i,  75 
Danbury  Hatters’  case,  iii,  304 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Dance  halls,  regulation  of,  i,  41 
Dancing,  among  Indians,  ii,  164 
Dane,  Nathan,  and  Ordinance  of  1787,  ii,  58G 
Dangerous  callings,  i,  538 
Danish  Sound  dues,  i,  539 

— American  influence  in  abolishing,  ii,  210 
Danish  West  Indies,  iii,  676 

— ■ proposed  annexation  of,  i,  46,  539 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  467 

Daniel  Dull  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  218 
Daniel,  Peter  V.,  iii,  462 

— William,  vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  36 
Daniels,  Josephus,  Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 
— ■ cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

Daniels,  Wiuthrop  M.,  ii,  225 

Damages,  i,  538 

— -consequential,  i,  538 

Dams,  and  interstate  commerce,  ii,  219 

— - see  Rivers,  iii,  229 

Danube,  in  international  law,  iii,  528 

— navigation  of,  ii.  502 
Dartmouth  College,  iii,  410 

— case  (New  Hampshire),  ii,  529 
(law  of  the  land),  ii,  319 

(impairment  of  contract),  i,  458,  530 

and  constitutional  limitations,  i,  443 

Dark  and  bloody  ground,  i,  539 

— horse,  i,  539 

- — — and  nomination  of  the  president,  ii,  551 
Davenport  vs.  Newton  (nolle  prosequi),  ii,  548 
Davila,  Discourses  of,  i,  6 ; ii,  720 
Davis,  Bancroft,  in  Geneva  arbitration,  il,  73 

— Cushman,  K„  i.  540 

— David,  ii,  295  ; iii,  462 

Liberal  Republican  party,  ii,  344 

— George  W.,  as  Confederate  cabinet  officer,  i,  219, 

372 

— Henry  G.,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  575 

— — vote  for,  iii,  32,  42 

— Henry  W.,  iii,  635 

— Jefferson,  biography,  i,  540 

cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

Confederate  States,  president  of,  1,  371 

and  Hampton  Roads  Conference,  ii,  109 

see  Rebellion,  iii,  157 

quoted  ou  bases  of  secession,  iii,  277 

— - — Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 

— Lieutenant  Governor,  and  Mississippi,  ii,  454 

— T.  W.,  speaker,  i,  390 

Davis,  In  re  investigations,  legislative,  ii.  237 
Davis- Smith  Co.,  Ex  rel.  Clausen  (industrial  in- 
surance), ii,  189 
Dawes  Act,  i,  32 

— in  Indian  policy  of  the  United  States,  ii,  163 
Dawes,  Thomas,  Jr.,  quoted  on  social  compact, 

iii.  325 

Dawson,  N.  H.  R.,  i,  635 
— • City.  iii.  704 

Day,  William  R.,  cabinet  officer,  i.  197  : iii,  402 

— United  States  supreme  court,  iii,  462 
Day  in  court,  i,  541 

Day’s  work  system  on  public  works,  i,  459 
Dayton,  J.,  speaker,  i,  389 

— William  Lewis,  i,  541 

and  Republican  party,  iii,  191 

vote  for,  iii,  28 

Dead,  care  of,  and  health,  public,  ii,  120 
Deadlocks  in  legislation,  i,  541 

— and  Senators,  election  of,  iii,  294 
Deaf  and  dumb,  public  care  of,  i,  541 

— public  care  of,  i,  557 

Dealev,  Professor,  quoted  on  distrust  of  legisla- 
tures, i,  442 

Dealing  in  futures,  iii,  430 
Deals  in  polities,  i,  542 
Dean  schedule,  ii,  18 
Deane,  Silas,  biography,  i,  542 

Dearborn.  Henry,  cabinet  officer,  i,  195  ; ii,  506  ; 
iii,  648 

— iii,  651 

Death,  causes  of,  iii.  624 
— - rate,  statistics  and  the,  iii,  421 
— ■ rates,  iii,  623 

— tax,  iii,  493 

Debate  in  House  of  Representatives,  ii,  133 

— limitation  of.  and  rules  of  Congress,  iii,  237 
Debates  in  legislatures,  i,  542 

— political,  i,  209 

Debs.  Eugene  V.,  biography,  i,  543 
— -and  Social  Democrats,  iii,  326 

— and  Socialist  Labor  Party,  iii,  338 

— vote  for  1900,  iii,  41 

— — 1904,  iii,  42 

1908,  iii,  44 

— . — 1912,  iii,  45 
Debt,  floating,  i.  543 

— imprisonment  for.  i,  544 

— limits  In  states  and  local  governments,  1,  544 

— national,  ii,  15 
changes  in,  ii,  15 

7 


Debt,  public,  administration  of,  i,  545 

economic  effects  of,  i,  551 

— ■ — funding  of,  i,  548 

interest  on,  i,  548 

principles  of,  i,  549 

— ■ — redemption  of,  i,  551 

refunding  of,  i,  552 

repudiation  of,  i,  552 

Debts,  in  financial  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  7 

— legislature  and  legislative  reform,  ii,  341 

— public,  ii,  14 

Debtors'  exemptions  as  impairments  of  contract, 
i,  458 

Dc  Give,  of  Hobbes,  ii,  725 

Declaration  of  the  Causes  and  Necessity  of  Tak- 
iny  up  Arms,  i,  588 

Declaration  of  Independence,  i,  553  ; ii,  719 
• and  Revolution,  right  of,  iii,  223 

— — Mecklenburg,  ii,  416 

and  naturalization,  law  of,  ii,  498 

— - — and  the  recall,  iii,  157 

— — and  slavery,  iii,  317 

— of  the  intention  to  be  naturalized,  i,  556;  ii, 

497 

— of  London,  on  blockades,  i,  135 

and  continuous  voyages,  i,  454 

— of  Paris,  i,  556 

— - — (privateers),  iii,  66 

— of  rights  and  grievances  of  Continental  Con- 

gress, i,  452 

— of  war,  i,  556 

Declarations,  in  international  law,  iii,  570 
Declaratory  Act.  and  Revolution,  American,  causes 
of,  iii,  220 

— statute,  i,  557 

and  separation  of  powers,  iii,  297 

Declared  exports,  i,  447 
Decoration  Day,  i,  557 
Decree,  legislative  power,  ii,  337 
De  domino  marts,  ii,  208 
Deeds,  recorder  of,  iii,  169 
Deerfield  massacre,  i,  319 
De  facto  government,  i,  557 

— recognition  of  a,  iii,  163 

De  facto  vs.  de  jure  sovereignty,  iii,  364 
Defective  classes,  deaf  and  dumb,  i,  542 

— see  Feeble  minded,  i,  725 

— public  care  of,  i,  557 
Defective  delinquents,  i,  525 
— -see  Reformatories,  iii.  174 
Defectives,  see  Epileptics,  i,  672 

— public  institutions  for,  i,  558 

— state  institutions  for,  administration  of,  ii,  185 
Defensor  Pads,  ii,  717 

Deferred  liabilities,  i,  545 
Deficiency  Bill,  i,  558 
Degrees,  academic,  i,  559 
De  jure  government,  i.  557,  559 
Delano,  Columbus,  ii,  199 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

Delavos,  Victor,  manual  training,  ii,  392 
Delaware,  i,  559 

— Bay,  sea  boundary  of,  i,  150 
— - — in  international  law.  iii.  528 

— constitutional  amendment  in,  i,  436 

— Division  Canal,  i,  221 

— and  Hudson  Canal,  i,  221 
— - Hundreds,  i,  559 

— and  middle  states,  ii,  427 
— - and  New  Sweden,  ii,  535 

— and  Raritan  Canal,  i,  221 

— River,  canals  along  the,  i,  221 
Delegates,  credentials  of,  i.  518 

— convention,  the,  and  nominating  systems,  ii, 

549 

— house  of,  legislation  and  legislative  problems  in 

cities,  ii.  326 

— and  primary,  direct,  iii.  51 
— - system,  and  primaries,  iii,  49 

— territorial,  i,  561 
Delegation,  i,  561 

Delfosse,  on  Halifax  commission,  ii,  108 

Delictual  rights,  iii.  227 

De  Lima  vs.  Bid  well  (insular),  ii,  187 

Delinquents,  correction  of,  i,  561 

De  Lovio  vs.  Boit,  i,  12 

Demand,  i,  678 

— - see  Value,  iii,  607 

— and  supply,  and  wages,  iii,  636 
Demiurgoi,  in  Greek  federations,  ii.  100 
Democracies,  see  also  States,  classifications  of,  iii, 

417 

Democratic  clubs,  ii,  711 
— - donkey,  i.  564 

— government,  i,  564 

— party,  i,  565 

Democratic  party  and  Democratic-Republican 
party,  i,  581 
— ■ — national,  ii,  493 

— vote,  1844,  iii,  25 


INDEX 


Democratic  vote,  see  Tables,  iii.  13  et  seq. 

— Republican  party  (1792-1828),  i,  576 

organization  of  the  county  of  New  York, 

iii,  467 

Democracy,  history  of,  i,  561 
Democracy  in  America,  ii,  731  ; iii,  539 
Democracy,  Jeffersonian,  ii,  250 

— the  problem  of.  and  party,  place  and  signifi- 

cance of,  ii,  641 

— see  Representative  government,  iii,  184 

— and  social  ethics,  i,  563 

— sec  States,  classification  of,  iii,  416 
Democrats,  social,  iii,  326 

Demonetization,  see  Silver  coinage  controversy, 
iii,  310 

Demos  krateo  principle,  i,  581 
Dennison,  Edward,  iii,  300 

— William,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii,  767 
Denmark,  suffrage  in,  iii,  458 

Denomination  of  paper  money  in  the  United  States, 
ii,  606 

Dent,  Judge,  and  Mississippi,  ii,  454 

Dental  schools,  iii,  266 

Dentists,  regulation  of,  ii,  288 

Density  of  population  of  United  States  (map), 

ii,  754 

Denver,  sec  Physics  and  politics,  ii.  686 

— and  Rio  Grande,  and  Pacific  railroad,  ii,  597 
Departments,  in  French  administration,  i,  505 

— of  government,  reports  of.  iii,  182 
Departmental  organization,  of  railroads,  iii,  137 
Dependencies  and  colonies,  iii,  527 

— suffrage  iu,  iii,  446 

- — of  the  United  States,  i,  581;  iii,  519 
Dependent  people,  i,  584 

— states  and  unities  having  qualified  status,  i,  584 
Deposit  of  public  fund,  i,  585 

Depositary  of  funds,  see  Treasury  department, 

iii,  563 

Deposits,  removal  of,  iii,  177 
Depressions,  economic,  i,  526 
Deputies,  legal  authority  of,  i,  586 
Deputy  governor,  i,  586 

Derelicts,  see  Revenue  cutter  service,  iii,  212 
Derrick,  William  S.,  Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 
Des  Moines  plan  of  commission  government,  i, 
345  ; ii.  239 

— in  development  of  municipal  government,  ii,  482 

— River,  controversy  over  the,  i,  166 
Desert  land,  i,  586 

— Act,  ii,  241 

- — reclamation,  see  Public  Works,  iii,  115 
Deseret,  self-organized  territory  of,  i,  586 

— state,  see  Utah,  iii,  602 
Designs,  and  patent  office,  ii,  650 

Despatch  No.  266,  and  Spain,  diplomatic  rela- 
tions with,  iii,  368 
Despotism,  and  monarchy,  ii,  459 
Destiny,  man  of,  ii,  390 

— manifest,  ii,  391 

Destroyer  (naval  vessels),  ii,  500 
Destruction,  and  police  power,  ii,  707 
Detective  inspectors,  ii,  705 
Detectives,  legal  status  of.  iii,  340 

— see  Pinkerton  men,  ii,  692 

— public,  i,  587 

Determinism,  and  criminology,  i,  523 
Detention  homes,  i,  587 
Detroit,  budget  of,  i,  183 
Devans,  Charles,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

Devine,  Dr.,  quoted  on  poverty  and  poor  relief,  ii, 
768 

Dexter.  Samuel,  cabinet  officer,  i,  195 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii,  648 

— Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 
Dewey,  Melvil,  iii,  600 

Diaz,  and  Mexico,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii, 
424 

Dicev.  A.  V.,  on  English  popular  opinion,  iii, 
104 

— on  unconstitutional  law,  ii,  316 

— on  prerogative,  ii,  773 

Dick  law  of  1903  and  militarism,  ii,  432 
Dickens,  Ashbury,  Secretary  of  Treaury,  iii,  566 
Dickering  in  politics,  iii,  548 
Dickerson,  Mahlon,  Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

Dickinson,  Don  M.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii,  767 

— Daniel  S.,  iii,  641 

— John,  biography,  i,  588 

-and  Declaration  of  Independence,  i,  554 

and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 

■ — • — political  theories  of,  ii,  719 

— Jacob  McG.,  biography,  i.  587 

Secretary  of  War,  iii.  649 

cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

Differentials  in  railroad  traffic,  1,  588 
Diminishing  returns,  i,  588 

Dingley  Tariff,  i,  588  ; iii,  480 


Dingley  and  reciprocity,  iii,  160 

— schedules  of,  iii,  482 
Diplomacy,  attache,  i,  92 

— charge  d'affaires,  i,  243 

— diplomatic  commissioners,  i,  350 
— - and  diplomatic  usage,  i,  589 

— effect  of,  on  American  frontier,  ii,  63 
— -envoy  extraordinary,  i,  671 

— see  also  Foreign  policy  of  the  United  States, 

ii,  35 

— - minister  plenipotentiary,  ii,  446 

— ministers  of  the  United  States,  ii,  446 

— See  also  under  Legations 

— See  also  under  I’ersona  grata 

— protocol,  iii,  84 

— see  Ratification  of  treaties,  iii,  151 
— - secretary  of  legation,  iii,  279 

— shirt  sleeve,  iii,  308 
Diplomatic  agent,  i,  591,  593 

— agreements,  i,  591 

— Bureau,  i,  592 

— - commissioners,  i,  350 

— correspondence,  i.  592 

— instructions,  i,  592 

— relations.  See  countries  by  name. 

— representatives,  children  of,  i,  271 

— service  of  the  United  States,  i,  593 

Direct  democracy,  and  state  governments,  iii, 
389 

— and  indirect  taxes,  iii,  498 

— legislation,  ii,  331 

— nominations,  see  Primary,  iii,  49 
— - primary,  iii,  51 

in  popular  government,  ii,  737 

and  nomination  of  the  President,  ii,  551 

See  various  states  by  name. 

-and  public  opinion,  iii,  103 

— system,  public  works,  iii,  116 

— taxes,  iii,  507 

refunding  of,  i,  692 

see  also  School  funds,  state,  iii,  256 

constitutional  compromise  as  to,  i,  419 

Directory  statutes,  i,  596 
Director  of  posts,  ii,  763 
Directors  of  corporations,  i,  595 
Disabilities,  political,  i,  596 
Disarmament,  i,  596 
Discounts,  see  Banking  methods,  i.  111 
Discourses  of  Davila,  i,  6 
Discoveries,  in  equity,  i,  674 

Discovery  of  domain,  in  international  law,  ii, 
209 

Discharge  certificate,  of  soldiers  and  sailors,  iii, 
350 

Discipline,  military,  ii,  436 
Discrimination  iu  railroad  rates,  i,  596 

— and  interstate  commerce  legislation,  ii,  227 
Diseases,  contagious,  i,  450 

— - occupational,  ii,  568 
Disfranchisement,  i,  596 
Dismal  Swamp  Canal,  i.  221 
Dispensaries,  free,  i,  597 

— in  liquor  legislation,  ii,  358 

— See  also  under  Liquor  question. 

Dispensary  system,  ii,  360 
Disraeli,  and  Tory  party,  i,  401 
Dissolution  of  corporations,  i,  473 
— -of  Parliament,  ii,  616 

— in  legislative  system  in  Europe,  ii,  339 
Distributing  clauses,  and  separation  of  powers,  iii, 

296 

Distribution  Bill,  Clay’s,  iii,  95 
— - economic,  i,  597 

— and  transportation,  iii,  553 

— of  population  of  tTnited  States  (map),  ii,  745, 

746,  747,  748,  750,  752 

— powers,  i,  600 
District  attorney,  ii,  273 

— - and  attorney  general  of  state,  i,  94 

— federal,  i,  600 
District,  city,  i,  604 

— courts,  original  jurisdiction  of,  i.  513 
— ■ — see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii.  248 
in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 

— judge,  federal,  i,  513 

— leader,  and  machine,  political,  ii,  384 
— ■ — -see  Tammany,  iii,  469 

— nurses,  ii,  567 

— of  Columbia,  i,  601 

— — and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  692 
federal  sites  in,  ii,  263 

— - — and  incorporation  of  territory,  ii.  154 

see  also  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  249 

see  also  South,  iii,  353 

suffrage  in,  iii,  446 

— -transfer  of,  i.  163 

— of  Louisiana,  and  Orleans  territory,  ii,  593 

— system  and  general  ticket  system,  i,  603 
— ■ — rural  administrative,  i,  604 
Dividends,  sec  Scrip,  iii,  274 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Dividends,  see  under  Stock. 

Divine  light  of  kings,  i,  605 

— and  Declaration  of  independence,  i,  554 

— in  political  theory,  ii,  724 

— theory  of  government,  ii,  90 

— theory  of,  in  Homan  law,  iii,  234 
Divorce  act  (uniform),  iii,  502 

— increase  of,  ii,  401 

— and  international  law,  private,  ii,  211 

— and  interstate  law,  ii,  231 

— and  marriage,  ii,  398 

sec  Vital  statistics,  iii,  625 

Division,  in  legislative  bodies,  iii,  632 

— in  parliamentary  law,  i,  606 

— of  labor,  i,  605 

— organization,  of  railroads,  iii,  136 

— of  powers,  i,  605 
Dix,  Dorothea  L.,  i,  606 

— John  A.,  iii,  566 

cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

Dixon,  Jeremiah,  and  Mason  and  Dixon’s  line,  ii, 
406 

Dobbin,  James  C.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; ii,  506 
Dockery  Commission,  i,  354 

— and  public  accounts,  iii,  88 
Dockery  law,  i,  368 

Docks,  and  municipal  government,  functions  of, 
ii,  476 

— wharves,  public,  i,  606 

Dockyards,  jurisdiction  of  United  States  over,  iii, 
518 

Documented  vessels,  and  merchant  marine,  ii,  418 
Documents,  House  and  Senate,  iii,  116 
Dog  tax,  iii,  490 

— and  libraries,  public,  ii,  349 

Doherty  vs.  Town  of  Ayer  (automobile),  i,  98 
Dole,  President,  and  Hawaiian  annexation,  ii,  114 
Dollar  a day  pension,  and  Democratic  party,  i, 
576 

— diplomacy,  i,  606 

— of  our  daddies,  i,  606 

sec  Silver  coinage  controversy,  iii,  311 

Dollar  Savings  I?k.  Co.  vs.  Bowen  (uniform  legisla- 
tion), iii,  591 

Domain,  in  international  law,  iii,  527 

— territorial,  and  international  law,  ii,  209 
Domesday  Book,  as  a census,  i,  235 
Domestic  economy,  manual  training,  ii,  392 

— industries,  see  Free  trade  and  protection,  ii, 

54 

Domicil,  i,  607 ; ii,  211 

— and  residence,  i,  607 

Dominican  Republic,  see  San  Domingo,  ii,  115 

— proposed  annexation  of,  i,  46 
Donaldson's  Public  Domain,  iii,  95 
Donelson.  Andrew  J.,  i,  38 

— vote  for,  iii,  28 
Dongan,  Thomas,  ii,  701 

— and  New  York,  ii,  536,  541 

Donnelly,  Ignatius,  and  Populist  party,  ii,  758 

— vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  42 
Dooley  vs.  United  States  (insular),  ii,  187 

— (taxation  of  exports),  iii,  501 

— (territorial  status),  iii,  524 
Dooming,  i,  88 

— - of  taxes,  iii.  509 

Dorr,  Thomas  Wilson,  i,  607 

Dorr  Rebellion,  i,  608;  ii,  195:  iii,  159 

— and  Suffrage  party,  iii,  458 

Dorsey's  “soap,”  and  Republican  party,  iii,  107 
Double  audit,  in  Treasury  Department,  iii,  88 

— citizenship,  i,  608 

— -profit  of  national  banks,  i,  116 
— - taxation,  iii,  495 

Doubtful  states,  party  system  in,  ii,  645 
Dough  face,  i,  608 

Douglas,  Stephen  A.,  biography,  i,  608 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  560 

— and  Freeport  Doctrine,  ii,  59 

— Little  Giant,  ii,  360 

— - and  middle  west,  ii,  430 

— and  popular  sovereignty,  ii,  739 
— -vote  for,  iii,  13,  29 

— see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics,  iii, 

671 

Douglass,  Frederick,  i,  609 
Dow,  Neal,  i,  609 
— -and  Prohibition  party,  iii,  77 

— vote  for,  iii.  35 
Dowieites,  i,  364 

Downes  vs.  Rhlwell  (insular),  ii,  187 ; iii,  597 
Draft  and  conscription,  i,  398 

— riots,  i,  609 

— ■ — -as  insurrections,  ii,  195 
Drafting  of  legislation,  i,  609 
Drago  Doctrine,  i,  610;  ii,  234 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  468 
Drainage,  i.  610 

— districts,  iii,  242 

— sec  Sewers,  iii,  301 


Drake,  Sir  Francis,  on  isthmus  canal,  i,  215 
Drawbacks,  see  Bounties,  i,  167 

— in  tariff  administration,  iii,  471 
Dreadnought  design,  and  naval  vessels,  ii,  500 
Dred  Scott  case,  i,  612 

— see  also  under  Citizenship  in  the  United  States, 

i,  272 

— • and  Democratic  party,  i,  568 

— and  growth  of  Constitution,  i,  420 
— - and  Republican  party,  iii,  191 
Drinking  cups,  public,  iii,  581 
Droit  administratif,  ii,  310 

Droit  d’aubaine,  iii,  568 

Droop  quota,  and  proportional  representation,  iii, 
80 

Drugs,  inspection  of,  as  a public  function,  ii,  1S4 
— - public  regulation  of,  i,  612 

— standardization  of,  ii,  118 
Druillette,  i,  319 

Drummers’  tax,  and  interstate  commerce,  ii,  219 
Drunkenness,  in  criminal  law,  ii,  318 

— regulation  of,  i,  613 
“Dry,”  i,  613 

— territory,  extent  of,  ii,  366 

Dual  citizenship  in  federal  state,  i,  719 

— government,  i,  613 

— ■ system,  and  party  government,  comparative,  ii, 
626 

— — contracts,  see  Subways,  iii,  442 
Dualist ic  theory  of  society,  iii,  341 

Duane,  William  J.,  Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 
— -cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— and  removal  of  deposits,  iii,  177 
DuCroeq,  quoted  on  judicial  power,  ii,  256 
Dudley,  Joseph,  and  New  England,  British  prov- 
ince. ii,  526 

— see  King's  province,  ii,  280 
Dudley's  “blocks  of  five,”  iii,  197 
Due  diligence,  i,  614 

— and  neutrality,  principles  of,  ii,  522 
Due  process  of  law.  i,  614,  673 

— law  of  the  laud,  ii,  319 

— and  nuisances,  abatement  of,  ii,  565 

— and  taxation,  ii,  10;  iii,  500 
Duke’s  laws  i,  616 

Dulaney,  Daniel,  political  theories  of,  ii,  719 
Duma,  iii,  457 

Dumb  and  deaf,  public  care  of,  i,  541 
Dummy  incorporators,  i,  471 
Dumoulin,  and  North  Dakota,  ii,  558 
Dunning,  William  A.,  political  theories  of,  ii,  720 
Duplessis-Mornay,  ii,  728 

DuPont  de  Nemours  Powder  Co.  (trust),  iii,  580 

Durand,  Edward  Dana,  i,  616 

Durax  pavements,  ii,  655 

Durgin,  Samuel  H.,  iii  257 

Durham,  Lord,  and  Canada,  iii,  127 

— ■ and  Ontario,  ii,  581 

— ■ quoted,  on  responsible  government  in  Canada, 
iii,  206 

Dutch  Guiana,  ii,  104 

— West  Indian  Company,  and  New  Y'ork,  ii,  535 
Duties,  ad  valorem,  i,  617 

— appraisers  of,  i,  58 

— compound,  i,  6i7 

— • drawbacks  of,  i,  617 

— foreign  valuations  for,  i,  618 

— mixed  (tariff),  i,  617 

— on  passengers’  baggage,  ii,  650 

— see  Rights  and  remedies,  iii,  227 

— specific,  i,  618 

— See  also  under  Tariff. 

Duty  on  imports,  average  rate  of,  i,  618 
Duvall,  Gabriel,  iii,  462 
Dwellings,  model,  ii.  459 

— inviolability  of,  iii,  655 

Dyea  in  Alaska  boundary  controversy,  i,  27 

E pluribus  unum,  i,  672 
Earle.  William  II. . ii.  654 

Earnings  and  capitalization,  of  railroads,  iii,  133 
“Earth-butchery.”  i,  620 
Easement,  i.  620 
— ■ see  Servitude,  iii,  299 

— see  Streets,  iii.  434 
East  India  Company,  i,  585 

— • Jersey,  and  New  Jersey,  ii,  531 

— Florida,  i.  620 

Eastern  highlands  of  United  States,  ii,  6S9 

— standard  time.  iii.  376 

— townships  (Quebec),  iii.  127 

Eaton.  Dorman  B.,  and  Pc-ndleton  Act,  ii,  661 

— John,  i.  635 

— John  H„  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; iii.  649 
Eavesdroppers,  and  right  to  privacy,  iii,  64 
Economic  cost.  5,  482 

— -credit,  i.  518 

— crises,  i.  526 

— distribution,  i.  597 

— - history  of  the  United  States,  i,  620 


INDEX 


Economic  interests,  and  police  power,  ii,  707 

— theory,  history  of,  i,  025 

Economics,  capital  and  capitalization,  i,  225 

— collectivism,  i,  313 

— corners  in  commodities,  i,  409 

— competition,  i,  365 

— diminishing  returns,  i,  588 

— distribution,  economic,  i,  597 

— division  of  labor,  i,  605 

— exchange,  principles  of,  i,  677 

— fair  wage,  i,  708 

- — Gresham's  law,  ii,  102 

— labor  and  wages,  theory  of,  ii,  284 

— laissez  faire,  ii,  303 

See  also  under  Marginal  Cost. 

— mercantilism,  ii,  418 

— see  Political  economy,  ii,  711 

— see  also  Political  theories,  ii,  723 

— and  political  science,  ii,  715 

— price,  economic  theory  of,  iii,  48 

— production,  iii,  71 

— profit  sharing,  iii,  73 

— profits,  iii.  74 

See  also  under  Property. 

See  also  under  Protection. 

— rent,  iii,  ISO 

— supply  and  demand,  iii,  461 

— taxation,  principles  of,  iii,  504 

— see  Transportation,  economic  problems  of,  iii, 

553 

— see  Trusts,  iii,  576 

— unearned  increment,  iii,  587 

— value,  iii,  606 

— wages,  iii.  635 

regulation  of,  iii,  636 

— wpalth.  national,  iii,  664 
“Economists,"  ii.  730 

Economy,  obstacles  to,  in  Congress,  i,  62 

— and  social  reform,  i,  564 
Ecuador,  i,  629 
Edmunds.  George  F..  i,  629 

— and  Mugwumps,  ii,  474 

Fdmunds-Tucker  law  (polygamy),  i,  629;  iii,  99 
Education  Act  of  1902  (England),  i,  490 

— agricultural,  i,  630 

— of  the  blind,  i,  639 

— board  of,  i.  634,  635 

— board  of  (British),  i,  689 

— certificates  to  teachers,  i,  241 

— commissioner  of.  i.  634,  642  ; ii,  199 

— compulsory,  i,  636 

— coeducation  and  coordinate,  i,  305 
— ■ college,  i,  314 

— compulsory,  child  labor  and,  i,  256 
- — expenditures  for.  i,  694 

— in  forestry,  i,  638 

— as  a function  of  government,  i,  631 

— industrial,  i,  637 

— see  Manual  training,  ii.  392 

— military  and  naval,  i.  638 

— and  negro  problem,  ii,  516 

— recent  tendencies  in.  i.  641 

— See  also  under  Schools. 

— State  Board  of.  i.  140 

— state  superintendents  of,  i,  642 

— in  state  systems  of  finance,  ii,  4 

— superintendent  of,  iii,  381 

— technical,  i,  642 

— of  women,  i.  640 
Educational  administration,  i,  644 

— land  grants,  i,  645 

— statistics,  i.  647 

— test  for  suffrage,  iii,  445 
Efficiency,  i,  650 

Egerton  vs.  Brownlow  (public  policy),  iii,  105 
Eggs,  state  inspection  of,  ii,  184 
Egypt,  diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  14 
- — extraterritoriality  in.  i.  707 

— and  near  east,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  508 

— see  Suzerainty,  iii,  463 
Egvntians,  ii,  207 

Eight  ballot  box  law,  i.  650 

— and  negro  suffrage,  ii,  518 
Eight-hour  day.  i,  650 

— for  child  labor,  i.  256 
Elastic  clause,  i,  650 
Elasticity  of  the  currency,  i,  650 
Elba,  back  from,  i.  99 
Election  bets,  ii.  69 

— boards  and  commissions,  i,  141 

— certificate,  i.  651 

— see  Counted  out.  i.  487 

— day  and  presidential  elections,  iii,  9 

— district,  i.  604 ; ii.  772 
captain  of.  i,  229 

— laws  for  South,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  572 

— precincts,  iii.  242 

— see  Primary,  iii,  49 

— returns,  i,  651 


Election  system  of  the  United  States,  i,  652 

— systems,  comparison  of,  i,  654 

— tidal  wave,  iii,  537 
Elections.  See  also  under  Ballot. 

— boards  of,  ii.  369 

— see  Blocks  of  five,  i,  136 

— city  and  state  in,  i.  275 

— to  Congress  of  United  States,  i,  383 

— contested,  i,  655 
and  Senate,  iii,  290 

— see  District  system  and  general  ticket  system, 
i,  603 

— federal  control  of,  i,  656 

— heelers,  ii,  121 

— inspectors  of,  ii,  1S5 

— intimidation  at,  ii,  234 

— judges  of,  ii,  255 
— - minority  representation,  ii,  450 

— polls,  ii,  733 

— precinct,  electoral,  ii,  772 

— preliminary,  ii,  773 

— returning  boards,  iii.  210 

— and  nomination  papers,  ii.  552 

— nominating  systems,  ii.  548 

— see  Pivotal  state,  ii.  695 

— see  Plumping,  ii,  698 

— see  Plurality,  ii,  698 

— see  also  Straw  vote.  iii.  432 

— see  under  Voters,  iii,  629 
Elective  monarchy,  ii,  459 

— work  in  schools,  i,  641 
Electoral  college,  i,  657 

— presidential,  i,  465 
Electoral  commission,  i,  657 

— see  “Can’t  go  behind  the  returns,”  iii,  211 

— see  Counting  in  the  alternative,  i,  488 

— and  presidential  elections,  iii,  10 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  196 
Electoral  Count  Act  of  1887,  i,  659 

— for  President,  i.  658 

— law,  in  constitutions,  i,  432 
Electoral  frauds,  ii.  50 

— vote,  see  also  Twenty-second  joint  rule,  iii,  584 
Electorate,  the,  iii,  416 

— and  sovereignty  of  the  people,  iii,  363 
Electors,  legislative  system  in  Europe,  ii,  340 

— presidential,  i.  659  : iii,  8 

— see  Vote,  popular,  iii,  627 
Electric  bond  and  share  company,  ii,  124 

— power,  ii,  770 

— railroads,  iii.  138 
Electrical  securities  company,  ii.  124 
Electrification  of  steam  roads,  iii.  139 
Electrotechnical  commission,  the  international,  ii, 

216 

Elephant,  Republican,  i,  659 
Elevators,  freight  and  passenger,  i,  659 

— grain,  i.  600 
Eleventh  Amendment,  i,  660 

— see  United  States  vs.  Peters,  iii,  598 
Elgin,  Lord,  iii,  207 

— and  Ontario,  ii.  581 

Eliot.  Charles,  and  parks  and  boulevards,  ii,  611 

— Charles  W..  biography,  i.  661 

and  Mugwumps,  ii.  474 

— • John,  and  slavery,  iii,  317 
Elk  vs.  Wilkins  (Indians),  i,  272;  ii.  172 
Elkins,  Stephen  B.,  cabinet  officer,  i.  197  : iii,  649 

— Act  of  1903  (rebates),  i,  661;  ii,  227;  iii,  156 
Ellery,  William,  i.  554 

Ellerman  vs.  Chicago  Junction  Ry.  (directors), 
i,  595 

Ellis,  vote  for,  iii,  41 

— Island  hospital,  ii.  127 
— ■ — and  immigration,  ii,  146 
Ellmaker.  Amos,  i,  49 

— vote  for,  iii.  21 

Ellsworth,  Oliver,  supreme  court  United  States, 
iii.  462 

— - chief  justice,  i,  255 

— in  Federal  Convention,  i.  713 

— vote  for,  iii,  15 
Elmira  compact,  i,  661 

Ely,  Richard  T.,  analysis  of  monopolies,  ii,  464 
Emancipation  Proclamation,  i,  663 

— cabinet  and  the.  i.  201 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 

— and  slavery  controversy,  iii,  320 
Emancipation  by  states,  i,  661 
Embargo,  i.  663 
— cases,  and  treason,  ii,  196 
— -and  non-importation,  ii.  553 

— and  O grab  me  act.  ii,  573 
— - Act  and  continental  system,  i.  453 
— -—and  orders  in  council,  i,  663;  ii,  585;  iii, 

209 

Embargoes,  in  Hartford  Convention,  ii,  112 
Embassies,  in  diplomatic  service,  i,  593 

— special,  i,  594 

729 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Emergency  currency,  i,  527 

Emert  vs.  Missouri  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  219 
Emigration  from  the  United  States,  i,  004 
Eminent  domain,  i,  004 

— appropriation  of  property  under,  i,  58 

— city  planning  and,  i,  280 

— and  federal  sites,  ii,  203 

— and  impairment  of  contract,  i,  458 

— and  internal  improvements,  ii,  202 

— and  jurisdiction  of  United  States,  iii,  519 

— and  property,  rights  of,  iii,  79 

— and  public  property,  iii,  100 

— see  Public  use.  iii,  112 
Emoluments  of  public  officers,  i,  667 
Employees  and  officers,  distinguished,  i,  52,  667 ; 

iii,  101 

Employees  of  government,  i,  667 

salaries  of,  iii,  247 

Employers’  associations,  i,  667 

— and  labor  organizations,  ii,  293 
Employers’  liability,  i.  668  ; iii,  700 

— Act  of  1906,  ii,  228 

(uniform  state  legislation),  iii,  591 

(English),  ii,  189 

— assumption  of  risk  in,  i,  91 

— legislation,  and  police  power,  ii,  707 
Employment  agencies,  i,  668 

— conditions  of,  and  manufacturing,  relation  of 

government  to,  ii,  394 

— objectionable,  ii,  289 

— securing,  see  Charities,  i.  246 
Empresarios  (Texas),  iii,  529 
Enabling  act,  see  Territories,  iii,  521 
Enacting  clause,  legislative  assembly,  ii,  S36 
Enclaves,  iii,  527 

Enclosed  arc,  lighting,  electric,  ii,  353 
Enclosures  or  enclaves,  iii,  527 
Encomienda  system,  in  Philippine  Islands,  ii,  680 
Endicott,  William  C..  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  649 

— board,  on  coast  defense,  i,  300 

— Governor,  i,  35 
Enforcement  act  of  1870,  ii.  41 

Engineer  corps,  United  States  Army,  i,  670 

— on  public  works,  iii,  114 

— and  waterways,  iii,  661 
Engineering  schools,  iii,  266 
Engineers,  i,  699 

England,  codification  in,  i,  304 

— constitutional  amendment  in,  i,  418 

— local  government  in,  ii,  365 

— see  Mayor  in  European  cities,  ii,  415 
- — parish  council  in,  ii,  609 

— representative  government  in.  iii,  185 

See  also  under  Great  Britain. 

Engle  dam  (irrigation),  ii,  243 
English  America,  i,  34 

— colonists  and  Indians,  ii.  170 
English  in  schools,  compulsory,  i,  633 

— social  insurance,  ii,  189 

— type,  of  party  government,  comparative,  ii,  626 
English,  William  H„  and  Democratic  party,  i,  572 

— Bill,  see  Kansas  struggle,  ii,  277 

— (Ind.).  vote  for,  iii,  35 
Englishman's  Home  and  militarism,  ii,  433 
Engraving  and  Printing.  Bureau  of,  i,  670 
Engrossing,  and  police  power,  ii,  708 
Enquetes,  legislative  system  in  Europe,  ii,  339 
Enforcement,  i,  669 

— Act  of  May  31,  1870,  and  negro  suffrage,  ii, 

517 

Engrossment,  see  Bills,  course  of,  i,  127 
Enlistment,  naval  and  military,  i,  670  : iii,  350 
Enrolled  bill,  see  Statutes,  state,  iii,  425 
Enrollment,  see  Bills,  course  of,  i,  127 
Entangling  alliances,  i,  671 
Entomology,  Bureau  of.  i.  18,  671 

— public  health  and,  ii.  117 
Entrepreneur’s  cost,  i.  482 
Entryman,  in  homesteads,  ii.  126 
“Enumerated”  colonial  products,  and  the  Naviga- 
tion Acts,  ii.  501 

— in  British  colonial  policy,  i,  621 

— goods,  i,  5 

— powers,  constitutional  construction  of,  i,  445 
Enumerators,  of  census,  i,  235 

Envoys  extraordinary,  i,  589,  671 
Epicureans,  political  theories  of,  ii,  716 
Epidemic  fund,  ii.  118 

Epidemics  and  contagious  diseases,  ii.  118 
Epileptics,  public  care  of.  i.  557,  672 

— state  institutions  for.  administration  of,  ii,  185 
Equador.  diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  356 
Equal  Rights  party,  i.  672 

— suffrage  and  Senate  of  United  States,  iii,  291 

party,  iii,  695 

Equality  before  the  law.  i.  673 

— see  Slaughter  house  cases,  iii,  314 
Equality  of  states,  iii.  418 
Equalization,  board  of  (St.  Louis),  iii,  246 

— in  state  systems  of  finance,  ii,  5 


Equalization  of  taxes,  iii,  509 
Equity,  i,  673 

— see  also  Chancery,  i,  243 

— cases,  see  also  State  judiciary,  iii,  397 

— and  law,  civil,  ii,  313 

Era  of  good  feeling,  in  Congress,  i,  389,  580,  675 
Erdman  Act,  i,  67 

Ericsson’s  Monitor,  and  Navy,  Department  of,  ii, 
503 

Erie  canal,  i,  220,  675 

— see  Canal  Ring,  i,  218 

— as  Clinton's  ditch,  i,  298 

— see  Public  works,  iii,  115 
Error,  writ  of,  iii,  702 

Erskine,  treaty  with  United  States  (1808),  i,  592 
Escanaba  Co.  vs.  Chicago  (admission  of  states), 
iii,  415 

— (interstate  commerce),  ii,  219 
Escheat,  i,  675 

Eskimo  government,  ii,  161 
Essex  junto,  i,  675  ; ii,  691 

— Cabot  and  the,  i,  202 

— and  Federalist  party,  i,  723 

Estimate  and  Apportionment,  Board  of,  i,  144 

— in  preparing  budget,  i,  183 
Estimates,  Treasury,  i.  181,  675 

— and  committee  system,  i,  359 

Etat  civil,  France,  and  mayor  in  European 
cities,  ii,  415 

Ethics  and  political  science,  ii,  715 

— social,  and  democracy,  i,  563 
Ethnology,  bureau  of  America,  iii,  323 
Eugenic  marriage,  ii,  400 

Eugenics,  see  Family,  i,  709 

— and  social  reform,  problems  of,  iii.  331 
- — - and  sociology,  iii,  344 

Eupatridse,  iii,  07 

Europe,  legislative  system  in,  ii,  339 

— municipal  government  in  continental,  ii,  478 

— party  system  in,  ii,  646 
European  concert,  i,  368 

— system  of  finance,  ii.  1 

Eustis,  William,  cabinet  officer,  i,  195  ; iii,  648 
Eustis,  and  Netherlands,  diplomatic  relations 
with,  ii.  519 

Evarts,  William  M.,  attorney  general,  i,  95 

— biography,  i,  670 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197:  iii,  402 
Everett,  Edward,  i,  431,  676 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— vote  for,  iii,  29 
Evidence,  i,  676 

Evolutionism  and  sociology,  iii,  344 
Ewing.  Thomas,  i,  676  : ii,  199 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  190 

— and  Middle  West,  ii.  430 

— and  Ohio  idea,  ii,  576 
Ex  post  facto  law,  i,  700 

— see  Retrospective  legislation,  iii,  210 
Examinations  for  employment  and  professions, 
i.  677 

Examining  Commissioner  vs.  Wetzel  County 
Court  (societies),  iii,  341 
Excellency,  title  of.  in  diplomacy,  i,  590 
Excess  condemnation  in  city  planning,  i,  280 
Exchange,  banking  methods  in,  i,  112 

— business,  i,  678 

— of  funds,  i.  677 

— principles  of,  i,  677 

— service  of  Smithsonian  Institution,  iii,  323 
Exchequer,  chancellor  of,  in  cabinet  government, 

i.  194 

— - and  law,  administrative,  ii,  310 
Excise  taxes,  i,  679  ; iii,  505 
Exclusion  of  aliens,  i,  29 

— of  Japanese  laborers,  ii.  248 

Execution,  in  German  federal  organization,  ii,  81 

— in  German  law.  i,  718 
— - of  process,  i,  680 
Executive  agreements,  i,  681 

— centralization,  i,  239 

— commissions,  i,  351 

— - committee  of  corporations,  i,  595 
and  commissions,  i,  351 

— and  Congress,  i,  680 

— council  of  state,  ii,  91 
of  Switzerland,  i,  6S8 

— departments,  i.  686 

-in  constitutions,  i.  440 

— — -and  law,  administrative,  ii,  310 

— discretionary  right  of  action  of.  iii.  297 

— and  executive  reform  in  the  American  system, 

i.  682 

— fear  of.  in  revolutionary  period,  iii,  392 

— and  judiciary,  i.  685 
- — mansion,  iii.  687 

— member,  see  Tammany,  iii,  469 

— messages,  ii,  419 


INDEX 


Executive  ordinances,  ii,  586 

— order  reservation,  ii,  167 

— power,  i,  687 

in  American  cities,  mayor  and,  ii,  411 

— See  also  under  President. 

— proclamations,  iii,  71 

— and  representative  government,  iii,  85 

— sessions,  i,  688 

see  Publicity,  iii,  118 

— state,  ii,  91  ; iii,  382 
boards,  i,  140 

— system  of  Great  Britain,  i,  688 

— usurpation,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  575 
Exempt  class  in  civil  service,  i,  284 
Exemption  law.  and  mortgage  taxation,  iii,  501 
Exemptions,  debtors'  as  impairments  of  contracts, 

i.  458 

Exequatur,  i,  689 

Exhibitions,  public  aid  to,  i,  700 

Expansion,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  566 

— in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  38 

— of  United  States,  i,  690 
Expatriation,  i,  690;  ii,  37,  205 

— and  allegiance,  i,  31 

— in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  37 

— and  indefeasible  allegiance,  ii,  155 
Expediting  act,  the,  ii,  227 
Expenditures,  federal,  i.  690 

— in  financial  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  6 

— state  and  local,  i,  693 
Experiment  stations,  agricultural,  i,  18 
- — • office  of,  i,  698 

Experts  in  American  government,  i,  698 

— see  State  legislature,  iii,  400 

— referee  board  of  consulting,  iii,  170 

— in  government,  see  Tariff  administration,  iii, 

473 

Explosives,  accidents,  railroad  and  steamship,  i,  4 
- — and  health,  public,  ii,  120 

— regulation  of,  i,  700 

— ■ restrictions  on,  i,  190 
Exports,  i,  331 

— in  interstate  commerce  decisions,  ii,  226 

— taxation  of,  iii,  501 
Expositions,  public  aid  to,  i,  700 

— see  Treasury  department,  iii,  563 
Expository  statute,  i,  557 

Exposure  hazard  in  building  laws,  i.  186 
Expounder  of  the  Constitution,  i,  701 
Express  companies,  and  interstate  commerce,  ii, 
219 

— as  public  utilities,  iii,  112 
Express  powers,  i,  701 

— and  corporation  charters,  i,  472 
Express  service,  regulation  of,  i,  701 
Expulsion  from  United  States,  i.  703 

— of  members  of  legislative  bodies,  i,  704 
Expunging  matter  from  the  record  in  parliamen- 
tary law,  ii.  618 

— resolution,  i.  704 
Extension  teaching,  iii,  599 
Extra  session,  i,  705 
Extradition,  ii.  65.  230 

— with  Great  Britain,  ii,  96 

— international,  i,  704 

— interstate,  i,  705 

— see  also  Treaties  of  United  States,  iii,  568 
“Extra-lateral"  mining  law,  ii,  443 
Extraterritorial  effect  of  law,  ii,  210 

— recognition  of  rights,  ii,  210 
Extraterritoriality,  i,  705 

— of  aliens,  i,  30 

— in  Turkey,  ii,  507 

— capitulations,  Turkish,  i,  228 

— see  Treaties  of  United  States,  iii.  567 
Extravagance  in  cost  of  government,  i,  484 

Fabian  policy,  i,  708 

— socialists,  i.  708 
Fnbius,  American,  i,  35 

Factions,  see  Party,  place  and  significance  of, 

ii,  640 

Factories,  regulation  of,  ii,  300 

Factory  construction,  building  laws  as  to,  i,  185 

- — -inspection,  and  health,  public,  ii,  120 

laws,  manufacturing,  relation  of  government 

to,  ii,  393 

— legislation,  i,  708 

— -mutuals,  and  fire  protection,  ii,  19 

— schools,  iii,  271 
Faculty  tax,  iii,  491 

— and  taxation,  principles  of,  iii,  504 
Fair  value  of  public  utilities,  iii,  600 

— wage,  i,  708 

Fairbank  vs.  United  States  (taxation  of  ex- 
ports), iii,  501 

Fairbanks,  Charles  W.,  Vice-President,  iii,  616 

— vote  for,  iii,  42 

Fairchild,  Charles  S.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  566 
Fairlie,  J.  A.,  and  political  theories,  ii,  722 

144 


Fairs,  agricultural,  i,  709 
"Faith  and  credit,”  i,  709 
Falkland  Islands,  iii,  701 
Fall  line,  the,  ii,  687 

Falmouth,  burning  of,  and  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, i,  554 
Family,  i,  709 

— compact,  and  Ontario,  ii,  581 

— desertion  act  (uniform),  iii,  592 

— relations,  and  international  law,  private,  ii, 

212 

— and  socialism,  iii,  333 
Far  west,  i,  710 

Farewell  address,  Washington’s,  i,  711 
Farmer  in  colonization,  i,  325 
Farmer  refuted,  ii,  719 
Farmers’  alliance,  i,  711 

— and  Ocala  platform,  ii,  568 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  197 
Farmers’  associations,  i,  712 

— Mutual  Benefit  Association,  i,  711 
Farming.  See  under  Agriculture. 

— farming  out  system  (paupers),  i,  246 
Farms,  county,  i,  491 

Fashion,  iii,  87 
Father  Abraham,  i,  712 

— of  American  normal  schools,  iii,  265 

— of  the  Constitution,  Madison  as,  i,  420,  712 

— of  his  country,  i,  712 
Fava,  Baron,  ii,  245 

Favored  nation  clause  and  commerce,  interna- 
tional, i,  338 
Favorite  son,  i.  712 
Fay,  Theodore  S.,  iii,  464 
Faxon,  William,  Secretary  of  Navy,  ii.  506 
Federal  advisory  council  (reserve  act),  iii,  203 

— aid  to  railroads,  iii,  145 

in  domestic  disturbances,  see  Posse  comi- 

tatus,  ii,  761 

— appropriations  and  expenditures,  ii,  9 

— archives,  i,  69 

— City  (Washington.  D.  C.),  iii,  658 
— - common  law,  ii,  309 

— constitutional  convention,  i,  427 

— control  of  elections,  i,  656 

— Convention  and  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  i, 

713 

of  1787  and  suffrage,  i,  563 

— - corporation  tax,  i,  476 

— — see  also  Franchises,  corporation,  legal  as- 

pects of,  ii,  46 

— court,  and  federal  state,  i,  719 
of  claims,  i,  502 

— -courts  during  Civil  War,  i,  290 

— debt,  analysis  of,  i,  545 

— expenditures,  i,  690 
— - extravagance,  t,  484 

— government,  receipts  and  expenditures  of,  ii,  16 
Federal  Hall,  iii,  90 

Federal  intervention  in  Dorr  Rebellion,  i,  608 

— judges,  ii,  254 

— law.  ii,  309 

— license  of  corporations,  i.  189 

— officers,  and  direct  primaries,  iii.  54 

— powers,  enlargement  of,  by  Civil  War,  i,  289 

— popular  government,  ii,  736 

— question,  i,  717 

— - — see  also  State  government,  characteristics  of, 

iii,  387 

— real  estate,  iii,  153 

— reporter,  iii,  183 

— Republicans,  i,  717 

— Reserve  Act,  iii,  202 
board,  iii,  203 

— sites,  jurisdiction  over,  ii,  263 

— state,  i,  718 

— states,  see  States,  classification  of,  iii,  416 

— and  state  citizenship,  i,  271 

— supervision  of  congressional  elections,  Feb.  28, 

1871,  and  negro  suffrage,  ii,  517 

— system  of  courts,  i,  512 

— taxation,  ii,  8 

— thirteen,  i,  720 

— vote,  see  Tables,  iii,  13  et  seq. 

— writs,  i,  720 

Federalism,  and  Democratic-Republican  party,  i, 
578 

— in  England,  iii,  222 

— and  Jacobinism,  i,  722 
Federalist,  i,  720 

— • party,  i,  721 
Federalist,  ii,  720 

— Hamilton  and,  ii,  108 

— -on  impairment  of  contract,  i,  456 
Federalists,  Blue  Light,  i,  136 

Federation  of  Labor,  American,  labor  organiza- 
tions, ii,  291 
Federations,  Greek,  ii,  99 
Feeble-minded,  public  care  of,  i,  557,  725 
Fees  and  the  fee  system,  i,  727 


731 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Fees,  see  Revenue,  public,  sources  of,  iii,  215 

— and  salaries,  distinguished,  iii,  246 
Felir,  on  jurisprudence,  ii,  267 
Felony,  i,  728 

— See  under  Crime. 

■ — see  Prisoners,  probation  of,  iii,  63 

— law,  criminal,  ii,  318 

— misprision  or  concealment  of,  ii,  318 
Fellow  servant  doctrine,  i,  668 
Fenian  invasion,  i,  174 

Fenwick,  John,  and  New  Jersey,  ii,  530 
Ferse  naturae,  and  the  police  power,  ii,  708 
Fermented  liquors,  see  Internal  revenue,  iii,  213 
Ferries,  i,  728 

Ferris,  Charles  G.  ( Loco-focos),  ii,  368 
Ferryboat,  interstate,  jurisdiction  over,  ii,  264 
Fertilizers  in  resources  of  North  America,  iii, 
205 

Fessenden,  William  P.,  i,  729  ; iii,  566 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
Fetter,  F.  A.,  on  rent,  iii,  181 
Feudal  monarchy,  ii,  459 

Fiat  money,  i,  729 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  575 

— and  Greenback  party,  ii,  101 

— and  political  party,  ii,  758 
Fichte,  political  theories  of,  ii,  731 

Ficklen  vs.  Shelby  County  Taxing  district  (in- 
terstate commerce),  ii,  219 
Fiduciary  rights,  iii,  227 

Field  Columbian  museum,  and  museums  public, 
ii,  490 

Field  vs.  Clark,  delegation  of  legislative  power, 
ii,  337 

■ — David  Dudley,  international  code,  ii,  205 

— James  G.,  and  Populist  party,  ii,  757 
vote  for,  iii,  38 

— Stephen  J.,  iii,  462 

judicial  and  legislative  acts,  iii,  297 

and  New  York  codes,  i,  304 

Fifer,  Joseph  W.,  ii,  225 
Fifteenth  Amendment,  i,  729 
— -and  negro  suffrage,  ii,  517 

— prohibitions  of,  i,  423 

Fifth  Amendment,  and  eminent  domain,  i,  664 
‘‘54,  40  or  tight,"  i.  45,  730  ; iii,  656 
— -and  Democratic  party,  i,  otW 
Filangieri,  ii,  730 

Filibusters  to  aid  insurrections,  i,  731 
Filibustering  in  House  of  Representatives,  ii,  134 
— - in  legislation,  i,  730 

— the  Senate,  iii.  290 
Fillmore,  Millard,  i,  38 

— biography,  i,  38 

— and  Silver  Grays,  iii,  312 

— vote  for,  iii,  26,  28 

— Vice-President,  iii,  616 

— and  Whig  party,  iii,  683 

Filmer,  Sir  Robert,  on  divine  right,  ii,  724 

— Patriarehia,  iii,  408 

Filtration,  for  water  supply,  iii,  660 

Finality  men,  i,  732 

Finance.  See  also  under  Appropriations. 

— See  also  under  Auditor. 

— sec.  Bimetallism,  i,  131 

— budget  system,  European,  i,  179 

— see  Clearing  house,  i,  294 

— commission,  and  purchase  of  supplies,  iii,  121 

— See  under  Debt. 

— deposit  of  public  funds,  i,  585 

• — department,  and  law,  administrative,  ii,  310 

— elasticity  of  the  currency,  i,  650 

— European  systems  of,  ii,  1 

— expenditures,  federal,  i,  690 

— See  under  Expenditures. 

— fees  and  fee  system,  i,  727 

— fines  as  sources  of  revenue,  ii,  17 

— fiscal  year  in,  ii,  20 

— floating  debt,  i,  543 

— forfeitures  as  a source  of  revenue,  ii,  39 

— gold  certificates,  ii,  84 

— gold  reserve,  ii,  85 

— greenbacks,  ii.  102 

— inflation,  ii,  176 

— local  systems  of,  ii,  2 

— municipal,  legislation  and  legislative  problems 

in  cities,  ii,  328 

— see  Multiple  standard,  ii,  474 

— national  currency  associations,  ii,  492 

— and  Ohio  idea,  ii,  576 

— party,  ii,  624 

— see  Public  accounts,  iii,  87 

— removal  of  deposits,  iii,  177 

— see  Reserve  Act,  Federal,  iii,  202 

— school,  iii,  255 

— seigniorage,  iii,  286 

— see  Silver  coinage  controversy,  iii,  309 

— sinking  fund,  iii.  312 

— see  Specie  Payments,  iii,  371 
— • specie  payments,  suspension  of,  iii,  372 


Finance,  state  systems  of,  ii,  3 

— see  also  Street  pavements,  iii,  434 

— superintendent  of,  iii,  563 
Financial  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  6 

— powers,  constitutional  basis  of,  ii,  8 

— statistics,  ii,  10 

Finch,  Captain,  and  Pacific  Islands,  diplomatic 
relations  with,  ii,  596 

Fine  arts,  commission  of,  for  District  of  Colum- 
bia, i,  603 

Fines  and  forfeitures,  ii,  17 
Finland,  suffrage  in,  iii,  458 
Fiore,  international*  code,  ii,  205 
"Fire  Lauds,”  iii,  680 
Fire-eaters,  ii,  18 
Fire  departments,  ii,  18 

— district,  i,  604 
— ■ limits,  ii,  18 

— building  laws  as  to,  i,  185 
— -loss  per  capita,  ii,  19 

— marshal,  state,  i,  604 

— and  municipal  government,  functions  of,  ii,  476 

— protection,  ii,  18 

— wall  street,  in  building  laws,  i,  185 
Fireworks,  and  health,  public,  ii,  120 
"First  families,"  iii,  353 

First  Hague  Conference,  ii,  203 
First  Nat.  Bk.  of  Shawano  vs.  Miller  (uniform 
legislation),  iii,  591 

First  papers,  see  Citizenship  in  the  United  States, 

i,  272 

Fiscal  bureaus,  iii,  562 

— year,  ii,  20 
Fiscus,  iii,  407 

Fish,  Hamilton,  biography,  ii,  21 
— ■ in  Alabama  controversy,  i,  23 
— ■ cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

Fish  Commission,  United  States,  ii,  20 

— commissions,  ii,  20 

Fisher,  Walter,  on  Alaska,  i,  25 

— Walter  H.,  ii,  199 

— ■ cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

— Warren,  and  Mulligan  letters,  ii.  474 
Fisheries  arbitration,  North  Atlantic,  ii,  555 
Fisheries,  Bureau  of,  i,  336 ; ii,  20,  21 

— diplomatic  relations  as  to,  i,  174 

— dispute,  Newfoundland,  ii,  545 

— and  Great  Britain,  ii,  99 

diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  96 

— - international,  ii,  21 

see  Halifax  commission  and  award,  ii,  108 

— - North  Atlantic  coast,  ii,  107 

— and  obstructions,  pollutions,  etc.,  of  rivers, 

ii,  25 

— police,  ii,  216 

— - relations  of  government  to,  ii,  23 
— - see  also  Resources  of  North  America,  iii,  206 

— seal,  iii,  274 

— - state  executive  departments  of,  ii,  25 
— ■ question,  i,  24 

Fishermen,  bounties  and  allowances  to,  ii,  24 
Fishery,  international,  headlands  theory  in.  ii,  116 
Fisk,  Clinton  B.,  and  Prohibition  party,  iii,  77 

— vote  for.  iii.  37 

Fitts  vs.  McGhee  (states  as  parties  to  suits),  iii, 
416 

Fitzpatrick,  Benjamin,  and  Democratic  party,  i, 
569 

Five  civilized  tribes  of  Indian  territory,  ii,  168 
“Five  Intolerable  Acts,”  iii,  220 
Five-minute  rule,  ii,  25 
Five-twenties  in  public  debt,  i,  546 
Fixing  of  rates  of  public  service  corporations,  see 
Separation  of  powers,  iii,  297 
Flag.  Constitution  follows  the.  i,  403 

— of  the  United  States,  ii,  25 
Flaming  arc.  lighting,  electric,  ii,  353 
Flats,  iii,  514 

Flax  and  hemp,  in  Underwood  Tariff,  iii.  5S6 
Fleming  us.  Page  (incorporation  of  territory),  ii, 
154 

— (insular),  ii,  187 

— (military  occupation),  ii.  437 

— (territorial  status),  i,  208:  iii,  523 
Fletcher  vs.  Peck  (contract),  i,  457 

— (impairment  of  contract),  ii,  26 
— - (land  frauds),  ii,  77 

Flint  vs.  Stone  Tracy  Co.  (franchises),  ii,  46 
Floating  debt,  i,  545 
Floor  leader  of  the  House,  ii,  320 
Florentines,  and  political  theories,  ii,  717 
Florida,  ii,  26 

— -acquisition  of,  and  foreign  policy  of  United 
States,  ii,  37 

— annexation,  ii,  28 

— claims  authorized  against,  i.  291 

— as  a dependency  of  United  States,  i,  582 

— East,  i,  620 

— incorporation  of  territory,  ii,  154 


INDEX 


Florida  parishes,  and  Orleans  territory,  ii,  503 

— republic  of,  ii,  27 

— see  also  South,  iii,  353 

— see  also  Territories  of  United  States,  iii,  520 
Floyd.  John,  vote  for,  iii,  22 

— John  B.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; iii,  649 

— William,  i,  554 

Flushing,  and  New  York  City,  ii,  540 

Flying  Fish  (executive),  i,  685 

Folger,  Charles  J.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  566 

Folk,  Joseph  W.,  ii,  29 

Fontainebleau  decree,  i,  453 

Food,  ii,  29 

Food  and  drugs,  inspection  of,  ii,  183 
— Act  of  1906,  and  manufacturing,  ii,  394 

and  pharmaceutical  legislation,  ii,  675 

public  health  and,  ii,  117 

inspection  under,  ii,  184 

Food  products,  inspection  of,  manufacturing,  ii, 
393 

— pure,  iii,  122 

Foote,  Charles  E.,  Liberty  League,  ii,  347 

— Henry  S.,  and  Mississippi,  ii,  453 
Foote's  ’ resolution,  ii,  29 

Fopino  vs.  Speed  (jurisdiction  over  waters),  ii, 
264 

Forbes  bill,  i,  13 

Foraker  Act,  annexation  under  the,  i.  46 

— and  dependencies  of  United  States,  i,  582 

— insular  cases,  ii.  187 

— Porto  Rico,  ii,  759 
Force  bill,  ii,  29 

— Jackson  and,  ii,  197 

— and  nullification  controversy,  ii,  566 

— and  Representatives,  election  of,  iii,  186 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  196 
Forced-labor  system  on  roads,  iii,  230 
Ford  special  franchise  tax,  ii,  47 

Ford,  H.  J..  quoted  on  party  funds,  ii,  643 
Foreign  affairs,  committee  of,  iii,  378 
(revolutionary),  i,  593 

— department  of,  i,  589 

see  Department  of  State,  iii,  378 

and  administrative  law,  ii,  310 

Foreign  born  white  population,  ii,  31 

— and  Domestic  Commerce,  Board  of,  i,  334 
Bureau  of,  ii,  29 

— elements,  geographic  distribution  of,  ii,  33 
in  the  United  States,  ii,  30 

— policy  of  the  United  States,  ii,  35 

— seed  and  plant  introduction,  office  of,  iii,  286 
— -trade,  i,  331 

— valuations  for  duties,  i,  618 

Foreigners  and  commerce,  international.  1,  338 
Forest  reservation  and  irrigation,  ii.  244 
— - reserve  policy,  and  public  lands,  iii,  96 

— reserves,  i,  638 

— schools,  iii,  263 

— Service,  i,  18,  38 

and  expenditures,  federal,  i.  692 

Forestalling  the  market,  iii,  431 

— and  police  power,  ii,  708 
Forestry.  Arbor  Day  and,  i,  69 

— education  in,  i.  638  ; ii,  39 

— and  game  commissions,  ii,  20 
— - service,  maps  of,  ii,  74 

— see  Tree  claims  to  public  lands,  iii,  571 
Forests,  government,  iii,  153 

— national,  map  of,  ii.  242 

— and  the  police  power,  ii,  708 

— and  public  lands,  reservation  of,  iii,  98 

— see  also  Resources  of  North  America,  iii,  205 

— state,  iii,  153 

Forfeited  rights.  Supreme  Court  on,  in  reconstruc- 
tion, iii,  168 

— and  reconstruction,  iii,  164 
Forfeiture,  see  Treason,  iii,  559 
Forfeitures  and  fines,  ii,  17 

— suits  for  penalties  and,  i,  514 
Fornication,  iii.  326 

Forsyth,  John,  iii,  402 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 
Fort  Bayard  hospital,  ii,  127 

— Leavenworth,  and  military  prisons,  ii,  438 

R.  R.  Co.  vs.  Lowe  (jurisdiction  of  United 

States),  iii,  519 

— Stanton  hospital,  ii,  127 

— Stanwix,  Treaty  of.  i,  319;  ii,  171 

— Sumter  episode,  and  Federal  sites,  ii,  263 
Fortbildungssehule,  i,  638 

Forteseue,  Sir  John,  ii,  724 
Fortieth  parallel  survey,  ii,  75 
Fortifications,  ii,  39 

— in  coast  defense,  i,  300 
Forts,  ii,  767 

— jurisdiction  of  United  States  over,  iii,  518 
Forty-niners,  ii.  39 

Forty-shilling  Freehold  Act  of  1430,  ii,  129 
Fortv  Thieves  Council,  i,  477 

— and  New  York  City,  ii,  542 


Forty  Thieves  Council  (Tammany),  iii,  46S 
Forward,  Walter,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; iii,  566 
Fossil  placers  and  Pacific  slope,  ii,  598 
Foster  vs.  Neilson  (political  questions),  ii,  713 
Foster,  Charles,  Secretary  of  Treasury,  i,  197 ; 
iii,  566 

— John  W.j  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
in  Chinese  diplomacy,  i,  262 

— — Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— Stephen  S.,  and  New  Hampshire,  ii,  529 

— and  Whitney,  surveys  of,  ii,  75 

Four  burghs,  parliament  of  the,  and  mediteval 
city  leagues,  ii,  417 
Four  Years’  Law  of  1820,  i,  53 
Fourteen  Diamond  Rings  vs.  United  States  (in- 
ternational law),  ii,  209 
Fourteenth  Amendment,  ii,  40 
— -centralization  under,  i,  239 

— Civil  Rights  Bill  and  the,  i,  282 
under,  i,  281 

— and  double  citizenship,  i,  608 

— and  due  process  of  law,  i,  614 
— -and  enforcement,  i,  670 

— and  federal  control  of  elections,  i,  656 

— federal  and  state  citizenship  before  the,  i 271 

— prohibitions  of,  i,  423 

— and  reconstruction,  iii,  165 

— and  suffrage,  i,  563 

Foville,  de,  and  national  wealth  of  France,  iii, 
664 

Fox  Libel  Act,  ii,  58 

— Gustavus  V.,  iii,  243 

and  Department  of  Navy,  ii,  503 

Fractional  currency  and  notes,  United  States,  ii, 
563 

— in  public  debt,  i,  545 

— see  Treasury  notes,  iii,  565 

"Frame  of  government,”  Penn’s,  ii,  662 
France,  army  and  navy,  i.  76 

— as  a centralized  state,  iii,  416 

— and  Democratic-Republican  party,  i,  578 

— during  Civil  War,  iii,  322 

— commercial  policy  and  relations  with  United 

States,  i,  340 
— - constitution  of,  i,  433 

— constitutional  amendment  in,  i,  418 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  42 

— financial  system  of,  ii,  1 

— and  mayor  in  European  cities,  ii,  415 
— - and  military  service,  compulsory,  ii,  439 

— officers,  military  and  naval,  of,  ii,  571 
— ■ municipal  government  in,  ii,  478 

— party  system  in  Europe,  ii,  646 
— - prefect  in,  ii,  772 

— representative  government  in,  iii,  185 

— sovereignty  of  the  people  in,  iii,  362 

— and  subsidies  to  shipping,  iii,  440 

— treaty  of  amity  and  commerce  with,  ii,  35 

— Treaty  of  1778  with,  quoted,  iii,  571 
— - wealth  of,  iii,  664 

Francis,  David  R.,  ii.  199 
— - cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

Franeo-Prussian  War,  and  diplomatic  relations 
with  France,  ii,  43 

Frankfort  arsenal,  and  ordnance,  chief  of,  ii,  588 
Franking,  ii,  48 

— privilege,  i,  385  : ii,  386 
Franchise  tax,  i,  475 ; ii,  46 

— - — in  state  systems  of  finance,  ii,  5 
Franchises,  approval  of,  by  public  service  com- 
missions, iii,  109 
— -as  bounties,  i,  168 

— - corporation,  financial  aspects  of,  ii,  44 

— and  corporation  charters,  i,  471 
— - and  impairment  of  contract,  i,  457 

— legal  aspects  of  corporation,  ii,  45 

— and  monopolies,  ii,  463 
— - municipal,  ii,  474 

— as  property,  ii,  46 

— See  also  Railroads. 

Franklin,  Benjamin,  on  Albany  plan  of  union,  i, 
28 

— ■ biography,  ii,  48 

— and  Declaration  of  Independence,  i,  554 

— and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 
— - and  police,  ii,  701 

— -and  postal  system  of  United  States,  ii,  764 

— and  the  Quakers,  ii,  663 

— and  public  schools,  normal,  iii.  265 
Franklin  district  of  Canada,  i.  214 

— state  of,  and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i, 

163  ; ii,  48 

see  Tennessee,  iii,  514 

Fraser  River,  boundary  of,  i,  150 
Fraternal  insurance,  ii,  49 

— orders,  ii.  584  . 

— organizations,  exemption  from  taxation,  iii,  499 
Fraud  orders  of  the  postal  service,  ii,  49 

— prevention  of,  ii,  50 

733 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Fraud  of  ’76,  ii,  49 

Frauds,  electoral,  ii,  50 

— -on  the  treasury,  ii,  51 

Fraudulent  entry,  and  smuggling,  iii,  324 

Frederick  the  Great,  and  American  Revolution, 

ii, .  78 

— and  codification,  i,  303 
Fredericton,  see  New  Brunswick,  ii,  524 
Free  coinage,  i,  311 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  574 

— of  silver,  see  Silver  coinage  controversy,  iii, 

311 

Free  Democrats  (1852),  vote  of,  iii,  27 

— dispensaries,  i,  597 

— government,  necessary  limits  on,  iii,  222 

— ■ land  in  economic  history  of  United  States,  i, 
622 

— ports,  ii,  51 
— - seeds,  ii,  52 

“Free  ships  free  goods,”  i,  75  ; ii,  52 

— and  Declaration  of  Paris,  i,  556 
Free  Soil  vote,  iii,  26 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  567 
— - party,  ii,  52 

Free  speech,  see  Privilege,  parliamentary,  iii,  66 

— trade  and  protection,  ii,  53 
and  sailors’  rights,  ii,  56 

— zone  and  Mexico,  diplomatic  relation  with,  ii, 

424 

Freedmen's  Bureau,  ii,  57 

— Bill,  and  Republican  party,  iii,  195 
— • and  reconstruction,  iii,  165 
Freedmen’s  hospital,  ii,  198 
Freedom  of  contract,  i,  456 

— ■ personal,  ii,  58 

— of  speech  and  of  the  press,  ii,  57 

■ — of  the  will  and  criminology,  i,  523 
"Freedoms  and  exemptions,  charter  of,”  and  New 
Netherland,  ii,  535 
“Freeholder,”  iii,  443 
Freeholders,  board  of,  i,  275 
"Freeman,  every,”  and  negro  suffrage,  ii,  516 
Free-soilers  and  Republican  party,  iii,  189 
Freeport  Doctrine,  ii,  59 
— - and  Republican  party,  iii,  191 
Freight  on  American  railroads,  i,  332 

— traffic  on  trolley  roads,  iii,  139 

— • transportation,  classification  of,  ii,  59 
Frelinghuysen,  Frederick  T.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; 

iii,  402 

— vote  for,  iii,  25 
Fremont,  John  C.,  i,  38 

— and  Bear  Flag  Republic,  i,  123 

— as  Pathfinder,  ii,  652 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  191 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  28 

French,  Henry  F.,  Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 
French  administrative  tribunals,  i,  505 
— - assembly,  committees  of,  i,  360 

— civil  code,  i,  303 

— economists,  ii,  730 

— Guiana,  ii,  104 

— and  Indians,  ii,  170 

— law,  civil,  in  America,  ii,  313 
— • in  Panama,  i,  216 

— Panama  Canal,  ii,  60 

diplomatic  relations  as  to,  ii,  44 

— Revolution  and  compromise,  i,  366 

-and  democracy,  history  of,  i,  562 

influence  on  American,  i,  578 

— shore  grievance,  i.  177 

— spoliation  claims,  ii,  43,  60 

and  continental  system,  i,  453 

and  Court  of  Claims,  i,  503 

Freneau,  Philip,  i,  577  ; ii,  61 
Frequency  tables,  in  statistics,  iii,  423 
Friars’  lands,  iii,  467 

Friendly  societies  acts,  and  orders,  fraternal,  ii, 
584 

Fries,  John,  ii,  149 

— case,  1798  (treason),  ii,  196 
— ■ Rebellion,  ii,  61,  195 

Frontier  in  American  development,  ii,  61 

— lines  of  United  States  (map),  ii,  744 
“Frost-bitten”  convention,  and  Michigan,  ii,  426 
Frve,  IV,  P.,  President  pro  tempore  of  Senate, 

‘ i,  386 

— and  subsidies  to  shipping,  iii,  440 
“Frying  the  fat”  and  Republican  party,  iii,  197 
Fugitive  slaves,  ii,  64 

. — slave  Act,  Cabot,  and  the,  i,  202 

of  1850,  and  personal  liberty  laws,  ii,  673 

Fugitives  from  justice,  ii,  65 

“Full  faith  and  credit.”  in  interstate  law,  ii,  231 
Full  powers,  of  diplomatic  agent,  i,  591 
Fuller.  Melville  Weston,  ii,  65 

— chief  justice,  i,  255  ... 

■ — supreme  court,  United  States,  m,  462 
Fundamental  law,  ii,  319 

— orders,  in  Connecticut,  i,  396 


Fundamental  orders,  in  New  Haven,  ii,  530 
Funded  debts,  i,  545 

Funding  act,  legal  tender  controversy,  ii,  324 
of  1790,  i,  548 

Funds  available  in  the  treasury  of  the  United 
States,  ii,  14 

— exchange  of,  i,  677 

— in  municipal  accounting,  iii,  89 

— to  Parents  Acts,  and  old  age  pensions,  ii, 

579 

— in  public  debt,  i,  547 

Fundy,  Bay  of,  boundary  of,  i,  150 
Fungibles,  i,  626 

Fur-bearing  animals,  see  Resources  of  North  Amer- 
ica, iii,  206 

Fur  seal  arbitration,  and  international  fisheries, 
ii,  22 

— controversy,  i,  68 ; ii,  66 

— relations  of  government  to,  ii,  23 
Fusion,  ii,  66 

Future  of  War,  The,  and  militarism,  ii,  431 
Futures,  dealing  in,  i,  679 ; ii,  66 

— as  gambling,  ii,  68 

Gabriel  insurrection,  ii,  195 
Gadsden  purchase,  ii,  67 

— treaty  and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  159 
Gag  laws,  ii,  67,  675 

Gag  order,  Roosevelt’s,  i,  285 

— resolution  and  slavery  controversy,  ii,  67 ; iii, 

319 

Gage,  Lyman  J.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  566 
Gains,  and  political  theories,  ii,  717 
Galiani,  ii,  730 
Gallatin,  Albert,  ii,  67 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  195 

— and  the  caucus,  i,  232 

— economies  of,  i,  579 

— Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 

— and  treaty  of  Ghent,  ii,  82 
Gallaudet,  Thomas  II.,  i,  541 
Gallinger  Ship  Subsidy  Bill,  iii,  440 
Galloway,  Joseph,  in  Continental  Congress,  i,  451 
Gallipolis,  iii,  273 

Galloway's  plan  of  union,  i,  320 
Galpin,  Henry  D.,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,,  196 

Galt,  A.  T.,  on  Halifax  Commission,  ii,  108 
Galveston,  ii,  68 

— exports  at,  i,  332 

— commission  government  in,  i,  344 
Galveston  H.  & S.  A.  R.  Co.  vs.  Texas  (interstate 

commerce),  ii,  221 

Galveston  plan  of  city  government,  ii,  412 

— in  development  of  municipal  government,  ii, 

482 

Gambling,  ii,  68 

— see  Lotteries,  ii,  373 

— objectionable  employments,  ii,  289 

— race-track,  iii,  130 

— restrictions  on,  i,  189 

Gamboa,  and  Panama  Canal,  ii,  600 
Game  commissions,  ii,  20 

— and  fish  protection,  and  police  power,  ii,  708 
— - laws,  ii,  69 

— see  Resources  of  North  America,  iii,  206 
Gangs,  and  machine,  political,  ii,  384 
Garbage  removal,  ii,  70 

Garden  cities,  i.  278 

— and  model  dwellings,  ii,  459 
Garfield.  James  A.,  ii,  70 

■ — and  Morey  letter,  ii,  471 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  35 
Garfield,  James  R.,  ii,  199 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  198 
Garland,  Augustus  H..  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
Garland.  Ex  parte  (fines),  ii,  17 

— (pardon,  constitutional  principles  of),  ii,  608 

— (reconstruction),  iii,  168 

Garner,  J.  W..  and  political  theory,  ii,  722 
Garrison,  Lindley  M.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198 ; iii, 
649 

Garrison,  William  Lloyd,  ii,  70 

— on  Constitution  of  United  States,  i,  420 

— and  slavery  controversy,  iii,  319 

Garrisonian  abolitionists,  Liberty  party,  ii,  348 
Garter  king  at  arms,  ii,  614  _ 

Gary,  James  A.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 : ii.  i6< 
Gas  company,  as  public  service  corporation,  in, 

— and  electric  light  commission,  iii,  109 

— engine,  ii,  771 

— lighting,  public  regulation,  ii,  71 

— natural,  and  oil  production,  regulation  of,  ii, 

576 

— power,  ii,  770 

— regulation  of  natural,  ii.  496 

— works,  and  municipal  ownership,  u,  486 


734 


INDEX 


Gas  company  works  and  public  property,  iii,  107 

Gaspee  Commission,  i,  301 

Gates,  General,  and  Conway  Cabal,  i,  467 

Gatun,  and  Panama  Canal,  ii,  600 

Gaynor,  William  Jay.  ii,  71 

Geary,  John  W.,  ii,  664 

— law,  i,  265  : ii,  72 
General  assembly,  ii,  336 

— court,  ii,  72 

— land  office,  ii,  73,  198,  306 
see  Timber  lands,  iii,  538 

— manager,  in  municipal  government,  ii,  485 

— rendezvous,  iii,  549 

— staff,  ii,  571 

— welfare  clause,  ii,  72 

and  internal  improvements,  ii,  202 

— - warrants,  iii,  655,  702 

Genesee  Chiefs  vs.  Fitzhugh  (maritime  law),  i,  12 
Genet,  in  diplomatic  relations  with  France,  ii,  42 

— expedition,  i,  731 
Geneva  arbitration,  ii,  73 

— commission,  the,  ii,  216 

— conference  of,  1864,  ii,  203 

— convention,  ii,  106 : iii,  169 

— tribunal,  1872,  i,  23 

and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  692 

Genius  of  Universal  Emancipation,  iii,  319 

Gens,  or  house,  iii,  409 

“Gentlemen,"  i,  72 

Gentlemen's  agreements,  ii,  73 

Geodetic  Association,  the  International,  ii.  216 

Geofrey  vs.  Riggs  (treaty  power),  iii,  570 

Geographer,  Public,  iii.  272 

Geographic  Board  of  the  United  States,  ii,  73 

Geographical  Survey,  ii,  74 

— surveys  and  maps,  ii,  73 

— township,  iii,  544 

Geological  Commission,  powers  of,  1,  353 

— Survey,  ii,  74,  198 

— see  American  Government  and  geography,  i,  35 
health,  public  and,  ii,  117 

maps  of,  ii,  74 

United  States  and  mines  and  mining,  ii,  444 

— surveys,  ii.  74 

George.  Henry,  and  labor  parties,  ii,  296 

— Progress  and  Poverty,  iii,  496 

— movement,  see  Reform  movements,  iii,  172 
George,  William  R.,  and  George  Junior  Republic, 

ii,  75 

Georgetown,  D.  C.,  see  District  of  Columbia,  i,  601 

— Guiana,  ii,  104 
Georgia,  ii,  76 

— code  of,  i.  304 

— colonization  of,  i,  321 

— Conservatives  in.  i,  402 

— constitutional  conventions,  in,  1,  426 

— see  also  South,  iii.  353 

— t'S.  Stanton,  i,  685 

— state-owned  railroad  in,  iii,  147 

— university  of,  iii,  410 

— see  Yazoo  frauds,  iii,  704 
Geran  Bill  (New  Jersey),  ii,  532 
Gerard,  on  Continental  Congress,  i,  453 
German  Alliance  Insurance  Co.  vs.  Hale  (insur- 
ance), ii.  192 

— city  planning,  i,  277 

— civil  code,  i,  303 

— Confederation,  i,  584 

— emperor,  the,  ii.  81 

— empire  centralization  in,  i,  238 
constitution  of,  i,  433 

legislative  system  in  Europe,  ii,  340 

party  system  in  Europe,  ii.  647 

— imperial  statistical  office,  iii,  425 

— Social  Democrats,  and  party  system  in  Europe, 

ii.  648 

— vote,  the,  iii,  626 

— workingmen’s  insurance  laws,  ii,  188 
“Germanicus,”  see  Randolph,  E.  J.,  iii,  150 
Germany,  army  and  navy,  i,  76 

— constitutional  amendment  in,  i,  418 

— customs  unions  of,  i.  537 

— see  Diplomatic  agreements,  i,  592 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  78 

— federal  diet  of,  ii.  80 
organization  of,  ii,  80 

— see  Federal  state,  i.  718 

— Financial  system  of,  ii.  1 

— mayor  in  European  cities,  ii,  415 

— military  service,  compulsory  in,  ii,  438 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  468 

— municipal  government  in,  ii,  478 

— and  officers,  military  and  naval,  ii,  571 

— and  particularism,  ii,  620 

— and  Samoa,  iii.  250 

— subsidies  to  shipping,  iii,  440 

— suffrage  in,  i,  562 

— see  also,  Tuitula,  iii.  582 

— Zollverein  dispute  with,  i,  342 


Germantown  protest  of  1688,  iii,  317 
Gerry,  Elbridge,  and  Declaration  of  Independence, 
i,  554 

— in  diplomatic  relations  with  France,  ii,  42 

— and  federal  Constitution,  i,  713 

— and  gerrymander,  ii,  82 

— Vice  President,  iii,  616 

— vote  for,  iii,  17 

— and  X Y Z,  iii,  703 
Gerrymander,  ii,  82 

— and  House  of  Representatives,  ii,  130 

— and  public  opinion,  iii,  103 

— in  state  government,  iii,  389 

— see  also  State  legislature,  iii,  398 
Gerrymandering  apportionment  and,  i,  55 

— see  Shoestring  district,  iii,  308 
Gettell,  R.  G.,  and  political  theory,  ii,  722 
Ghent,  Peace  of.  ii,  82 

— Treaty  of,  and  Astoria,  iii,  655 

— Treaty  of,  1814,  and  northeastern  boundary 

controversy,  ii,  560 
Giant.  Little,  ii.  360 

Gibbons  vs.  Ogden  (construction  of  Constitution), 
i.  445 

— (interstate  commerce),  ii,  83,  218 

— steamboat  navigation,  ii,  361 
Giddings,  Joshua  R.,  ii,  83 

— F.  H.  quoted  on  sociology,  iii,  346 
Giddings’  Resolutions,  ii,  83 

Giffen,  Sir  R..  and  national  wealth,  iii,  664 
Gifts  for  public  purposes,  ii,  84 
Gilbert  vs.  Priest  (judicial  power,  theory  of),  ii, 
255 

Giles  vs.  Harris  (Fourteenth  Amendment),  ii  41 

— (suffrage),  iii,  446 
Gillhaus,  August,  iii,  338,  339 

— vice  presidential  candidate,  iii,  46 
- — vote  for,  iii.  44 

Gilman  vs.  Sheboygan  (taxation),  iii,  498 
Gilmer,  Thomas  W.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; ii,  506 
Ginn,  Edward,  and  militarism,  ii.  433 
Girard  College,  assets  of,  iii,  258 
Girls,  feeble-minded,  iii,  262 
Glacial  invasion  of  United  States,  ii,  690 
Gladden,  Washington,  and  the  A.  P.  A.,  i,  51 
Gladstone,  and  boss  system,  i,  145 

— and  nationalists,  ii,  494 

— quoted  on  prime  minister,  iii,  56 

Glasgow,  Scotland,  experiment  with  municipal 
ownership,  ii.  486 

Glass  Banking  and  Currency  Act,  iii,  202 
Glass,  Carter,  and  Federal  Reserve  Act,  iii,  202 
Click,  G.  W„  ii,  274 
Gneist,  ii,  731 

God,  as  origin  of  state,  iii,  408 

— see  Theocracy,  iii,  533 
Goddard.  Daniel  C..  ii,  199 
Godkin,  E.  L..  iii,  253 
Goebel,  William,  ii,  279 

Goethals.  Col.  G.  W„  and  Panama  canal,  ii,  600 
Goff,  John  W„  ii.  236 

— Nathan,  Jr.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197;  ii,  506 
Gold  as  bullion,  i,  186 

— certificates,  and  notes.  United  States,  ii,  563 
(finance),  ii,  84 

and  paper  money  in  the  United  States,  ii, 

605,  606 

and  public  debt,  i,  545 

— and  crisis  of  1857,  i,  528 

— Democrats  and  Republican  party,  iii,  198 

— holdings  of  the  treasury,  ii,  12 

— imports  and  exports  of,  ii,  12 

— and  monetary  conferences,  international,  ii,  460 

— in  payment  of  public  debt,  i,  547 

— production  of,  see  West  as  a factor  in  Ameri- 

can politics,  iii,  673 

— reserve,  ii.  85 

inadequacy  of,  i,  107 

and  public  debt,  i,  546 

— in  resources  of  North  America,  iii,  205 

— Standard  Act  of  1900.  iii,  311 

—  -and  treasury  notes,  iii,  565 

— — boss  system  and  controversy  on,  I,  147 
see  Treasury,  federal,  iii,  564 

— see  Standard  money,  iii,  376 

— supply  and  cost  of  living,  i,  485 
Golden  Bull  of  Hungary,  i,  434 

— Circle,  knights  of  the,  ii,  281 
Goldsborough,  Charles  W.,  Secretary  of  Navy,  Ii, 

506 

Gomez,  Maximo,  i,  534 

— Miguel,  i,  534 

Gonzales  vs.  Williams  (citizenship),  i,  273 
— - (territorial  status),  iii,  524 
Good  behavior  of  prisoners,  ii,  85 

— character,  see  suffrage,  iii.  446 

“Good  enough  Morgan  till  after  election,”  ii,  86 
Good  government  clubs,  see  Goo  goos,  ii,  87 


CYCLOrEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Good  roads  movement,  ii,  86,  123  ; iii,  233 

Goodloe,  William  C„  iii,  372 

Goodnow,  !>'.  J.,  and  political  theories,  ii,  722 

— quoted  on  separation  of  powers,  iii,  296 
Gordon  rs.  United  States  (separation  of  powers), 

iii,  298 

Gorges,  Sir  Ferdinando,  and  New  England  coun- 
cil. ii,  526 

Gothenburg  system,  ii,  S7,  360 
Gove  Insurrection,  ii.  194 

— system  of  proportional  representation,  iii,  81 
Government,  ii,  8S 

— the,  ii.  88 

— aid,  and  Pacific  railroads,  ii,  597 

— confused,  party  and,  ii,  592 

— cost  of  in  United  States,  i,  483 
- — democratic,  i,  564 

— effect  on,  of  public  opinion,  iii,  103 

— influence  in,  ii,  177 

— by  injunction,  ii.  88 

— inspection  as  a function  of,  ii,  182 
“Government  of  laws  and  not  of  men,”  iii,  296 
Government  monopolies,  ii,  463 

— ownership  and  transportation,  iii,  556,  558 

— philosophy  of,  during  the  Revolution,  iii,  392 
- — popular  participation  in,  i,  407 

— printing  office,  ii.  88 

— regulation  of  public  service  corporations,  iii,  112 

— residuary  powers  of,  i,  432 

— spheres  of.  iii,  372 

— and  state,  distinguished,  iii,  400 

— theory  of,  ii,  89 

Governmental  functions,  separation  of,  i,  9 
Governor,  i,  6S3 

— colonial,  and  Revolution,  iii.  219 

— and  constitution  making  in  United  States,  i,  406 

— deputy,  i,  586 

— under  federal  appointments,  ii,  92 
- — general  of  Canada,  iii,  207 

and  Parliament.  Canadian,  ii,  615 

— of  the  state,  ii.  91 

— see  also  Territories,  of  United  States,  iii,  520 
Governor's  council,  i,  486 

Governors,  Conference  of,  ii,  92 

— royal,  i.  35 

— of  states,  see  also  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  249 
Governor’s  veto,  iii,  614 

Grade  crossings  elimination,  ii,  93 
Grading,  in  schools,  iii,  267 
Gradualists,  i,  1 
Graduated  lands,  ii.  93 

— taxation,  iii,  505 
Graft,  ii,  94 

— honest,  ii,  127 

Graham.  George,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; iii,  648 

— John.  iii.  402 

— Senator,  in  Confederate  States,  i,  373 
- — William  A.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196 
vote  for,  iii.  27 

Grain  elevators,  i,  660 

— inspection  of.  ii.  184 
Granadine  Confederation,  i,  315 

Grand  Army  of  the  Republic,  and  militarism,  ii, 
432 

Grand  Canyon,  ii,  613 
Grand  committee,  ii,  94 

— jury,  ii,  268 

— list.  ii.  94 

“Grand  Fortage,”  iii,  549 
Grandfather  clause,  ii,  94 

— in  Alabama,  i.  22 

— and  negro  suffrage,  ii,  518 

— and  party  organization  in  the  South,  ii  638 

— see  Suffrage,  iii.  446 
Grandfather's  hat.  ii,  94 
Granger  cases.  i>.  94 

— Francis,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; ii,  767 
vote  for,  iii.  21 

— movement  and  party  organization  in  Califor- 

nia, ii,  631 

and  sectionalism  in  United  States,  iii,  284 

see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics, 

iii.  672 

- — organization,  and  transportation,  regulation  of, 
iii,  556 

— sec  also  Reform  movements,  iii,  172 
Grant,  Lewis  A.,  Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 

— Ulvsses  S.,  arbitrator  over  Lew  Chew  Islands, 

i,  262 

— - — ■biography,  ii,  95 

— - — and  his  cabinet,  i,  200 
— - — cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

and  Republican  party,  1868,  iii,  196 

Secretary  of  War.  iii,  649 

see  Third  term.  iii.  535 

see  Three  hundred  and  six,  iii,  536 

vote  for,  iii,  13,  31.  32 

Graunde  inquest,  le,  ii,  268 
Graves,  John  Temple,  ii,  155 


Graves,  John  Temple,  vice-presidential  candidate, 
iii,  45 

Gray,  Captain,  and  northwestern  boundary  contro- 
versy, ii,  562 

— Horace,  iii.  462 

— on  international  law,  ii,  214 

quoted  on  responsible  government  in  Canada, 

iii,  208 

— J.  C.,  definition  of  the  law.  ii,  308 

"Gray  wolves,"  and  non-partizan  political  organ- 
izations, ii,  554 
Great  American  desert,  ii.  686 

— Britain,  absence  of  written  constitution  in,  ii, 

315 

army  and  navy,  i,  76 

budget  system  of,  i,  180 

cabinet  government  in,  i,  193 

city  planning  in.  i,  278 

colonization  by,  in  America,  i.  320 

and  Confederate  States,  recognition  of,  i,  375 

diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  96 

See  also  under  England. 

executive  system  of,  i.  688 

and  expatriation,  i,  690 

financial  system  of,  ii,  1 

judicial  system  of.  ii.  258 

— — nominations  in.  ii,  552 

and  officers,  military  and  naval,  ii,  571 

party  government  in,  ii,  628 

and  Samoa,  iii,  250 

and  subsidies  to  shipping,  iii,  440 

— case  of  monopolies,  iii,  155 

— Commoner,  ii,  99 

— compromise,  the  i.  419,  715 

— expedition  in  Alaska,  i,  24 

— Lakes,  boundaries  of,  i,  150 
highlands  and  plains,  ii.  689 

jurisdiction  and  navigation  of,  ii,  304 

traffic  upon,  i,  333 

training  station,  iii,  549 

as  waterways,  iii,  664 

— Meadows,  i,  319 

— Northern,  and  Pacific  railroads,  ii,  123,  597 

— Objector,  the,  iii,  658 

— seal,  iii,  275 

Greek  economic  theories,  i,  625 

— federations,  ii,  99 
Greeley,  Horace,  ii,  100 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  571 

— Liberal  Republican  party,  ii.  345 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  192 

— vote  for.  iii,  13.  32 

Greenback  heresy  and  Democratic  party,  i,  570 

— movement  and  sectionalism  in  United  States, 

iii.  284 

see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics, 

iii,  672 

— Labor  party,  ii.  101.  296 

— party  and  Democratic  party,  i,  572 

vote  of,  see  Tables,  iii,  13  et  seq. 

Greenhackism.  and  money,  theory  of,  ii,  462 
Greenbacks  (finance),  ii.  102 

— legal  tender  controversy,  ii,  323 

— see  also  Rag  baby.  iii.  131 

— see  Treasury  notes,  iii.  565 
Grcenhew  rs.  Poindexter  (state  debt),  i.  552 
Greenleaf,  in  Washington.  D.  C.,  i,  602 
Greenville,  Treaty  of,  ii.  171 

Greer,  James  R.,  in  American  convention,  i,  34 

— vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  37 
Gregorius,  code  of,  i,  302 
Grenville's  Stamp  Act.  iii.  375 
Gresham,  Walter  Q.,  iii,  402 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197  : ii,  767  ; iii,  566 
Grier.  Robert,  iii.  462.  645 

Grievances,  Seventh  Report  on  (Canadian),  iii, 
207 

“Griffon,”  and  Michigan,  ii,  425 
Griggs,  John  W.,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

Griswold  rs.  Hepburn,  legal  tender,  ii,  322 
Groesbeck.  W.  S„  vote  for,  iii,  31 
Grosseiliers,  and  Michigan,  ii,  425 
Grosvenor  shin  subsidy  bill.  iii.  440 
Grotius.  and  development  of  international  law,  ii, 
207,  214 

— jurisprudence,  ii.  266 

— quoted  on  neutrality,  principles  of,  ii,  521 

— political  theories  of,  ii,  729 

— quoted  on  right  of  trade,  i,  338 

— quoted  on  sovereignty,  iii,  363 

— quoted  on  war,  iii,  645 

— see  also  States,  equality  of,  iii,  418 
Grow.  G.  A.,  speaker,  i,  391 
Grundy,  Felix,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 
Guadaloupe  (Colorado),  i.  328 
— Hidalgo,  Treaty  of,  ii,  102 

California  annexed  under,  i,  203,  207 


INDEX 


Guadaloupe  Hidalgo  and  Mexico,  diplomatic  rela- 
tions with,  ii,  424 
Guam,  annexation  of,  i,  40:  ii,  679 

— and  naval  stations,  ii,  499 

— and  Tutuila,  as  dependencies  of  United  States, 

i,  582 

Guano  Islands,  ii,  103 

— annexation  of,  i,  43 

— and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  153 

— see  also  Territory,  constitutional  questions  of, 

iii,  525 

Guantanamo  (coaling  station),  i.  299 

— and  naval  stations,  ii,  499,  507 

Guardian  and  ward,  and  international  law,  pri- 
vate, ii,  212 
Guatemala,  ii,  103 

— Congress  in,  i,  236 

— and  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  37 
Guerrillas,  ii,  103 

Guianas,  ii,  104 
Guiana.  British,  iii,  356 

— highland,  iii.  355 

Guild,  neighborhood,  iii,  300 

Guilds,  labor,  relation  of  the  state  to,  ii,  299 

Guillotine  in  debate,  i,  298 

— procedure  and  filibustering,  i,  730 
Gulfs,  jurisdiction  over,  ii,  264 
Gttmplowicz,  see  State,  theory  of,  iii,  406 
Gunmen,  and  machine,  political,  ii,  384 
Gurteen,  S.  H.,  i,  244 

Guthrie,  James,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196;  iii,  566 

— and  Oklahoma,  ii,  577 

Gwinnett,  Button,  and  Declaration  of  Independ- 
ence, i,  554 

Habeas  corpus,  ii,  105 

— Act,  ii,  315 

— - McLeod  case,  ii,  383 

— suspension  of,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 
Habersham,  J.,  Postmaster-General,  ii,  766 
Habitancy,  ii,  211 

Habitation  tax,  iii,  490 
Habitual  criminals,  i,  525 

Hack  drivers,  license  taxes  on  occupations,  ii, 
351 

Haddock  vs.  Haddock  (divorce  in  interstate  law), 

ii,  231 

Hadley,  Arthur  T.,  quoted  on  minorities,  rights 
of,  ii,  450 

Hagenbach-Bisehof,  and  proportional  representa- 
tion, iii,  81 

Hague  Conference,  First,  ii,  203 

— Second  (1907),  ii,  203 

Court  of  Arbitral  Justice,  i,  64 

— and  Drago  Doctrine,  i,  611 

— — good  offices  and  mediation,  ii,  86 
and  neutrality,  ii,  522 

and  states,  equality  of,  iii,  419 

and  maritime  war,  ii,  397 

— Conferences,  ii,  106 

-and  international  usages,  ii.  213 

— Convention,  and  declaration  of  war,  i,  556 

— tribunal,  ii,  107 

see  Pious  fund  arbitration,  ii,  693 

Hale,  John  P.,  i,  2 

— and  Free  Soil  party,  ii,  53 

— Liberty  party,  ii,  348 

— and  New  Hampshire,  ii,  529 

— vote  for,  iii,  27 

Half-breeds,  and  Republican  party,  iii,  196 
Halifax  award  of  1877  (fisheries),  i,  68,  174;  ii, 
108 

-and  Newfoundland  fisheries  dispute,  ii,  545 

— Nova  Scotia,  ii,  564 
Hall,  A.  Oakley,  iii,  468 

— Henry  C.,  ii,  225 

— Lyman,  i,  554 

— Nathan  K.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196;  ii,  767 

— William  E.,  quoted  on  state,  theory  of,  iii,  407 

— vs.  Wisconsin  (public  officers),  iii,  100 
Hamburg,  ii,  80,  109 

Hamilton,  Alexander,  ii,  108 

— army  plans  of,  i,  78 

— and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 

— articles  of  war,  revised  by,  i,  83 
- — -cabinet  officer,  i,  195 

— and  Democratic-Republican  party,  i,  576 

— Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 

— see  Treasury  Department,  iii,  563 

— and  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  477 

— in  Washington's  cabinet,  i,  199 

— quoted  on  federal  judiciary,  ii,  260 

— see  Federalist , i,  720 

— see  Federalist  party,  i,  721 

— quoted  on  judicial  tenure,  ii,  256,  261 
- — -political  theories  of.  ii,  719 

— and  party  organization,  ii,  591 

— quoted  on  resulting  powers,  iii,  209 
Hamilton,  Henry,  and  Michigan,  ii,  425 


Hamilton,  James  A.,  Secretary  of  State,  ill,  402 
— - Paul,  Secretary  of  Navy,  1,  195 ; ii,  506 

— Co.  its.  Mighels  (local  government),  ii,  364 
Hamiltonian  Federalism,  i,  722 

Hamlin,  Hannibal,  ii,  108 
— - Vice-President,  iii,  616 

— vote  for,  iii,  29 

Hampton  Roads  Conference,  ii,  109 
Hancock,  John,  i,  554  ; ii,  109 
— ■ vote  for,  iii,  13,  14 

Hancock,  Winfield  S.  and  Democratic  party,  i, 
570,  572 

and  tariff  as  a local  issue,  iii,  472,  480 

vote  for,  iii,  35 

"Hands  off"  policy,  and  Great  Britain,  ii,  98 
Hanford,  Benjamin,  iii,  339 

— vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  43,  45 
Hanger  vs.  Abbott  (war),  iii,  046 
Hanna,  Marcus  Alonzo,  ii,  109 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  198 
— -and  stand  pat,  iii,  376 

— as  Warwick  the  kingmaker,  iii,  655 

— -and  party  expenditures,  publicity  of,  ii,  623 

and  Nicaragua  Canal  policy,  ii,  547 

Hanna-Payne  Bill  (subsidies  to  shipping),  iii,  440 
Hanover,  diplomatic  relations  with,  Ti,  79 
Hans  vs.  Louisiana  (Eleventh  Amendment),  i,  660 
Hansa,  ii,  110 

Ilanse  cities,  commercial  treaties  with,  ii,  79 
Hanseatic  league,  ii,  109 

— and  mediaeval  city  leagues,  ii,  417 
Harbor  systems,  ii,  110 

Harbors,  and  municipal  government,  functions  of, 

ii,  476 

— - and  municipal  trading,  ii,  488 
Harcourt,  Sir  William  V.,  quoted  on  interven- 
tion, ii,  234 

Hard  cider  campaign,  ii,  110 
— -money  and  Democratic  party,  i,  566 

— — and  Greenback  party,  ii,  101 

— - — policy  and  Democratic  party,  i,  570 
Hards,  in  Democratic  party,  i,  568 
Hare,  Thomas,  on  proportional  representation,  iii, 
80 

Harlan,  James,  i.  197  ; ii,  199 

— James  S.,  ii,  225 

— John  M.,  iii,  462 

on  Preamble  to  Constitution,  i,  422 

Harman  vs.  Chicago  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  219 
Harmon,  Judson,  i,  95;  ii,  111 
— • cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
Harper,  William  It.,  iii,  258,  600 

— Robert  G.,  vote  for,  iii,  18 
Harper's  Ferry  raid,  ii,  235 
Harriman  decision,  ii,  223 

— Job  and  Social  Democrats,  iii,  326 

vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  42 

and  Socialist  Labor  party,  iii,  338 

— roads,  iii,  131 

Harrington,  George,  Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii, 
566 

— James,  ii,  724 

Harris,  Carey  A.,  Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 

— Isham  G.,  iii,  515 

— Townsend,  ii.  247  ; iii,  568 

— W.  A.,  Populist,  ii,  275 

— William  T„  i,  635 

kindergarten,  ii,  280 

Harrisburg,  capitol  at,  iii,  91 
Harrison,  Benjamin,  biography,  ii.  111 

— grandfather's  hat,  ii,  94 

— -and  Quay,  Matthew  S.,  iii,  126 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  37,  38 

Harrison,  Robert  II.,  supreme  court  United  States, 

iii,  14,  462 

— William  Henry,  biography,  ii,  111 
and  hard  cider  campaign,  ii,  111 

— — and  Michigan,  ii,  425 
and  Middle  West,  ii,  430 

Tippecanoe  and  Tyler  too,  iii,  538 

and  northwest  territory,  ii,  562 

— ■ — vote  for,  iii,  13,  23,  24 

see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics, 

iii,  671 

and  Whig  party,  iii,  681 

Hart,  Hastings  H.,  and  juvenile  court,  i,  500 

— John,  i,  554 

Hartford  vs.  Bennett  (office,  obligation  to  ac- 
cept), ii.  570 

Hartford  Convention,  ii,  112 

— and  Federalist  party,  i,  725 

— see  Sectionalism  in  the  United  States,  iii,  282 
Hartley,  John  F.,  iii,  566 

Harvard  College,  iii,  410 

— University,  bureau  for  research  in  municipal 

government  at,  ii,  488 

Harvey,  William  H.,  and  silver  coinage  contro- 
versy, iii,  312 

Hatch  Act  (agricultural  experiment),  iii,  272 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Hatton,  Frank,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii,  767 
Haul,  long  and  short,  ii,  26,  371  ; iii,  555 
Hautral  and  X Y Z,  iii,  703 

Haver  vs.  Yaker  (negotiation  of  treaties  by  the 
United  States),  ii,  512 
Hawaii  vs.  Mankiehi  (insular),  ii,  187 

— (territorial  status),  iii,  524 
Hawaiian  Islands,  ii,  112 

— annexation  of,  i,  46;  ii,  114 

— and  international  law,  ii,  208 

— bird  reservation  of,  i,  153 

— as  dependency  of  United  States,  i,  582 

— in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  38 

— navy  yard,  in,  ii,  507 

— and  Pacific  islands,  diplomatic  relations  with, 

ii,  596 

— protectorate  over,  iii,  84 

— reciprocity  treaty  with,  i,  343 

— see  also  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  249 

— see  Territories  of  United  States,  iii,  521 

— see  also  Territory,  acquired,  status  of,  iii,  524 

— see  also  Territory,  constitutional  questions  of, 

iii,  525 

— treaties  and  reciprocity,  iii,  160 
Hay,  Charles,  Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 

— John,  ii,  114 

cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

see  Russia,  diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  243 

as  secretary  to  the  President,  iii,  280 

on  treaty  negotiations,  iii,  288 

Hay-Bond  Treaty  of  1904,  i,  175,  177 
Hay-Herbert  Treaty,  1903,  i,  176 
Hay-Herran  convention,  i,  218  ; iii,  569 
Hay-Pauncefote  Treaty,  i,  217,  94 ; ii,  115 

— and  international  law,  ii,  208 

— see  West  Indies,  iii,  678 

Hayburn’s  case  (separation  of  powers),  iii,  298 

— (unconstitutionality),  i,  508 
Hayden,  surveys  by,  ii,  75 
Hayes,  Max,  iii,  338 

— Rutherford  B.,  ii,  115 

and  canal  diplomacy,  i,  216 

and  electoral  commission,  i,  657 

and  Republican  party,  iii,  196 

vote  for.  iii,  13,  34 

— S.  S„  iii,  472 

Hayne,  Robert  Young,  ii,  115 
Hayti,  ii,  115 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  116 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  468 

— and  negro  problem,  ii,  513 

— negro  settlement  at,  i,  323 

— protectorate  over,  iii,  84 

— see  also  San  Domingo,  diplomatic  relations 

with,  iii,  250 

— see  also  West  Indies,  iii,  678 

Hazardous  employment,  federal  legislation  as  to, 
ii,  189 

— child  labor  in,  i,  255 
Head,  Sir  Edmund,  iii,  208 
Headlands  theory,  ii,  116 

— in  international  fisheries,  ii,  21 
Health,  Board  of,  i,  140,  604 

— powers  of  a,  i,  253 

— and  contagious  diseases,  i,  450 

— and  garbage  removal,  ii,  70 

— labor,  hours  of,  ii,  290 

— and  morals  of  Apprentices  Act  (England),  iii, 

99 

— officer,  as  county  officer,  i,  494 

— public,  international  office  of,  ii,  203 
-regulation  of,  ii,  117 

— and  safety,  and  hours  of  labor,  ii,  290 
Hearst,  William  R.,  his  Independence  League,  ii, 

155 

Hedging,  in  political  platforms,  ii,  696 
Heelers,  ii,  121 
Hegel,  ii,  731 
— - and  sociology,  iii,  342 
Hegemony,  and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  467 
Height  of  buildings,  laws  as  to,  i,  186 
Hempstead,  and  New  York  City,  ii,  540 
Henchmen,  ii,  121 

Henderson  Bridge  Company  vs.  Kentucky  (fran- 
chises), ii,  46 

— D.  R.,  speaker,  i,  392 

— vs.  Mavor  of  New  York  (interstate  commerce), 

ii,  220 

— Richard,  iii,  559 
Kentucky,  ii,  277 

Hendricks,  Thomas  A.,  and  Democratic  party, 
i,  573 

— and  electoral  commission,  i,  657 

— Vice-President,  iii,  616 

■ — - vote  for,  iii.  32,  34,  36 
Hennepin  Canal,  i,  221 
Hennessey,  Mayor,  ii,  245 

Hennington  vs.  Georgia  (interstate  commerce),  ii. 


Henry  documents,  ii,  121 
— • John,  ii,  121 

— Patrick,  ii,  121 

on  Federalism,  i,  47 

— - — see  Kentucky,  ii,  278 

and  Parson’s  Cause,  ii,  620 

and  Stamp  Act  agitation,  iii,  375 

vote  for,  iii,  15 

Henshaw,  D.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196 
- — Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 
Hepburn  Act,  ii,  227 

— and  express  companies,  i,  703 

— interstate  commerce,  ii,  221 

— Bill  (Nicaraguan  Canal),  i,  217 

— vs.  Griswold  (legal  tender  cases),  ii,  322 
Herbert,  Hilary  A.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii,  506 
Hereditary  monarchy,  ii,  459 

Hermandad,  lynching,  ii,  380 
Hermeneutics,  i,  444 
Hermitage,  ii,  122 
Hermogenianus,  code  of,  i,  302 
Herzegovina,  under  Austria,  i,  97 
Hesse,  ii,  80 

Hetch  Hetchy  Valley,  iii,  252 
Hewes,  Joseph,  i,  554 
Hewitt,  Abram  S.,  i,  491 

— ■ and  independent  movements  in  politics,  ii,  156 
Heyward,  Thomas,  jr.,  i,  554 
Hickory  pole  canvass,  ii,  122 
Hides,  tariff  on,  iii,  483 

Higginson,  Thomas  Wentworth,  and  Mugwumps, 
ii,  474 

High  cost  of  living,  and  money,  theory  of,  ii, 
462 

— crimes  and  misdemeanors,  and  impeachment, 

ii,  150 

— license,  in  liquor  legislation,  ii,  356 

— schools,  iii,  259 

statistics  of,  i,  649 

Higher  law,  ii,  122 
Highway,  ii,  122 

— commissioner,  state,  ii,  123 

— tax,  iii,  230 
Highways,  ii,  655 

— see  also  Public  works,  iii,  113 

— and  canals  in  1830  (map),  iii,  231 

see  Public  works,  iii,  115 

— and  eminent  domain,  i,  665 
Hildreth,  Richard,  ii,  123 

Hill,  Benjamin  H.,  and  secession  of  Georgia,  ii,  77 

— David  B.,  ii,  123 

— - — and  Democratic  party,  i.  574 
— - — and  middle  states,  ii,  428 

and  Snappers,  iii,  324 

— - Isaac,  and  New  Hampshire,  ii,  529 
— -James  Jerome,  ii,  123 
— - roads,  iii,  131 

Hillquit.  Morris,  quoted  on  Socialist  party,  iii, 
339 

Hilton  vs.  Guyot  (international  law),  ii,  207 
Hipolite  Egg  Co.  vs.  United  States  (interstate 
commerce),  ii,  221 
His  Majesty's  opposition,  ii,  632 
Hisgen,  Thomas  L.,  ii,  155 
— - vote  for,  iii,  44 
Hispanola,  ii,  115 

Historic  relics,  public  ownership  of,  iii,  153 
Historical  societies,  ii,  320 
— - theory  of  state,  ii,  721  ; iii.  409 
History,  materialistic  interpretation  of,  iii,  335 

— and  political  science,  ii,  714 

— and  sociology,  iii,  348 
Hitchcock,  Ethan  A.,  ii.  199 
— - cabinet  officer,  i,  198 
Hitchcock,  Frank  Harris,  ii,  124 
— -cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

— Postmaster-General,  ii,  767 

Hoadlv,  Bishop,  quoted  on  interpretation  of  laws, 
ii,  317 

Hoar,  Ebenezer  R.,  i,  95,  197 
— ■ George  Frisbie,  ii,  124 
iii,  290 

Hobart,  Garret  A.,  Vice-President,  iii,  616 
— - vote  for,  iii,  39 

Hobbes,  Thomas,  political  theories  of,  ii,  725 

— on  state,  theory  of,  iii.  408 

Hobbie,  Selah  R.,  Postmaster-General,  ii,  767 
Hobhouse,  and  sociology,  iii,  344 
Hodgkins  fund,  iii,  323 

Hoe  & Company  (trade  school),  iii,  271 

Hoke  vs.  Henderson  (due  process  of  law),  i,  615 

— - (public  officers),  iii,  100 

Holden  vs.  Hardy  (contract),  i,  456 

Holding  companies,  ii,  124 ; iii,  579 

Holidays,  legal,  ii,  125 

Holland,  see  Netherlands,  ii,  519 

— purchase,  ii,  125 

Hollerith  system,  in  census,  i,  235 


738 


INDEX 


Hollingsworth  vs.  Virginia  (constitutional  amend- 
ment), i,  419 

Hollman,  Ex  parte  (Thirteenth  Amendment),  iii, 
536 

Holman,  William  S.,  iii,  658 

Holmes,  Oliver  Wendell,  and  Old  Ironsides,  ii, 
579 

Holmes,  O.  W.,  supreme  court  United  States,  ill, 
462 

— quoted,  on  primary,  direct,  iii,  51 
Holmes  vs.  Walton,  i,  509 

— (constitutional  limitations),  i,  442 
Holst,  Hermann  Edward  von,  ii,  125 

llolt,  Joseph,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196;  iii,  649 

Holy  Alliance,  ii,  125 

Holy  ltoman  Empire,  ii,  125 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  465 

Homans,  Benjamin,  Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 
Home  Department,  federal,  ii,  198 

— and  law,  administrative,  ii,  311 
Home  market,  the,  ii,  56 

— -Office  (England),  i,  689 

— rule  charter  system,  i,  249 
for  cities,  i,  274 

and  municipal  government  in  the  United 

States,  ii,  484 

and  ordinances,  municipal,  ii,  587 

in  development  of  municipal  government,  ii, 

481 

— safety  of,  ii,  134 

Homestead  Act  and  economic  history  of  United 
States,  i,  622 

— exemptions,  ii,  126 

— land  grants,  ii,  305 

— law  and  public  lands,  iii,  95 
of  Texas,  iii,  531 

— legislation  and  labor  organizations,  ii,  293 
Homestead  strike,  and  Republican  party,  iii,  197 
Homesteads  on  public  lands,  ii,  126 
Honduras,  ii,  126 

— and  canal  diplomacy,  i,  216 

— diplomatic  agreement  with,  i,  591 

— and  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  37 

— independence  of,  i,  237 

— and  Mosquito  Question,  ii,  472 

— protectorate  over,  iii,  84 
Honest  graft,  ii,  127 
Honest  Old  Abe,  ii,  127 

Hondt,  Victor  d’,  and  proportional  representation, 

i.  81 

Hooker,  Richard,  ii,  724 

— and  social  compact  theory,  iii,  325 
Hooker,  Thomas,  and  political  theories,  ii,  718 
Hookworm,  and  health,  public,  ii,  121 
Hooper,  William,  i,  554 

— vs.  California  (insurance),  ii,  192 
Hoosac  tunnel,  iii,  148 

Hopkins,  Stephen,  i,  554;  ii,  127 
— -political  theories  of,  ii,  719 
Hopkinson,  Fraser,  i,  554 ; iii,  253 
Horseshoe  reef,  and  boundaries  of  United  States, 

i,  153 

Horton,  S.  Dana,  and  silver  coinage  controversy, 
iii,  311 

Hospitals,  exemption  from  taxation,  iii,  499 

— - public,  ii,  127 

Hostilities,  opening  of,  i,  556 

Hotels  and  lodging  houses,  regulation  of,  ii,  127 
Hottinguer,  and  X Y Z,  iii,  703 
Hour  rule,  ii,  128 
Hours  of  labor,  ii,  289 
for  trainmen,  i,  4 

— of  railroad  employees,  in  interstate  commerce, 

ii,  221 

— service,  and  transportation,  regulation  of,  iii, 

557 

House  of  Burgesses,  iii,  617 

— of  Commons,  ii,  128,  614 

— — - committees  of,  i,  360 
— ' ' — and  Parliament,  ii,  614 
Canadian,  ii,  615 

— of  delegates,  and  legislative  problems  in  cities, 

ii,  326 

see  also  State  assembly,  iii,  377 

— of  governors,  and  railroad  commissions,  state, 

iii,  134 

and  statutes,  state,  iii,  426 

— inspection,  and  social  reform,  iii,  329 

— leader  of  the,  ii,  320 

— of  Lords,  ii,  614;  iii,  258 

legislation,  British  system  of,  ii,  330 

— - numbering,  iii,  435 

— of  refuge,  New  York,  iii,  260 

— of  Representatives,  ii,  129 

apportionment  of.  i,  56 

clerk  of  the,  i,  295 

committees,  appointment  of,  i,  355 

election  to.  iii,  186 

of  President  by,  iii,  10 

mediocrity  of  members  of,  explained,  iii,  187 


House  of  Representatives  and  order  of  business  in 
legislative  bodies,  ii,  584 

representation  in  the,  i,  382 

see  Revenue,  bills  for  raising,  iii,  211 

see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  248 

see  also  State  assembly,  iii,  377 

see  also  State  legislature,  iii,  398 

in  tariff  legislation,  framing  of,  iii  474 

vacancies  in,  iii,  604 

— of  correction,  ii,  134 

— of  ill  fame,  and  social  reform,  iii,  330 

— private,  constitutional  protection  of,  ii  134 
Household  arts,  manual  training,  ii,  392 
Housing,  municipal,  ii,  486 

— of  the  working  classes,  London  county  coun- 

cil, ii,  370 

Houston,  David  F.,  i,  20 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

Houston  vs.  Moore  (concurrent  powers),  i 369 

— Samuel,  ii,  135 

and  Indians,  ii,  172 

H°w?rd,  Jacob  M.,  and  Republican  party,  iii, 

— vote  for,  iii,  18 

Howard  vs.  Illinois  Central  R.  R.  Co.  (interstate 
commerce),  ii,  221 

— University,  ii,  198 

Howe,  Joseph,  and  Nova  Scotia,  ii,  564 

— F.  C.,  quoted  on  revenue,  internal,  iii,  212 

— S.  G.,  i,  639 

— T.  O.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 ; ii,  767 
Howland  Island,  ii,  135 

— and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  153 
Hubbard,  Samuel  D„  cabinet  officer,  i,  196:  ii. 

767 

Huddersfield,  England,  experiment  with  munici- 
pal ownership,  ii,  486 

Hudson  Bay,  and  international  fisheries,  ii,  22 

— Company,  ii,  135 

and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  155 

charter  of,  i,  213 

and  Manitoba,  ii,  392 

Huelsemann  episode,  ii,  136 

Huerta,  Victoriana,  and  Mexico,  diplomatic  re- 
lations with,  ii,  424 
Hughes.  Charles  Evans,  ii,  136,  iii,  462 

— on  administrative  system  in  New  York,  i,  353 

— on  independent  movements  in  politics,  ii,  157 

— on  messages,  executive,  ii,  419 
— "and  party  leadership,  ii,  630 

Hull,  Governor  William,  and  Michigan,  ii,  425 
Humboldt,  Wilhelm  von,  ii,  731 
Hume,  David,  political  theories  of,  ii,  726 
Humphreys,  Governor,  and  Mississippi,  ii,  454 

— West  H.,  impeachment  of,  ii,  149 
Hundred,  ii,  136 

— - in  Delaware,  i,  498,  561 
Hunkers,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  567 
Hunt,  Ward,  iii,  462 

— Washington,  iii,  312 

— William  II.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 : ii,  506 
-judge  of  Commerce  Court,  i,  499 

Hunter,  R.  M.  T.,  as  Confederate  cabinet  officer, 
i.  372 

— William.  Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 
speaker,  i,  390 

Huntington.  Samuel,  and  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, i,  554 

— vote  for,  iii,  14 

Huntington  vs.  Attrill  (penal  laws),  ii,  658 
Hurd,  Harvey  H.,  i,  500 

— John  Codman,  ii,  136 

Hurtado  vs.  California  (due  process  of  law),  i, 
616 

Huse  vs.  Glover  (admission  of  states)  iii,  415 

Hustings,  ii,  137 

Hutchinson,  Thomas,  ii,  137 

Hyde,  Sir  Edward,  and  New  Jersey,  ii,  531 

Hydrographic  Office,  maps  of,  ii,  74 

Hygiene,  and  health,  public,  ii,  121 

— school,  iii,  257 

— in  schools  and  health,  public,  ii,  120 

— see  also  Tuberculosis,  iii.  581 

Hylton  vs.  United  States  (direct  taxes),  iii,  498, 
508 

Icarian  community-  i,  365 

Ice  cream,  state  inspection  of,  ii,  184 

— supply,  and  health,  public,  ii,  119 
Idaho,  ii,  138 

Ide,  William  B.,  founds  Bear  Flag  Republic,  I, 
123 

Identic  notes,  in  international  law,  iii,  570 
lie  Royal,  and  Nova  Scotia,  ii,  564 

— St.  Jean,  and  Nova  Scotia,  ii,  564 
Illegitimate  children,  i,  257 

Illinois,  ii,  139 

— building  code  of,  i,  186 

— child  labor,  in,  i,  256 


739 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Illinois,  depedendent  children,  in,  i,  257 
Industrial  University,  ii,  141 

— legislative  voters'  league,  ii,  342 

— and  Middle  West,  ii,  429 

— minority  representation  in,  ii,  451 

— office  and  commission  in,  iii,  101 

— public  opinion  law,  iii,  029 

— state  owned  railroad  in,  iii,  147 

— territory,  ii,  158 

— University  of,  iii,  412 
Illiteracy,  ii,  142 

— and  immigration,  ii,  144 

— suffrage,  iii,  445 
Illuminati,  ii,  142 

Imitations,  see  Pure  food,  iii,  122 
Immanuel  case  (continuous  voyages),  i,  454 
Immigration,  ii,  143 

— administrative  decisions  on,  i,  11 

— American  convention  against,  i,  34 

— American  race  and  nationality  and,  i,  38 

— Bureau  of,  ii,  148,  288 
Immigrants,  convict,  i,  405 

— and  crime,  i,  520 

— head  tax  on,  ii,  143 

— Health  Bureau  and.  ii,  117 

— hospitals  for,  ii,  127 
Immigration,  and  aliens,  ii,  30 

— and  charities,  i,  240 
— Commission,  ii,  148 

and  contract  labor  law,  i,  459 

— and  decay  of  executive  power  in  American 

cities,  ii,  411 

— Japanese,  into  Canada,  i,  213 

— see  Japan,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  249 

— and  Naturalization,  Bureau  of,  ii,  498 

— and  population  of  United  States,  ii,  741 

— see  Race  elements,  iii,  130 
— • regulation  of,  and  expenditures,  federal, 

092 

Immunities  and  privileges,  of  citizens,  iii,  08 
Immunity,  ii,  148 

— bath,  ii,  148 

— baths,  and  Interstate  Commerce  Commission, 

ii,  224 

— from  prosecution,  ii,  148 
Impairment,  what  constitutes  an,  i,  458 
Impeachment,  ii,  149,  235 

— 8'ee  Constitution  making  in  United  States 

— of  judges,  ii,  254 

— of  legislators,  iii,  101 

— see  Removal  of  public  officials,  iii,  178 

— Senate  and,  iii.  289 

Imperial  chancellor  (German),  ii,  81 

— federal  order  and  American  Revolution,  iii,  222 
Imperialism,  ii,  151 

— in  England,  i,  402 

— and  Hawaiian  annexation,  ii,  114 
Implied  powers,  ii,  152 

— and  Democratic-Republican  party,  i,  570 
Imports,  i,  331 

— appraisal  of,  i,  57 

— not  per  se  a cause  of  loss,  ii,  54 

Impost  duties,  see  Taxation,  subject  of,  iii,  50G 
Imposts,  ii,  153 
Impressment,  ii,  153 

— and  search,  ii,  90 

Imprisonment  for  debt,  abolition  of,  i,  023 
Improvement  debt,  i,  550 

— district,  iii,  001 

— Board  of  Public  (St.  Louis),  iii,  246 

— internal,  constitutional  status  of,  ii,  202 
“Inability”  and  presidential  succession,  iii.  47 
Inaugurals  of  Presidents  of  United  States,  ii,  154  ; 

iii,  4 

Incandescent  lamp,  lighting,  electric,  ii,  353 
Incidental  damages,  and  eminent  domain,  i,  666 

— motions,  and  parliamentary  law,  ii,  618 
Income,  and  profits,  iii,  74 

— and  taxation,  principles  of,  iii,  504 

— see  Taxation,  subjects  of,  iii,  506 

— tax,  iii,  490 

and  Democratic  party,  i,  574 

in  financial  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  6 

— - — in  financial  system  of  Europe,  ii,  2 

and  manufacturing,  relation  of  government 

to,  ii,  394 

and  national  wealth,  iii,  664 

see  also  Pollock  vs.  Farmers  L.  & T.  Co.,  ii, 

732 

— • — see  Sixteenth  Amendment,  iii,  313 

in  state  systems  of  finance,  ii,  5 

in  Underwood  Tariff,  iii,  587 

Incorporation  of  associations,  ii,  154 

— and  corporation  charters,  i,  471 

— of  territory,  ii,  154 

— of  labor  organizations,  ii,  294 
Increment  taxes,  and  single  tax,  iii,  497 

— value  duty  (British),  iii,  588 
Incurables,  public  care  of,  i,  557  ; ii,  154 


Indebtedness,  constitutional  limitations  upon,  i. 
443 

— public,  ii,  14 

— state,  constitutional  limits  to,  i,  407 
Indefeasible  allegiance,  ii.  90,  155,  580 
Indelible  allegiance,  i,  090 

— see  Impressment,  ii.  153 

Indemnity,  payment  of,  by  United  States,  i,  291 

— of  1879,  ii,  107 

Indentured  service  and  slavery,  iii,  310 
— white  servants,  i,  621 
Indentures  and  indented  servants,  ii,  155 
Independence,  Declaration  of.  i,  553;  ii,  250 
— • Hall,  Philadelphia,  iii,  90 
— - political  party  of  1908,  ii,  155 

— of  states  in  international  law.  ii,  208 
Independent  movements  in  politics,  ii,  156 

— treasury,  ii,  157 

system,  see  Treasury  Department,  iii,  564 

Indestructible  union  of  indestructible  states,  ii, 
157 

Indeterminate  permit  to  street  railroads  in  Wis- 
consin, iii.  149 

— sentence,  ii,  157 
Index  numbers,  in  statistics,  iii.  423 
Indexes  and  Archives,  Bureau  of.  ii,  158 
Indeterminate  sentence,  and  parole  system,  ii,  019 
India,  see  Suzerainty,  iii,  403 
— Office  (British),  i,  089 

Indian  Affairs,  Bureau  of,  public  health,  and,  ii, 

117 

— Office  of,  ii,  199 
Indian  commissioner,  ii.  161 
— Commissioners,  Board  of,  ii.  101 

— depredations.  Court  of  Claims  and,  i,  503 

— government,  ii,  161 

— policy  of  the  United  States,  ii,  162 
i,  — reservations,  ii,  105 

government  ownership  of  iii,  153 

map  of,  ii,  166 

— schools,  church  and  state  and,  i,  267 

— slavery,  iii,  316 
— Territory,  ii,  108 

area  of,  i,  103 

government  of,  ii,  171 

and  Indian  policy  of  the  United  States,  ii, 

163 

and  Oklahoma,  ii,  577 

— treaties,  ii,  108 

— tribes,  commerce  with,  i,  337 

— wars  of  United  States  (map),  iii,  650 

— — to  1815,  iii,  651 

1812-1875,  iii,  652 

Indiana,  ii,  158 

— canals,  i,  221 
— • constitution  of  1911,  i,  426 

— constitutional  amendment  in,  i,  436 

— — restrictions  upon  special  legislation,  i,  443 
— - dependent  children  in,  i,  258 

— and  Middle  West,  ii,  429 

— plan  of  segregation  of  unfit,  iii,  331 
— - state-owned  railroad  in.  iii,  147 
Indians,  allotment  of  land  to,  i,  32 
— American,  ethnology  of,  i,  2 

— colonial  status  of,  ii,  170 

— constitutional  and  legal  status  of,  ii,  170 
— - as  dependent  people,  i,  584 

— and  federal  expenditures,  i,  691 

— jurisdiction  of  United  States  and,  iii,  519 

— and  negro  problem,  ii,  513 

— status  of,  as  to  citizenship,  i,  272 
— -as  wards  of  the  nation,  iii,  654 
Indianapolis,  Indiana,  ii,  158 
Indictment,  ii,  173 
Indirect  taxes,  iii,  509 

— see  Imposts,  ii,  153 

Indiscriminate  location,  see  Surveys  of  land,  iii, 
463 

Individual  and  the  socius.  iii,  345 
Individualism  and  coercion  of  individuals,  i,  307 

— in  England,  iii,  104 
— - and  modified  socialism,  iii,  332 

— in  political  theory,  ii,  727 

— theory  of,  ii,  173 
Indoor  relief,  i,  246 

Industrial  combinations  and  public  opinion,  iii, 
103 

— in  economic  history  of  United  States,  i,  624 
Industrial  Commission,  i,  351 
— Congress,  ii,  175 
— - injuries,  ii,  175 

— insurance,  ii,  190 

and  fraternal  insurance,  ii,  49 

— Labor  party,  ii,  296 

— and  literary  property,  conventions  for  protec- 
tion of,  ii,  216 

— property,  international  union  for  the  protec- 
tion of,  ii,  651 

— training,  see  Reformatories,  iii,  173 


INDEX 


Industrial  Workers  of  the  World,  il,  145 

— labor  organizations,  ii,  293 

— aud  syndicalism,  iii,  46t5 
Industry,  infant,  ii,  176 
Industry,  patrons  of,  ii,  654 
Inebriate  asylums,  ii,  175 
Infamous  crime,  ii,  176 

— offense  defined,  ii.  268 
Infant  industry,  ii,  176 

— under  free  trade  and  protection,  ii,  55 
Infant  mortality  and  social  justice,  i,  564 
Inferior  officers,  ii,  176 

Inflation,  ii.  176 

Inflation  Bill  of  1874,  and  Greenback  party,  ii, 
101 

Inflation  of  currency,  see  Silver  coinage  contro- 
versy, iii,  311 

Inflationists,  legal  tender  controversy,  ii,  324 
Influence  in  government,  ii,  177 
Information,  ii,  178 

— calls  for,  ii,  178 

— in  the  nature  of  quo  warranto,  iii,  129 
Ingersoll,  Jared,  vote  for,  iii,  17 

— Robert  G.,  ii,  698 

Ingham,  Samuel  D.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196;  iii,  566 
Inhabitant,  i,  607 

— see  Suffrage,  iii,  443 
Inherent  sovereignty,  iii,  596 
Inherited  capital,  and  socialism,  iii,  333 
Inheritance,  and  international  law,  private,  ii,  211 

— taxes,  iii,  443,  493 

in  financial  system  of  Europe,  ii,  2 

and  national  wealth,  iii,  664 

■ and  revenue,  internal,  iii,  213 

in  state  systems  of  finance,  ii,  4 

see  Taxation,  subjects  of,  iii,  506 

Initiative,  ii,  179 

— advisory,  iii.  629 

— legislation,  direct,  ii,  331 

— in  popular  government,  ii,  737 

— and  public  opinion,  iii,  104 

— and  referendum,  see  Constitution  making  in 

United  States,  i,  407 

ordinary  legislation  by,  ii.  332 

see  State  legislature,  iii,  400 

and  suffrage,  iii,  448 

— in  Switzerland,  iii,  466 
Injunction,  ii,  179 

— in  equity,  i,  674 

— government  by.  ii,  88 

— in  labor  disputes,  ii,  180 
■ — and  insurrections,  ii,  197 
— - in  strikes,  iii,  438 
Injuries,  industrial,  ii,  175 

Inland  Empire,  aud  Pacific  slope,  ii,  598 

— and  sectionalism  in  United  States,  iii,  281 

— Waterways  Commission,  ii,  181 
Inn  keepers,  restrictions  on,  i.  189 
“Innocuous  desuetude,”  ii,  182 
inquest,  le  graunde,  ii,  268 
Inquiry,  court  of,  i,  503 
Iuquisitio  (Norman),  iii,  184 
Insane  criminal,  i,  525 

— expenditures  for,  i,  694 

— public  care  of,  i,  557  ; ii,  182 

— public  institutions  for,  i,  558 

— hospitals,  state  administration  of,  ii,  185 
Insanity,  in  criminal  law,  ii,  318 

Insects,  see  Bureau  of  Entomology,  i,  18 
Insolvency  law  and  impairment  of  contract,  i, 
458 

Inspection  of  food  and  drugs  as  a public  function, 

ii.  184 

— food  products,  relation  of  government  to,  ii, 

393 

— as  a function  of  government,  ii,  182 
Inspector-general,  ii,  185 

Inspectors  of  elections,  ii,  185 
Institutions,  state,  administration  of.  ii,  185 
Instruction  period,  in  diplomatic  service,  i,  594 
Instructions  for  the  Government  of  Armies  in  the 
field,  ii,  186 

Instructions  to  representatives,  ii,  186 
Instrument  of  government,  i,  434 
Insular  Cases,  ii,  187 

— and  dependencies  of  United  States,  i,  582 

— see  Dependencies  of  the  United  States,  i,  583 

— of  1900,  and  military  occupation,  ii,  437 

— and  incorporation  of  territory,  ii,  154 

— sec  Philippines,  ii,  681 

— • «ee  also  Territory,  constitutional  questions  of, 

iii,  525 

— see  Territories  of  United  States,  iii,  521 
Insular  government,  Philippine  Islands,  ii,  681 

— possessions,  citizenship  in,  i,  272 

— protection,  i,  301 

Insurance  Act,  National,  (English),  ii,  189 
Insurance  Co.  vs.  Dunham  (maritime  law),  i,  12 


Insurance  and  Banking,  Commissioner  of,  in  Tex- 
as, iii,  531 

— commissioners,  duties  of,  ii,  191 

— commissions  and  commissioners,  ii,  190 
— ■ companies,  tax  on,  ii,  190 

see  Taxation,  subjects  of,  iii,  506 

— government  restrictions  as  to,  i,  190 

— industrial,  ii,  190 
— - fraternal,  ii,  49 

— see  also.  Fire,  ii,  18 

— legal  basis  and  regulations  of  ii,  190 

— old  age,  ii,  579 

— savings  bank,  iii,  253 
— - social,  iii,  700 

— and  social  welfare,  ii,  188 

— workingmen's,  iii,  700 
Insurgency  in  international  law,  ii,  192 
Insurgent  blockade,  i,  135 
Insurgents,  and  martial  law,  ii,  403 
Insurgents  in  Congress,  i,  387  ; ii,  193 

— Progressives,  iii,  75 

— Republican  party,  iii,  199 
Insurgency,  and  the  speaker,  iii,  371 
Insurrection,  in  Civil  War,  i,  2SS 

— and  mob  rule,  ii,  458 

— right  of,  iii.  223 

— history  of,  ii,  194 

— filibusters  to  aid.  i,  731 

— suppression  of,  ii.  195 

— against  a stale,  ii,  196 
Intendant,  ii.  197 

— of  villages,  iii,  47 

Intention,  declaration  of,  and  naturalization,  law 
of,  i,  556  ; ii.  497 

Interborough  Rapid  Transit  Co.,  iii,  442 
Intercourse,  right  of,  ii,  208 

— of  states,  ii,  197 

Interest  aud  capital,  and  socialism,  iii,  333 

— distribution,  economic,  i,  599 

— and  profits,  iii,  74 

— on  public  debt,  i,  548 
Interests,  ii,  198 
Interests,  the  iii,  75 
Interference,  ii,  651 

Interior,  Department  of,  ii,  198 

— assistant  attorney  general,  ii,  271 

— -charts  of  internal  organization  of,  ii,  200,  201 

— and  health,  public,  ii,  117 

— and  law,  administrative,  ii,  311 

— Mines,  Bureau  of,  ii,  442,  445 

— Patent  Office,  ii,  650 

— Pension  Bureau,  ii,  666 

— see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  248 
Interior,  secretaries  of,  ii,  199 
Intermunicipal  law,  ii,  210 

Internal  improvements,  see  Public  works,  iii,  113 

— state  participation  in,  forbidden,  iii,  145 
— -constitutional  status  of,  ii,  202 

— constitutional  limitations  upon,  i,  407 
Internal  revenue,  collector  of,  i,  314 
receipts  from,  i,  181 

duties,  i,  679 

laws,  the  tariff  and,  manufacturing,  ii,  394 

fines  as  source  of  revenue,  ii,  18 

International  agreements,  i,  368 

— Bureau  of  American  Republics,  ii,  603 

— commerce,  i,  338 

— Congresses . and  conferences,  ii,  202 

— copyright,  lobby  for,  ii,  362 

— Copyright  Union,  i,  468 

— correspondence  schools,  iii,  258 

— institute  of  Agriculture,  i,  529;  iii,  425 

— law.  ambassadors,  i,  33 

annexation,  diplomatic  principles  of,  i,  42 

armed  neutrality,  i,  75 

asylum,  international,  i,  91 

belligerency,  i,  123 

Berlin  Decree,  i,  125 

blockade,  i,  134 

capitulations,  Turkish,  i,  228 

Caroline  affair,  i,  230 

compacts,  iii,  570 

concert  of  powers,  i,  368 

conflict  of  laws  in,  i,  380 

continuous  voyages,  i,  454 

conventions,  iii,  570 

— - — declaration,  iii,  570 

dependent  states,  i,  584 

See  also  under  Diplomacy 

diplomatic  agent,  i.  591 

— - — See  also  Diplomatic  relations  with  various 
countries  by  name 

Drago  Doctrine,  i.  610 

due  diligence,  i,  614 

embargo,  i,  663 

exequatur,  i,  689 

expatriation,  i,  690 

extradition,  international,  i,  704 

extraterritoriality,  i,  705 


741 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


International  law,  federal  statute  In,  ii,  309 

filibusters  to  aid  insurrections,  i,  731 

fisheries,  international,  ii,  21 

see  also  Foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii, 

55 

— — free  ships  make  free  goods,  ii,  52 

— - — free  trade  and  sailors’  rights,  ii,  56 
— • — ■ French  Panama  Canal,  ii,  60 

French  spoliation  claims,  ii,  60 

headlands  theory,  ii,  116 

high  seas,  ii,  122 

Iluelsemann  episode,  ii,  136 

identic  notes,  iii,  570 

insurgency,  ii,  192 

intervention,  ii,  234 

— ■ — -Jay  Treaty,  ii,  249 
— ■ — Ghent,  Peace  of,  ii,  82 

good  offices  and  mediation,  ii,  86 

L’Amistad  case,  ii,  305 

— - — - — See  also  under  Legations. 

McLeod  case,  ii,  383 

mediation,  good  offices  and,  ii,  86 

— - — - mare  clausum,  ii,  395 

—  See  also  under  Maritime. 

memoranda,  iii,  570  , 

— - — Miranda  project,  ii.  451 

modi  vivendi,  iii,  570 

Monroe  Doctrine,  ii.  465 

Mosquito  Question,  ii,  472 

most  favored  nation  clause,  ii,  473 

nationality,  ii,  495 

— - — naval  vessels,  ii,  500 
— - — navigation  of  international  rivers,  ii,  502 
'negotiation  of  treaties  by  the  United  States, 

ii,  511 

neutral  trade  during  the  Napoleonic  wars,  ii, 

519 

neutral  trade,  principles  of,  ii,  520 

— - — neutrality,  principles  of  ii,  520 

notes,  iii,  570 

peace,  conclusion  of,  ii,  657 

persona  non  grata,  ii,  197 

ports,  jurisdiction  in,  ii,  760 

— - — principles  of,  ii,  206 

— - — protection  to  American  citizens  abroad,  iii, 
82 

— - — protocol,  iii,  570 

private,  ii,  207,  210 

conferences  on,  ii,  203 

- — — • private  property  at  sea,  iii,  65 
— - — publicists  in,  ii,  214 

ratification  of  treaties  by  the  United  States, 

iii.  151 

recognition  of  new  states,  iii,  162 

sanction  of,  iii,  250 

— — seas,  high,  ii.  122 

— - — servitudes,  international,  iii,  299 
sources  of,  ii,  213 

Supreme  Court  of  United  States,  jurisdiction 

of,  i,  515 

• suzerainty,  iii.  463 

— - — territory  in,  iii,  527 

three-mile  limit,  iii,  536 

— - — see  Treaties,  iii,  569 

treaties  as  the  law  of  the  land,  iii,  566 

tributary  states,  iii,  573 

— ■ — United  States  on  Influence  of  the,  ii,  204 
— - — United  States  as  a territorial  expression,  iii, 
597 

— - — uti  possidetis,  iii,  603 
— ■ — see  also  under  War,  iii,  638 
vessels,  iii.  611 

— Monetary  Conference,  iii.  310 

— Naval  Conference,  London,  1908-9,  ii,  203 

— Naval  Conference  on  contraband,  i,  455 

— Office  of  Public  Health,  ii,  203 

— Peace  Conference.  1899-1907,  ii,  203 

— prize  court,  ii,  106 

proposition  for  an,  iii,  70 

— Radiotelographic  Convention,  and  states,  equal- 

ity of,  iii,  419 

— Sanitary  Conference,  ii,  203 

— Socialist  Congress,  iii,  336 

— tribunal,  influence  of  United  States  upon,  ii, 

206 

— union  of  American  republics,  ii,  217,  603 

— — for  the  protection  of  industrial  property, 

ii,  651 

of  railwav  freight  transportation,  the,  ii,  216 

— unions,  ii,  215 

— — see  Treaties  of  United  States,  iii,  568 

— Waterways  Commission,  ii,  304 

— See  also  under  Waters. 

— Workingmen’s  Association  (American),  ii,  217 
(European),  ii,  217 

Internationalism,  ii,  215 
Internuncios,  i.  591 
Interparliamentary  union,  11,  106,  217 


Interpellations  in  continental  chambers,  ii,  217. 
339 

Interposition,  ii,  218 

— and  Democratic-Republican  party,  i,  578 

— and  nullification  controversy,  ii,  567 
Interpretation,  ii,  218 

— and  construction,  i,  444 

— of  treaties,  rules  for,  iii,  570 
Interpreters,  student,  i,  450 

— - in  diplomatic  service,  i,  593 
Interstate  comity,  ii,  230 

— commerce,  ii,  218 

concurrent  powers  as  to,  i,  369 

— - — -decisions,  ii,  225 

freight  transportation,  classification  of,  ii, 

59 

-interference  with  by  insurrection,  ii,  197 

— ■ — and  manufacturing,  relation  of  government 
to,  ii,  394 

and  restraint  of  trade,  iii,  154 

— - — -Commission,  ii,  222 

— see  Coasting  trade,  i,  301 

— - — - — accidents,  railroad  and  steamship,  i,  3 

vs.  Alabama  Midland  Railway  Co.  (long 

and  short  haul),  ii,  371 

— — — -vs.  Brimson  (investigations,  legislative), 

ii,  235 

—  Cooley,  T.  M.,  chairman,  i,  467 

— — - — and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  692 
— - — : — and  express  companies,  i,  703 

— ■ — - — and  publicity  of  corporate  accounts,  iii, 
119 

—  and  railroads,  electric,  iii,  139 

— - — • — railroad  valuation  by.  iii,  141 
see  Salaries,  tables  of,  248 

— ■ — — see  Securities,  federal  commission  on,  iii, 
285 

—  and  sleeping  cars,  iii,  321 

— — ■ — West  as  a factor  in  American  politics,  iii, 

672 

law,  inadequacy  of,  iii,  557 

legislation,  ii,  227 

not  taxable  by  states,  ii,  9 

— law  and  relations,  ii,  230 

— recognition  of  judgments,  ii,  255 
Interurban  electric  railway  systems  in  1913,  map 

of,  ii,  232 

— lines,  ii,  233 

— trolley  system,  iii,  139 
Intervales,  and  New  England,  ii,  524 
Intervention,  ii,  234 
Intimidation,  ii,  234 

— - in  labor  controversies,  iii,  438 
Intoxicants  among  Indians,  ii,  164 
Intoxicating  liquors,  in  interstate  commerce,  ii, 
220 

— and  original  package,  ii,  593 

— sale  of,  as  objectionable  employment,  ii, 

289 

Interstate  commerce,  at  Conference  of  Governors, 
ii.  92 

Invalidity,  insurance,  ii,  188 
Invasion,  ii,  235,  639 
Inventions,  see  Patents,  ii,  651 
Investigations,  legislative,  ii,  235 

— state,  iii,  382 

Invisible  empire,  the,  Ku  KIux  Klan.  ii,  282 
Involuntary  servitude,  ii,  237  ; iii,  536 
Iowa,  ii,  237 

— State  Historical  Society,  ii,  320 

— party  system,  ii,  649 
Iredell,  James,  iii,  462 

— vote  for,  313 

Ireland,  in  executive  system  of  Great  Britain,  i, 
689 

Irish  Nationalist,  and  party  government  in  Great 
Britain,  ii,  629 
— - vote,  the,  iii,  626 
Iron  see  also  South,  iii,  353 

— law  of  wages,  i,  527,  628,  636 

— and  steel,  duties  on,  iii,  488 
Iron-clad  oath,  ii,  239 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 

— and  reconstruction,  iii,  167 

— and  Missouri,  ii,  455 
Iroquoian  Indians,  i,  2 
Iroquois,  League  of  the,  ii.  162 
Irrepressible  conflict,  ii,  239 

— speech  of  Seward,  iii,  191 
Irrigable  land.  iii.  95 
Irrigation,  bounties  for,  i.  167 

— and  conservation,  i,  400 

— in  economic  history  of  United  States,  i,  624 

— and  irrigated  lands,  ii.  239 

— projects,  map  of,  ii,  242 

— see  Reclamation  service,  iii.  161 

— in  resources  of  North  America,  iii,  205 

— and  riparian  rights,  iii,  228 
— - systems,  great,  ii,  243 


742 


INDEX 


Irrigation  works,  and  interstate  law,  ii,  233 
Irving.  Washington,  iii,  253 

— Hall,  i,  491 

Island  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  150 
Isolation  policy,  ii,  244 

Isthmian  Canal  Commission,  i,  219  ; ii,  600 

— zone,  see  also  Salaries,  tables  of  iii,  249 
Italy,  army  and  navy,  i,  76 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  245 

— see  Diplomacy,  i,  590 

— financial  system  of,  ii,  1 

— legislative  system  in  Europe,  ii,  340 

— municipal  government  in,  ii,  479 

— party  system  in  Europe,  ii,  647 

— suffrage  in,  iii,  458 

Iturbide  in  Mexico,  and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  466 
Ives  vs.  South  Buffalo  Ry.  Co.  tdue  process  of 
law),  i,  616 

— (workmen's  compensation),  ii,  189 

— (labor,  protection,  to),  ii,  297 
Ives  law  (race-tracks),  iii,  130 
I.  W.  \V„  ii.  145 

Izard,  Mark  W.,  on  democracy,  i,  577 

— and  Nebraska,  ii,  508 

Jackson.  Andrew,  ii,  246 

— and  his  cabinet,  i.  200 

— censure  of,  ii,  246 

— coffin  hand-bills,  i,  308 

— and  countervailing  legislation,  i,  487 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  565 

— and  executive  centralization,  i,  240 

— and  expunging  resolution,  i,  704 

— Hermitage,  ii,  122 

— hickory  pole  canvass,  ii,  122 
— - invasion  of  Florida,  iii,  638 

— kitchen  cabinet,  ii.  280 

— and  National  Republican  party,  ii,  493 

— and  nullification,  ii,  197 

— as  Old  Hickory,  ii,  579 

— and  organization,  ii,  592 

— pet  banks,  ii,  674 

— see  President  of  United  States,  constitutional 

powers  of,  iii,  6 

— his  proclamation,  and  nullification  controversy, 

ii,  566 

— and  removal  of  bank  deposits,  iii,  177 

— and  rotation  in  office,  iii,  235 

— see  Scrub  race  for  the  presidency,  iii,  274 

— and  spoils  system,  iii,  373 

— and  Spain,  diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  367 

— and  Tariff  of  Abominations,  iii,  476 

— in  tariff  legislation,  iii,  475 

— see  Territory,  acquired,  status  of,  iii,  523 

— see  Third  term,  iii,  535 

— see  Treasury  Department,  iii,  564 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  19,  20,  21,  22 

— and  the  West  Indian  trade,  i,  341  : iii,  676 

— see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics,  iii, 

670 

— and  West  Florida,  iii,  675 

— see  Whig  party,  iii,  681 

Jackson,  Ex  parte  (freedom  of  speech),  ii,  58 

— Howell  E„  iii,  462 

— James,  ii,  77 

— William  and  Federal  Convention,  i,  713 

— men,  ii,  246 

— Michigan,  and  Republican  party,  iii,  190 
Jacksonian  democracy,  ii,  246 

— and  political  corruption,  i,  479 
Jacksonian  period,  in  Congress,  i,  389 
Jacobinism,  and  Federalism,  i,  722 
Jacobins,  American,  i,  578 
Jackpot,  i,  171 

— and  corruption,  legislative,  i,  477 
Jails,  county,  i.  497 

— see  also  Vagrants,  iii,  605 

James  I,  quoted  on  divine  right,  ii,  724 

— quoted  on  self-governing  churches,  i,  562 
James,  Thomas  L.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  : ii,  767 
James,  Duke  of  York,  and  New  Jersey,  ii,  530 

— and  New  York  ii,  536 

Jameson,  J.  A.,  quoted  on  constitutional  conven- 
tions, i,  429 

Jamestown  Tercentennial  Exposition,  i,  701 
Japan,  see  Diplomatic  agreement,  i,  592 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  84  ; ii,  247 

— expeditions  to,  iii,  652 

— extraterritoriality  in,  i.  706 

— recognition  of,  iii,  162 
— - rice  corner  in,  i.  469 

— see  also  Russia,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  243 
Japanese  constitution  of  1889,  i,  435 

— as  foreign  element,  ii,  30 

— house  tax  case,  ii,  107 

— immigration  into  Canada,  i,  213 
Jay,  John,  ii,  249 

— chief  justice,  i,  255 

— see  Federalist,  i,  720 


Jay,  John,  as  foreign  secretary,  i,  377 

— political  theories  of,  ii,  720 

— as  Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— supreme  court  of  United  States,  iii,  462 

— vote  for,  iii,  14,  15,  16 

— his  mission,  i,  340 

— Treaty,  i,  65;  ii,  249;  iii,  567 

and  Democratic-Republican  party,  i,  578 

influence  of,  on  arbitration,  ii,  205 

— — see  Ratification  of  treaties,  iii,  152 

— Gardoqui  negotiations,  iii,  567 
Jefferson,  Thomas,  biography  of,  ii,  250 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  195 

— quoted  ou  caucuses,  i,  232 

— and  the  consular  service,  i,  447 

— quoted  on  council  of  state,  iii,  392 

— ■ and  Declaration  of  Independence,  i,  554 ; ii, 
250 

— quoted  on  entangling  alliances,  i,  671 

— and  individualism,  theory  of,  ii,  173 

— quoted  on  Louisiana  legislature,  i,  583 

— Manual  of  Parliamentary  Laie  ii,  617;  iii,  239 

— and  party  organization,  ii,  591 

— quoted  on  National  Bank  Bill,  i,  577 

— <)  Grab  Me  Act,  ii.  573 

— -Ordinance  of  1784,  ii,  585 

— policy  of  peaceable  coercion,  i,  579 
— -political  theories  of,  ii,  719 

— quoted  on  republic,  iii,  188 

— and  Republican  party  (Jeffersonian),  iii,  202 
— -in  revolution  of  1800,  i,  579 

— quoted  on  revolution,  right  of,  iii,  223 

— and  right  of  deposit,  iii,  226 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— -quoted  on  State,  Department  of,  iii,  378 

— see  Third  term,  iii,  535 

— Tripolitan  negotiations  with,  i,  13 

— see  Twelfth  Amendment,  iii,  583 

— In  Washington's  cabinet,  i.  199 

— Virginia  and  Kentucky  Resolutions,  iii,  620 

— Vice-President,  iii,  616 
— -vote  for,  iii,  13,  15,  16 
Jefferson,  territory  of,  i,  328 
Jeffersonian  democracy,  ii,  250 
— -political  theory,  ii,  721 

— -simplicity,  ii,  251 

Jecker  vs.  Montgomery  (territorial  status),  1,  208 

Jefe  politico,  and  Mexico,  ii,  422 

Jenckes,  Thomas  A.,  and  appointments  to  office, 

i,  53 

Jenkins,  Charles  J.,  vote  for,  Iii,  32 
Jenks,  J.  IV.,  and  political  theories,  ii,  722 
Jeopardy,  ii,  251 

Jewell,  Marshall,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii,  767 
Jews,  Roumanians,  ii,  508 

— see  also  Russia,  diplomatic  relations  with,  iii, 

243 

— in  Russia,  and  United  States  as  a world  power, 

iii,  701 

— see  Theocracy,  iii,  533 

Jewish  band  of  associated  workers,  and  nihilism, 

ii,  548 

— questions  in  diplomacy,  ii,  251 
Thering,  R.  von,  ii,  266 
Jingoes,  ii,  252 

Jim  Crow  laws,  and  negro  problem,  ii,  515 
Jogues,  and  Michigan,  ii,  425 
John  Doe  warrants,  ii,  704 
John,  King,  iii,  185 

— of  Salisbury,  and  political  theories,  ii,  717 
quoted  on  tyrannicide,  ii,  724 

Johnny  Reb,  ii,  252 

Johnson  Andrew,  biography  of,  ii,  252 

and  Democratic  party,  i,  570 

and  executive  centralization,  i,  240 

— - — impeachment  of,  ii.  149 

— — and  "my  policy,”  ii,  491 
in  reconstruction,  iii,  194 

— - — presidential  reconstruction  under,  iii,  165 

and  Republican  party,  iii,  193 

— - — see  also  Stevens,  Thaddeus,  iii,  427 

swinging  around  the  circle,  iii,  464 

see  Tenure  of  office  act.  iii,  517 

— - — and  Union  party,  iii,  594 

Vice-President,  iii,  616 

vote  for,  iii,  30 

— Cave,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; iii,  767 
— governments,  and  reconstruction,  iii.  165 

— Hale,  vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  40 

— Hershell  V.,  in  Confederate  States,  i,  373 

and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 

— - — and  secession  of  Georgia,  ii,  77 
vote  for,  iii.  29 

— Hiram,  and  Progressive  party,  iii,  45,  74 
— - men,  i,  402 

— Reverd.v,  attorney  general,  i,  95 
— - — cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 

— - — and  Democratic  party,  i,  570 


743 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Johnson,  Richard  M.,  and  Democratic  party,  i, 
566 

Vice-President,  iii,  G16 

— - — vote  for,  iii,  21,  23,  24 

— S.,  vote  for,  iii,  15 

— - Senator,  expulsion  of,  iii,  290 

— Thomas,  ii,  274  ; iii,  462 

— William,  supreme  court  United  States,  iii,  462 

— William  S.,  in  Federal  Convention,  i,  713 
Johnson  vs.  McIntosh  (international  law),  ii,  209 
Johnson-Clarendon  Convention,  i,  23 

— Treaty,  iii,  568 

Johnston,  Albert  Sidney,  and  Confederate  States, 

i,  373 

— Joseph  E.,  and  Confederate  States,  i,  373 

— William  F„  i,  3S 
Johnstone,  Edward  It.,  i,  725 
Joint  occupation,  iii,  527 

— Caucus  or  Primary  Election  Act  of  1903  in 

Massachusetts,  ii,  635 

— committees,  i,  358 

— resolution,  ii,  253 
in  Congress,  iii,  204 

— Rule  22  (elections),  i,  659 

— Traffic  Association,  iii,  548 

case  (restraint  of  trade),  iii,  155 

Jokers,  in  tariff,  ii,  657  ; iii,  475 
Joliet,  and  Michigan,  ii,  425 
Jonathan,  Brother,  i,  178 
Jones,  Commodore,  iii,  638 

— John  Pan  I.  iii,  651 

— J.  W.,  speaker,  i,  390 

— William,  cabinet  officer,  i,  195 ; ii,  506 ; iii, 

566 

— vs.  United  States  (de  jure  government),  i,  559 

— administrator  vs.  United  States  (recognition  of 

new  states),  iii,  162 

Jordan,  David  S.,  quoted  on  war  loans,  ii,  432 
Joscelyn,  John,  iii,  253 
Journalism,  schools  of,  iii,  267 
Journals  of  legislative  bodies,  ii,  253 

— of  House  and  Senate,  iii,  116 
Judge-advocate,  of  courts-martial,  i,  516 
general,  ii,  254 

— and  jury,  functions  of,  ii,  270 

— made  law,  ii,  254,  256 

— - — and  legislative  power,  ii,  337 
Judges  of  elections,  ii,  255 

— federal,  ii,  254 
salary  of,  iii,  247 

— midnight,  ii,  430 

— recall  of,  iii,  157 

in  constitutions,  i,  440 

— sec  Removal  of  public  officials,  iii,  178 

— retirement  of,  iii,  209 
Judicature  Act,  British,  i,  302 
Judgments  as  contracts,  i,  457 

— ■ enforcement  of,  and  international  law,  private, 

ii,  212 

— interstate  recognition  of,  ii,  255 

— in  public  debt,  i,  547 

Judicial  authority,  political  questions  and,  ii,  713 

— decisions,  recall  of,  iii.  158 

see  also  Uniform  state  legislation,  iii,  591 

— department,  see  Constitution  making  in  United 

States,  i,  406 

— — in  constitutions,  i,  440 

— districts,  iii,  242 

— and  legislative  acts  distinguished,  iii,  297 

— power,  theory  of,  ii,  255 

— reform,  judiciary  and,  ii,  260 

— - system  in  Europe,  ii,  257 
of  Great  Britain,  ii,  258 

— tenure,  ii,  261 

— townships  (California),  iii,  242 
Judiciary  Act,  and  Federalist  party,  i,  724 

— of  1789,  i,  239 
Judiciary  acts,  ii,  259 

— and  Congress,  ii,  259 

— constitutional  compromise  as  to,  i,  419 

— elective  state,  iii,  394 

— and  executive,  i,  685 

— and  judicial  reform,  ii,  260 
— ■ licensing  by,  ii.  356 

— and  public  service  commissions,  iii,  110 

— qualification  for  office  in,  iii,  125 

— state,  iii,  394 

— see  Trevett  vs.  Weeden,  iii,  572 

Juillard  vs.  Greenman  (legal  tender),  i,  190;  ii,  9, 
322 

Julian.  George  W.,  and  Republican  party,  iii, 
191 

— vote  for,  iii,  27,  31 

Junr/le,  The,  and  meat  inspection,  ii,  416 
Junket,  ii,  262 

Junta,  in  Italian  municipal  government,  ii.  479 

— and  municipal  government  in  continental  Eu- 

rope, ii,  479 

Juries,  panels  for,  ii,  605 


Jurisdiction,  ii,  262 

— concurrent,  i,  368 

— federal  apportionment  of,  i,  513 
— -of  federal  courts,  i,  511 

— over  federal  sites,  ii,  263 

— in  international  law,  private,  ii,  211 

— original,  ii,  592 

— • see  State  judiciary,  iii,  396 

— over  waters,  ii,  263 
Jurisprudence,  ii,  264 

— and  law,  in  political  theories,  ii,  723 

— see  also  Rights  and  remedies,  iii,  227 
Jurors,  selection  and  qualifications  of,  ii,  269 

— and  unanimity  of  verdict,  ii,  270 
Jury  commissions,  ii,  268 

— functions  of  judge  and,  ii,  270 

— in  libel  cases,  ii,  58 

— see  Government,  theory  of,  ii,  90 

— grand,  ii,  268 
— police,  ii,  705 

— see  also  State  government,  characteristics  of, 

iii,  387 

— see  also  State  judiciary,  iii,  397 

— trial,  aud  impeachment,  ii,  150 

in  territories,  of  United  States,  iii,  524 

— — see  Trevett  vs.  Weeden,  iii,  572 

— of  twelve,  and  due  process  of  law,  i,  616 
Jus  civile,  ii,  312 

— gentium,  Grotius  and  the,  ii,  729 

— — and  law,  civil,  ii,  312 

— naturale,  ii,  265 

— sanguinis,  i,  271  ; ii,  270 

and  nationality,  ii,  495 

— - soli,  i,  271  ; ii,  270 

and  nationality,  ii,  495 

Justice,  ii,  270 

— Department  of,  ii,  271 

attorney  general  of  the  United  States,  i,  93 

chart  of  the  internal  organization  of  the, 

ii,  272 

and  law,  administrative,  ii,  310 

— - — -see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  248 
solicitor  general,  iii,  352 

— see  also  Equity,  i,  674 
— • fugitives  from,  ii,  65 

— and  punishment  for  crime,  ii,  659 
Justices,  chief,  i,  254 

— of  the  peace,  as  administrators,  i,  9 
as  county  officers,  i,  496 

— - — -in  Great  Britain,  ii,  273;  iii,  307 
— - — immunity  of,  iii,  101 

-in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 

Justinian,  codes  of,  i,  302  ; in  law,  civil,  ii,  312 

Juul  law  (Chicago),  i,  254 

Juvenile  court,  in  criminology,  i,  525 

— and  detention  homes,  i,  587 

— and  municipal  government,  functions  of,  ii,  477 
--and  social  justice,  i,  564 

— probation,  iii,  63 

Juvenile  reformatories,  iii,  174,  260 

Kaiser  and  his  rights,  the,  ii,  SI 
Kamehameha,  ii,  112 
Kanawha  River,  Great,  iii,  663 
Kansas,  ii,  274 

— Dank  deposits,  guaranty  of,  in,  i,  190 

— see  Blue  lodges,  i,  136 

— see  Blue  sky  law,  i,  136 

— see  Border  Ruffians,  i,  143 

— vs.  Colorado  (irrigation),  ii,  241:  iii,  229 

(states  as  parties  to  suits),  iii,  416 

(United  States  as  federal  state),  iii,  596 

— Law  and  Order  party,  ii,  312 

— Nebraska  Bill,  ii,  276 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  189 

— questions  and  Democratic  party,  i,  568 

— and  Republican  party,  formation  of,  iii,  191 

— struggle,  ii,  276 

as  an  insurrection,  ii,  195 

— • — see  Kansas-Nebraska  Bill,  ii,  276 

— see  Wyandotte  constitution,  iii,  702 
Kansas  City  (Mo.  and  Kans.),  ii,  166 
Kant,  Immanuel  (jurisprudence),  ii,  266 

— political  theories  of,  ii,  731 
Kaskaskia,  ii.  139 

Katipunan  (in  Philippine  Islands),  ii,  680 
Kearney,  Dennis,  iii,  252 

— California,  Workingmen's  party  in.  ii,  296 

— and  party  organization  in  California,  ii,  631 
Kearneyism,  i,  204  : ii,  277 

— See  also  under  Chinese. 

Kearny,  Admiral,  i,  260 
Keep  Commission,  i,  354 
Keewatin,  ii,  277 

Keifer,  J.  W„  speaker,  i,  391 

Kellogg,  Ensign  H.,  on  Halifax  Commission,  ii, 
108 

Kelly.  John,  ii,  277  : iii.  468 

— and  middle  states,  ii,  42S 


INDEX 


Kelly,  John,  and  New  York  City,  ii,  542 
Kelly,  Moses,  ii,  199 

— ().  H„  and  Grangers,  ii,  95 
Kelsey,  Otto,  ii,  136 

Kemmler,  In  re  (constitutional  amendment),  i, 
419 

Kelso,  J.  J„  i,  500 

— vs.  Durston  (punishments),  iii,  129 
Kendall,  Amos,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196;  ii,  767 

— vs.  United  States  (federal  service),  iii,  6 
Kennedy,  John  1’.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196;  ii,  506 
Kenner,  Duncan  F.,  i,  374 

Kent,  James,  ii,  277 

— law,  civil,  in  America,  ii,  313 
Kentucky,  ii,  277 

— boundaries  of,  i,  163 

— see  Briscoe  vs.  Bank  of  Kentucky,  i,  173 

— constitution  of,  on  majority  rule,  ii,  390 

— dark  and  bloody  ground,  i,  539 
— -vs.  Dennison  (extradition),  i,  705 
. — see  also  Roads,  iii.  232 

— resolutions  of  179S  and  1799,  ii,  278 

— see  also  South,  iii,  353 

— see  also  Transylvania,  iii,  559 

— union  and  secession  legislators  of,  ii,  196 

— and  Virginia  Resolutions,  i,  578 
Kern,  John  W.,  vote  for,  iii,  44 
Kerr,  M.  C.,  speaker,  i,  391 
Keweenaw-Lake  Superior  Canal,  i,  223 

Key,  David  M.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii,  767 

— Francis  Scott,  i,  105 

Keystone  state  (Pennsylvania),  ii,  662 
Kiaochau,  iii,  527 

Kidd  vs.  Pearson  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  221 
Kid-glove  politics,  ii.  280 
Kidnapping  act,  ii.  59 
Kiel  Canal  (neutralization),  ii,  522 
Kilbourn  vs.  Thompson  (investigations,  legisla- 
tive), ii,  235 

— (parliamentary  privilege),  iii,  67 
Kilogram,  as  weight  standard,  iii,  668 
Kimmish  vs.  Ball  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  220 
Kindergarten,  ii,  280 

"King  can  do  no  wrong,”  i,  530  ; ii,  280 
King,  Clarence,  ii,  75 

— Ilawkesbury  Convention,  iii,  568 

— Horatio,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; ii,  767 

— Leicester,  i,  2 

— Rufus,  ii,  280 

— - — -and  Ordinance  of  1787.  ii,  586 
vote  for,  iii,  13.  16,  17,  18 

— William  R.,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  568 
- — - — -Vice-president,  iii,  616 

vote  for,  iii.  27 

King’s  College,  iii,  410 

— Province,  ii,  280 

Kings  County,  and  New  York  City,  li,  540 
Kings,  in  government,  ii.  89 
Kirkpatrick,  Donald,  i.  37 

— vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  34 
Kirkwood.  Samuel  J.,  ii,  199 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  644 
Kishinev  massacre,  iii,  243 
Kitchen  cabinet,  i,  201  ; ii,  280 
Kitchenette  apartment,  ii,  128 
Kleinpflaster,  pavements,  ii,  655 
Klondike  traffic,  Great  Britain  and,  ii,  98 
Knapp,  Martin  A.,  ii,  225 

— judge  of  Commerce  Court,  i,  499 
Knifiing,  ii,  281 

Knight  case  (holding  company),  iii,  580 

— (restraint  of  trade),  iii.  155 
Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,  i,  51  ; ii,  281 

— and  insurrection,  ii,  195 
Knights  of  Labor,  ii,  291 

- — of  the  shire,  ii,  128 

— -of  the  White  Camelia  (Ku  KIux  Klan),  ii,  282 
Knisely  rs.  Pratt  (labor,  protection  to),  ii,  297 
Know-nothing  party,  ii.  281 

— and  nativism.  ii.  496 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  568 

Knox,  Henry,  cabinet  officer,  i.  195  ; iii,  648 
— quoted  on  camps  of  discipline,  ii,  439 
Knox  vs.  Lee  (legal  tender),  ii,  323 

— Philander  Chase,  ii.  281 

attorney  general,  i,  95 

cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

— — Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

Knoxville  Iron  Co.  vs.  Ilarbison  (due  process  of 
law),  i,  616 

— vs.  Water  Co.  (valuation  of  public  utilities),  iii, 

606 

Kodak  convention,  iii.  324 

Kohl  vs.  United  States  (eminent  domain),  i,  666 

— (jurisdiction  of  United  States),  iii,  519 
Kohler  (jurisprudence),  ii.  266 
Kompetenz-Kompetenz,  ii,  81 

Korea,  China’s  claim  on.  i.  262 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  84 


Korea,  protectorate  of,  iii,  83 
Kossuth  episode,  ii,  282 

— and  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  37 
Koszta,  Martin,  episode,  i,  97  ; ii,  282 
Krause,  ii,  731 

Kring  vs.  Missouri  (ex  post  facto  law),  i,  700 
Krupps,  and  militarism,  ii,  432 
Ku-Klux  Act,  ii,  41 
— and  negro  suffrage,  ii,  517 
Ku  Klux  Klan,  ii,  282 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  571 

— lynching,  ii,  380 

— and  reconstruction,  iii,  167 

— — and  Republican  party,  iii,  196 

h'Amistad  case,  ii,  305 
La  Follette,  Robert  M.,  ii,  303 

— and  party  leadership,  ii,  630 

— as  a progressive  Republican,  iii,  75 
— ■ and  Republican  party,  iii,  200 

— see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics,  ii,  673 
La  Fontaine,  Louis,  iii,  207 

LaNinfa  the  (political  questions),  ii,  713 

La  Paz,  i,  141 

La  Plata  River,  iii,  356 

La  Riviere,  Mercier,  ii,  730 

La  Salle,  and  Michigan,  ii,  425 

La  Tour,  i,  319 

Las  Animas  hospital  ii,  127 

L’Rnfant.  Major,  i,  227,  279,  601 

L’Ouverture.  Touissaint,  ii,  116 

Label,  union,  ii,  294 

Labels,  party,  ii,  629 

— and  patent  office,  ii,  650 
Labor,  alien,  ii,  284 

“Labor  alone  is  productive,”  iii,  332 
Labor  Bureau,  ii,  285 

— conditions  of,  ii,  300 

— see  Contract,  i,  461 

— contracts,  ii,  286 

— conventions  for  protection  of,  ii,  216 

— dangerous  callings,  i,  538 
— -Department  of,  ii,  148,  286 

— - — Children’s  Bureau  of,  i,  259 

Immigration,  Bureau  of,  ii,  148 

Manufacturers,  Bureau  of,  ii,  393 

and  naturalization,  law  of,  ii,  498 

public  health  and,  ii,  117 

— — see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  248 
— • — -solicitor  for,  ii.  271 

— disputes,  arbitration  of.  i,  166 
injunction  in,  ii,  180 

— division  of,  i,  605,  627 

— in  economic  history  of  United  States,  i,  624 

— freedom  of.  ii,  288 

— hours  of,  ii,  288 

— ■ — relation  of  state  to,  ii,  300 

— and  interstate  commerce  legislation,  ii,  228 

— law,  contract,  i,  459 

— legislation,  and  health,  public,  ii,  120 
and  the  police  power,  ii,  708 

— see  Mechanic’s  lien,  ii,  416 

— organization,  and  social  reform,  iii,  330 

— organizations,  ii,  290 

— ■ — encouraged  by  statute,  ii,  294 

incorporation  of,  ii,  294 

see  also  Strikes,  iii,  437 

see  Walking  delegate,  iii,  638 

— parties,  ii,  294 

— party,  in  Great  Britain,  ii,  629 
— • — vote  for,  iii,  37 

— pauper,  ii,  654 

— protection  to.  il,  297 

— relation  of  the  state  to,  ii,  298 

— right  to,  iii.  226 

— Reforpa  party,  ii,  296 

— secretary  of.  administrative  decisions  of,  i,  11 

— Statistics.  Rureau  of,  ii,  288 

— — public  health  and,  ii,  117 

— strikes  and  insurrections,  ii,  196 

— theory  of  value,  and  socialism,  iii,  335 

— see  Unemployment,  iii,  588 

— union,  iii,  593 

— unions,  and  open  and  closed  shop,  ii,  582 
and  popular  opinion,  iii,  105 

— • — see  Unfair  list,  iii,  589 

— see  Wage  earners  as  preferred  creditors,  ill,  635 

— and  wages,  theory  of.  ii.  284 

— women’s,  legislative  control  of,  ii,  301 
Laboratories,  diagnostic,  and  health,  public,  ii,  120 

— public  research,  ii,  303 
Laborers,  mine  legislation  for.  ii,  442 
Labrador  and  Newfoundland,  ii,  545 
Ladd,  William,  i,  66 

Ladrone  Islands,  ii,  102 

Lafayette,  Marquis  de,  on  Continental  Congress, 
i.  453 

Laissez  faire,  ii,  303 

— anarchy  and,  i,  41 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Laissez  faire,  and  competition,  i,  365 

— in  economic  theory,  i,  627 

— theory  of  government,  ii,  90 
Laissez  passer,  ii,  303 

Lake  Erie,  in  international  law,  iii,  528 
Lake  of  the  Woods,  and  boundaries  of  United 
States,  i,  155 

Lakes  to  the  Gulf  waterway,  i,  224;  ii,  304 

— jurisdiction  and  navigation  of,  ii,  304 
Lamar,  Joseph  R.,  iii,  462 

— Lucius  Q.  C.,  ii,  199;  iii,  462 

cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

Lamb.  John,  i,  121 

Lamont,  Daniel  S.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— secretary  to  the  President,  iii,  280 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 
Lancaster,  duchy  of,  i,  689 

— turnpike,  iii,  230 

— bounties,  i,  168 

Land  hanks,  colonial,  ii,  305 

— condemnation  of,  i,  369 

— compact,  iii,  96 

— frauds,  secret  service  and,  iii,  279 

— grant  colleges,  i,  635 

— ■ — and  militarism,  ii,  432 

statistics  of,  i,  649 

Land  grants,  ii.  305 

educational,  i.  645 

-see  also  School  funds,  state,  iii,  256 

— increment  tax  in  Germany,  i,  278 

— and  labor  in  economics,  ii,  285 

— law  of  the,  ii,  319 

— league,  and  nationalists,  ii,  494 

— Office.  General,  ii.  73 

of  the  United  States,  ii,  306 

— patents  to,  ii.  652 

— public,  iii,  106 

— and  real  estate  tax,  iii,  495 

— records,  ii,  307 

— reform,  and  labor  organizations,  ii,  291 

— roads,  and  Pacific  railroads,  ii,  597 

— sales  and  crises,  economic,  i,  528 

— speculation,  and  single  tax,  iii,  497 

— tax,  iii.  504 

— Tenure  Reform  Association,  iii,  588 

— and  territory,  in  international  law,  iii,  527 

— titles,  see  Torrens  system,  iii,  540 

— values  and  socialism,  iii.  333 
Landesgemeinde.  ii,  736  : iii,  465 

— see  Town  meetings,  iii,  542 
Lands,  graduated,  ii,  93 

— public,  claims  associations  for.  i,  291 

— see  Unearned  increment,  iii,  587 

Landscape  architect,  and  parks  and  boulevards,  ii, 
612 

Landslide,  ii,  307 

Lane  County  vs.  Oregon  (legal  tender),  ii,  322 

— Franklin  K.,  ii.  199.  225 
cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

— Joseph,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 
Harry,  and  Oregon,  ii,  590 

— Joseph,  vote  for,  iii,  29 
Langdon,  John,  vote  for,  iii,  17 
Languet.  Hubert,  ii.  728 
Langworthys,  ii,  237 

Lansing,  John,  in  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 
Lasalle,  F..  ii,  731 

Large  state  party,  in  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 
Lathrop.  Julia  C.,  i.  260 
Latin  America,  ii,  307 

— union,  and  monetary  conferences,  international, 

ii,  460 

Latter  Day  Saints,  iii,  322 

— in  Idaho,  ii,  139 
Laurens,  Henry,  ii.  308 

— on  Continental  Congress,  i.  453 

Laurier.  Sir  Wilfred,  on  autonomy  of  Canada,  i, 
176 

Lavroff.  Peter,  and  nihilism,  ii,  548 
Law.  ii,  308 

— administration  of.  by  the  courts,  ii,  308 

— administrative,  ii,  310 

— application  of,  ii,  267 

— civil,  ii,  312 

in  America,  ii.  313 

— see  Codification,  i,  302 

— common,  ii,  314 

— constitutional.  American,  Ii,  315 

— criminal,  ii,  318 

— due  process  of,  i,  614 

— see  also  Equity,  i.  673 

— fundamental,  ii.  319 

— and  jurisprudence,  ii,  266 

— and  justice,  ii,  270 

— of  the  land.  i.  614  ; ii,  319 

— merchant,  ii.  313 

— military,  ii.  436 

— of  nature,  ii.  319 

in  jurisprudence,  11,  266 


Law,  and  order  leagues,  ii,  311 

party,  ii,  312 

in  Rhode  Island,  i,  607 

— paramount,  i,  435 

— parliamentary,  see  under  Parliamentary  law,  ii, 

616 

— in  political  theories,  ii,  723 

— regulation  of  practice  of.  iii,  73 

— • — of  professions  and  callings,  ii,  288 

— reports,  iii,  182 

— respect  for,  in  popular  opinion,  iii,  104 

— schools,  iii,  266 

— the  science  of,  ii.  264 
Law,  Thomas,  i,  602 

Law,  uniform  state,  by  codification,  i,  304 
Lawrence,  T.  J.,  quoted  on  states,  equality  of,  iii, 
419 

Law’s  Mississippi  Company,  ii,  374 
Laws,  conflict  of,  i,  380 

— multiplicity  of,  ii,  336 

Lawson.  Thomas,  articles  and  crisis  of  1907,  i, 
528 

— vs.  Hewell  (societies),  iii.  341 

Lawton  vs.  Steele  (due  process  of  law),  i,  616 
Lawyers,  examination  for,  i,  677 
Lay,  Benjamin,  and  slavery,  iii,  317 
Laybaeb,  Treaty  of.  ii,  203 
Laying  pipes,  ii,  320 

Lea,  Albert  M.,  Secretary  of  War.  iii,  649 
Leach.  In  re  women’s  labor,  ii,  302 
Leader  of  the  house,  ii,  320 
Leadership,  party,  ii.  629 
— -and  public  opinion,  iii,  103 

— and  statesmanship,  see  Party  leadership,  ii,  630 
Lear,  Tobias,  iii,  280 

Learned  societies,  ii,  320 

Lease  system  of  prison  labor,  i,  466  ; iii,  60 

Leave  to  print,  i,  396 

Lecompton  constitution  and  Democratic  party  i 
569 

— - see  Kansas  struggle,  ii,  276 
Lee,  Arthur,  in  diplomatic  relations  with  Germany, 
ii.  78 

— Charles,  i,  95 

cabinet  officer,  i,  195  ; iii,  402 

— Francis  L.,  i.  554 

— • Henry,  vote  for,  iii,  21 

— Jason,  iii,  656 

— Richard  Henry,  in  Continental  Congress,  i,  452 
and  Declaration  of  Independence,  i,  554 

— Robert  Edward,  ii,  321 

as  Confederate  general,  i.  373 

Leet  and  baron,  courts,  iii,  542 
Legacy  duty,  iii.  443,  493 
Legal  holidays,  ii,  125 
— -and  political  sovereignty,  iii,  364 

— procedure,  proposed  reform  of,  ii,  321 

— tender,  ii,  322 

Act  of  1862  and  Democratic  part'’  i,  569 

and  Greenback  party,  ii,  101 

— ■ — cases,  i,  322 

— - — 'Constitutional  discussion  of  ii,  322 

controversy,  ii,  323 

restrictions  as  to,  i,  190 

notes,  ii,  563 

and  paper  money  in  the  United  States,  ii,  605 

Legar£,  Hugh,  S.,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; iii,  402 
Legates,  in  diplomacy,  i.  589 
Legation,  right  of.  i,  589  ; ii,  208 
— • secretary  of,  iii,  279 
Legations,  asylum  in,  i,  91 

— in  diplomatic  service,  i.  593 

— international  law,  ii,  324 
Legislation,  ii,  325 

— advisory  opinions  upon,  i,  12 

— British  system  of,  ii.  330 

— - constitutional  limitations  upon,  i,  443 

— countervailing,  i,  487 

— deadlocks  in,  i,  541 

— direct,  ii,  331 

— drafting  of,  i,  609 

— when  it  takes  effect,  ii,  336 

— through  the  judiciary,  i,  420 

— local  and  special,  restrictions  upon.  iii.  400 

— and  legislative  problems  in  cities,  ii,  325 

— minority  report,  ii.  450 
— ■ see  private  bills,  iii,  64 

— quality  of.  in  House  of  Representatives,  ii,  134 

— see  Railroading,  iii,  138 

— reports  of  committees,  iii,  181 

— see  Representatives  in  Congress,  iii,  186 

— retrospective,  iii.  210 

— rider  on,  iii,  226 

— unconstitutional,  ii.  316 

— uniform  state,  iii.  589 
Legislative  assembly,  ii.  336 

— bodies,  bribery  in,  i.  171 
calendar  of,  i,  202 


INDEX 


Legislative  bodies,  expulsion  from,  i,  704 

journals  of,  ii,  253 

order  of  business  in,  ii,  584 

party  organization  in,  ii,  632 

rules  of,  iii,  239 

sessions  of,  iii,  299 

— caucus,  the,  and  nominating  system,  ii,  549 

— centralization,  i,  239,  240  ; ii,  364 

— commissions,  i,  351 

— corruption,  i,  476 

— department  in  constitutions,  i,  439 

— investigations,  ii,  235 

— inefficiency,  causes  of,  iii,  389 

— output,  state  and  national,  ii,  336 

— pairs,  ii,  600 

— power,  delegation  of,  to  administrative  officers, 

iii,  384 

limitations  upon  the,  i,  406 

theory  of,  ii,  337 

— procedure,  constitutional  limitations  on,  i,  443 

— reference  bureau,  ii,  338 

and  applied  sociology,  iii.  349 

in  state  government,  iii,  389 

Library  of  Congress,  ii,  350 

— reform,  legislature  and,  ii,  341 

— system  in  Europe,  ii.  339 

— -Voters’  League,  Illinois,  ii,  342 
Legislator  as  a public  officer,  iii,  101 

— mileage  of,  ii,  431 

Legislature  and  legislative  reform,  ii,  341 

— state,  iii,  398 

— - state,  organization  of,  iii,  390 
Legislatures,  ii,  343 

— constitutional  limitations  upon,  i,  438;  ii,  316 

— debates  in.  i,  542 

— distrust  of.  i,  442  : iii.  399 

— low  standing  of.  explained,  i,  476 

— speaker  in  state,  iii,  369 

— state,  contested  elections  in,  i.  656 

— see,  also  State  governments,  characteristics  of, 

iii,  389 

Legitimacy  and  international  law.  ii,  212 
Lehigh  River,  canalization  of,  i,  221 
Leisler  Congress,  i,  320 
I.eisler's  rebellion,  ii.  194 

Leisy  rs.  Hardin  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  220 
— - (original  package),  ii,  593 

Leitensdorfer  vs.  Webb  (territorial  status),  i,  208 

Leon,  Daniel  de,  iii,  338 

Leon  vs.  Galceran  (maritime  law),  i,  12 

Leonard,  J.  F.  R.,  vote  for.  iii,  41 

Leprosy  in  Philippine  Islands,  ii,  683 

— and  public  health  service,  iii,  92 
Lesseps,  Ferdinand  de,  i,  216 

— and  French  Panama  Canal,  ii,  60 
Letehworth,  i,  278 

Letter  of  acceptance,  ii,  344 

— of  credence,  in  diplomacy,  i,  590 

— of  marque,  ii,  344 

Letter  to  Governor  Hamilton,  and  nullification 
controversy,  ii,  566 

Letters  of  acceptance  of  candidates,  i,  224 
Letters  from  a Farmer,  i,  588 

— rogatory,  ii,  344 

Levering.  Joshua,  and  Prohibition  party,  iii,  78 

— vote  for  iii,  39 
Levies,  districts,  iii,  242 

‘ — see  Waterways,  iii.  663 

Leviathan,  Hobbes’,  ii,  725 

Levy  courts,  Maryland,  ii,  404 

Levy  vs.  Magnolia  Lo(jge  (societies),  iii,  340 

Lew  Chew  Islands,  i,  262 

Lewis  and  Clark,  expedition  of,  i.  35 

— and  northwestern  boundary  controversy,  ii,  562 

— Portland  Exposition,  i,  701 
Lewis,  Frans,  i,  554 

— Sir  George,  quoted  on  dependencies,  i,  324 

— Meriwether,  iii,  280 
Lex  actus,  ii,  212 

— domicilii,  ii,  211 

— fori,  ii.  211,  344 

— loci,  ii.  344 

solutionis,  ii,  212 

— patriae,  ii,  211 

— personalis,  ii.  211 

— situs,  ii,  212 

— talionis,  i,  521 

— terrae,  i,  614 

Lexow  committee.  1893,  and  party  finance,  ii,  625 
■ — investigation,  ii,  236 
Libel,  ii.  57.  344 

— and  slander,  and  privileged  communications,  iii, 

67 

Liberal  party  in  Great  Britain,  ii,  629 

— Republican  party,  ii.  344 

— Republicans  and  Democratic  party,  i,  571 

— I’nionists.  ii.  345 

in  England,  i.  402 

Liberals,  British,  ii,  345 

145 


Liberator,  the,  ii,  71  ; iii,  319 
Liberia,  i,  36 

— colonization  in,  i,  323 

— as  dependent  state,  i,  5S5 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  346 

— protectorate  over,  iii,  84 

— and  United  States  as  a world  power,  iii,  701 
Liberty,  civil,  ii.  347 

— Congress  (1900),  i,  48 

— and  due  process  of  law,  i,  616 

— laws,  personal,  ii,  673 

— League,  ii,  347 

— legal  significance  of,  ii.  347 

— as  the  object  of  jurisprudence,  ii,  264 

— party,  ii,  348 

and  Democratic  party,  i,  567 

vote,  iii,  25 

— political,  ii,  712 

— religious,  iii,  175 

Librarian,  state,  learned  societies,  ii,  320 
Libraries,  public,  ii,  349 

— state,  iii,  401 

Library  commissions,  state,  ii,  350 

— of  Congress,  ii,  350 
archives  of,  i.  69 

— hall  association,  ii,  554 

— of  legislative  reference,  and  statutes,  state,  iii, 

426 

License  cases  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  219,  220 

— to  solemnize  marriages,  ii,  351 
— - taxes,  iii.  491 

on  occupations,  ii,  350 

Licenses,  Bureau  of,  in  regulation  of  amusements, 
i,  40 

— see  also  Revenue,  public  sources  of,  iii,  216 

— for  callings,  ii.  351 

Licensing  in  professions  and  callings,  iii,  73 

— systems  of  different  states,  ii,  358 
Lieber,  Francis,  ii,  205 

— quoted  on  civil  liberty,  ii,  347 

— political  theories  of.  ii,  721 
Lien  for  wages,  iii,  637 
Lieu  land,  ii,  306 
Lieutenant-governor,  ii.  91,  351 

— see  also  State  executive,  iii,  383 

— see  also  State  governments,  characteristics  of, 

iii,  3S8 

Life,  protection  of,  ii,  352 
Life-saving  apparatus,  i,  4 

— service,  ii,  352 

see  Revenue  cutter  service,  iii,  212 

Light  and  air,  iii,  434 

— Railways  Act  (England),  i,  491 
Lighthouse  board,  and  public  works,  iii.  114 

— Bureau,  of  the  Department  of  Commerce  and 

Labor,  ii,  353 

— establishment  and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  692 

— system,  ii,  352 
Lighthouses,  Bureau  of,  i,  336 
Lighting,  electric,  ii.  353 

— franchises  (electric),  ii.  "54 

— street,  expenditures  for.  695 

Lily  White  Republicans,  ami  party  organization  in 
the  South,  ii,  639 

— Whites,  ii,  354 

Limitations  on  actions,  as  impairments  of  con- 
tract, i,  458 

— statute  of,  and  international  law,  private,  ii, 

213 

— in  war,  iii,  646 
Limited  monarchy,  ii,  459 

— town  meeting,  and  Newport  system  of  city  gov- 

ernment. ii.  546 

Limon  Bay,  and  Panama  Canal,  ii,  600 
Lincoln,  Abraham,  ii.  355 

— amnesty  proclamation  of,  i.  308 
— -and  “coercion  of  states,’’  iii.  278 

- — see  under  Confederate  States,  i,  371 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 

— Douglas  debates,  i,  209 

and  Democratic  party,  i.  569 

— • Emancipation  Proclamation,  i.  663 

— executive  proclamations  of,  iii,  71 

— as  Father  Abraham,  i,  712 

— as  Honest  Old  Abe.  ii.  127 

— inaugural,  on  secession,  iii,  164 

— and  Middle  West,  ii  430 

— and  negro  suffrage,  grant  of,  ii.  517 

— and  patronage,  ii,  653 

— on  popular  government,  ii.  735 

— -presidential  reconstruction  under,  iii  164 

— on  right  to  retake  federal  forts,  i,  308 

— and  rotation  in  office,  iii.  235 

— quoted  on  slavery,  iii.  192 

— quoted  on  spread  of  slavery,  iii.  191 

— ten  per  cent  plan  of  reconstruction,  iii.  194 

— vote  for.  iii,  13.  29.  30 

— see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics,  iii, 

671 


747 


CYCLOPEDIA  OP  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Lincoln,  Benjamin,  Secretary  of  War,  i,  377  ; ill, 
648 

■ vote  for,  iii,  14 

— Levi,  i,  95 

cabinet  officer,  i,  195  ; iii,  402 

— Robert  T.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 ; iii,  649 
Lincoln-Roosevelt  clubs,  ii,  711 

— Republican  League,  and  party  organization  in 

California,  ii,  632 

Lindsey,  Ben  B.,  and  juvenile  court,  i,  500 
Linens,  in  Underwood  Tariff,  iii,  587 
Lippe,  ii,  80 

Liquor  dealers,  taxes  on,  ii,  351 

— (impairment  of  contract),  i,  459 

— laws  and  public  opinion,  iii,  104 
see  also  Prohibition,  iii,  76 

— legislation,  ii.  355 

and  due  process  of  law,  i,  616 

see  Gothenburg  system,  ii,  87 

see  also  Reform  movements,  iii,  171 

See  also  States  by  name. 

— licenses,  ii,  358 

*  see  also  Revenue,  public,  iii,  216 

in  state  systems  of  finance,  ii,  5 

— monopolies,  ii,  463 

— see  also  under  Prohibition. 

— question,  drunkenness,  regulation  of,  i,  613 
and  inebriate  asylums,  ii,  175 

see  Temperance  agitation,  iii,  513 

— sale  to  Indians,  iii,  519 

— selling,  local  option  and,  ii,  366 
public,  ii.  358 

— • state  dispensary  of,  ii.  360 

— tax,  sec  also  Raines  Law,  iii,  150 

— trade,  restrictions  on,  i,  189 

— traffic  and  fee  system,  i,  727 
see  also  Police,  ii,  705 

— in  bond.  iii.  654 

— and  revenue,  internal,  iii.  214 

— see  Taxation,  subjects  of,  iii,  506 

List  system,  of  proportional  representation,  iii,  80 
Literacy,  in  criminology,  i,  524 
Little  vs.  Barreme  (executive),  i,  685 
Little  Giant,  ii,  360 

— Mac,  ii,  361 

— Magician,  ii.  361 

— Phil,  ii,  361 

Live  stock  legislation,  ii,  361 
Liverpool  harbor  system,  ii,  110 

— Insurance  Co.  vs.  Massachusetts  (insurance), 

ii.  192 

— Lord,  ii,  121 
Living,  cost  of,  i,  485 

— standards  of,  ii,  768 

— wage,  ii,  361 

- — — child  labor  and  a,  i,  255 
Livingston.  Brockholst,  iii,  462 

— Edward,  ii,  361 

■ — ■ — cabinet  officer,  i,  196;  iii,  402 

— Philip,  i,  554 

— Robert  R..  ii,  361 

*  as  foreign  secretary,  i,  377 

as  Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

Loan  Association  vs.  Topeka  (taxation),  ii,  362, 
392 

— sharks,  regulation  of.  ii,  460 
Loans  on  collateral,  i.  112 

— and  Currency,  Division  of,  ii,  362 
- — See  Debt,  public. 

— and  taxation,  iii.  500 

Lobbies  in  tariff  legislation,  iii,  475 
Lobby,  ii.  362 

— legislature  and  legislative  reform,  ii,  342 
- — see  Third  house,  iii,  533 

Lobbying  and  cabinet  government,  i.  192 

— and  legislative  corruption,  i,  478 
Lobbyist,  in  state  government,  iii,  390 

Local  Government  Act  (English),  see  Urban  dis- 
trict council,  iii,  601 

— of  1894  (British),  iii,  241 

and  parish  council  in  England,  ii,  609 

I.ocal  government  board  (British),  i,  490,  689 
■ — and  the  district  system,  i,  603 

— in  England,  ii.  365 

— local  option  in,  ii,  366 
- — and  the  states,  ii,  363 
Local  option.  Kentucky,  ii.  279 

— liquor  legislation,  ii.  357 

— See  also  under  Liquor. 

- — and  liquor  selling,  ii,  366 

— in  local  government,  ii.  366 

— See  various  states  by  name. 

— system,  ii,  367 

— see  Town  meetings,  iii,  543 
Local  self  government,  ii.  367 

— see  Centralization  in  Europe,  1,  10 

— sec  Centralization,  i,  240 

Local  Taxation  Act  (England),  1,  491 

— veto  in  New  York,  i,  274 


Location  and  society,  iii,  342 

Lochner  vs.  New  York  (contract),  i,  456 

— - (due  process  of  law),  i,  014 

— (labor,  freedom  of),  ii.  289 
( — • (labor,  hours  of),  ii,  290 

— (labor,  protection  to),  ii,  297 

Locke,  John,  doctrines  of,  in  Declaration  of  In- 
dependence, i,  555 

— quoted  on  law  of  nature,  ii,  319 

— and  political  theories,  ii,  718,  725 

— quoted  on  right  of  revolution,  iii,  223 

social  compact  theory,  iii,  325 

— • — sovereignty,  iii,  362 

Locker  vs.  New  York  (police  power),  ii,  709 
Lockouts,  ii,  368 
Loco-Foco,  i,  672  ; ii,  368 
Lodge,  Henry  Cabot,  ii,  369 

— in  Alaska  boundary  controversy,  i,  28,  176 

— extension  of  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  468 
Lodging  in  station  house,  iii,  420 

— houses,  municipal,  ii,  486 

public,  ii,  369 

regulation  of  hotels  and,  ii,  127 

Loeb,  William,  Jr.,  ii,  369 

— as  secretary  to  the  President,  iii,  280 

— and  sugar  frauds,  iii,  459 

— and  undervaluations,  iii,  585 

Loewe  vs.  Lawler  (anti-trust  act),  iii,  304 

— (boycott),  i,  170 

— (unfair  list),  iii,  589 

Loftus  rs.  Pullman  (Pullman  cars),  iii.  120 
Log  cabin  and  hard  cider  campaign,  ii,  110 
Log-rolling,  ii.  369 

— see  Bills,  titles  of.  i.  131 

> — and  cabinet  government,  i,  192 

— in  House  of  Representatives,  ii.  133 
— ■ and  legislative  corruption,  i,  478 

— legislature  and  legislative  reform,  ii,  342 

— on  public  works,  iii.  114 
Logan.  John  A.,  i.  133 

— and  Decoration  Day,  i,  557 

— vote  for,  iii,  36 
Lombard  League,  ii.  417 
I.ombroso  and  criminology,  i,  524 
Lome,  Depuy  de,  iii,  368' 

London  Company,  ii.  370 

— county  council,  ii,  370 

— Declaration  of,  on  blockades,  i,  135 
— - — and  continuous  voyages,  i,  454 
and  contraband,  i,  455 

— - — and  maritime  war,  ii,  397 
and  militarism,  ii.  433 

— government  act,  ii,  370 

— and  local  government,  ii,  365 

— traffic  commission,  iii,  435 

— Treaty  of,  ii,  203 

Lone  Wolf  and  Indian  lands,  ii.  169 
Long  Island,  and  New  York  City,  ii,  539 
Long,  John  Davis,  ii.  371 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  198  ; ii,  506 
Lopez  expedition,  i.  731 

Long  and  short  haul,  ii.  222.  371 

Lopez,  Narciso.  i.  532  ; iii,  367 

Lord  chamberlain,  department  of  the.  i,  689 

— chancellor,  and  Parliament,  ii,  614 
Lords  proprietors  of  Carolina  Colonv,  i,  230 

— spiritual,  and  Parliament,  ii,  614 

— of  trade,  ii.  371 

— - — privy  council  in  colonial  affairs,  iii.  69 
Lorimer.  William,  and  minority  representation  in 
Illinois,  ii,  451 

— see  Bribery,  i,  171 
Lome.  Lord,  iii,  207 
Los  Angeles,  ii,  372 

— charter,  on  recall,  iii,  157 

— harbor,  ii,  110 

— water  supply,  i,  63 
Lotteries,  ii.  373 

— as  gambling,  ii,  68 

— and  the  police  power,  ii,  709 

— restrictions  on.  i.  189 

Lottery  case  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  219 
i — and  impairment  of  contract,  i,  459 

— tickets,  commerce  clause  and.  i,  337 

see  Objectionable  employments,  ii,  289 

Louisburg  and  Nova  Scotia,  ii,  564 
Louisiana,  ii,  374 

— acquisition  of.  and  Federalist  party,  i,  724 

— annexation,  ii,  376 

— boundaries  of,  i.  157 

— ■ boundary  controversy,  ii,  377 
■ — civil  law  of.  ii.  312 

— constitutional  amendment  in,  i.  436 

— as  dependency  of  United  States,  i.  581 

— in  diplomatic  relations  with  France,  ii.  43 

— district  of.  and  Orleans  Territory,  ii,  593 

— incorporation  of  territory,  ii,  154 

— and  New  France,  ii.  526 

— police  jury  in,  ii,  705 


INDEX 


Louisiana,  purchase  and  the  cabinet,  i,  201 

in  lirst  Republican  administration,  i,  579 

■ in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  36 

— radical  government  of,  ii,  190 

— Treaty,  1803,  iii,  567 

— see  also  South,  iii,  353 
Louisville  Canal,  i,  220 
Low,  Seth,  ii,  378 

- — and  independent  movements  in  politics,  ii,  156 

Lowell,  James  Russell,  ii,  379 

Lower  South,  iii,  353,  671 

Loyal  Union  Party,  iii,  195 

Loyalists,  ii,  379 

■ — in  the  American  Revolution,  ii,  379 

— in  Continental  Congress,  i,  554 

— during  the  Revolution,  iii,  393 
Loyalty  to  class  consciousness,  iii,  334 

— party,  ii,  380 

— and  reconstruction,  iii,  164 
Lubeck,  ii,  80,  109 

Lucas,  Robert,  ii,  238 

Ludlow,  Roger,  i,  397 

Lumber,  official  grading  of,  ii,  184 

Luneburg,  ii,  109 

Lurton,  Horace  H.,  iii,  462 

Luther  vs.  Borden  (political  power),  ii,  713 

— (republican  form  of  government),  ii,  380;  iii, 

188 

Luther.  Martin,  political  theories  of,  ii,  728 
Luxemburg,  i,  584 

Luxton  vs.  North  River  Co.  (internal  improve- 
ments), ii,  202 
Luzon,  ii,  680 

Lynch  law  and  negro  problem,  ii,  516 
Lynch.  Thomas,  Jr.,  i,  554 
Lynching,  ii,  380 

— and  public  opinion,  iii,  104 
Lynch’s  survey  of  Dead  Sea,  i,  36 

McAdoo,  William  G.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198  ; iii,  566 

— his  subway  system,  iii,  442 
McCardle  case  (reconstruction),  iii,  168 
McCarthy,  Ex  parte  (investigations,  legislative), 

ii.  237 

— Justin,  and  Nationalists,  ii,  494 
McChord,  Charles  C.,  ii,  225 

McClain,  Emlin,  quoted  on  taxation,  ii,  10 
McClellan.  George  B..  and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 

— vote  for,  iii.  13,  30 
McClelland,  Robert,  ii,  199 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

McConaughy  rs.  Secretary  of  State  (constitution- 
al amendment),  i,  436 

McCrary,  George  W.,  cabinet  officer,  i.  197  : iii,  649 
McCray  rs.  United  States  (tariff),  iii,  481 
McCreary  amendment,  i,  265 
McCulloch.  Hugh,  ii,  382 

— and  Greenback  party,  ii,  101 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii.  566 
McCulloch  vs.  Maryland  (bank  charter),  ii,  9 

— (internal  improvements),  ii,  202 

— (state  bank  tax),  ii,  382 
McDill,  James  M.,  ii,  225 
Macdonald,  Sir  John,  i,  213 

— and  Canadian  national  policy,  i,  176 
McDuffie,  George,  ii.  382 

McGlynn,  Father  Edward,  ii,  296 
McGrad.v,  General,  i,  650 

McGuire,  Matthew,  vice-presidential  candidate,  Iii. 
40 

McHenry,  James,  and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 

— cabinet  officer,  i.  195  : iii,  648 
M’Kean.  Thomas,  i.  554 
McKenna.  Joseph  W..  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— Supreme  Court,  United  States,  iii,  462 
McKennan,  Thomas  M.  T.,  ii,  199 
McKinley.  A.  E..  quoted  on  suffrage,  iii,  444 

— John,  iii.  462 

— Mount,  ii.  690 

— Tariff,  iii,  480 

— Act.  ii,  383 

< — - — and  Democratic  party,  i,  574 
Customs  Administrative  Act,  iii,  471 

— — reciprocity  under,  iii,  159 
McKinley.  William,  ii,  383 

— and  his  cabinet,  i,  200 

- — and  Spain,  diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  369 

— and  tariff  legislation,  iii,  475 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  39.  41 

McLane.  Louis,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196;  iii,  402,  566 

— and  removal  of  denosits,  iii,  177 
McLean.  John.  iii.  462 

— postmaster  general,  ii.  766 
McLean  vs.  Arkansas  (contract),  i,  456 
McLennan,  on  state,  theory  of,  iii,  409 
McLeod  case,  ii.  383 

McParlan,  and  Molly  Maguires,  ii,  459 


MacVeagh,  Franklin,  ii,  384 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  198  ; iii,  566 
McVeagh,  Wayne,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
McReynolds.  James  C.,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  198 
Mac.  Little,  ii,  361 

Mackenzie,  district  of  Canada,  i,  214 

— William  L..  i,  212 

and  Ontario,  ii,  581 

Mably.  Abbe,  ii,  730 
Macadam,  iii,  433 

— see  Pavements,  ii,  655 
Machen,  Willis  B„  vote  for,  iii,  31 
Machette,  Charles  II.,  vote  for,  iii,  39 
Machiavelli  (political  theories),  ii,  718 
Machine,  and  the  organization,  ii,  592 
— ■ political,  ii,  384 

— voting,  iii,  633 

- — type,  and  party  system  in  sure  states,  ii,  649 
Mack,  Julian  W.,  judge  of  Commerce  Court,  i, 
499 

— and  juvenile  court,  i,  500 

— vs.  People  (presentment),  ii,  773 

Mackin  vs.  United  States  (infamous  crime),  ii, 
176 

Macon,  Nathaniel,  ii.  385 

— speaker,  i,  389  : iii,  370 
— - vote  for,  iii,  21 

Mad  Anthony  Wayne,  ii,  385 
Madero,  ii,  424 
Madison  Island,  ii,  596 

— James,  ii,  385 

— — -cabinet  officer,  i,  195 

— - — as  "Father  of  the  Constitution,”  i,  420,  712 

and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 

see  Federalist,  i,  720 

and  Henry  documents,  ii,  121 

-on  minorities,  rights  of,  ii.  449 

— ■ — quoted  on  paper  money,  i,  128 

— » republic,  iii,  188 

Secretary  of  State,  iii.  402 

quoted  on  state  sovereignty,  iii,  404 

and  Virginia  and  Kentucky  Resolutions,  iii, 

620 

— ■ — quoted  on  national  bank,  i,  577 

quoted  on  separation  of  powers,  i,  250 

vote  for,  iii,  13,  17 

>— — his  war,  i,  580 

Madrid,  Treaty  of  (1795),  iii,  226 

— (1880),  ii.  508 

Magazines,  jurisdiction  of  United  States  over,  iii, 
518 

Magdalen  Islands,  and  North  Atlantic  fisheries 
arbitration,  ii,  556 
Magellan,  ii.  680 

— pirates,  the,  ii,  693 
Magician,  Little,  ii,  361 
Magisterial  districts,  i,  498  ; iii,  242 
— • — Virginia,  iii.  619 
Magistrates,  Great  Britain,  ii,  258 

— in  police  courts,  i,  505 

Magna  Charta,  i,  404,  434;  ii,  315,  319 

— and  jury  trial,  ii,  269 

Magnetic  arc,  lighting,  electric,  ii,  353 

— statesman,  ii,  386 
Magyars  and  suffrage,  iii,  457 
Mafiosi,  ii,  245 

Mahan,  Alfred  Thayer,  ii,  386 ; iii.  274 

— quoted  on  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  465 
Mahon  rs.  Justice  (extradition),  i,  705 
Mahone,  William,  iii,  153 

Mail  carriers,  subventions  to,  iii,  440 
— - matter,  classification  and  rates,  ii,  386 
second  class,  iii.  278 

— ocean,  subsidies,  and  Bureau  of  Navigation,  ii, 

502 

— registration  of.  iii,  175 

— subsidies,  ii.  386 

Mails,  freedom  of  the,  ii,  58 

— interference  with  the,  by  insurrection,  ii,  197 

— misuse  of,  i,  11 

Maine.  Henry  S..  quoted  on  jurisprudence,  ii,  264 

— political  theories  of.  ii.  727 

— quoted  on  presidential  choice,  i,  423 
— - — applied  sociology,  iii,  348 

state,  theory  of,  iii,  409 

Maine,  ii,  387 

— boundaries  of,  i,  174 

— and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  163 

— law,  ii.  389 

— - — see  Dow.  Neal,  i,  609 

— - — (prohibition),  iii,  76 

see  Temperance  agitation,  iii.  513 

— and  northeastern  boundary  controversy,  ii,  560 
Maine,  i.  533:  ii,  388;  iii.  369 

Maire.  France,  and  mayor  in  European  cities,  ii, 
415 

Majorities,  and  public  opinion,  iii,  103 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Majorities,  theory  of,  ii,  389 
Majority  leader,  ii,  320 

— necessary  for  nomination,  iii,  53 
Malaria,  and  health,  public,  ii,  120 
Malietoa,  iii,  250 

Mall,  the,  i.  003 

Malloney,  Joseph  F„  iii,  338 

— vote  for,  iii,  41 

Malone  vs.  St.  Peter's  and  St.  Paul’s  Church  (sur- 
rogates), i,  517 
Malthus,  i,  027 
Man  of  Destiny,  ii,  390 

— the  Revolution,  ii,  390 
Managua,  ii,  546 

Manchester  vs.  Massachusetts  (maritime  law),  i, 
12 

Manchuria,  and  Russia,  iii,  243 
Mandamus,  ii,  390 

— to  ministerial  officers,  iii,  101 

— and  obligation  to  accept  office,  ii,  570 
Mandatory  (state  railroad),  commissions,  iii,  134 

— statutes,  ii,  391 

Mangum.  Willie  P.,  and  Whig  party,  iii,  081 

— vote  for,  iii.  23 
Manhattan  club,  ii,  711 

— Island,  ii.  539 
Manhood  suffrage,  iii,  458 
Manifest  destiny,  ii,  391 

— ■ and  Democratic  party,  i.  560 
Manifests  of  vessels,  ii,  391 
Manila,  ii,  391.  080 

— capture  of,  iii,  053 
Manitoba,  ii,  392 

— ■ Canadian  province  of,  i,  214 

— creation  of.  i,  213 

Mann,  A.  Dudley,  ii.  130  : iii,  464 

— on  mission  to  Austria,  i,  97 
Mann,  Horace,  ii.  392 

— law  (white  slave),  iii,  327 

— Elkins  Act  (express  companies),  i,  703 
-(railroad  valuation),  iii,  141 

Manning,  Daniel,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  566 

Manouba  case,  ii,  107 

Manua.  iii,  582 

Manual  training,  ii,  392 

— and  democracy,  i,  504 

— in  schools,  iii,  208 

— and  technical  education,  i,  042 
Manufactures,  under  Acts  of  Trade,  i,  5 

— Bureau  of,  i,  334  : ii.  393 

— in  economic  development  of  United  States,  i, 

024 

— relation  of  government  to,  ii,  393 
— ■ report  on.  iii,  477 

by  Hamilton,  ii.  108 

Maps,  geographical  surveys  and,  ii,  73 
Marble.  John  II. . ii,  225 
Marbury  vs.  Madison,  i,  508 

— (commissions],  i.  355 

— (constitutional  law),  ii.  317 

— (executive  and  judiciary),  i.  685 

— (unconstitutionality),  ii.  395 
Marcy,  William  Learned,  ii,  395 

— and  spoils  system,  iii.  373 
— - Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— quoted  on  privateers,  iii,  66 

— spoils  system,  i,  53 

— Secretary  of  War.  iii,  649 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

Mare  Island,  navy  yard,  ii,  507 
Mare  clausum,  ii,  208,  395 

— sec  also  Seal  fisheries,  iii,  274 
Mare  liberum,  ii.  208 

Margin,  buying  and  selling  on,  iii,  430 

— purchases  on.  i,  079 
Marginal  cost.  i.  4S2 

— ■ lands  and  rent.  iii.  180 
- — powers  and  rent,  iii.  ISO 

— productivity  and  wages,  iii,  636 

— utility  and  rent,  iii,  181 

— want,  i.  678 

Maria  (prize  law  and  courts),  iii,  70 
Mariana,  or  Padrone  Islands,  ii,  102 
Mariana,  Juan  de,  ii,  729 
Marietta,  and  Ohio  Company,  ii,  576 
Marine  corps,  ii,  396 

— band,  the,  and  music,  public,  ii,  490 
— ■ hospital.  United  States,  iii,  276 

■— . — fund,  iii.  92 

service,  iii.  92 

— . health,  public,  and,  ii,  118 

— hospitals,  ii,  127,  390 
- — merchant,  ii.  418 
Mariners,  status  of,  iii,  275 
Maritime  boundary  case.  ii.  107 

— conference  of  1853.  ii,  203 

— domain  in  international  lawT,  ii,  209 

— neutrality,  ii,  522 

— usages,  and  international  law,  ii,  213 


Maritime  war,  ii,  397 

Matkby,  W.,  quoted  on  legislation,  ii,  325 
Market  price,  i,  078 
— • see  Supply  and  demand,  iii,  401 
Markets,  and  municipal  government,  functions  of, 
ii.  470 

— ■ and  municipal  trading,  ii,  488 

— public,  ii,  398 

— regulation  of,  ii,  398 

Married  women  in  trades,  iii,  329 
Marque  and  reprisal,  ii.  398 

— letters  of,  ii,  344  : iii,  646 
Marquette,  and  Michigan,  ii,  425 
Marriage,  annulment  of  a,  ii,  400 

— and  divorce,  ii,  398 

see  Vital  statistics  in  United  States,  iii,  625 

— see  Family,  i.  709 

— license,  ii,  399 

— - — to  solemnize,  ii,  351 

— and  impairment  of  contract,  i,  457 

— and  nationality,  ii,  495 

— see  Uniform  state  legislation,  iii,  591 

Mars  Hill,  and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  155 
Marsh,  George  P.,  ii,  245 
Marshal,  federal,  ii,  402 
Marshall,  Alfred,  on  rent,  iii,  180 

— James  W..  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii,  767 

— John,  biography  of,  ii.  402 
i — - — cabinet  officer,  i,  195 

and  centralized  judicial  control,  i,  239 

chief  justice,  i.  255 

definition  of  a corporation,  i,  470 

in  diplomatic  relations  with  France,  ii,  42 

as  expounder  of  the  Constitution,  i,  701 

and  Federalist  party,  i,  723 

and  growth  of  Constitution,  i,  420 

quoted  on  international  law.  ii.  215 

judicial  power  to  declare  unconstitution- 
ality of  statute,  ii,  317 

Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— : — quoted  on  states,  equality  of.  iii.  418 

Supreme  Court,  United  States,  iii,  462 

quoted  on  territory,  constitutional  questions 

of,  iii,  525 

unconstitutionality  of  laws,  i,  508 

and  X Y Z,  iii,  703 

vote  for,  iii.  18 

— Thomas  R.,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  576 
— < — Vice-President,  iii,  616 

vote  for,  iii,  45 

• — vs.  Harwood  (investigations,  legislative),  ii, 
237 

Marsiglio  of  Tadua,  political  theories  of,  ii,  402, 
717 

Martha's  Vineyard  summer  institute,  iii,  209 
Martial  law,  ii,  402 

— in  Civil  War,  i,  290 

— ■ and  coercion  of  individuals,  i,  307 

— and  military  commissions,  ii,  430 
Martin  Act  of  1822,  i,  530 

— vs.  Hunter’s  Lessee  (constitutional),  i,  308,  422 
— ■ (jurisdiction),  i,  512 

Martin,  Luther,  and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 

— quoted  on  recall,  iii,  157 

Martin  vs.  Mott  (War  of  1812),  iii,  651 
Marx.  Karl,  ii,  217 

— political  theories  of,  ii,  731 

— and  socialism,  iii,  334 
Maryland,  ii,  403 

— -attitude  of.  on  western  territory,  i.  82 

— and  B.  & O.  R.  It.,  iii,  142 

• — - colonial  proprietary  government,  i,  318 

— religious  motives  in  colonization  of,  i,  321 

— see  also  South,  iii,  353 

— see  States,  admission  of,  iii,  413 
Mason,  Charles,  ii,  400 

Mason  and  Dixon's  Line,  ii,  400 

— and  Delaware,  i,  559 

— and  Maryland,  ii,  404 

— see  Pennsylvania,  ii,  602 

Mason.  Ex  parte  (courts  martial),  i,  517 

— George,  and  federal  Constitution,  i,  713,  714 

— John,  and  New  Hampshire,  ii,  527 

— John  Y.,  i,  95 

cabinet  officer,  i,  196  : ii,  500 

— Jonathan.  Jr.,  quoted  on  social  compact,  iii,  325 

— and  Slidell,  iii,  571 

Mass  meeting,  and  parliamentary  law,  ii,  617 

— and  popular  government,  ii,  735 
Massachusetts,  ii,  406 

— ballot,  i,  101 

— - — in  election  system,  i,  652 

— Bay  colony,  ii,  410 

■ — body  of  liberties,  on  slavery,  iii,  316 

— capitalization  of  public  utilities  in,  i,  226 

— caucus  in,  i,  232 

— first  child  labor  law  in,  i,  255 

— children,  dependent  in,  i,  258 
- — commissions  in,  i,  351 


750 


INDEX 


Massachusetts  Company,  the,  i,  316 

— constitution,  quoted  on  social  compact,  iii,  326 

— constitutional  convention  in  (1777),  i,  425 

— contingent  debt  of,  i,  547 

— corporation  tax  in,  i,  475 

— Corrupt  Practices  Act,  i,  4S1 

• — high  license  with  restricted  sales,  ii,  358 

— gas  and  electric  light  commission,  iii,  109 

— expenditures  per  capita,  i,  697 

— Institute  of  Technology,  ii,  321 

— religious  motives  in  colonization  of,  i,  321 

— see  also  Roads,  iii,  232 

— as  a royal  province,  iii,  85 

— slavery  in,  in  1641,  ii,  170 

— special  municipal  charters  in,  i,  248 

— state  owned  railroad  in,  iii.  148 
Master  Car  Builders’  Association,  iii,  137 
Matchette,  Charles  H„  iii,  338 

Matriarchial  family,  and  state,  theory  of,  iii,  409 
Mather,  Cotton,  on  religious  refugees  to  America, 
iii.  218 

— on  slavery,  iii.  317 
Mathurians,  i,  121 
Matrons,  prison,  iii,  62 

Matthew,  Father,  Catholic  total  abstinence  socie- 
ties, iii.  513 

Matthews,  Stanley,  iii,  462 
Maurice,  Frederic  D.,  iii,  300 
Maury,  .Tames,  and  Parson's  Cause,  ii,  620 
Maximilian's  empire,  ii,  410 

Maximum  and  minimum  duties  in  Payne-Aldrieh 
Tariff,  ii,  657 

— provisions  of  Payne- Aldrich  Act  of  1909,  iii, 

160 

— tariff,  iii,  476 

Maxwell  vs.  Dow  (constitutional  amendment),  i, 
419 

— (due  process  of  law),  i,  616 

— (jury  trial),  ii,  270 

— (privileges  and  immunities  of  citizens),  iii,  68 
May  Clark  case  (labor  contracts),  ii,  286 
Mayflower  Compact,  ii,  410,  699 

— and  state,  theory  of.  iii,  408 

Maynard,  Horace,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  : ii,  767 
Mayo  vs.  Wilson  (due  process  of  law),  i,  614 
Maysville  turnpike,  veto  on,  i,  565 
Mayor,  colonial,  ii,  411 
- — in  French  city,  ii,  478 

— in  European  cities,  ii.  415 

— - and  executive  pow’er  in  American  cities,  ii,  411 

— in  municipal  government,  organization  of,  ii, 

485 

— and  New  York  City,  ii,  543 

— veto  power  of,  in  New  York,  i,  274 

— of  villages,  iii,  47.  617 
Mayor's  cabinet,  i,  202 
Mayor's  veto,  iii,  615 

Mayors,  elective,  in  development  of  municipal  gov- 
ernment, ii,  480 
Me  too,  ii,  420 

Meat  food  products,  see  Pure  food,  iii,  122 

— inspection,  ii,  416 
Act,  ii,  229 

law-,  see  Pure  food,  iii,  122 

— service,  federal,  ii,  184 

Mechanical  and  agricultural  colleges,  iii,  266 
Mechanic’s  lien,  ii,  416 

Mechanics'  and  Farmers’  Rank  vs.  Ivatterjohn 
(uniform  legislation),  iii,  591 
MecWyxhprg  Declaration  of  Independence,  ii,  416 
« — Scnvnq-in.  ii.  80 

— Strelitz.  ii.  80 

Medals  of  honor  (accidents,  railroad  and  steam- 
ship), i,  4 

— (officers,  military  and  naval),  ii,  571 
Medi®val  city  leagues,  ii,  417 
Medical  examiners  and  coroners,  i,  470 

— inspection  of  schools,  iii,  262 

— practice,  regulation  of,  and  health,  public,  ii, 

120 

— - schools,  iii,  266 

Medicine  men.  Indian,  ii,  164 

- — ■ regulation  of  practice  of.  iii,  73 

— and  Surgery.  Bureau  of.  ii,  417 

Meigs,  R.  J.,  ,Tr..  postmaster  general,  ii,  766 
Melancthon.  Philip,  political  theories  of,  ii,  728 
Melbourne  administration  (cabinet  government),  i, 
194 

Memminger,  C.  G.,  i,  372 

Memoranda,  in  international  law,  iii,  570 

Memorial  Day,  i.  557 

“Men  of  the  western  world,”  iii,  281 

Mending  fences,  ii.  417 

Mental  hygiene,  national  committee  for,  i,  558 
Mercantile  appraisers,  ii,  418 

— system,  influence  of,  on  American  Revolution, 

iii.  219 

and  navigation  acts,  ii.  501 

Mercantilism,  i,  626 ; ii,  304,  418 


Mercantilism,  see  Free  trade  and  protection,  ii,  54 
Mercantilists  and  commerce,  international,  i,  338 
Merchandise,  dealers  in  (license  taxes  on  occupa- 
tions), ii,  351 

Merchant  marine,  i,  624  ; ii,  418  ; iii,  305 

— commission,  iii,  440 

— decline  of,  reasons  for,  i,  342 

— United  States  during  European  wars,  i,  340 
Meredith,  William  M.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196 ; iii, 

566 

Merger  of  railroads,  ii,  418 
Merit  system,  ii,  418 

— in  development  of  municipal  government,  ii,  482 

— and  primary,  direct,  iii,  55 

— see  Tenure  of  office,  iii,  517 
Meriwether  vs.  Garrett,  i.  273 

Merriam,  Charles  E.,  political  theories  of,  ii,  721 
Mersey  docks  and  harbor  board,  ii,  110 
Message,  executive,  ii,  419 

— presidential,  i,  681 

Messages  of  presidents  of  United  States,  i,  7 ; iii, 
4.  117 

Metallic  minerals,  in  resources  of  North  America, 
iii,  205 

Metcalfe,  Sir  Charles,  iii.  207 

— Victor  H.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198,  333  ; ii,  506 

— vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  42 
Meteorological  observations  at  sea,  conference  on, 

ii,  203 

Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  South,  iii,  276 
Metric  system,  ii,  420  ; iii,  667 

— union,  the,  ii,  216 
Metropolitan  police,  ii,  705 

Mexican  conquests  and  military  government,  iii, 
523 

— empire,  and  diplomatic  relations  with  France, 

ii,  43 

— War,  iii,  652 

— greaser,  ii,  96 
Mexico,  ii,  420 

— and  Central  America,  settlement  of  boundaries 

in,  ii,  421 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  422 

— and  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  37 
in  1848,  ii,  38 

— and  Gadsden  Purchase,  ii,  67 

— Guadalupe  Hidalgo,  Treaty  of,  ii,  102 

— Indian  government  in,  ii,  162 

— and  Maximilian’s  empire,  ii,  410 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  467 

— see  also  Pious  fund  arbitration,  ii,  693 

— protectorate  over,  iii,  84 

— - Pan  American  conference  in,  1901-2,  ii,  203 

— recognition  of  governments  of,  iii,  163 

— see  also  States,  classification  of,  iii,  417 

— war  with,  and  Whig  party,  iii,  683 
Meyer,  Balthasar  H.,  ii,  225 

Meyer,  George  von  L.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198  ; ii, 
506,  767 
Michigan,  ii,  425 

— children,  dependent,  in,  i.  259 

— constitution  of  1873,  i,  426 

— constitution  on  special  legislation,  i,  444 

— constitutional  amendment  in.  i.  436 

— constitutional  convention  of  1908,  i,  428 

— and  Middle  West,  ii.  429 

— northern  and  southern  parts  of,  i,  166 

— public  school  of,  i,  259 

— state-owned  railroad  in,  iii,  147 

— University  of,  iii,  412 

Middle  Ages,  political  theories  of,  ii,  717 

— of  the  Road  Populists,  ii,  757 

— states,  ii,  427 

and  sectionalism  in  the  United  States,  iii, 

280 

— West,  ii,  429 

and  sectionalism  in  the  United  States,  iii, 

281 

Middleton,  Arthur,  i,  554 
Midnight  appointments,  i,  53 

— judges,  ii,  430 
Midway  Islands,  ii,  430 

— and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  153 

— annexed,  i,  46 

Milan  decree,  Napoleon’s,  and  Orders  in  Council, 
i,  453  ; ii,  430,  585 
Mileage,  i,  667 

— congressional,  i,  385 

— of  legislators,  ii.  431 
— ■ (railroad),  iii,  135 

Milecke,  In  re  (Thirteenth  Amendment),  iii,  536 
Militarism,  ii,  431 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  575 
Military  Academy  at  West  Point,  ii,  433 

— commissions,  ii,  436 

— courts  martial,  i,  516 

— discipline,  ii,  436 

— government,  characteristics  of,  i,  289 

— law,  ii,  436 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Military  and  naval  education,  i,  638 

expenditures,  ii,  434 

pensions,  ii,  608 

officers,  ii,  570 

— occupation,  ii,  437 
law  of,  ii,  402 

— organizations,  legal  status  of,  iii,  340 

— posts,  ii,  767 

— prisons,  ii,  438 

— reservations,  ii,  438 

— service,  compulsory,  ii,  438 

— substitute,  iii,  441 
Militia,  ii,  439 

— Act  of  1792,  i,  398 

— and  coercion  of  individuals,  i,  307 

• — constitutional  compromise  as  to,  i,  420 

— districts  in  Georgia,  i,  498 

— and  Fore?  Bill,  ii,  197 

— and  insurrection,  ii,  197 

— and  militarism,  ii,  432 

— reserve,  iii,  203 

— pasteurized,  ii,  441 

— public  health  and,  ii,  117 

— standards,  national  commission  on,  ii,  441 

— supply,  ii,  441 

Mill,  James,  political  theories  of,  ii,  726 

— John  Stuart,  quoted  on  bureaucracy,  i,  187 
and  crises,  economic,  i,  527 

quoted  on  functions  of  government,  i,  483 

law  making,  i,  394 

political  theories  of,  ii,  726 

quoted  on  state,  theory  of,  iii,  408 

on  suffrage,  iii,  458 

-on  taxes,  direct,  iii,  507 

on  unearned  increment,  iii,  558 

and  wage-fund,  iii,  635 

Mill-boy  of  the  slashes,  ii,  441 

Miller,  Samuel  F.,  iii,  462 

Miller,  W.  H.  H„  cabinet  officer,  i,  95,  197 

— vs.  United  States  (confiscation),  i,  380 
Milligan,  Ex  parte  (reconstruction),  iii,  168 

— (martial  law),  ii,  441 

- — ("military  commissions),  ii,  436 
Millions  for  defense,  but  not  one  cent  for  tribute, 
ii.  442 

Mills,  Roger  Q.,  ii,  442 

— Tariff  Bill,  i,  573  ; ii,  442  ; iii,  480,  484 

— hotels,  ii,  369 

Milton,  John,  political  theories  of,  ii,  724 

— quoted  on  social  compact  theory,  iii,  325 
sovereignty,  iii,  362 

Milton.  John,  vote  for.  iii,  14 
Milwaukee  school  of  trades,  iii,  271 
Mindanao,  ii,  680 
Mineral  land,  ii,  442 
■ — and  conservation,  i,  400 
Mineral  oils,  ii,  443 

— surveys,  iii,  463 

Minerals,  see  Physics  and  politics,  ii,  686 

— in  the  United  States,  distribution  of  the  prin- 

cipal economic  (map),  ii,  444 
Mines.  Bureau  of,  ii,  199,  442,  445 

— regulation  of,  ii.  301 

— labor,  in  relation  of  the  state  to,  ii,  301,  443 

— legislation  for  laborers  in,  ii,  442 

— National  Bureau  of,  ii,  198 

— schools  of,  iii,  266 

— women  in,  ii,  302 
Minidoka,  ii.  243 

Mining  law,  in  California,  i,  203 

— (lode)  Act  of  1866,  ii,  442 

Minimum  percentage  plan  of  nomination,  iii,  53 

— wage,  ii,  445 

■ Commission,  ii,  289,  302 

for  women,  ii,  302 

— - — see  Sweatshops,  iii,  464 

Minister  plenipotentiary,  i,  671  ; ii,  446 

Ministerial  government,  i,  393 

Ministers,  and  ministerial  responsibility,  ii,  446 

— resident,  in  diplomacy,  i,  589 
Ministry  fn  cabinet  government,  i,  192 
Minnesota,  ii,  447 

— vs.  Barber  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  220 

- — railway  commission  injunction  case,  ii,  92 

— University  of.  iii,  412 
Minor  coins,  iii,  539 

Minor  vs.  Happersett  (privileges  and  immunities 
of  citizens),  iii.  68 

— (woman  suffrage),  iii,  696 
Minority  elections,  presidential,  iii,  11 
— -government  by  the,  ii,  737 

— and  proportional  representation,  ii,  343 

— report,  ii,  450 

— representation,  ii,  450 ; iii.  80 

• apportionment  and,  i,  57 

v — ' — and  public  opinion,  iii,  104 

— stockholders,  iii,  430 
Minorities,  theory  of,  ii,  390 

— rights  of,  ii,  449 


Minorities,  see  Vote,  popular,  iii,  628 
Minors,  qualification  for  office,  iii,  124 
Mint,  museums  at  the,  ii,  490 

— see  Seigniorage,  iii,  286 

— of  the  United  States,  ii,  451 

Minuit,  Peter,  and  New  Amsterdam,  ii,  524 

— and  New  Sweden,  ii,  535 
Minute-men  of  1775,  ii,  439 
Miquel  reforms,  ii,  2 
Mirabeau,  Count,  ii,  731 
Miraflores,  and  Panama  Canal,  ii,  601 
Miranda  expedition,  i,  731  ; ii.  451 
Misbranding,  i,  18:  ii,  229;  iii,  122 
Miscegenation,  and  police  power,  ii,  707 
Misdemeanors,  ii,  318,  452 

- — • See  Crime. 

Misprision  of  felony,  ii,  318 

— of  treason,  ii,  452 
Missionaries,  colonization  and,  i,  325 

— in  the  near  east,  ii,  507 
Missions,  secretaries  of,  i,  594 
Mississippi,  ii,  452 

— constitutional  amendment  in,  i,  436 

— Historical  Society,  ii,  320 

— vs.  Johnson  (executive),  i,  685 

— and  Louisiana  annexation,  ii.  376 

— and  Missouri  River  commissions,  ii,  454 
— and  North  America,  ii,  555 

— River,  iii,  663 

— - — in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  36 
navigation  of,  ii,  502 

see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics, 

iii,  672 

— see  also  South,  iii,  353 
Missouri,  ii,  455 

— Blue  lodges,  i,  136 

— border  ruffians,  i.  143 

— Compromise,  i,  366  ; ii,  457 
and  Democratic  party,  i,  567 

— - — growth  of  Constitution  and,  i,  421 

see  Kansas-Nebraska  Bill,  ii.  276 

and  Republican  party,  iii,  189 

— constitution,  on  special  legislation,  i,  444 

— constitutional  amendment  in.  i,  436 

— home  rule  charter  plan  in,  i,  275 

— vs.  Illinois  (states  as  parties  to  suits),  iii,  416 

— lead  mines  of,  ii,  443 

— River,  iii  663 

commissions,  ii,  454 

— see  also  South,  iii,  353 

— -see  also  Territory,  acquired,  status  of,  iii,  522 

— and  trusts,  iii,  580 

— union  and  secession  legislatures  of,  ii,  196 
Mitchell,  John,  ii,  458 

— on  strikes,  iii.  437 

Mitchell  and  Vigol  cases,  1794,  ii,  196 

Mixed  duties,  i,  617 

Mobile  Bay.  waterways  of,  iii,  663 

Mobilia  personam  sequuntur,  ii,  212 

Mobilization,  iii.  639 

Mobs,  and  mob  rule,  ii,  458  ; iii,  86 

Model  dwellings,  ii,  459 

Moderator,  ii.  459 

— of  assembly,  and  parliamentary  law,  ii,  617 

— in  town  meetings,  iii,  542 
Modoc  War,  iii,  652 
Modus  vivendi.  ii.  459 

— treaties  as  to  iii,  570 

Mohl,  von,  and  sociology,  iii,  342 
Mohun.  Barry,  iii,  590 
Mole  St.  Nicholas  ii,  116 
Molasses  Act  of  1733.  i.  5 

— and  American  Revolution,  iii,  220 
Molly  Maguires,  ii,  459 
Monadnistic  theory  of  society,  iii,  341 
Monarchomachs.  iii,  362 

Monarchical  and  republican  constitutions,  i.  434 
Monarchies,  see  also  States,  classification  of,  iii, 
417 

Monarchy,  ii,  459 

— in  government,  ii,  90 
Monetary  circulation,  ii,  11 

— conferences,  international,  ii,  460 

see  Silver  coinage  controversy,  iii,  310 

Money,  amount  of  each  kind  in  United  States, 
ii.  11 

— as  contraband  of  war,  ii,  432 

— lending,  ii,  460 

— see  Multiple  standard,  ii,  474 
■ — - orders,  postal,  ii,  763 

— and  price,  iii.  48 

— public,  iii,  106 

— quantitative  theory  of,  ii.  461 

— rate  fluctuations  of,  i,  107 

— theory  of,  ii,  461 

— total  stock  of,  ii,  11 

— in  the  United  States,  paper,  ii,  605 
Mongolians.  See  Chinese. 

Mongrel  caucus,  iii,  49 


INDEX 


Monitor.  Ericsson’s,  ii,  503 
— • and  naval  vessels,  ii,  499 
Monistic  theory  of  society,  iii,  341 
Monocrats,  i,  577 
Monongahela  River,  iii,  663 
Monometallism,  ii,  463 
Monopolies,  great  case  of,  iii,  155 
Monopoly,  ii,  463 

— and  American  Revolution,  iii,  219 

— grants,  ii,  651 

— in  interstate  commerce  decisions,  ii,  226 

— price,  ii,  464 

— and  restraint  of  trade,  iii,  155,  208 

— and  taxation,  iii,  504 
Monroe,  James,  ii,  465 ; iii,  402 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  195 

— in  diplomatic  relations  with  France,  ii,  42 

— and  general  welfare  clause,  ii,  72 

— and  the  new  republicanism,  i,  580 

— on  post  roads,  ii,  763 

— Pinckney  negotiation,  and  northeastern  bound- 

ary controversy,  ii,  560 

— and  the  Republican  schism,  i,  580 

— Secretary  of  War.  iii,  648 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  17,  18 

— Doctrine,  ii,  205,  234 

— — Alaska  and  the,  i,  24 

and  Democratic  party,  i,  568 

in  diplomatic  relations.  See  various  coun- 
tries by  name. 

-and  Drago  Doctrine,  i,  611 

in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  37 

and  Great  Britain,  ii,  98 

— — and  Maximilian’s  empire,  ii,  410 

and  Oregon  country,  ii,  656 

and  Russian  colonization,  iii,  243 

and  United  States  as  a world  power,  iii,  701 

see  West  as  a factor  American  politics,  iii, 

672 

Montana,  ii,  469 
Montcalm,  General,  i,  212 
Montesquieu,  political  theories  of,  ii,  730 
Montevideo,  iii.  601 

Montford,  Simon  de,  Parliament  and,  iii,  185 
Montgomerie  charter  (New  York  City),  ii,  541 
Montpelier,  iii,  608 
Montreal,  iii.  127 

— capitulation  of,  iii,  126 

— and  New  France,  ii,  527 

Monts.  Sieur  de  (Nova  Scotia),  ii,  564 
“Monumental  City,’’  i,  105 
Monuments,  public,  ii.  470 
Moody.  William  H.,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  i98,  506 ; iii,  462 
Mooney,  William,  iii,  467 
Moonshine  whiskey,  ii,  51 

Moore,  J.  B , quoted  on  war,  iii,  645 

— Alfred,  iii,  462 
Mooshassuc.  iii,  224 

Moot  questions,  not  decided  by  courts,  iii,  2 
Morals,  care  for  public,  iii,  99 

— sec  Justice,  ii,  270 

— and  police  power,  ii.  707 
Morbidity  statistics,  iii,  623 
More,  Thomas,  ii,  724 
Morehead,  Charles  S.,  ii,  279 
Moresnet,  iii,  527 

Morey  letter,  ii,  471 
Morgan.  Edwin  D.,  iii,  644 

— William,  i,  49 

see  "Good  enough  Morgan,”  ii,  86 

Morgan’s  Steamship  Co.  vs.  Louisiana  Board  of 
Health  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  219 
Mormon  church,  i,  711  : iii,  322 

— war  as  an  insurrection,  ii,  195 
Mormons,  iii,  603 

— see  Edmunds  Bill,  i,  629 

— and  polygamy,  ii,  733 
Morning  hour,  ii.  471 

— in  legislative  bodies,  i,  202 

Morocco,  diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  13,  122 

— extraterritoriality  in,  i,  706 

— and  United  States  as  a world  power,  iii,  701 

— and  near  east,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  507 
Moros  and  dependencies  of  United  States,  i,  582 

— see  Philippines,  ii,  682 
Morrill,  Justin  Smith,  ii.  471 

- — and  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  479 

— Tariff,  ii.  471 

— grant  for  agricultural  colleges,  ii.  471 
Morrill,  Lot  M„  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  566 
Morris,  Gouverneur,  ii.  471 

— in  diplomatic  relations  with  France,  ii,  42 

— and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 

Morris,  Lewis,  and  Declaration  of  Independence,  i, 
554 

— Robert,  ii,  472 

and  Declaration  of  Independence,  i,  554 

and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 


Morris,  Robert,  as  Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii, 
565 

-as  superintendent  of  finance,  i,  377 

see  Treasury  Department,  iii,  563 

and  Washington  real  estate,  i,  602 

— Thomas,  vote  for.  iii,  24,  25 
Morris  and  Essex  Canal,  i,  221 

— vs.  Cotton  (confiscation),  i,  380 
Morrison,  William  It.,  ii  225 

— Tariff,  i,  577  ; iii,  480 
Morrissey,  John,  iii,  464 
Morse,  Samuel  F.  B..  iii,  510 
Mortgage  taxation,  iii,  500 

Mortensen  vs.  Peters  (international  fisheries),  ii, 
22 

Morton,  John,  i,  554 

— J.  Sterling  and  Nebraska,  i,  20,  197  ; ii,  509 

— Levi  P.,  Vice-President,  iii,  616 
vote  for.  iii,  37 

— Oliver  P„  ii,  472 

and  Republican  party,  iii,  189 

— • — war  governor,  iii,  644 

— Paul,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198;  ii,  506 
Mosquitia,  and  Mosquito  Question,  ii,  472 
Mosquito  Indians,  and  Clayton-Bulwer  Treaty,  i, 

294 

— question,  ii,  472 

Mosquitoes,  health,  public,  and,  ii,  117 
Moses  Taylor  (maritime  law),  i,  12 
Most  favored  nation  clause,  ii,  473 

— see  Treaties,  iii,  57 1 
Mothers’  pensions,  ii,  579 

Motion,  in  parliamentary  law,  ii,  617 

— pictures  as  amusements,  i,  40 

— study,  iii,  273 
Moulton,  R.  G.,  iii,  599 

Mt.  Desert,  expedition  against,  i,  319 
Mountain  region,  and  sectionalism  in  United 
States,  iii,  283 
— -standard  time,  iii,  376 

Mountains  of  United  States,  see  Physiography,  ii, 
689 

Mounted  state  police  in  suppression  of  riots,  iii, 
228 

Movable  property,  and  international  law,  private, 
ii,  212 

Moving  pictures,  ii,  473 

— the  crops,  and  currency,  i,  650 
Mozart  Hall,  iii,  468 
Muck-raking,  ii.  473 

Mud  sill,  ii,  473 
Mugwumps,  ii,  473 

— and  independent  movements  in  politics,  ii,  156 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  197 
Muhlenberg,  Frederick  A.,  speaker,  i,  388  ; ii,  474 
Mulatfoes,  and  negro  problem,  ii,  513 
Muldrow,  Henry  L.,  ii,  199 

Mulford,  Elisha,  ii,  474 

Mulhall.  Michael,  on  wealth,  national,  iii,  665 
Muller  vs.  Oregon  (due  process  of  law),  i,  616 

— (labor,  freedom  of),  ii,  289 

— (police  power),  ii,  709 

Muller  vs.  State  (labor,  women's,  legislative  con- 
trol of),  ii,  303 
Mulligan  letters,  i,  134  ; ii,  474 
Multiple  standard,  ii,  474 
Multiplicity  of  offices,  ii,  572 
Municipal  accounting,  uniformity  of,  iii,  89 

— boards,  i.  137 

bipartisan,  i,  132 

— bonds,  i,  551 

— budget  of  American  cities,  ii,  414 

— charters,  i,  248 

— commissions,  iii.  110 

— concerts,  supervisor  of,  and  parks  and  boule- 

vards, ii.  612 

— corporation,  see  City  and  state,  i,  273 

local  self-government,  ii,  368 

Act  of  1882  (England),  ii.  365 

special  legislation  for,  i,  444 

— council,  i,  486 

structure  of  the  American,  ii,  325 

— courts,  appeals  from,  i.  505 
in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 

— franchises,  ii,  474 

— functions,  ii.  481 

— government  in  continental  Europe,  ii,  478 
cost  of.  i,  484 

functions  cf,  ii,  475 

see  Local  government  and  the  states,  ii,  364 

— ■ — and  political  theories,  ii.  722 
— - — in  the  United  States,  historical  development 
of,  ii.  479 

— ■ — in  the  United  States,  organization  of,  ii,  483 

— home  rule,  i,  408 

— housing,  ii,  486 

— lodging  houses,  ii.  486 

— newspapers,  i,  281 

— ordinances,  ii,  587 

753 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Municipal  ownership,  ii,  48G 

of  ferries,  i,  728 

league,  ii,  155 

lighting,  electric,  ii,  354 

-of  railways,  electric,  iii,  139 

of  steam  roads,  iii,  148 

and  transit  in  cities,  iii,  552 

— reference  bureaus,  ii,  487 

— research,  bureaus  of,  ii,  487 

— socialism,  iii,  336 

— trade,  i,  483 

— trading,  ii,  488 

— veto  of  state  acts,  ii,  488 

— voters’  league  in  Chicago,  i,  253  ; ii,  488 

• -and  legislative  corruption,  i,  478 

— - — ■ and  non-partisan  political  organization,  ii, 
554 

and  parties,  state  and  local,  ii,  622 

— works,  labor  on,  ii.  289 
Municipalities,  centralization  in,  i,  240 
Municipality,  i,  273 

— Roman,  iii,  233 
Municipium,  Roman,  iii,  233 

Munn  vs.  Illinois  (due  process  of  law),  i.  615 
- — (grain  elevators),  i,  660 

— (police  power),  ii,  489,  708 

— (transportation,  regulation  of),  iii,  556 
Monroe,  Donald  B.,  vice-presidential  candidate, 

iii,  45 

— W.  B.,  and  political  theories,  ii,  723 
Murdock,  Victor,  iii,  535 

Murphy,  Charles  Francis,  ii,  489,  542  ; iii,  468 
Murray,  William  V.,  and  Netherlands,  diplomatic 
relations  with,  ii.  519 

— in  diplomatic  relations  with  France,  ii,  42 
Murray  vs.  C.  & N.  W.  R.  R.  Co.  (federal  law), 

ii,  309 

Murrv  vs.  Hoboken  Co.  (due  process  of  law),  i, 
614 

Muscat  case,  ii,  107 
> — extraterritoriality  in.  i,  706 
Museums,  public,  ii,  490 
Music,  public,  ii,  490 
Muskingum  River,  iii,  663 
Muskogean  Indians,  i,  2, 

Muskrat  vs.  United  States  (constitutional  law), 
i.  231 

— (separation  of  powers),  iii,  298 
Mutiny  Act  (British),  i,  83 

“My  policy,”  ii,  491 

Nagel,  Charles,  ii,  492 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  198,  333 
Names,  board  on  geographic,  ii,  73 
Napoleon,  Code,  i,  303 

— and  the  continental  system,  i,  453 

— and  Milan  Decree,  ii,  430 

— Ill,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  43 
Napoleonic  wars,  neutral  trade  during  the.  ii,  519 
Narragansett  Bay,  and  navy  yards,  ii,  507 
“Narrow  gaugers,”  in  Prohibition  party,  iii,  78 
Nashborough,  iii,  514 

Nashville,  C.  & St.  L.  R.  Co.  vs.  Alabama  (inter- 
state commerce),  ii,  220 
Nast.  Thomas,  i,  564  ; iii,  489 
Natal,  iii,  354 

Nathan  vs.  Louisiana  (interstate  commerce),  ii, 
219 

Nation,  ii,  492 

— and  state,  distinguished,  iii,  406 
National,  see  Nation,  ii,  492 

— Academy  of  Sciences,  learned  societies,  ii,  320 

— Assembly,  in  France,  i.  418.  433 

— association  of  state  universities,  i,  559  ; iii,  598 
of  comptrollers  and  accounting  officers,  iii, 

89 

— bank  act,  Comptroller  of  the  Currency  and  the, 

i,  367 

and  revenue,  bills  for  raising,  iii,  211 

— bank  depositories,  i,  585 

notes,  and  notes.  United  States,  ii,  563 

redemption  fund,  i,  545 

— banking  act,  and  the  currency,  i,  535 

— banks,  ii,  13 

and  banking  acts,  i,  115 

and  national  currency  association,  ii,  492 

— ■ — and  Reserve  Act,  Federal,  iii,  202 
— ■ — see  also  Treasury  department,  iii,  564 
United  States,  i.  11.3 

— Board  of  fire  underwriters,  i,  185  : ii.  19 

— -Cash  Register  Co.  (welfare  systems),  iii,  668 

— Child  Labor  Committee,  i,  255 

— Civic  Federation,  ii.  554 

— committees,  and  conventions,  i.  463 

— congressional  committee,  ii.  645 

— Conservation  Association,  i.  401 
- — — Commission,  ii,  181:  iii,  96 

— convention  of  1916,  apportionment  in,  iii,  201 


National  convention  of  1916,  see  also  Unit  rule, 
iii,  594 

— Currency  Act,  i,  535 

— Currency  Association,  i,  536  ; ii,  492 
- — debt,  ii,  15 

changes  in,  ii,  15 

in  financial  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  7 

► see  also  Revenue,  surplus,  iii,  217 

— — per  capita,  ii,  7 

— Democratic  League,  ii,  711 
party,  ii,  493 

— Direct  Legislation  League,  ii,  553 

— Education  Association,  iii,  264 

— -Electric  Light  Association  (welfare  systems), 
iii,  668 

— Erectors'  Association,  ii,  294 

— Farmers’  Alliance,  i,  711 

— — League,  i,  711 

— Fire  Protection  Association,  i,  186  ; ii,  19 

— forests  (map),  ii,  242 

— Fraternal  Congress,  ii,  584 

— gallery  of  art,  iii,  323 

— Gazette  and  Democratic-Republican  party,  i, 

577 

- — Good  Roads  Association,  iii,  233 

— Guards,  and  militia,  ii,  440 

— Labor  Congress,  ii,  295 

— labor  reform,  ii,  295 
party,  ii,  295 

— labor  union,  ii,  291,  295 

— league  for  the  protection  of  American  institu- 

tions, i,  268 

— military  parks,  and  reservations,  ii,  438 

— Monetary  Association,  i,  536 

— monuments,  ii,  613 

and  public  lands,  reservation  of,  iii,  98 

— Municipal  League,  iii,  89,  592 

and  budgets,  i,  184 

and  municipal  government  in  the  United 

States,  ii,  484 

— • — and  municipal  reference  bureaus,  ii,  487 
and  non-partisan  political  organizations,  ii,  554 

— Negro  Business  League,  iii,  658 

— parks,  ii,  199 

and  boulevards,  ii,  613 

— - — and  public  lands,  reservation  of,  iii,  98 

— party,  ii,  493 

— Republican  League,  ii,  711 
— - — party,  ii.  493 

and  organization,  ii,  592 

— Republicans  (1828),  i,  581 

— Reserve  Association,  i,  536 

— road,  the,  i,  535 

“National”  and  state  sovereignty,  iii,  403 
National  LTnion  Convention,  i,  402 

— party,  iii,  193 

— Waterways  Commission,  ii,  494 

— zoological  park,  iii,  323 
Nationalism,  in  economic  theory,  i,  628 

— and  international  unions,  ii,  216 

— new,  ii,  534 
Nationalists,  ii,  494 
Nationality,  ii.  495 

Nationalrat,  of  Switzerland,  iii,  465 
Native  American  race,  ii,  495 

— Americanism,  i.  37 
Nativism.  i,  37  : ii,  496 

— see  Know-nothing  party,  ii.  281 
Nativist  legislation,  and  suffrage,  iii,  445 
Natural  born  citizens,  ii,  496 

— gas,  regulation  of,  ii,  496 

in  resources  of  North  America,  iii,  204 

— law.  ii.  265 

and  political  theories,  ii,  725 

— liberty,  theory  of,  i.  627 

— rights,  i.  281  ; ii,  496 

in  political  theory,  ii.  722 

(and  remedies),  iii,  227 

theory  of  government,  ii.  90 

Naturalist  school  of  international  law,  ii,  214 
Naturalization  Act,  i,  30 

— — of  1870  (British),  ii,  96 

— Bureau  of.  ii,  288 

— commissioner  of,  ii.  288 

— See  also  under  Chinese. 

— see  also  Declaration  of  intention,  i,  556 

— and  expatriation,  i,  690 

— in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  37 

— and  indefeasible  allegiance,  ii,  155 

— law  of,  ii,  497 

— see  also  Treaties  of  United  States,  iii,  568 
Naturalized  citizens,  in  Hartford  convention,  ii, 

112 

Nature,  law  of,  ii,  319 

Nautical  Almanac,  and  Navigation,  Bureau  of,  ii, 
502 

— and  observatories,  public,  ii,  56S 
Navajo  reservation,  ii,  167 
Naval  Academy  at  Annapolis,  ii,  498 


INDEX 


Naval  auxiliaries,  and  maritime  war,  ii,  397 
■ — Conference,  International,  London,  1908-9,  ii, 
203 

— expenditures,  ii,  434 

— homes,  ii,  499 

— observatory,  ii,  568 

— officer  in  Customs  service,  ii,  499 

— officers,  ii,  570 

— raids,  iii,  639 

— stations,  ii,  499 

— stores,  colonization  and,  i,  321 

— strength,  relative,  i,  77 

— vessels,  ii,  499 

— war,  neutrality  during,  ii,  522 

Navassa  Island  and  boundaries  of  United  States,  l, 
153 

Navigable  waters,  ii,  501 

— jurisdiction  of,  i,  12 

— and  the  police  power,  ii,  708 

— see  also  War  department,  iii,  641 
Navigation  acts,  and  American  Revolution,  iii,  219 

— under  Confederation,  i,  378,  ii,  501 
Navigation,  Bureau  of,  Department  of  Commerce, 

i,  226;  ii,  501 

— and  navigation,  regulation  of,  ii,  503 

— (navy  department),  ii.  502 

Navigation,  discrimination  and  reciprocity  in,  i, 
341 

— fisheries  as  related  to,  ii,  24 

— of  international  rivers,  ii,  502 

— of  lakes,  ii,  304 

— lighthouse  system,  ii,  352 

— - see  Manifests  of  vessels,  ii,  391 

— regulation  of,  ii,  503 

— river,  ii,  36 

Navy,  bluejackets  of,  i,  137 

— and  coast  defense,  i,  301 

— Department,  ii,  503 

archives  of,  i,  69 

chart  of,  ii,  504,  505 

collier  service,  iii.  553 

Construction  and  Repair,  Bureau  of,  i,  445 

and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  690 

and  health,  public,  ii,  117 

and  law,  administrative,  ii,  310 

Medicine  and  Surgery,  Bureau  of,  ii,  417 

Navigation,  Bureau  of,  ii,  502 

Ordnance,  Bureau  of,  ii,  588 

see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  248 

see  Soldiers  and  sailors,  legal  status  of,  iii, 

350 

Steam  Engineering,  Bureau  of,  iii,  426 

Supplies  and  Accounts,  Bureau  of,  iii,  461 

training  ships,  iii,  549 

training  stations,  iii,  549 

Tutuila,  iii,  582 

Yards  and  Docks,  Bureau  of,  iii,  704 

— gunboat  system  in,  ii,  104 

— hospitals,  ii,  127 

— judge  advocate  general,  ii,  254 

— see  also  Sea  power,  iii,  274 

— secretaries  of,  ii,  506 

— see  Training  ships,  iii,  549 

— yards,  ii,  507 

Neagle,  In  re  (habeas  corpus),  ii,  106 

— (powers  of  the  President),  iii,  7 

Near  East,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  507 
Nebraska,  ii,  508 

— Bill,  and  popular  sovereignty,  ii.  739 

— constitutional  amendment  in,  i.  437 

— constitution  of  1866.  i,  426 

“'Necessary  and  proper,”  in  federal  Constitution,  ii, 
511 

Neebish  Rapids  (boundaries  of  United  States),  i, 
155 

Negligence,  ii,  511 

Negotiable  instruments  law,  uniform,  iii,  590 
Negotiation  of  treaties  by  the  United  States,  ii, 
511 

Negro  exodus  (Kansas),  ii,  276 

— illiteracy,  ii,  142 

— see  Peonage,  ii,  671 

— population  of  the  United  States,  1900  (map), 

ii.  514 

— problem,  ii,  513 

see  also  South,  iii,  353 

— suffrage,  ii,  516 ; iii,  444 

and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 

see  Wisconsin,  iii,  691 

— vote,  the,  iii,  626 
in  Delaware,  i,  561 

— voter,  and  party  organization  in  the  South,  ii, 

638 

“Negro  worshippers,”  iii,  190 
Negroes  in  Alabama,  i,  22 

— see  Black  belt,  i,  133 

— and  Civil  Rights  Bill,  i,  282 

— during  Civil  War,  i.  290 

— colonization  of,  i,  323 


Negroes  as  dependent  people,  i,  584 

— see  Disfranchisement,  i,  596 

— see  also  States,  admission  of,  iii,  414 
Neighborhood  guild,  iii,  300 

Nelson,  John,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 ; iii,  402 
Nelson,  Samuel,  iii,  462 

— Thomas,  jr.,  i,  554 

— Act,  i,  630 
Nemacolin’s  Path,  i,  535 
Neo-Hegelians,  jurisprudence,  ii,  266 
Neo-Kantians,  jurisprudence,  ii,  266 
Netherlands,  army  and  navy,  i,  76 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  519 

— and  Luxemburg,  i,  584 

— New,  ii,  534 

Nettleton,  Allured  B.,  Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii, 
566 

Neutral  goods  and  Declaration  of  Paris,  i,  556 

— trade  during  the  Napoleonic  wars,  ii,  519 

principles  of,  ii,  520 

Neutrality,  ii,  37 

— Act  of  1794,  and  filibusters,  i,  781 

— doctrine  of,  ii,  204 

— in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  37 

— influence  of  United  States  upon,  ii,  210 
— - and  maritime  war,  ii,  397 

— in  naval  war,  ii,  106 

— principles  of,  ii,  520 

— proclamation  of  1793,  ii,  522 
Neutralization  of  canals,  ii,  522 
Neutralized  states,  i,  584 
Neutrals,  due  diligence  and,  i,  614 

— effect  on,  of  war,  iii,  646 
Nevada,  ii,  522 

— claims  against,  i,  291 
New  Amsterdam,  ii,  524 
New  Brunswick,  ii,  524 

— Canadian  province  of,  i,  214 

New  Connecticut,  and  New  Hampshire,  ii,  529 

— and  New  Hampshire  grants,  ii,  529 
New  England,  ii,  524 

— British  province,  ii,  526 

— Confederation  of  1643,  i,  317  ; ii,  524 

— Council,  ii,  526 

— plot,  ii,  091 

— and  sectionalism  in  the  United  States,  iii,  280 
New  France,  i,  212  : ii,  526 

New  Granada,  sec  Colombia,  i,  314 
New  Hampshire,  ii,  527 

— constitutional  convention  in,  i,  425 

— grants,  ii,  529 

— vs.  Louisiana  (Eleventh  Amendment),  i,  660 

— as  a royal  province,  iii,  85 
New  Haven,  ii.  530 

— lighting,  electric,  ii,  353 
New  Jersey,  ii,  530 

— canal  development  of,  i,  223 

— children,  dependent,  in.  i,  258 

— chosen  freeholders  in,  i.  266 

— corporation  tax  in,  i,  475 

— and  middle  states,  ii,  427 

— or  Paterson  plan,  in  Federal  Convention,  i,  715 

— plan,  ii,  652 

— see  also  Roads,  iii,  232 

— as  a royal  province,  iii,  85 
— see  Trusts,  iii.  579 

— vs.  Wilson  (legislative  grant),  i,  443 
New  Mexico,  ii.  533 

— boundaries  of,  i.  163 

— as  dependency  of  United  States,  i,  582 
New  nationalism,  ii.  534  ; iii.  76  : 234 

— see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics,  iii, 

674 

New  Netherland,  ii,  534 

— and  New  York,  ii,  535 

New  Orleans,  exports  of,  i,  332 

— harbor,  ii,  110 

— navy  yard,  ii,  507 

— see  also  Right  of  deposit,  iii,  226 

— steam  road  of,  iii,  148 

— see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics,  iii, 

672 

New  roof.  ii.  535 

New  South  Wales.  See  under  Australia. 

New  Spain,  and  Mexico,  ii,  422 
New  states,  constitutional  compromise  as  to,  i, 
420 

New  Sweden,  ii,  535 

— and  Delaware,  i,  559 
New  tenor  bills,  ii.  535 

New  Testament,  and  political  theories,  ii,  717 
New  York,  ii.  535 

— City,  ii,  539 

aldermen  and  legislative  corruption,  i,  477 

see  Borough  president,  i,  144 

boundaries  (map),  ii,  540 

budget  of,  i,  183 


755 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


New  York  City,  concurrent  county  and  city  gov- 
ernment in,  1,  488 

— — congestion  in,  i,  881 

expenditures  of.  i,  697 

exports  of,  i,  332 

Forty  Thieves  Council,  i,  477 

— - — and  parties,  state  and  local,  ii,  622 
— • — police  pensions,  ii,  667 

relation  of,  to  national  banking  system,  ii,  12 

water  front,  ii.  110 

supply,  i,  63 

— state,  canals  in,  i,  223 

— capitalization  of  public  utilities  in,  i,  226 

— and  children,  dependent,  i,  257 

— classification  of  cities,  i,  274 

— clearing  house,  transactions  of,  ii,  14 

— codes  of.  i,  304 

— commission  on  congestion  of  population,  i.  380 

— constitutional  conventions,  i,  426 

— Corrupt  Practices  Act,  i,  481 

— as  a doubtful  state,  ii,  646 

— franchise  tax,  ii,  47 

— Life  Insurance  Co.  vs.  Cravens  (insurance),  ii, 

192 

— local  veto  in.  i,  274 

- — and  middle  states,  ii,  427 

— vs.  Miln  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  220 

— municipal  railroad  corporation,  iii,  442 
charters  in,  i,  248 

- — navy  yard,  ii.  507 

- — N.  E.  R.  R.  Co.  vs.  Bristol  (grade  crossings), 
ii,  93 

— N.  H.  & H.  R.  R.  vs.  New  York  (concurrent 

powers),  i,  369 

— N.  H.  & H.  R.  R.  Co.  vs.  New  York  (interstate 

commerce),  ii,  220 

— point,  education  of,  in  blind,  i,  640 

— public  buildings  in.  iii,  91 

— regents’  examinations  in,  iii,  174 

— as  a royal  province,  iii,  85 

— Times,  and  Tweed  ring,  iii,  583 

New  Zealand,  arbitration  of  labor  disputes  in,  i, 
67 

Newberry,  Truman  H.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198 ; ii, 
506 

Newfoundland,  ii,  544 

— diplomatic  relations  of,  i,  177 

— and  Dominion  of  Canada,  i,  213 

— fisheries  dispute,  ii,  545 

influence  of,  on  arbitration,  ii,  206 

— and  North  Atlantic  fisheries  arbitration,  ii,  556 
Newlands  Act  (1902),  ii,  241 

- — for  irrigation,  i,  400 
Newport  naval  war  college,  iii,  640 

— system  of  city  government,  ii,  546 
- — training  station,  iii,  549 
Newsboys,  ii,  351 

Newspapers,  freedom  of,  ii,  58 
— - and  public  opinion,  iii.  102 

— see  also  Publicity,  iii,  118 

Newtonian  theory  of  government  (checks  and  bal- 
ances). i,  250 
Newtown,  ii.  540 
Nicaragua,  ii,  546 

— and  canal  diplomacy,  i,  216:  ii.  546 

— diplomatic  agreement  with,  i,  591 

— independence  of,  i,  237 

— and  Mosquito  Question,  ii,  472 

— protectorate  over,  iii,  84 

Nicholson,  vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  42 
Nicolas  of  Cusa,  political  theories  of,  ii,  718 
Nicolav,  John  G.,  as  secretary  to  the  President,  iii, 
280 

Nicolet.  Jean.  iii.  690 

— and  Michigan,  ii,  425 
Nicolls.  Governor,  ii.  541 
Niger,  navigation  of,  ii,  502 
Night  court,  i,  502 

— riders,  ii,  547 

— work  for  women,  ii,  302 

— — children,  i,  255 
Nihilism,  ii.  547 

Niles.  John  M..  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; ii,  767 

Nile  River,  ii,  502 

Nipissing  route.  Lake,  iii.  548 

“.No  bishop  no  king,”  i.  562 

No  man’s  land.  iii.  528 

Nobility,  privileged  status  of,  iii,  67 

— titles  of,  i.  418 : ii.  548 
Noble.  John  TV.,  ii.  199 

— cabinet  officer,  i.  197 

Noble  State  Bank  vs.  Haskell  (banks),  i,  109 

— (due  process  of  law),  i,  616 
Nolle  prosequi,  ii.  548 

— attorney  general’s  power  to,  i,  94 
Nominating  petitions,  ii,  635 

— • systems,  ii.  548 

and  election  systems,  i.  655 

Nomination,  majority  necessary  for,  ill,  53 


Nomination  papers,  ii,  552 

— by  petition,  ii,  674 ; iii,  49 
and  nominating  systems,  ii,  549 

— of  the  President,  ii,  550 
— - see  Primary,  direct,  iii,  53 
Nominations  in  Great  Britain,  ii,  552 
Nomographoi,  ii,  100 
Noncombatant,  ii,  553 

N'on-hostis,  and  neutrality,  principles  of,  il,  521 
Non-importation,  ii,  553 

— Act,  iii,  209 

Non  intercourse,  ii,  553 

— Act,  i.  664  ; iii,  209 

— • and  non-importation,  ii.  553 

— policy,  Jefferson’s,  i,  580 
Non-interference  with  slavery,  ii,  553 
Non-intervention,  doctrine  of,  ii,  205,  553 
"Non-national”  states,  iii,  406 
Non-partisan  municipal  party,  ii,  554 

— political  organizations,  ii,  553 

— primary,  iii,  50,  54 
Non-resistance,  doctrine  of,  iii,  223 
Non-resistant,  ii,  555 

Non-support,  probation  system  in,  iii,  63 
Nootka  Sound  Convention,  ii,  555  ; iii,  655 
Norfolk  navy  yard,  ii,  507 
Normal  institutes,  iii,  265 

— schools,  iii,  206 
statistics  of,  i,  649 

— tax  (income  tax),  iii,  493 
North  America,  ii.  555 

— ■ physiography  of,  ii,  687 

— resources  of,  iii,  204 

North  American  Company,  ii,  124 

— Federation  of  the  International  Workingmen's 

Association,  ii,  217 

— Woman  Suffrage  Association,  iii.  695 

North  Atlantic  Fisheries  arbitration,  i,  68 ; ii, 
107,  545.  555 

North  Brookfield,  steam  road  of,  iii,  148 
North  Carolina,  ii,  556 

— constitution,  on  special  legislation,  i,  444 

— and  state  of  Franklin,  ii,  48 

— see  Regulators,  iii.  175 

— see  also  South,  iii.  353 

— state  owned  railroad  in,  iii,  147 

— L’niversit.v  of.  iii.  410 
North  Dakota,  ii.  558 

— distribution  of  state  institutions,  i,  227 
North  River  Sugar  Refining  Company  (sugar 

trust),  iii,  579 

— -against  South  (sectionalism),  iii,  284 
North  Star.  i.  609 

Northeastern  boundary  arbitration,  i,  68  ; ii,  560 

— (map),  ii,  561 

Northern  Alliance  (Farmers'),  i,  711 
— ■ Pacific,  and  Pacific  railroads,  ii,  596 
— - Securities  Case.  ii.  560,  580 

(restraint  of  trade),  iii.  155 

(Sherman  Anti-trust  Act),  iii.  303 

Northwest  conspiracy  of  1864,  ii,  281 
— • Fur  Company  of  Montreal,  ii.  135 

— and  sectionalism  in  the  United  States,  iii,  281 

— territories  of  Canada,  i,  214 

— territory,  ii,  158,  519,  562 

— - — of  1787,  area  of,  i,  163 
see  Clark.  G.  R..  i.  293 

as  dependency  of  United  States,  i,  581 

and  Ohio,  ii,  573 

— - — -see  also  Towns  and  townships,  iii,  545 
Northwestern  boundary  controversy,  ii,  562 

— map  of.  ii,  563 

Norton  letter  on  patronage,  i,  477 
Norway,  suffrage  in.  iii,  458 
• — and  Sweden,  i.  584 
— - treaty  on  integrity  of,  ii,  208 
Norwich  Tailors’  case  (labor,  relation  of  the  state 
to),  ii.  298 

Note  circulation,  i.  107 

— issues  and  Reserve  Act,  Federal,  iii,  202 
Notes,  in  international  law.  iii.  570 

— • payable  in  public  debt,  i,  545 

— United  States,  ii,  563 
Nova  Scotia,  ii,  564 

— - Canadian  province  of.  i,  214 

— as  a royal  province,  iii.  85 
Novels,  of  Justinian,  i,  303 

Noyes  Academy,  and  New  Hampshire,  ii,  529 
Nuisances,  abatement  of,  ii.  564 

— and  health,  public,  ii,  119 
• — slaughter  houses  as,  i,  1 
Nullification.  Calhoun  and,  i,  203 

— controversy,  ii,  565 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  565 

• — ■ and  Democratic-Republican  party,  i,  578 

— and  insurrection,  ii.  197 

— and  interposition,  ii.  218 

— see  also  South  Carolina,  iii.  358 

— and  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  478 


INDEX 


Nullification,  see  Virginia  and  Kentucky  Resolu- 
tions, iii,  620 
Nul  tiel  record,  ii,  255 
Nuncios,  in  diplomacy,  i,  589 
Nurses,  district,  ii.  567 
Nursing,  and  health,  public,  ii,  120 
Nutting  vs.  Massachusetts  (insurance),  ii,  192 

O’Connell,  Daniel,  and  nationalists,  ii,  494 
O'Connor,  Charles,  ii,  295  ; iii,  432 

— vote  for.  iii,  32 
Oath  of  Office,  ii,  568 
Oberlin  College,  i,  306 
Obiter  dictum,  i,  232;  iifi  568 
Objectionable  employments,  ii,  289 
Obligation,  see  Rights  and  remedies,  iii,  227 
Obscene  literature,  i,  190 

— matter,  ii,  57 
Observatories,  public,  ii.  568 
Obsolete  laws,  disregard  of,  iii,  104 
Ocala  platform,  ii,  568 
Occupation  and  crime,  i,  524 
Occupational  diseases,  ii,  568 

— risk,  ii,  175 

Occupations,  license  taxes  on,  ii,  350 

Oceana,  Harrington’s,  ii,  724 

Ochlocracy,  ii,  569 

October  states,  ii,  569 

Octroi,  iii.  509 

Off-year,  ii,  573 

— • party  committees  in,  i.  362 

Offensive  partizans,  ii,  569 

Office,  ii,  569 

— appointments  to,  i,  52 

— candidacy  as  a party,  i,  224 

— and  commission,  distinguished,  iii,  101 

— definition  of.  i.  51 

— oath  of,  ii,  568 

— obligation  to  accept,  ii,  570 

— of  Public  Roads,  iii.  232 

— qualifications  for,  iti,  124 

— of  Hoad  Inquiry,  iii.  232 

— vacancies  in,  iii,  604 

Officer  and  employee  distinguished,  i,  677  ; Iii,  101 
Officers,  bonding  of  public,  i,  142 

— in  city  government,  ii,  570 

— commissions  to  public,  i,  354 

— inferior,  ii,  176 

— military  and  naval,  ii.  570 
Offices,  multiplicity  of,  ii,  572 

Official  class,  and  rotation  in  office,  iii,  235 

— Gazette  of  the  United  States  Patent  Office,  ii, 

650 

Officials,  ii.  573 

— choice  of,  ii,  642 

— public  addresses  of,  i.  7 

— removal  of  public,  iii,  177 

— salaries  of  public,  iii.  246 

Oglethorpe,  James,  and  settlement  of  Georgia,  ii,  76 
O grab  me  act,  ii,  573 
Ohio,  ii.  573 

— Adams  County,  bribery  in,  i,  171 

— admission  of,  and  first  Republican  administra- 

tion, i,  579 

— building  code  of,  i,  186 

— children,  dependent,  in,  i,  258 

— claims  against,  i,  291 

— Company,  ii,  576 

■ and  Ordinance  of  1787,  ii,  586 

-of  1788.  i.  168 

— — and  public  lands  to,  iii,  94 

— vs.  Creamer  (state  issurance),  ii,  189 

— grant  of  public  lands,  to,  iii,  96 

— high  license  without  restriction,  ii,  358 

— idea,  ii.  576 

- — and  Middle  West,  ii,  429 

— municipal  charters  in.  i,  248 

— purchase,  and  Ohio,  ii,  573 

— River,  canalization  of,  i,  220 

— see  also  Roads,  iii.  232 

— state  school  examiners  in,  i,  140 

— tax  inquisitors  in.  i.  89 

— Territory  South  of  the,  iii,  529 

— Valley  and  sectionalism  in  United  States,  iii, 

281 

— and  Western  Reserve,  i,  163 
Oil  lands,  surveys  of,  ii,  75 

— government  regulation  of,  ii,  184 
■ — production,  regulation  of,  ii,  576 
Oklahoma,  ii.  576 

— bank  deposits,  guaranty  of,  in,  i,  109 

— constitutional  amendment  in.  i,  436 

— constitution  of.  on  injunctions,  ii,  181 

— and  Indian  policy  of  the  United  States,  ii,  163 
Old  age  insurance,  ii,  188 

— pensions,  ii,  579 

Old  Rullion,  i.  125:  ii,  579 

— Guard,  and  Republican  party,  iii,  199 

— Hickory,  ii,  579 


Old  Ironsides,  i,  403  ; ii,  579 

— Man  Eloquent,  ii,  579 

— Public  Functionary,  i,  179 

— Roman,  iii,  537 

— tenor  bills,  ii,  580 

— York  Road,  iii,  230 
Oldenburg,  ii,  80 
Oleomargarine,  ii,  229 

— and  interstate  commerce,  ii,  220 

— and  police  power,  ii,  707 

— and  prevention  of  fraud,  ii,  50 

— see  Revenue,  internal,  iii,  213 

— tax,  ii,  580 ; iii,  481 
Olfron,  laws  of,  i,  12  ; ii,  213 
Oligarchy,  i,  72 

- — see  States,  classification  of.  iii,  416 
Olmsted,  Frederick  L.,  and  parks  and  boulevards, 
ii.  611 

— vs.  Mayor  of  New  York  (employees),  i,  667 
Olney,  Richard,  ii,  580 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  95,  197  ; iii,  402 

— doctrine,  and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  467 

— Pauncefote  Treaty,  ii,  568 
Olongapo,  navy  yard,  ii,  507 
Omnibus  bill,  i.  4 ; ii,  580' 

— and  Compromise  of  1850,  i,  367 

“Once  an  Englishman,  always  an  Englishman,”  ii, 
580 

One  man,  one  vote,  ii,  580 
Ontario,  ii,  .581 

— Canadian  province  of,  i,  214 

— see  also  Quebec,  iii,  127 
Open  arc,  ii.  353 

— air  schools,  iii,  263 

— and  closed  shop,  ii,  582 

— door,  ii,  248.  582 

— — and  United  States,  as  a world  power,  iii,  701 
— • — policy,  i,  262 

American  influence  on,  ii,  210 

and  Russia,  iii,  243 

— letter,  ii,  583 

— primary,  iii,  50 

— shop,  ii,  291 
Opinions,  advisory,  i,  12 

Opium  Commission,  International,  ii,  216 

— monopolies,  ii,  463 
Opportunity,  cost,  i,  482 
Opposition,  ii,  583 
Option,  buying  at,  iii,  430 

— and  Parson’s  Cause,  ii,  620 
Options,  dealing  in,  i,  679 
Orange  Free  State,  iii,  354 
Orchestra,  and  music,  public,  ii,  490 
Order  of  American  Knights,  ii,  281 

— of  business,  in  Congress,  iii.  237 
in  legislative  bodies,  ii,  584 

— call  to,  in  legislative  debates,  i,  543 

— of  the  Knights  of  Labor,  ii,  291 
— - maintenance  of,  ii.  583 

— and  police  power,  ii,  707 

— question  of,  ii.  619 

— of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  ii.  281 

— of  the  Star  Spangled  Banner,  ii,  281 

— of  the  White  Rose,  ii,  282 
Orders  in  Council,  ii.  584 

and  commercial  policy  of  United  States,  1, 

340 

and  the  continental  system,  i,  453 

and  Milan  Decree,  ii,  430 

— fraternal,  ii.  584 
Ordinance  of  1784,  ii,  585 

— of  1787.  i,  378:  ii,  585:  iii.  96 

and  dependencies  of  United  States,  i,  581 

on  educational  land,  grants,  i,  646 

and  Michigan,  ii,  426 

— < — and  slavery,  iii,  317 
— • — see  also  Territory,  acquired,  iii,  522 

— power  of  executive,  i,  688 
Ordinances,  see  By-laws,  i,  191 

— executive,  ii,  586 

— in  cities,  ii,  328 
Legislative  power,  ii,  337 

— municipal,  ii,  587 
Ordinary,  ii.  588 

— the,  in  county-precinct  system,  i,  497 

— in  Georgia,  i.  504 
Ordnance,  Bureau  of,  ii,  588 
— - chief  of,  ii.  588 

Oregon,  ii,  588 

— Act  of  1848  (school  lands),  i.  646 

— country  and  boundaries  of  United  States,  ii, 

155 

— constitutional  amendment  in,  i,  436 
— - commissions  in,  i,  354 

— and  Democratic  party,  i.  566 

— see  Fifty-four  forty  or  fight,  i,  730 

— Great  Britain  and.  ii,  98 
— Initiative  in,  ii,  179 

— joint  occupation,  iii,  527 


757 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Oregon  legislation,  direct,  ii,  332 

— limitation  of  hours  of  labor  in,  ii,  289 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  406 

— publicity  pamphlets  in,  iii,  53 
• — • recall  process,  iii,  158 

— vs.  Roy  McClallen  (recall),  iii,  158 

— ■ system,  see  West  as  factor  in  American  politics, 
iii,  673 

— territory,  area  of,  i,  163 

— trail,  see  Wyoming,  iii,  702 
Organic  law,  see  under  Constitution. 

— theory  of  society,  ii,  591  ; iii,  341 
Organization,  ii,  591 

Organized  territories,  iii,  526 
Original  jurisdiction,  ii,  592 

— package,  ii,  593 

* Kansas,  ii,  274 

in  interstate  commerce,  ii,  219 

— • surveyed  township,  iii,  544 
Orinoco  Steamship  Company  case,  ii,  107 
• — vs.  Venezuela  (claim),  i,  291 
Orinoco  River,  iii,  357 
Orleans  territory,  i,  579  ; ii,  593 

— Louisiana,  ii,  374 

— see  also  Territories  of  United  States,  iii,  520 
Orphanages,  i,  258 

— subsidies  to,  iii,  439 
Orphans’  court,  i,  504 
Orr,  J.  L.,  speaker,  i,  391 
Osage  reservation,  ii,  167 

Osborn  vs.  Bank  of  United  States,  ii,  593 
Osgood,  Samuel,  Postmaster  General,  ii,  766 
Ossawatomie,  Kansas,  and  new  nationalism,  ii, 
534 

Ostend  manifesto,  i,  46 

— Buchanan  and  the,  i,  149 

— on  Cuba,  i,  533 

— and  Spain,  diplomatic  relations  with,  iii, 

367 

Ostrogorski,  quoted  on  House  of  Representatives, 
iii,  187 

Otis,  James,  ii,  594 

— and  Revolution,  American,  iii,  220 

— see  Warrants,  iii,  654 

— and  writs  of  assistance,  iii,  702 
— -political  theories  of,  ii,  718 

Otto  vs.  Journeymen  Tailors’  Union  (societies), 
iii,  340 

Ottoman  empire,  see  Turkey,  ii,  507 
Outdoor  relief,  i,  246  ; ii,  594,  769 

— in  England,  ii,  734 
Overcapitalization,  i,  226 
Overcrowding,  and  health,  public,  ii,  119 
Overflowed  lands,  iii,  161 

Overlay  on  back  taxes,  iii,  507 
Overpopulation,  ii,  739 

— and  colonization,  i,  324 
Overseers  of  the  poor,  ii,  595 

Owen  Robert,  colony  at  New  Harmony,  i,  365 
Oyer  and  terminer,  court  of,  i,  503 
Oyster  dredging,  regulation  of,  ii,  24 

— or  shellfish  commissions,  ii,  20,  595 

Paca,  William,  i,  554 
Pacific  blockade,  ii,  596 

Pacific  coast,  and  sectionalism  in  United  States, 
iii,  281 

— Insurance  Co.  vs.  Soule  (direct  tax),  iii,  508 

— islands  annexed  to  the  United  States  (map),  ii, 

597 

diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  596 

— railroad  commission,  ii,  237 

— railroads,  ii,  596 

— — federal  aid  to,  iii,  145 

— railway  (war  power),  ii,  202 

— slope,  ii,  598 

— standard  time,  iii,  376 

— States  Telephone  and  Telegraph  Co.  vs.  Ore- 

gon (legislation,  direct),  ii,  335 

— — ( republican  form  of  government),  ii,  380, 

189 

Pacification  of  Ghent,  iii,  594 
Pacifism,  and  militarism,  ii,  431,  433  . 

Package,  original,  ii,  593 
Packing  houses,  inspection  of,  ii,  183 
Paddock,  A.  S.,  and  Nebraska,  ii,  509 
Padrone  system,  ii,  245  ; iii,  536 

— in  contract  lauor  law,  i,  459 
Pagan  tribes  of  Philippines,  i,  582 
Pago-Pago,  iii,  250,  582 

— (coaling  station),  i,  299 

— ■ and  Pacific  islands,  diplomatic  relations  with, 
ii,  596 

Paine,  Robert  T.,  and  Declaration  of  Indepen- 
dence, i,  554 

— Thomas,  ii,  599 

Common  Sense,  and  divine  right,  i,  554 

political  theories  of,  ii,  719 


Pains  and  penalties,  bill  of,  ii,  600 

Pairs,  legislative,  ii,  600,  628 

Pale  Faces  (Ku  Klux  Klan),  ii,  282 

Palma,  Tomas  Estrado,  i,  534 

Palmer,  John  M.,  and  Republican  party,  iii,  189 

— - and  Liberal  Republican  party,  ii,  344 

— vote  for,  iii,  31,  39 
Palouse  district,  ii,  598 

Pamphlets,  publicity,  in  direct  primary,  iii,  53 
Pan  American  Congress  of  1889  (Washington), 
ii,  203,  602 

— of  1901-2  (Mexico),  ii,  203 

— of  1906  (Rio  Janeiro),  ii,  203 
and  Drago  Doctrine,  i,  611 

— of  1910  (Buenos  Aires),  ii,  203 
and  census  uniformity,  i,  235 

— congresses,  ii,  203,  603 

and  Monroe  doctrine,  ii,  467 

— ■ — and  South  America,  diplomatic  relations 
with,  iii,  357 

— Sanitary  Union,  ii,  216 

— Union,  ii,  604 
Pan-Americanism,  iii,  701 

Panama,  see  also  Canal  Diplomacy,  i,  215 

— Canal,  ii,  600 

— — Act,  1912,  5,  219 

and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  693 

— ■ — fortification  of,  i,  301  ; ii,  39 
French,  ii,  60 

see  Hay-Pauncefote  treaties,  ii,  115 

loan,  in  public  debt,  i,  545 

and  Monroe  doctrine,  ii,  467 

and  the  navy,  ii,  601 

■ neutralization  of,  ii,  522 

— — see  Public  works,  iii,  114 

-and  South  America,  diplomatic  relations 

with,  iii,  357 

Zone,  and  boundary  of  United  States,  i,  153 

(map),  i,  219 

— ■ — - — -paternalism  in,  iii,  337 

— Congress,  ii,  602 

of  1826,  ii,  203 

— - and  Panama  Canal,  ii,  600 

— protectorate  over,  iii,  83 

— railroad,  ii,  602  ; iii,  553 

— - recognition  of  Republic  of,  iii,  162 

— Republic  of,  ii,  602 

and  canal  diplomacy,  i,  217 

Panels  for  juries,  ii,  605 

Panic  of  undigested  securities,  i,  528 

Panics,  i,  526 

— and  crises,  economic,  i,  528 

— and  elasticity  of  the  currency,  i,  651 
Papal  states,  and  monarchy,  ii,  459 
Paper  blockade,  ii,  605 

— currency  outstanding,  ii,  11 

— money,  colonial,  i,  621 

— — - under  the  Confederation,  i,  378 

Madison  quoted  on  evils  of,  i,  128 

in  the  United  States,  ii.  605 

Papineau,  Louis  Joseph,  i,  212 

Paquete  Habana  (Federal  statute),  ii,  309 

— (international  law),  ii,  309 
Par  value  of  stock,  iii,  429 
Paraguay,  ii,  607 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  356 

— River,  iii,  701 
Paramaribo,  ii,  104 

Paramount  issues,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  575 
Parana  River,  iii,  356 
Parcel  post,  ii,  607 
Pardon,  amnesty  and,  i,  39 

— constitutional  principles  of,  ii,  608 

— and  impeachment,  ii,  150 

— see  also  Reprieve,  iii,  188 
Pardoning  power  of  governor,  ii,  91 

Pardons  attorney,  Justice,  Department  of,  ii,  271 

— board  of,  i,  140  ; ii,  608 
— ■ legislative  power,  ii,  338 

Paris,  Declaration  of,  i,  556  ; ii,  97 

— and  international  law,  ii,  215 
— ■ and  maritime  war,  ii,  397 

— and  paper  blockade,  ii,  605 
— • (privateers),  iii,  66 

— Treaty  of,  1763,  influence  on  American  Revo- 

lution, iii,  219  - 
— - — see  New  Brunswick,  ii,  524 
— ■ — -and  Newfoundland,  ii,  545 

— Treaty  of,  1856  (international  rivers),  ii,  502 __ 

— Treaty  of,  1898,  on  Philippine  annexation,  ii, 

679 

and  Porto  Rico,  ii,  759 

— > — (ratification  of),  iii,  151 
Spain,  diplomatic  relations  with,  iii.  369 

— Treaty  of,  1902  (white  slave),  iii,  327 
Parish,  ii,  609 

— - council  in  England,  ii,  609 

— in  county  government,  i,  492 

— local  government  in  England,  ii,  365 


758 


INDEX 


Parish  vestry  in  England,  ii,  GOO 
Park  certificates,  ii,  613 
Parker,  Alton  B.,  ii,  609 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  575 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  42 
Parker,  Joel,  ii,  295 

— vs.  Davis  (legal  tender),  ii,  322 
Parkhurst,  Charles  Henry,  ii,  610 
Parks  and  boulevards,  ii,  610 

— national,  ii,  199 

— and  recreation,  expenditures  for,  i,  695 
Parlement  Beige  (international  law),  Ii,  208 
Parliament,  ii,  613 

— Act  of  1911,  i,  404;  ii,  615 

— in  British  constitution,  i,  403 
— -Canadian,  ii,  615 

— of  the  four  burghs,  ii,  417 

— prorogation  and  dissolution  of,  ii,  616 

— questions  in,  iii,  128 

— see  Representative  government,  iii,  185 

— and  sovereignty,  theory  of,  iii,  364 
Parliamentary  law,  li,  616 

— adjournment,  i,  7 

— committee  of  the  whole,  i,  356 

— closure,  i,  298 

— divisions,  i,  606 

— expulsion  of  members  of  legislative  bodies,  i, 

704 

— filibustering,  i,  730 

— - five-minute  rule,  ii,  25 

— gag  resolutions,  ii,  67 

— ‘ guillotine"  in,  i,  298 

— hour  rule,  ii,  128 

— interpellations  in  continental  chambers,  ii,  217 

— Jefferson's  Manual,  iii,  239 

— joint  resolution,  ii,  253 

— journals  of  legislative  bodies,  ii,  253 

— morning  hour,  ii,  471 
— -pairs  legislative,  ii,  600 

— permanent  chairman,  ii,  672 

— See  also  under  Present  but  not  voting. 

— previous  question,  iii,  48 

— amendment  of  legislative  measures,  i,  33 

— recognition,  iii,  161 

— rule,  bringing  in  a,  iii,  236 
— - rules  of  Congress,  iii,  236 

legislative  bodies,  iii,  239 

state  legislatures,  iii.  240 

— see  White,  John,  iii,  687 
Parliamentary  privilege,  iii,  66 

— secretary  to  the  Treasury,  ii,  629 
Parlor  caucus,  ii,  549 

Parnell,  Charles  Stewart,  and  Nationalists,  ii,  494 
Parole  system,  ii,  619 

— for  criminals,  i,  561  ; ii,  659 

— in  prison  discipline;  iii,  58 

— see  also  Reformatories,  iii,  173 

— in  schools,  industrial,  iii,  261 
Parson's  Cause,  the,  ii,  620 

Parsons,  Samuel  Holden  and  Northwest  Terri- 
tory, ii,  562 
Particularism,  ii,  620 
Parties,  state  and  local,  ii,  620 
— - third,  iii,  534 
Partisan  rangers,  ii,  103,  622 

— political  organizations,  ii,  622 
Partners,  government  regulation  of,  i,  189 
Partnership  law,  sec  Uniform  state  legislation,  iii, 

591 

Partnerships,  ii,  673 
Party  affiliation,  test  of,  iii,  50 

— bills  and  corruption,  i,  478 

— circle,  ii,  622 

— • — and  direct  primary,  iii,  55 

— column  ballot,  i.  101 

— committees,  i,  361,  462 

— expenditures,  publicity  of,  ii,  623 

— feeling  and  public  opinion,  iii,  103 

— finance,  ii,  624 

— government  and  cabinets,  i,  192 
— • — -comparative,  ii,  626 
in  Great  Britain,  ii,  628 

— and  government,  confused,  ii,  592 

— labels,  ii,  629 

— leadership,  ii,  629 

— loyalty  to,  ii,  380 

— organization  in  California,  ii,  631 

-in  legislative  bodies,  ii.  632 

in  Massachusetts,  ii,  634 

-in  Pennsylvania,  ii,  636,  665 

in  the  South,  ii,  638 

in  state  government,  iii,  390 

— organs,  ii,  640 

— place  and  significance  of,  ii,  640 

— platforms,  ii,  695 

— political,  as  a government  agency,  iii,  51 

— in  power,  ii,  627 

— spirit,  i,  479 

— system  in  doubtful  states,  ii,  645 


Party  organization  in  Europe,  ii,  646 
— - — -and  patronage,  ii,  654 

in  sure  states,  ii,  649 

Passenger  cases,  and  immigration,  ii,  146 

— in  interstate  commerce,  ii,  220 
Passengers’  baggage,  duties  on,  ii,  650 
Passes,  mountain,  in  United  States,  ii,  655 
Passports,  ii,  282,  650 

— Koszta  incident,  ii,  282 
Passy,  Frederic,  ii,  217 
Pasters,  ii,  650 

Pastorius,  Francis  Daniel,  ii,  662 
Pasturage,  iii,  95 
Patent  Office,  ii,  650 

— and  museums,  public,  ii,  490 

— and  public  science,  iii,  272 
Patents,  ii,  651 

— -administrative  decisions  on,  i,  11 

— commissioner  of,  ii,  199 

— to  land,  ii,  652 

— and  manufacturing,  relation  of  government  to, 

ii,  394 

— and  monopolies,  ii,  463 
Paternalism,  ii,  652;  iii,  337 
— - and  individualism,  theory  of,  ii,  174 

— in  Panama  Canal  Zone,  iii,  337 

— In  political  theory,  ii,  90,  721 
Paterson,  William,  ii,  652 

— and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 
Pathfinder,  the,  ii,  60,  652 
Pathfinder  Dam  (irrigation),  ii,  243 
Patria  potestas,  i,  5^3 

Patriarchal  system  of  government,  ii,  89 

— theory  of  state,  iii,  409 
Patricians  in  Rome,  iii,  67 

Patriotic  societies,  and  militarism,  ii,  432 
Patrolmen,  ii,  703 
Patronage,  ii,  652 

— and  Civil  Service,  i,  283 

— and  corruption,  legislation,  i,  477 

— see  Executive  and  Congress,  i,  680 
— -see  Representation,  iii,  184 

— • see  Rotation  in  office,  iii,  235 

— secretary,  and  party  government  in  Great  Brit- 

ain, ii,  629 

— see  Seeds,  distribution  of,  iii,  286 

— see  Tenure  of  office,  iii,  517 
Patrons  of  husbandry,  ii,  654 

— of  industry,  ii,  654 

Patroonships,  and  New  Netherland,  ii,  535 

Patterson,  William,  iii,  462 

Paul  vs.  Virginia  (insurance),  ii,  190,  192 

— (interstate  commerce),  ii,  219,  230 
— - (state  citizenship),  iii,  69 

Paulding,  James  K.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196;  ii,  506 
Pauncefote,  Sir  Julian;  see  Hay-l’auncefote  treat- 
ies, ii,  115 
Pauper  labor,  ii,  654 

— and  immigration,  ii,  145 
Pauperism,  ii,  768 
Paupers,  see  Charities,  i,  246 
Pavements,  ii,  655 

— - street,  iii,  433 

Pawnshops,  municipal,  ii,  656 

Paymaster  general,  ii,  656 

Payne,  Henry  C.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198;  ii,  767 

Payne-Aldrich  Tariff,  ii,  656  ; iii,  480 

— maximum  and  minimum  principle  in,  i,  344 
Pea  Patch  Island,  jurisdiction  of,  i,  161 
Peabody,  Elizabeth  P.,  ii,  280 

Peace,  Algeeiras  Conference  and,  i,  14 

— and  arbitration,  i,  64 

— Carnegie  Endowment  for  International,  ii,  433 

— Commission,  and  Indian  Territory,  ii,  168 

— conclusion  of,  ii,  657 

— conservator  of  the,  iii,  303 
— - Democrats,  i,  50 

and  Republican  party,  iii,  193 

— -justice  of  the(English),  ii,  273 

— of  the  king,  i,  674 

— movement,  and  militarism,  ii,  433 

— societies,  see  Arbitration  and  peace,  i,  66 
Peacemaker,  ii,  658 

Peanut  politics,  ii,  658 

Pearl  fisheries,  ii,  22 

Pearl  Harbor  (coaling  station),  i,  299 

— and  navy  yards,  ii,  507 

— and  Pacific  islands,  diplomatic  relations  with, 

ii,  596 

Pear  tree,  shaking  of,  ii,  658 

Pearse  Island,  in  Alaska  boundary  controversy,  i. 

Peck,  James  H.,  ii,  149 

Peekham,  Rufus  W.,  iii.  462 

Pedagogy,  see  under  Education 

Peddlers,  license  taxes  on  occupations,  iii,  351 

Peddlers’  tax,  and  interstate  commerce,  ii,  219 

Pedro  Miguel,  and  Panama  Canal,  ii,  601 

Peel,  Sir  Robert,  administration  of,  i,  194 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Peel,  Sir  Robert,  and  police,  ii,  701 

— quoted  on  responsible  government  in  Canada, 

iii,  207 

“Peelers,”  ii,  701 

PeUr  vs.  Chicago  & N.  W.  R.  Co.  (Granger  case), 
ii,  04 

Peirpont  government  (Virginia),  ii,  658 
Pekin,  agreement  of  allies  at,  iii,  84 

— opening  of,  i,  261 

— treaty  of,  1881,  i,  262 

Pembina  Mining  Co.  vs.  Pennsylvania  (persons), 

ii,  673 

— and  North  Dakota,  ii,  558 

Penal  institutions,  expenditures  for,  i,  694 

— laws,  ii,  658 

— -transportation  colonization  and,  i,  325 
Penalties  for  crime,  ii,  658 

— and  forfeitures,  suits  for;  i,  514 
Penalty  mail,  ii,  386 
Pendleton  Act,  ii,  661 

— - (civil  service),  i,  285 

Pendleton,  George  H.,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 

— and  Ohio  idea,  ii,  576 
— ■ vote  for,  iii,  30 
Penitentiaries,  ii,  661 

Penman  of  the  American  Revolution,  ii,  719 
Penn,  John,  i,  554 

— William,  ii,  662 

colonial  proprietary  government  and,  i,  318 

frame  of  government  and  rotation  in  office, 

iii,  235 

and  New  Jersey,  ii,  530 

and  Philadelphia,  i,  279;  ii,  676 

his  plan  of  union,  i,  320 

— -vs.  Lord  Baltimore  (boundaries),  i,  166 
Pennington,  W.,  speaker,  i,  391 
Pennsylvania,  ii,  662 

— and  the  boss  system,  i,  146 

— building  code  of,  i,  186 

— College,  iii,  410 

— constitutional  convention  in,  i,  425 

— council  of  censors  in,  i,  425 

— legislative  debates  of,  iii,  117 

— liquor  licenses,  ii,  358 

- — and  middle  states,  ii,  427 
— - party  organization  in,  ii,  631,  636 

— see  Quay,  Matthew  S.,  iii,  126 

— railroad,  organization  of,  iii,  136 

— state  constabulary,  i,  403 

— state  owned  railroad  in,  iii,  147 

— type  of  party  system  in  sure  states,  ii,  649 
Penology,  capital  punishment,  i,  226 

— charities  and  corrections,  state  boards  of,  i,  243 

— county  jails,  i,  497 

— see  under  Crime. 

— see  Delinquents,  correction  of,  i,  561 

— see  Good  behavior  of  prisoners,  ii,  85 

— see  Houses  of  correction,  ii,  134 

— indefinite  sentence,  ii,  157 

— parole  system,  ii,  619 

— see  Penalties  for  crime,  ii,  658 

— police  stations  and  lockups,  ii,  710 

— see  under  Prisons,  iii,  58  et  seq. 

— sec  Reformatories,  iii,  172 
■ — convict  labor,  1,  466 

Penrose,  Boise,  and  middle  states,  ii,  428 
Pensacola,  navy  yard,  ii,  507 

Pensacola  Telegraph  Co.  vs.  Western  Union  Co. 

(telegraphs),  ii,  218;  iii,  511 
Pension  Bureau,  ii,  666 
Pensions,  civil,  ii,  666 

— in  civil  service,  i,  285 

— commissioner  of,  ii.  199 

— Confederate,  ii,  667 

— and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  691 

— military  and  naval,  ii,  668 

— old  age,  ii,  579 

— for  teachers,  ii,  668 

— for  widows,  ii,  769 

and  outdoor  relief,  ii,  594 

Peonage,  ii,  670,  iii,  536 

— Act  of  1867,  ii,  59 

— see  Enforcement,  i,  670 

— labor  contracts,  ii,  286 
People,  ii,  671 

People  and  nation  distinguished,  ii,  492 

— sovereignty  of  the.  iii,  362 

— of  the  United  States,  legal  sense,  ii,  671 
People  vs.  Elerding  (women’s  labor),  ii,  303 

— vs.  Keeler  (investigations,  legislative),  ii  236 

— vs.  Kerrigan  (trials),  iii,  573 

— vs.  Mahaney  (bills,  titles  of),  i,  130 

— vs.  Webb  (investigations,  legislative),  ii,  237 

— vs.  Williams  (office,  obligation  to  accept),  ii, 

570 

People’s  banks,  and  building  associations,  i,  184 
- — counsel,  ii.  672 

People’s  money,  and  Greenback  party,  ii,  101 
People’s  party,  ii,  672,  757 


People’s  party  in  Rhode  Island,  i,  607 
People’s  rule  and  suffrage,  iii,  448 
Percy-Gray  Law  (racing),  iii,  130 
Per  diem  allowance  and  fees,  iii,  246 
Perdicaris,  ii,  508 
Perfectionists  of  Oneida,  i,  364 
Permanent  appropriation,  ii,  672 

— chairman,  ii,  672 

— International  Association  of  Navigation  Con- 

gresses, ii,  216 

— pools,  iii,  579 

— - society,  and  parliamentary  law,  ii,  617 
Pernicious  activity,  ii,  672 
Perpetuation  of  testimony,  i,  674 
Perry,  Oliver  H.,  and  Michigan,  ii,  425 
Perry,  Matthew  C.,  in  Japan,  ii, 

— see  Treaties  of  United  States,  iii,  568 
Persia,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  508 
— -extraterritoriality  in,  i,  706 

— and  near  east,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  507 
Person,  legal  sense  of,  ii,  672 

Persona  grata,  ii,  325 

— non  grata,  ii,  197 

— • — -and  diplomatic  usage,  i,  589 
Personal  freedom,  ii,  58 

— injuries,  and  international  law,  private,  ii,  213 

— liberty  laws,  ii,  673 
Personal  Liberty  party,  ii,  673 
Personal  property,  ii,  673 

— - — tax,  iii,  491,  496 

— union,  ii,  674 

-of  states,  i,  584 

Personation  of  voters,  ii,  674 

— see  Voters,  registration  of,  iii,  630 
Persons,  status  of,  ii,  209 

Peru,  ii,  674 

— diplomatic  relation  with,  iii,  356 
— - Indian  government  in,  ii,  162 
Pet  banks,  ii,  674 

“Peter  Porcupine,”  iii,  253 
Pcterhoff,  The  (contraband),  i,  455 
Petition  circulators,  ii,  335 

— jobbing,  ii,  590 

— nomination  by,  ii,  674  ; iii,  49 
and  nominating  systems,  ii,  549 

— — in  Massachusetts,  ii,  635 
— - right  of,  ii,  675 

Petroleum,  and  mines  and  mining,  ii,  443 

— people,  ii,  675 

— in  resources  of  North  America,  iii,  204 
Pewter  muggers,  ii,  675 

Pharmaceutical  legislation  and  administration,  ii, 
675 

Pharmacists,  regulation  of,  ii,  288 
Pharmacology,  regulation  of,  ii,  118 
Pharmacopoeia,  United  States,  i,  612 
Pharmacy,  schools  of,  iii,  266 
Phelps,  John  W.,  vote  for,  iii,  35 
Phil,  Little,  ii,  361 
Philadelphia,  ii,  676 

— budget  of,  i,  184 

— Committee  of  One  Hundred,  ii,  554 

— corporation  franchises  in,  ii,  45 

— municipal  legislature,  i,  349 

— navy  yard,  ii,  507 

— and  parties,  state  and  local,  ii,  622 

— planning  of,  i,  279 

— society  for  promoting  agriculture,  i.  712 

— & Southern  S.  S.  Co.  vs.  Pennsylvania  (inter- 

state commerce),  ii,  221 
Philanthropy  and  five  per  cent,  ii,  459 

— see  Poverty  and  poor  relief,  ii,  708 
Philippine  annexation,  ii,  679 

— assembly,  ii,  682 

— Commission,  ii,  682 

— constabulary,  ii,  683 

— Islands,  ii,  680 

citizenship  in,  i,  273 

divisions  of,  i,  166 

Manila,  ii,  391 

— — and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  468 

supervision  of  finances  of,  ii,  183 

and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  153 

— - — See  also  under  Chinese. 

and  Democratic  party,  i,  575 

' as  dependencies  of  United  States,  i,  582 

dependent  people  in,  i,  584 

diplomatic  relations  with  Asia  and.  i,  84 

in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  38 

— - — and  imperialism,  ii,  152 

— — incorporation  of  territory,  ii,  154 

and  Insular  Affairs,  Bureau  of,  ii,  187 

insurrection  in,  ii,  197 

law,  civil,  ii,  312 

— ■ — and  open  door,  ii.  582 

see  also  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  249 

— ■ suffrage  in,  iii,  447 

Sulu  Archipelago,  iii,  459 


760 


INDEX 


Philippine  Islands,  see  also  Territory,  acquired, 
status  of,  iii,  524 

Philippovich,  von,  quoted  on  sociology,  iii,  346 
Philllmore,  quoted  on  neutrality,  ii,  521 
Phillips,  David  Graham,  ii,  198 

— Samuel  F.,  i,  95 

— Wendell,  ii,  684 
Philosophy,  political,  ii,  712 
Physical  education,  i,  641 

— -valuation  of  railroads,  iii,  132 
Physicians,  examinations  for,  i,  677 

— regulation  of  professions  and  callings,  ii,  288 
Physics  and  politics,  ii,  684 

Physiocrats,  i,  627 

— and  single  tax,  iii,  496 
Physiography  of  North  America,  ii,  687 
Physiology  and  political  science,  ii,  715 
Pic'hilinque  Bay  coaling  station,  i,  299 
Pickering,  John,  impeachment  of,  ii,  149 

— I'imothy,  ii,  691 

cabinet  officer,  i,  195  ; ii,  766  : iii,  402,  648 

and  Ordinance  of  1787,  ii,  586 

Picketing,  ii,  691 

— and  labor  organizations,  ii,  293 

— see  also  Strikes,  iii,  436 

Piece  price  system  of  convict  labor,  i,  466  ; iii,  60 
Piedmont,  the,  ii,  687 

— and  sectionalism  in  United  States,  iii,  281 

— Italy,  ii,  691 

Pierce,  Franklin,  biography,  ii,  691 

— and  his  cabinet,  i,  200 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  568 

— and  New  Hampshire,  ii,  529 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  27 

— and  Whig  party,  iii,  684 
Pier-head  line,  i,  606 
Pierrepont,  Edward,  i,  95 
— • cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
Pierpont,  Frances  H.,  iii,  619 
Pig  iron,  tariff  on,  iii,  482 
Pigeon-holing  in  committees,  i,  202,  356 
Pike,  expedition  of,  i,  35 

Pilotage,  ii,  691  ; iii,  427 

Pilots,  and  interstate  commerce,  ii,  219 

— see  Seamen,  status  of,  iii,  275 
Pinohot,  Gifford,  ii,  244,  692 
Pinckney,  Charles  C.,  i,  578 

— biography,  ii,  692 

— and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 
- — and  Federalist  party,  i,  723 

— ‘‘millions  for  defense,”  ii.  442 

— in  South  Carolina,  i,  579 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  15,  16,  17 

— and  X Y Z,  iii,  703 
Pinckney,  Thomas,  vote  for,  iii,  15 
and  Federalist  party,  i,  723 

and  West  Florida,  iii,  675 

Pines,  Isle  of,  ii,  697 

— -and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  153 
Pinkerton  men,  ii,  692 
Pinkney,  William,  i,  95  ; ii,  692 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  195 

Pious  Fund  arbitration,  ii,  107,  693 
Pipes,  laying,  ii,  320 
Piracy,  ii,  693 

— slave  trade  and,  iii,  315 
Pitney,  Mahlon,  iii,  462 
Pittsburgh,  ii,  694 

— civic  commission,  i,  279 

— Lake  Erie  waterway,  i,  220 

— railroad  riots,  ii,  458 
Pivotal  state,  ii,  695 
Placer  Act  of  1870,  ii,  442 
Placing  out  system,  iii,  261,  351 
Plains,  central,  ii,  689 

Plant  industry,  i,  18 
— • Bureau  of.  ii,  695 

Plant  introduction,  foreign  seed  and,  iii,  286 
Plantation.  Maine,  ii,  387 
Plantations,  in  colonization,  i,  321 

— and  slavery,  iii,  315 
Planter  in  colonization,  i,  325 

Planters  Protective  Association,  and  night  riders, 
ii,  547 

Platform  making  and  direct  primary,  iii,  53 

— political,  ii,  695 

— in  political  conventions,  i,  463 
Plato,  on  economic  theory,  i,  626 

— and  political  theories,  ii,  716 
Platoon  system,  police,  ii,  704 
Platt  amendment  (Cuba),  ii,  697 

— and  Cuban  Republic,  i,  534 

— Thomas  C.,  and  “me  too,”  ii,  420 
Play  in  school  hygiene,  iii,  257 

— theory  of,  i,  39 
Playgrounds,  i,  40,  ii,  697 

— and  municipal  government,  ii,  477 

— and  social  reform,  iii,  330 

Playing  cards,  see  Revenue,  internal,  iii,  213 


Plea,  arrangement  and,  ii,  319 
Pledges  of  territory,  iii,  527 
Plenipotentiaries,  i,  589 

— and  negotiation  of  treaties  by  the  United  States, 

ii,  512 

Plenipotentiary,  minister,  ii,  446 
Plucking  boards,  ii,  571 
Plugging  laws,  and  oil  production,  ii,  576 
Plumbers,  regulation  of,  ii,  288 
Plumed  Knight,  ii,  698 

Plumley  vs.  Massachusetts  (original  packages),  ii, 
50 

Plumping,  ii,  698 

Plural  marriages,  and  religious  freedom,  iii,  99 

— voters,  in  England,  ii,  129 

in  Belgium  and  Saxony,  ii,  340 

Pluralities,  see  Vote,  popular,  iii,  628 
Plurality,  ii,  698 

— system  of  nomination,  iii,  53 
Plutocracy,  ii,  698 
Plymouth,  ii,  698 

— colony,  Bradford,  William,  and  the,  i,  170 
Plymouth  Company,  territorial  grant,  ii,  699 
Pocket  veto,  iii,  613 

— of  mayor,  ii,  414 

Poinsett,  Joel  R.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; iii,  649 
Police  administration,  city  and  state  in,  i,  274 
— -in  American  cities,  ii,  700 

— commissions  and  commissioners,  ii,  699 

— continental,  ii,  700 

— -convention,  the  South  American,  ii,  216 

— Department,  see  Boards,  municipal,  i,  137 

— des  moeurs,  ii,  700 

— expenditures  for,  i,  695 

— force,  and  municipal  government,  ii,  476 
— - headquarters,  iii,  420 

— jury,  ii,  705 

—in  county  precinct  system,  i,  497 

in  Louisiana,  i,  496 

— metropolitan,  ii,  705 
— - power,  ii,  706 

commerce,  governmental  control  of,  under, 

i,  336 

— - — and  due  process  of  law.  i,  615 

and  impairment  of  contract,  i,  459 

and  interstate  commerce,  ii,  220 

local,  ii,  328 

and  original  package,  ii,  593 

— — and  public  health,  ii,  117 
and  prevention  of  fraud,  ii,  50 

to  regulate  professions  and  callings,  iii,  72 

— rural,  ii,  710 

— under  state  authorities,  i,  276 

— as  state  officers,  i,  275 

— stations  and  lockups,  ii,  710 
Policy,  public,  iii,  105 

Political  agents  and  party  expenditures,  ii,  623 

— arithmetic,  ii,  710 

— assessments,  i,  89 

— in  civil  service,  i,  285 

— bargain,  ii,  710 
— - campaigns,  i,  208 

— clubs,  ii,  710 

— committee,  i,  481 
— ■ convention,  i,  461 

— corruption,  i,  479 

— disabilities,  i,  596 

— economy,  ii,  711 

See  also  under  Economics. 

— and  legal  sovereignty,  iii,  364 

— liberty,  ii,  712 

— opinions,  freedom  of,  see  also  Police  power,  ii, 

706 

— organizations,  effect  of  frontier  upon,  ii,  64 

— parties,  A.  P.  A.,  i,  51 
and  direct  primary,  iii,  52 

— . _ votes  of,  see  Tables,  iii,  13  et  scq. 

— - — Abolitionists,  i,  1 

American  Anti-Masonic  Society,  i,  37 

—  Convention,  i,  34 

National  party,  i,  37 

— — — party,  i,  37 

—  Prohibition  National  party,  i,  37 

Protective  Association,  i,  51 

Anti-federalists,  i,  47 

Anti-imperialists,  i.  48 

— — Anti-Leeompton  Democrats,  i,  48 
Anti-Masonic,  i,  49 

Anti-monopoly  Convention,  i,  50 

Anti-Nebraska  Men,  i,  50 

Anti-Snappers,  i,  50 

Anti-war  Democrats,  i,  50 

Barnburners,  i,  122 

Black  Republicans,  i,  133 

Blue  Light  Federalists,  i,  136 

— ■ — Burrites,  i,  188 

Butternuts,  i,  51,  191 

Clay  Whigs,  i,  294 

Clintonians,  i,  298 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Political  parties,  Comeouter,  i,  330 

in  Congress  of  United  States,  i,  388 

Conservatives,  i,  402 

Constitutional  Union  party,  i,  431 

Unionists,  i,  402 

Coodies,  i,  467 

Copperheads,  i,  51,  468 

County  Democracy,  i,  491 

Democrats,  Gold,  ii,  84 

Independent,  ii,  155 

Democratic  party,  i,  565 

and  direct  primary,  iii,  13  et  seq. 

Drys,  i,  613 

— —Equal  Rights  party,  i,  672 

Suffrage  party,  iii,  695 

Farmers’  Alliance,  i,  711 

Federal  Republicans,  i,  717 

Fire-eaters,  ii,  18 

— —Free  Soil  party,  ii,  52 
Fusion,  ii,  66 

—  G.  O.  P.,  ii,  87 

Gold  Bugs,  ii,  84 

Democrats,  ii,  84 

— — Goo  Goos,  ii,  87 

• r Grand  Old  Party,  ii,  87 

Grangers,  ii,  95 

Greenback  Labor  party,  ii,  100 

party,  ii,  101 

Half-breeds,  ii,  108 

— - — -Hards,  ii.  111 
Hearst  party,  ii,  155 

High-minded  Federalists,  ii,  122 

— • — Hunkers,  ii.  111,  136 

Independence  League,  ii,  155 

Political  party  of  1908,  ii,  155 

Independent  Democrats,  ii,  155 

National  party,  ii,  101 

Industrial  Congress,  ii,  175 

Irving  Hall,  i,  491 

Jackson  Men,  ii,  246 

Jacksonian  democracy,  ii,  246 

Jeffersonian  democracy,  ii,  250 

Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,  ii,  281 

Know-nothing  party,  i,  37  ; ii,  281 

see  Labor  parties,  ii,  294 

party.  Greenback,  ii,  100 

Law  and  Order  party,  ii,  312 

Liberal  Republican  party,  ii,  344 

Unionists,  ii,  345 

— — Liberals,  British,  ii,  345 

Liberty  League,  ii,  347 

— party,  ii,  348 

Lily  Whites,  ii,  354 

— • — Loco-focos.  ii.  368 

Mugwumps,  ii,  473 

National  Democratic  party,  ii,  493 

—  party,  ii,  493 

Republican  party,  ii,  493 

Nationalists,  ii,  494 

Nativism,  i,  37 

Ocala  platform,  ii,  568 

Peace  Democrats,  i,  50 

People’s  party,  ii,  672 

Personal  Liberty  party,  ii,  673 

Pewter  Muggers,  ii,  675 

Populist  party,  ii,  757 

Progressive  Labor  party,  Iii,  74 

party,  iii,  74 

Prohibition  party,  iii,  77 

Quids,  iii,  128 

— Radical  party,  iii,  131 

Rads,  iii,  131 

Readjuster,  iii,  153 

Republican  party,  iii,  189 

party  (Jeffersonian),  iii,  202 

Seward  Whigs,  iii,  300 

Silk  Stockings,  iii,  309 

Silver  Grays,  iii,  312 

—  party,  iii,  312 

Republicans,  iii,  312 

Snappers,  iii,  324 

Social  Democrats,  iii,  326 

Socialist  Labor  party,  iii,  338 

party,  iii.  3355 

Softs,  iii,  350 

Stalwarts,  iii,  375 

Straight  Democrats,  iii,  431 

see  also  under  Third  parties,  iii,  533 

Toleration  party  in  Connecticut,  i,  397 

Union  Labor  party,  iii,  593 

— ■ party,  iii,  593 

Saver,  iii,  594 

United  Labor  party,  iii,  594 

votes  of,  see  Tables,  iii,  13  et  seq. 

War  Democrats,  iii,  640 

Whig  party,  iii,  680 

Woman  Rights  party,  iii,  698 

— philosophy,  ii,  712 

— platform,  ii,  695 


Political  power,  ii,  712 

— questions  and  judicial  authority,  ii,  713 

— reform  movements,  iii,  174 

— rights,  i,  281 

— ring,  iii,  228 

— satirists,  iii,  253 

— science,  ii,  713 

— socialism  and  social  reform,  iii,  330 

— state,  the,  iii,  416 

— theories  of  American  publicists,  ii,  720 
ancient  and  modern,  ii,  716 

of  English  publicists,  ii,  724 

— — of  modern  continental  publicists,  ii,  728 

— workers,  iii,  700 

Politics  and  contract  system  of  public  works,  i, 
460 

— independent  movements  in,  ii,  156 

— and  physics,  ii,  684 

— regularity  in,  iii,  175 

— trades  in,  iii,  548 

Polk,  James  K.,  biography,  ii,  732 

— and  Democratic  party,  i;  566 

— see  Ratification  of  treaties,  iii,  151 

— and  Scott,  iii,  274 

— as  speaker,  i,  390  ; iii,  370 

— and  tariff  legislation,  iii,  475 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  24,  25 

— as  Young  Hickory,  iii,  704 
Polk,  Senator,  expulsion  of,  iii,  290 
Poll  book  in  election  system,  i,  653 

— tax,  ii,  732 

and  suffrage,  iii,  444 

— ■ — see  also  Revenue,  public,  iii,  216 

in  state  systems  of  finance,  ii,  5 

Polls,  ii,  733 

Pollock  vs.  Farmers’  Loan  and  Trust  Co.  (income 
tax),  i,  266;  ii,  732;  iii,  492,  673 
— - (taxation),  iii,  498 
Pollution  of  inland  waters,  ii,  117 
Polyandry,  ii,  733 

— and  state,  theory  of,  iii,  409 
Polybius,  and  ochlocracy,  ii,  569 
Polycraticus , ii,  717 
Polygamy,  ii,  733 

— and  religious  freedom,  iii,  99 

— see  also  Representatives,  election  of,  iii,  186 

— see  also  States,  admission  of,  iii,  415 
Poly-national  states,  iii,  406 
Pomeroy,  Samuel  C.,  i,  37 

— and  Prohibition  party,  iii,  77 

— - vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  35 

Pomona  Grange,  ii,  95 

Ponce  de  Leon,  ii,  26 

Pontchartrain,  ii,  425 

Pontiac  War,  ii,  425 

Pooling  in  railroads,  ii,  733 ; iii,  555 

Pools,  railroad,  iii,  131,  548 

Poor  districts,  i,  604 

— Law  Act  of  1834  (England),  i.  10 
guardians  in  England,  ii,  733 

— - — union,  local  government  in  England,  ii,  365 

— laws,  ii,  734 

— man’s  dollar,  ii,  735 

— overseers  of  the,  ii,  595 

— relief  and  poverty,  ii,  767 

— superintendent  of,  i,  494 

— whites,  and  slavery,  iii,  315 
Poor’s  Railroad  Manual,  iii,  132 
Pope,  John,  ii,  77 

— vs.  Williams  (Fifteenth  Amendment),  i,  730 
Pop-gun  bills,  i,  574 

Popliam,  George,  ii,  699 

Popular  control  and  public  opinion,  iii,  102 

— - government,  ii,  735 

— sovereignty,  ii,  738 
Cass  and,  i,  231 

and  Democratic  party,  i,  568 

see  Kansas-Nebraska  Bill,  ii,  276 

and  non-interference  with  slavery,  ii,  553 

in  political  theory,  ii,  729 

in  Roman  law,  iii,  234 

— vote,  submission  of  constitutions  to,  i,  428 

— will,  and  party,  place  and  significance  of,  Ii, 

642 

Population.  See  also  under  Census. 

— - see  Foreign  elements  in  United  States,  Ii,  31 

— and  the  frontier  line,  ii,  61 

— of  the  United  States,  ii,  739 

— of  United  States  by  race,  nativity  and  parent- 

age, ii,  30 

Populism,  see  West  as  a factor  in  American  poli- 
tics, iii,  673 

Populist  movement  and  sectionalism  in  United 
States,  iii.  284 
— • party,  ii,  757 

and  Farmers’  Alliance,  i,  711 

vote  of,  iii.  38 

— risings  of  1890,  ii,  274 

Populists  and  labor  organizations,  ii,  291 


INDEX 


Pork  barrel,  i,  394  ; ii,  758 

i — products,  and  diplomatic  relations  with  France, 
ii,  44 

Port  au  Prince,  ii,  116 

— Royal,  and  Nova  Scotia,  ii,  564 
Ports,  free,  ii,  51 

— -jurisdiction  in,  ii,  760 
Portage  Lake  Canal,  i,  223 
Portages,  trails  and,  iii,  548 

Porter,  David,  and  Pacific  islands,  diplomatic  rela- 
tions with,  ii,  596 ; iii,  638 
Porter,  James  M.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  : iii,  650 

— Peter  B.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; iii,  649 
Porto  Rico,  ii,  758 

■ — citizenship  of,  i,  273 

— as  dependency  of  United  States,  i,  582 

— dependent  people  in,  i,  584 

— divisions  of.  i,  166 

— foreign  policy  of  United  States  in,  ii  38 
• — » incorporation  of  territory,  ii,  154 

— and  Insular  Affairs,  Bureau  of,  ii,  1S7 

— law,  civil,  ii,  312 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii.  468 

— see  also  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  249 

— and  Spain,  diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  367 

— suffrage  in,  iii,  447 

— and  taxation  of  exports,  iii,  501 

— see  also  Territory,  acquired,  status  of,  iii,  524 

— see  West  Indies,  iii.  678 
Portsmouth  navy  yard,  ii,  507 

— Peace  of,  see  Good  offices  and  mediation,  ii,  86 
Ports,  preference  to,  ii,  761 

Portugal,  suffrage  in,  iii,  458 
Posse  comitatus,  ii,  761 
- — see  also  State  judiciary,  iii,  397 
Post  cards,  ii,  386 

— exchanges,  ii,  767 

— office  (British),  i,  089 
Department,  ii,  761 

assistant  attorney  general  for,  ii,  271 

chart  of  organization  of,  ii,  762 

*  fraud  orders  of,  ii  49 

, opening  mail  by.  iii,  655 

— i parcel  post,  ii,  607 

rural  free  delivery,  iii,  242 

see  also  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  248 

• — • second  class  mail  matter,  iii,  278 

— roads,  ii,  763 

Act,  and  telegraphs,  511 

Postal  aid  law,  ii,  387 

— money  orders,  ii,  703 

— notes,  ii,  764 

— revenue  and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  692 

— savings  banks,  ii.  764 

•  • bonds  in  public  debt,  i,  545 

— service,  and  expenditures,  federal  i,  693 

— system  of  the  United  States,  ii,  764 

— Telegraph  Bill  of  1872.  iii,  511 

— Union,  conference  of  1863,  ii,  203 

universal,  ii,  766 

Postmaster  general,  ii.  766 

— administrative  decisions  of,  i,  11 

Posts,  department  of  and  law,  administrative,  ii, 
311 

— military,  ii.  767 
Potomac  Park,  i,  603 
Pottawatomie  massacre,  i,  178 
Potter  law,  Wisconsin,  iii,  692 
Potwallopers,  ii,  129 
Pouvoir  rfglementaire,  i,  688 

— and  legislative  power,  ii,  337 
Poverty  and  poor  relief,  ii,  767 

Powell,  Sir  Robert  Baden-,  and  militarism,  ii,  482 

— John  Wesley,  ii,  244 
Power,  balance  of,  i,  99 

— for  industries,  ii,  770 

— political,  ii,  712 

— sites,  surveys  of,  ii,  75 
Powers,  concurrent,  i.  369 
• — -distribution  of,  i,  600 
in  federal  state,  i,  718 

— division  of,  i.  605 : iii.  295 

— see  States,  equality  of.  iii,  419 
Practical  arts  schools,  iii,  263 
Pragmatic  sanction,  i,  96 

Pratt  vs.  Philadelphia  (markets,  public),  ii,  398 
Prayer  of  twenty  millions,  iii.  193 
Preamble  to  Constitution  of  United  States,  i, 
422 

— to  constitutions,  i,  432 
Precedents,  1,  230 
Precinct,  electoral,  ii,  772 

— municipal,  ii.  772 

— police,  ii.  703 

Preemption  of  public  lands,  iii,  98 
Prefect  in  France,  ii,  478,  772 

— of  police,  ii.  700 

Prefectoral  system  in  administration  in  Europe, 
i,  10 


i Prefecture,  council  of  the,  i,  505 
I Preferential  ballot,  i,  104 

— tariff,  iii,  481 

— treatment  case,  ii,  107 

— vote  and  proportional  representation,  iii,  81 

see  Vote,  popular,  iii,  627 

— voting,  iii,  633 

and  primary  direct,  iii,  54 

Preferred  stock,  see  Trusts,  iii,  578 
Preliminary  canvass,  ii,  772 

— elections,  ii,  773 

Premier,  see  Prime  minister,  iii,  56 
Preprimary  caucuses,  iii,  52 
Prerogative,  ii,  773 

— court,  and  New  Jersey,  ii,  532 
Present  but  not  voting,  i,  33  ; iii,  129 
Presentment,  ii,  773 

Presidency,  constitutional  compromise  as  to,  i,  420 
* — -doubtful  states  and  the,  ii,  645 

— see  also  Third  term,  iii,  535 
President  of  assembly,  ii,  617 

— cabinet  of,  i,  198 

— - electoral  count  for,  i,  658 

— see  also  Executive  power,  i,  687 

— functions  during  Civil  War,  i,  290 

— growth  of  powers  of,  i,  421 
— -inauguration  of,  ii,  154 

— nomination  of  the,  ii,  550 

— and  party,  place  and  significance  of,  ii,  642 

— protection  of,  iii,  279 
— • pro  tempore,  iii,  7 
of  Senate,  i,  386 

— secretary  to  the.  iii,  2S0 
— - of  the  Senate,  iii,  1 

— and  tariff  legislation,  framing  of,  iii.  475 
— -see  also  Twelfth  Amendment,  iii,  583 

— of  the  United  States,  authority,  and  influence 

of,  iii,  1 

— - — constitutional  powers,  of,  iii,  5 

qualifications  for,  iii,  124 

— • — see  Veto,  iii,  613 
— - — • war  powers  of  the,  iii,  648 
Presidential  bee.  iii,  7 
■ — -election,  iii,  8 

— - — proposal  for  a direct,  iii,  628 
— - — counting  in  the  alternative  in,  i,  488 
— -elector,  qualifications  of,  iii,  124 
— - electoral  college,  i,  465 

— fever,  iii,  47 

— government,  i,  393  ; iii,  526 
— • legislative  powers,  i,  681 

— - offices,  in  civil  service,  i,  284 

— plan,  of  reconstruction,  iii,  194 
- — ■ preference  primary,  iii,  55 

— succession,  iii.  47 

-see  President  pro  tempore,  iii,  7 

'President’s  authority  as  to  treaties,  iii,  569 

— message,  ii,  419 
Presidents  and  patronage,  ii,  653 

— of  the  United  States,  list  of,  iii,  47.  See  also 

Presidents  by  name. 

— of  villages,  iii,  47 
Press,  freedom  of  the,  ii,  57 

— gang  riot,  1747.  ii.  196 

— influence  of  in  primary,  direct,  iii,  52 

— subsidy  of.  iii,  278 

Presser  rs.  Illinois  (societies),  iii,  341 
Preston,  Martin  R..  iii,  338 

— William  B.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; ii,  506 
Pretoria,  iii,  354 

Prevention  of  Cruelty  to  Animals,  Society  for.  i, 
530 

— as  a remedy,  iii,  227 

Previous  question,  i,  298:  ii,  618;  iii,  48 

I’ribilof  Islands,  and  Alaska,  i.  24 

• — and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  150 

— -see  Seal  fisheries,  iii,  275 

Price  analysis,  i.  678 

— - control,  and  police  power,  ii,  708 

— economic  theory  of,  iii,  48 

— fixing  and  restraint  of  trade,  iii,  208 
by  state,  ii,  192 

— and  money,  theory  of,  ii.  461 

Prices  and  charges,  regulation  of.  iii,  48 
"Priest,  press  and  politician,”  ii,  217 
Priest-king,  iii,  533 
Priest-state,  iii,  533 

Prigg  vs.  Pennsylvania  (personal  liberty),  ii,  673 
Prim.  General,  iii,  368 

Primaries,  and  nomination  papers,  ii,  552 
— - direct,  in  Kansas,  ii,  275 
— - — -and  public  opinion,  iii,  103 
Primary,  iii,  49 

— - committee  and  political  conventions,  i,  462 

— direct,  iii,  51 

' — < — -and  nomination  of  the  President,  ii,  551 

— election,  and  nominating  systems,  ii.  549 
— < — Act  of  1903,  and  Massachusetts,  ii,  635 

— local  caucus  and  nominating  systems,  ii,  549 


763 


146 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Primary,  see  Preliminary  elections,  ii,  773 
• — presidential  preference,  iii,  55 

> and  direct  primary,  iii,  54 

— • schools,  iii,  263 
Prime  minister,  iii,  56 

— in  cabinet  government,  i,  192 

— and  law  and  custom  of  constitution,  i,  404 

— and  Parliament,  Canadian,  ii,  615 
Primogeniture,  iii,  57 

— and  divine  right  of  kings,  i,  605 
Prince,  The,  ii,  718 

Prince  Edward  Island,  iii,  57 
■ — - Canadian  province  of,  i,  214 

— and  Nova  Scotia,  ii,  564 
Princeton  College,  iii,  410 

Principal  in  the  first  degree  (law,  criminal),  ii, 
318 

Printer,  state,  iii,  57 

Printing  and  binding,  public,  iii,  57 

- — office,  government,  ii,  88 

- — -and  Stationery,  Division  of,  iii,  58 

Prints,  Patent  Office  and,  ii,  650 

Prison  boards,  i,  140 

— - Congress,  the  International,  ii,  216 

— discipline,  iii,  58 

— industries,  iii,  59 

— inspectors,  iii,  59 

— labor,  iii,  60 

- — - — -public  account  system  of,  iii,  61 
— - laboratories,  iii,  61 

— matrons,  iii,  62 
Prisoners,  age  of,  i,  524 

— good  behavior,  of  ii,  85 
- — probation  of,  iii.  62 

— of  war,  iii,  62,  646 
Prisons,  census  of,  i,  520 

— military,  ii,  438 

— -state  administration  of,  ii.  185 

— superintendent  of,  ii,  271 

— for  women,  iii,  64 
Privacy,  ii,  135  ; iii,  64 
Private  bills,  iii,  64 

— legislation,  British  system  of,  ii,  331 

— day,  iii,  65 

— international  law,  ii,  207,  210 

— property  at  sea,  iii,  65 
Privateering,  iii,  66 

— and  Declaration  of  Paris,  i.  556 

— and  letters  of  marque  and  reprisal,  ii,  398 

— and  maritime  war,  ii,  397 

■ — and  Spain,  diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  367 
Privateers  in  Civil  War,  iii,  653 
Privilege,  parliamentary,  ii,  619  ; iii,  66 

— taxes,  ii,  351 

Privileged  communications,  iii,  67 

— and  freedom  of  speech,  ii,  57 
Privileged  status  of  persons,  iii,  67 
Privileges  and  immunities  of  citizens,  iii,  68 
Privy  council,  i,  689  ; iii,  69 

— Canadian  appeals  to,  i,  214 

— in  colonial  affairs,  iii,  69 

— in  cabinet  government,  i,  194 

— of  governor,  i,  486 

- — of  Great  Britain,  ii,  258 

— see  Responsible  government  in  Canada,  iii,  206 
Privy  seal,  iii,  275 

Prize  cases,  iii,  70 

— admiralty  and  maritime  jurisdiction  of,  i,  12 

— ( war ) , iii,  645 

Prize,  see  Continuous  voyages,  i,  454 

— courts,  court  of  appeals  in  cases  of  capture,  i, 

502 

— — in  international  law,  ii,  214 

— fights,  and  moving  pictures,  ii,  473 

— law  and  courts,  iii,  70 

— money,  i,  168:  iii,  70 
Probate,  court  of,  i,  504 

- — and  international  law,  private,  ii,  211 

— judge,  i,  494 

— jurisdiction,  ii,  313 
Probation  court,  iii,  62 
— ■ officers,  iii,  70 

— in  penalty  for  crime,  i.  561  ; ii,  659  ; iii,  62 
Process,  conception  of  life,  iii,  345 

— execution  of.  i.  680 
Proclamation  of  1763,  i,  163 
Proclamations,  executive,  iii.  71 

Proctor,  Rpdfield.  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 ; iii,  649 
Producer,  and  taxation,  iii,  504 
Production,  iii,  71 

— equalization  of  cost  of,  and  the  tariff,  ii.  55 
Productivity  theory  of  distribution,  i,  598 
Professional  public  schools,  iii.  265 
Professions  and  callings,  regulation  of,  ii,  288 : 

iii.  72 

— commissions  controlling,  i,  353 

— examination  for  employment  and,  i,  677 
Profit  sharing,  iii.  73 

— and  social  reform,  iii,  329 


Profits,  iii,  74 

— and  production,  iii,  72 

— restrictions  as  to,  i,  190 

— undivided,  and  capital,  i,  226 

Progress,  principle  of,  in  political  theory,  ii,  731 
Progressive  Labor  party,  iii,  74 

— movement,  and  Middle  West,  ii,  430 

— party,  iii,  74 

and  independent  movements  in  politics,  ii, 

157 

— — on  injunctions,  ii,  88 

and  political  conventions,  i,  465 

and  Republican  party,  iii,  201 

see  also  Third  parties,  iii,  534 

— - Republicans,  iii,  75 
Progressive  taxation,  iii,  505 
Progressives,  iii,  75 

— London  county  council,  ii,  370 
- — and  Republican  party,  iii,  199 
Prohibition,  iii,  76 

— • see  Anti-Saloon  League,  i,  50 

— difficulties  of.  ii,  357 

— see  Dow,  Neal,  i,  609 

— Home  Protection  party,  iii,  77 

— and  interstate  commerce,  ii,  220 

— Kansas  and.  ii,  274 

— - law,  and  New  England,  ii,  525 

— liquor  legislation,  ii,  356 
— - See  under  Liquor. 

— - in  Maine,  ii,  387 

— party,  iii,  77 

— - — -see  also  Temperance  agitation,  iii,  513 
vote  of,  see  Tables,  iii,  13,  et  seq 

— and  police  power,  ii,  707 

— and  public  opinion,  iii,  104 

— Reform  party,  iii,  77 

— and  revenue,  internal,  iii,  213 

Prohibitions  in  Constitution  of  United  States,  i, 
422 

Prohibitory  law,  ii,  389 

Promotions  in  the  civil  service,  iii,  78 

Property,  appropriation  of,  i,  58 

— in  economic  theory,  i,  625 

— franchises  as,  ii,  46 

— personal,  ii.  673 

— public,  iii,  106 

— and  public  use.  Iii,  112 

— qualifications  for  office,  iii,  125 
for  suffrage,  iii,  443 

— - rights  of,  iii,  79 

and  eminent  domain,  i,  665 

— • tax.  genera],  see  Taxation,  subjects  of,  iii,  506 
iii,  505 

in  state  systems  of  finance,  ii,  4 

— theory  of,  iii,  79 

— in  the  United  States,  value  of  all,  ii,  17 
Proportional  representation,  i,  604 ; iii,  80 

— Federal  Convention  on,  i,  715 
Proprietary  villages,  iii,  81 
Prorogation  of  Parliament,  ii,  616 
Prosecuting  attorney  as  county  officer,  i,  494 

— See  District  attorney 
Proslavery,  iii,  81 
Prostitution,  laws  against,  iii,  104 

— as  objectionable  employment,  ii,  289 

— and  segregation,  iii,  327 
— - see  Social  evil,  iii,  326 

Protection  to  American  citizens  abroad,  iii,  82 
— - American  system  and,  i,  39 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  573 

— in  financial  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  6 

— free  trade  and,  ii,  53 

— -Hamilton,  quoted  on,  ii,  108 

— McKinley  Tariff  Act,  ii.  383 

— Republican  partv  and,  iii,  192 

— See  also  under  Tariff. 

Protectionism  see  Tariff  policy  of  United  States, 
iii.  477 

Protective  policy,  effect  of,  since  1861,  i,  342 

— tariff  and  Republican  party,  iii,  197 
Protectorates,  iii.  83 

— American,  iii.  83 
Protectory,  Catholic,  iii,  262 
Protest,  parties  of.  iii,  534 
Prothonotary,  iii,  84 
Protocol,  iii,  84 

— in  international  law,  iii,  570 

— see  Peace,  ii,  657 

Protocols,  and  negotiation  of  treaties  by  the 
LTnited  States,  ii.  512 
Prouty,  Charles  A.,  ii,  225 
Provencber.  ii,  558 

Provident  Loan  Society,  New  York,  ii.  656 
Providence  Plantations  and  Rhode  Island,  iii,  224 
Province,  royal,  in  America,  iii,  84 
Provincial  committees  of  safety,  i.  361 

— Congress,  and  Massachusetts,  ii,  407 
and  New  York,  ii,  536 

— congresses,  i,  424 

764 


INDEX 


Provisional  governments,  and  reconstruction,  iii, 
106 

Proxy,  iii,  85 

Prudhon,  on  anarchy,  i,  41 
Prussia,  ii,  80 

— customs  union,  i,  537 

— municipal  government  in,  ii,  478 

— suffrage  in,  iii,  457 

— treaty  with,  1785,  ii,  78,  204 
Pruyn,  R.  H.,  ii,  248 

Psychological  tests  for  feeble  minded,  i,  726 
Psychology  of  the  crowd,  iii,  86 

— and  political  science,  ii,  714 

Public  account  system,  in  prison  labor,  iii,  60 

— accounting,  see  Revenue,  public  sources  of,  iii, 

215 

— accounts,  iii,  87 
boards  of,  iii,  90 

— i — Department  of,  ii,  183 
• uniformity  of,  iii,  592 

— buildings,  iii,  106 

and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  692 

1 federal,  state  and  municipal,  iii,  90 

>—  — and  the  pork  barrel,  ii,  758 

— callings,  regulation  of,  ii,  489 

— credit,  i,  519 

— debt,  in  financial  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  7 
in  political  platforms,  ii,  696 

— domain,  iii,  92 

cessions  by  states  from,  i,  241 

see  Public  lands,  iii,  93 

— health,  see  also  Sweatshops,  iii,  464 
reports,  iii,  92 

— — service,  ii,  US,  188;  iii,  92 

— indebtedness,  ii,  14 

— lands,  iii,  100 

administrative  decisions  on,  i,  11 

» coal  lands  of,  i,  299 

— • — Commission,  iii,  96 

and  conservation,  i,  399 

in  financial  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  6 

Foote’s  resolution,  ii,  29 

see  Graduated  lands,  ii,  93 

preemption  of,  iii,  98 

and  public  land  policy,  iii,  93 

• — i — reclamation  of,  iii,  161 

reservation  of,  iii,  98 

state,  iii,  99 

— markets,  ii.  398 

— money,  division  of,  iii,  99 

— monuments,  ii,  470 

— morals,  care  for,  iii,  99 

— observatories,  ii,  568 

• — office  is  a public  trust,  iii,  100 

— officers,  classification  and  duties  of.  iii,  100 

— see  Courts  and  tribunals,  administrative,  i,  507 

— opinion  law,  Illinois,  iii,  629 

— * — and  legislation,  direct,  ii,  331 
and  popular  control,  iii,  102 

— ownership  of  railroads,  iii,  147 

— policy,  iii,  105 

— printing,  expenditures,  federal,  i,  692 

— property,  iii.  106 

— • prosecutor,  as  county  officer,  i,  496 

— records,  iii,  107 

— regulation  of  professions  and  callings,  iii,  72 
* — • Roads,  Office  of,  iii.  108 

■ — safety,  director  of,  ii,  702 

— service,  iii.  108 

commissions,  example  of  commissions  in 

American  government,  i,  351 

New  York  powers  of,  i,  353;  iii,  108 

■ — • — — and  New  York,  ii,  5.39 

see  Publicity  of  corporate  accounts,  iii, 

119 

corporations,  iii,  110 

■ and  commissions  in  American  government, 

i.  352 

— use,  iii.  112 

— ■ — svstem  in  prison  labor,  iii,  60 

— utilities,  ii,  329  ; iii,  112 

• — • — capitalization  of,  i.  226 
commissions,  iii,  108 

• — • — - — and  railroad  commissions,  state,  iii,  134 

— — • and  municipal  government,  functions  of,  ii, 

476 

— 'Works,  boards  of,  i.  139 

and  buildings,  office  of,  i.  689 

< — ■ — contract  system  of.  i,  459 

national,  state,  and  municipal,  iii,  113 

state  account  system  of,  iii.  116 

and  unemployment,  iii,  588 

Publication,  iii,  116 
Publications,  governmental,  iii,  116 
Publicists,  in  international  law,  ii,  214 
Publicity,  iii.  118 

— of  corporate  accounts,  iii.  119 

— pamphlets  in  primary,  direct,  iii,  53 

— of  party  expenditures,  ii,  623 


Publicity,  see  Police  power,  ii,  707 

— and  public  service  corporations,  iii,  111 
“Publius,”  ii,  719 

Pufendorf,  Samuel,  ii,  729 

— his  naturalist  school  of  international  law,  ii, 

214 

— on  right  to  trade,  i,  338 

— and  social  compact  theory,  iii,  325 
Puget  Sound,  arbitration  about,  i,  45 

— boundary  of,  i,  150 

— navy  yard,  ii,  507 

— and  navy  yards,  ii,  507 

— ports,  see  Physics  and  politics,  ii,  689 
Pullman  cars,  regulation  of,  iii,  119 

— riots  of  1893,  ii,  88 

— sleeping  cars,  iii,  321 
Punishment,  as  a remedy,  iii,  227 
— -cruel  and  unusual,  iii, ‘ 120 
Punitive  damages,  iii.  227 

Pupils  in  schools,  legal  rights  of,  iii,  120 
Purchase  of  public  supplies  and  property,  iii,  120 
Pure  food,  iii,  122 

— Act,  ii,  229 

— and  Drug  Act,  and  Agriculture,  Department  of, 

i,  18 

Chemistry  Bureau  of,  and.  i,  251 

-and  interstate  commerce,  ii,  221 

— • — and  prevention  of  fraud,  ii,  50 

see  Pure  food,  iii,  122 

Referee  Board,  iii,  170 

— and  expenditure,  federal,  i.  693 
Purity  and  quality  of  food,  iii,  122 
Push-cart  vendors’  licenses,  ii,  351 

Quadrennial  sessions  in  Alabama,  i,  22 

— see  Constitution  making  in  United  States,  i,  407 

— of  legislature,  iii,  299 
Quakers,  in  Pennsylvania,  ii,  662 
Qualifications  for  office,  124 
Quarantine,  ii,  117  ; iii,  92,  125 

— Agriculture,  Department  of,  i,  18 

— and  interstate  commerce,  ii.  219 
— .see  also  Tuberculosis,  iii,  581 
Quartering  of  soldiers,  iii,  351 
Quasi-contractual  rights,  iii,  227 
Quasi-corporations,  i,  474 

Quasi-judicial  functions  of  public  service  commis- 
sions, iii,  110 
Quasi-protectorate,  i,  585 
Quasi-public  corporations,  iii,  111,  125 
Quay,  Matthew  S,  iii,  126 
— and  middle  states,  ii,  428 
Quebec,  iii,  126 

— Act,  i,  212  ; iii,  127 
and  Michigan,  ii,  425 

— Canadian  province  of,  i,  214 

— and  New  France,  ii,  526 

— and  parliament,  Canadian,  ii,  616 
Queens  County,  and  New  York  City,  ii,  540 
Queensland,  sec  under  Australia. 

“Question  of  public  policy,”  iii,  629 

— -in  Parliament,  iii,  128 
Quids,  iii,  128 

— and  Federalist  party,  i,  724 

— the  Republican  schism,  i,  580 
Quincy.  Josiah,  iii,  128 

Quitman,  John  A.,  and  Mississippi,  ii,  453 
Quito,  i,  629 
Quit  rent,  iii,  128 

— on  public  lands,  iii,  93 
Quorum,  iii,  128 

Quo  warranto,  iii,  129 

— and  corporation  charters,  i,  473 

Race  elements,  iii,  130 

— in  immigration,  ii,  143 

— -and  nationality,  American,  i,  38 

— questions  and  public  opinion,  iii,  103 
Race-tracks  in  New  Jersey,  ii,  531 

— gambling,  ii,  68;  iii,  130 
Races,  restrictions  on,  i,  189 

— separation  of,  ii,  707 
Radical  party,  iii,  131 

— in  England,  ii,  345 
Radicals,  Louisiana,  ii,  376 
Radio-telegraphy,  iii,  131 

— see  Wireless  telegraphy,  iii,  690 
Radisson,  ii.  425 

Rads,  iii,  131 
Rag  baby,  iii,  131 

Railroad  accounting,  uniformity  of,  iii,  592 

— associations,  iii,  131,  137 

— brotherhoods,  iii,  137 

— - building  and  crises,  economic,  i,  528 
and  roads,  iii,  230 

— capitalization,  iii.  131 

— commission,  in  Texas,  iii,  531 
cases,  iii,  49 

(police  power),  ii,  707 


765 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Railroad  commissions,  iii,  109 
state,  iii,  134 

— -Company  vs.  Husen  (interstate  commerce),  ii, 
220 

— ■ — vs.  Fuller  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  220 

— control,  in  California,  ii,  031 

— establishment  and  management,  iii,  135 

— rate,  discrimination  in,  i,  596 
— - — and  police  power,  ii,  707 

— see  under  Interstate  commerce,  ii,  225 
— - and  steamship  accidents,  i,  3 

— see  also  Standard  time,  iii,  376 
— -terminals,  ii,  476 

— traffic,  differentials  in,  i,  588 

— valuation  in  Texas,  iii,  141 
Railroading,  in  legislation,  iii,  138 
Railroads,  bounties  to,  i,  107 

— and  California  politics,  i,  206 

— and  canals  in  1840  (map),  iii,  142 
1860  (map),  iii,  143 

— city-owned,  iii,  107 

— electric,  iii,  138 

— elevated,  iii,  140 

— and  eminent  domain,  i,  665 

— gentlemen's  agreements  between,  ii,  73 

— and  grade  crossings,  ii,  93 

— and  internal  commerce,  i,  332 

— iuterurbau,  ii,  233 

— laud  grants  to,  ii,  306 

— pooling  in,  ii,  733 

— ownership  of  coal  mines  by,  iii,  156 

— Pacific,  ii,  596 

— physical  valuation  of,  iii,  140 

— public  aid  to,  iii,  141 

— and  public  lands,  iii,  95 

— ■ public  ownership  of,  iii,  147 

— see  also  Pullman  cars,  regulation  of,  iii,  119 

— regulation  of,  iii,  148 

— ■ see  Securities  federal  commission  on,  iii,  285 

— street,  iii,  148 

— taxation  of,  iii,  501 

— see  Temperance  agitation,  iii,  513 

— see  Traffic  agreements,  iii,  548 
Railway  capitalization  commission,  i,  226 

— commissions,  i,  3 

— mail  service,  ii,  765 

— strikes  and  interstate  commerce  commission, 

ii,  223 

Railways,  canal  abandonment  due  to,  i,  223 

— government  ownership  of,  in  Switzerland,  iii, 

466 

— relations  between,  ii,  228 

— see  Trolley  lines,  iii,  573 
Raisuli,  ii,  508 

Raines  Law,  iii,  150 

— hotel,  ii,  128 
Raleigh,  grants  to,  i,  318 
Ramboullet  Decree,  i,  453 
Ramsey,  Alexander,  ii,  506 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  649 

Randall,  Alexander  W.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii, 
767 

— • Samuel  J.,  iii,  150 
speaker,  i,  391 

— vs.  Kreiger  (divorce),  ii,  398 
Randolph,  Kdmund  J.,  biography,  iii,  150 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  95,  195 

— ■ and  federal  Constitution,  i,  713 

— as  Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— in  Washington’s  cabinet,  i,  199 

Randolph,  George  W.,  as  Confederate  cabinet  offi- 
cer, i,  371 

— John,  biography,  iii.  151 

see  Blifil  and  Black  George,  i,  134 

— - — -quoted  on  Congress,  i,  452 

see  Dough-face,  i,  608 

and  Federalist  party,  i,  724 

— - — see  Quids,  iii,  128 

and  Republican  schism,  i,  580 

— - — - see  also  Tertium  quid,  iii,  529 

— Peyton,  president  Continental  Congress,  i,  451 

— Philip  G.,  Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 
Range,  in  surveys  of  land,  Iii,  463 
Rangers,  partisan,  ii,  103,  622 

Rape,  and  lynching,  ii.  28l 

Rapid  transit,  and  grade  crossings,  ii,  93 

— -see  Subways,  iii,  442 

— in  cities,  iii,  151 

Rapier,  In  re  (freedom  of  speech),  ii.  58 
Rassmussen  vs.  United  States  (insular),  ii,  187 

— (organized  territory),  iii,  526 

— (territorial  status),  iii,  524 

• — -(United  States  as  a territorial  expression),  iii, 
598 

Rate  making,  by  interstate  commerce  commission, 
ii,  222 

— - and  transportation,  iii,  555 
Rate  wars,  railroad,  ii,  733 
— r-  and  transportation,  iii,  555 


I Rates,  regulation  of,  ii,  220;  iii,  151 

— and  traffic,  in  interstate  commerce  legislation. 

ii,  227 

Ratification  by  the  people,  ii,  331 

— of  treaties  by  the  United  States,  iii.  151 

— see  Treaties  of  United  States,  iii,  568 
Itawle,  William,  iii,  152 

Rawlins,  John  A.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  649 
Raymbault,  ii,  425 

Raymond,  Henry  J.,  and  Republican  party,  iii, 
191,  194 

Read,  George,  i,  554 
Reading  the  riot  act,  iii,  228 
Readjuster,  iii,  153 

— party,  ii,  620 

Readjusters  and  Democratic  party,  i,  572 
Readmission,  see  also  States,  admission  of,  iii, 
415 

Reagan,  John  H.,  i,  372 
Real  estate,  iii,  153 

— in  cities,  iii,  550 

— public  ownership  of,  iii,  153 

— relation  of  transit  to,  iii,  552 

Real  and  personal  estate,  distinguished,  iii,  495 

— property  and  wealth,  national,  iii,  666 
— • union,  iii,  154 

of  states,  i,  584 

Reapportionment  committees,  in  state  government, 

iii,  389 

Reasonable  law,  i,  615 
— - rate,  i.  616 

Reasonableness,  in  restraint  of  trade,  iii,  154 
Reb,  Johnny,  iL  252 

Rebates,  and  interstate  commerce  legislation,  ii, 
227 

— in  transportation,  iii,  156 
Rebel  brigadiers,  iii,  156 
Rebellion,  iii,  156 

— Losses  Bill  (Canadian),  iii,  207 
— -and  insurrection,  il,  196 
Recall,  iii,  157 

— in  constitution  making  in  United  States,  i,  408 

— of  judges  in  constitutions,  i,  440 
in  state  judiciary,  iii,  396 

— of  judicial  decisions,  iii,  158 

— Los  Angeles,  ii,  372 

— in  popular  government,  ii,  738 

— and  public  opinion,  iii,  103 

— • see  Removal  of  public  officials,  iii,  178 

— see  also  State  executive,  iii,  385 
Receiver,  iii,  159 

Recess,  ii,  619 
Recidivism,  i,  525 
Reciprocity,  iii,  159 
— -with  Canada,  i,  174,  213 

commercial  relations  of  United  States  with, 

i,  344 

negotiations  of  1911,  i,  176 

— -and  commerce,  international,  i,  338 

— discretion  of  executive  and,  iii,  297 

— experiments  in  commercial,  i,  343 

— McKinley  Tariff  Act,  ii,  383 

— and  most  favored  nation  clause,  ii,  473 

— policy,  iii,  160 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  200 
— - in  tariff,  ii,  657 

— in  tonnage  duties,  iii,  305 

— see  Treaties,  iii,  571 

Reclamation  of  lands,  by  convict  labor,  i,  467 

— fund,  and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  692 

— or  Newlands  Act,  ii,  240 

— of  public  lands,  iii,  161 

— projects,  and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  693 

— service,  ii,  198;  iii,  161 
Recognition  of  new  states,  iii.  162 

— in  parliamentary  law,  iii,  161 
Reconcentrados,  i,  534  ; iii,  368 
Recognition  of  t lie  Union,  iii,  437 
Reconstruction,  iii,  163 

— conventions,  i,  431 

— -and  debt,  public,  repudiation  of,  i,  552 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  570 

— Freedmen’s  Bureau  in.  ii,  57 

— and  insurrection,  ii,  197 

— see  Ku  Klux  Klan,  ii,  282 

— Act,  and  military  commissions,  ii,  436 

— policy,  see  My  policy,  ii.  491 

— and  negro  suffrage,  ii,  517 

— Republican  party  in,  iii,  194 

— see  Scalawags,  iii,  254 

— see  also  Slaughter  bouse  cases,  iii,  314 

— see  also  States,  admission  of,  iii,  415 

— see  also  Stevens.  Thaddeus.  iii.  427 

— see  also  Unreconstructed,  iii,  600 
Recorder  in  court  of  inquiry,  i,  503 

— of  deeds,  iii,  169 

Recorder’s  court  (Great  Britain),  ii,  258 
Recording  tax.  mortgages,  iii,  501 
Records,  public,  iii,  107 


766 


INDEX 


Recreation,  ii,  477 

— grounds,  ii,  611 
— - piers,  ii,  612 

— and  social  reform,  iii,  330 
Recruiting,  i,  670 

Red  Cross  Convention,  ii,  203  ; iii,  169 
— - in  naval  warfare,  ii,  106 

Red  River  of  the  North  and  boundaries  of  United 
States,  i,  155 
Red  tape,  iii,  169 
— -in  bureaucracy,  i,  187 
Redemption  of  currency,  iii,  169 
— - and  refunding  of  public  debt,  i,  547 
Redemptioner,  iii,  170 

— in  colonization,  i,  321 

Redfield,  11  illiam  C.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198,  339 
Redintegration,  and  nationality,  ii,  495 
Rediscount,  see  Reserve  Act,  Federal,  iii,  202 
Rediscounting,  i,  112 

Redistribution  of  Seats  Act  of  1885,  ii,  128,  614 
Redmond,  J.  E.,  ii,  495 

Redress,  see  Rights  and  remedies,  iii,  227 
Reed,  Thomas  B.,  biography,  iii,  170 

— as  czar,  i,  53  i 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  574 

— and  filibustering,  i,  730 

— and  legislative  centralization,  i,  240 

— and  quorum,  iii,  129 

— as  speaker,  i,  392;  iii,  370 

Reed,  Walter,  general  hospital,  ii,  127 

— William  B.,  i,  261 

— Ex  parte  (courts  martial),  i,  517 
Reelections  to  Congress,  i,  384 
Reenlistment,  bounties  for,  168 

Referee  board  of  consulting  scientific  experts,  iii, 
170 

— in  bankruptcy,  iii,  170 

Reference  bureau  and  bill  drafting  agencies,  ii, 
342 

— - bureaus,  municipal,  ii,  487 
Referendum,  iii,  170 

— in  city  and  state,  i,  275 

— in  Connecticut  in  1660,  i.  397 

— and  constitutional  amendment,  i,  436 

— in  counties,  i,  493 

— and  Democratic  government,  i,  564 

— and  initiative,  see  State  legislature,  iii,  400 

— legislation,  direct,  ii,  331 

— in  popular  government,  ii,  737 

— and  public  opinion,  iii,  104 

— and  suffrage,  iii,  448 

— working  of  the,  and  Oregon,  ii,  590 
Reform  Act  of  1S32  (British),  iii,  235 

— club,  ii,  711 

— movements,  political,  iii,  171 

— parties  of,  iii,  534 
• — school,  iii,  261 

— schools,  and  social  justice,  i,  564 
Reformation.  See  under  Prison. 

Reformatory,  adults,  i,  561 

• — juvenile,  iii,  174 
Reformatories,  iii,  172 

— see  Schools,  industrial,  iii,  260 
Reformers,  strength  and  weakness  of,  ii,  554 

— London  county  council,  ii,  370 
Refunding  acts  of  1870  and  1900,  i,  552 
— - bonds,  in  public  debt,  i,  546 

— and  redemption  of  public  debt,  i,  547 
Refunds  and  drawbacks,  fraudulent,  ii,  51 
Regents  of  state  educational  institutions,  iii,  575 
— • see  also  State  examiners,  iii,  382 

Regents’  examinations,  iii,  174 
“Regie,”  and  night  riders,  ii,  547 
Regina,  iii,  253 

Register  in  bankruptcy,  iii,  170 
- — - of  deeds,  iii.  169 
— • — as  county  officer,  i,  494 
■ — -probate  as  county  officer,  i,  494 

— of  the  treasury,  iii,  174 

— of  wills,  iii,  174 

Registrar  general's  office.  England,  iii,  425 
Registration  in  election  system,  i,  652 

— list  and  primary,  iii,  50 
- — of  mail,  iii,  175 

— and  suffrage,  iii,  445 

— voters,  iii,  630 

— see  Voters,  challenge  of,  iii,  629 
Registry  of  shipping,  iii,  175 

— of  vessels,  American,  iii,  305 
Reglements,  legislative  power,  ii,  337 
Regrating,  and  police  power,  ii.  708 

Regular  provinces,  in  Philippine  Islands,  ii,  682 
Regularity  in  politics,  iii,  175 
Regulation  of  professions  and  callings,  ii.  288 
“Regulation”  the,  in  South  Carolina,  iii,  175 
Regulation.  War  of  the,  ii,  194 
Regulators,  ii,  62,  175 

— insurrection  of,  ii.  194 

— in  legislative  corruption,  i,  478 


Reichsgericht,  ii,  82,  257 
Reichstag.  German,  ii,  80 

Reid,  Whitelaw,  and  diplomatic  relations  with 
France,  ii,  44 

— vote  for,  iii,  38 
Rieimer,  Arthur  E.,  iii,  338 

— vote  for,  iii,  45 
Reindeer  in  Alaska,  i,  635 

— ■ and  commissioner  of  education,  ii,  199 
Relief  works,  and  unemployment,  iii,  588 
Religion  and  political  science,  ii,  715 

— see  Reformatories,  iii,  173 

— socialization  of,  i,  564 

Religious  divergence,  as  affecting  American  race, 

i,  38 

— education,  and  parties,  ii,  620 

— freedom,  and  plural  marriages,  iii,  99 
— -liberty,  iii,  175 

— and  political  opinion,  freedom  of,  ii,  706 

— revivals,  iii,  86 

— tests,  see  Qualifications  for  office,  iii,  124 
for  suffrage,  iii.  443 

— toleration,  in  Rhode  Island,  iii,  224 
Remedies,  and  rights,  iii,  226 
Remmel,  Valentine,  iii.  338 

— vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  42 
Removal  of  causes,  iii,  176 

— deposits,  iii.  177 

— public  officials,  iii,  177 
Rentsen  Board,  iii.  180 

— and  pharmaceutical  legislation,  ii,  675 
Rent,  iii.  180 

— and  distribution,  economic,  i,  599 

— quit,  iii,  128 

Renvoi,  theory  of,  in  international  law,  ii,  211 
Repeaters,  iii,  181,  630 

Report  on  manufactures  of  Hamilton,  ii,  108 
Reports  of  judicial  cases,  iii.  1S2 

— see  also  State  judiciary,  iii,  397 
Reports  of  committees,  iii.  181 

— heads  of  departments  and  subordinates,  iii,  1S2 
Representative  assembly,  and  parliamentary  law, 

ii.  617 

— and  popular  government,  ii,  736 
Representative  government,  iii,  184 

— recruits,  iii.  44l 

Representatives  in  Congress,  iii,  186 

— election  of.  iii.  186 
— House  of,  ii,  129 

— instructions  to,  ii,  186 

— at  large,  i,  383 

— qualifications  for,  iii.  124 
Representation,  apportionment  of,  i,  418 

— basis  of,  in  Constitution,  i,  420 

— minority,  ii.  450 

— proportional,  iii,  80 
— • theory  of,  iii,  183 
Reprieve,  iii,  188 

— and  pardon,  constitutional  principles  of,  ii,  608 
Reprisal,  marque  and,  ii,  398 

— and  war,  iii,  645 

Reproduction,  cost  of,  in  valuation,  iii,  606 
Republic,  iii,  188 
Republican  clubs,  ii,  711 
— • defined,  i,  561 

— form  of  government,  iii,  188 

opposition  to,  during  Revolution,  iii,  392 

— - parties,  Whig  and,  ii,  592 

— party  (Jeffersonian),  iii,  202 

iii,  189 

— • — National,  ii,  493 
- — • — Jefferson  and.  ii,  250 

— Progressives,  and  political  conventions,  i,  465 
— ■ Resubmission  League,  Kansas,  ii,  274 

— vote,  see  Tables,  iii,  13  et  scq. 

Republicanism,  the  new,  i,  580 

Republics,  see  also  States,  classification  of,  iii,  417 
Repudiation  in  Confederate  States,  i,  373 
Res  judicata,  iii.  204 

— nullius,  iii.  528 

Research,  municipal  bureaus  of,  ii,  487 
Reservations,  Indian,  ii,  165 

— doctrine  of.  ii.  171 

— in  Indian  policy  of  the  United  States,  ii,  163 

— military,  ii,  438 

— -jurisdiction  of  United  States,  over,  iii,  519 
Reserve  Act,  Federal,  iii,  202 

— association  (banking),  i,  108 

— banks,  iii,  202 

— • fund  in  treasury,  i,  545 

— militia,  iii.  203 

— system,  i,  117 

Reserved  rights  of  states,  iii,  326 

— ■ see  Virginia  and  Kentucky  Resolutions,  iii,  621 

Reservemen,  ii,  703 

Reserves,  army  and  navy,  iii,  204 

Residence,  ii.  211 

— and  domicile,  i,  607 

Residuary  powers  of  government,  i,  432 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Resignation  of  public  officials,  iii,  204 
Resolution,  concurrent,  i,  309 

— joint,  ii,  253 

Resolutions,  committee  on,  in  political  conven- 
tions, i,  463 

— in  Congress,  iii,  204 

— of  ’98,  iii,  620 

Resources  of  North  America,  iii,  204 
Responsible  government,  iii,  206 

— in  Canada,  iii,  206 

— and  ministers,  ii,  446 
Restraint,  and  police  power,  iii,  707 

— of  trade,  ii.  208 

■—  — ■ reasonableness  in,  iii,  154 
Restraining  order,  ii,  180 
Resulting  powers,  iii,  209 

— and  Federalist  party,  i,  722 

Resumption,  and  debt,  public,  repudiation  of,  1, 
552 

— of  specie  payments,  iii,  209 

— • — - and  Democratic  party,  i,  571 

Retirement  systems,  in  civil  service,  i,  285 

Retaliation  Act,  1818,  iii,  24)9 

Retired  list,  iii,  209 

Retired,  wholly  (from  army),  iii,  210 

Retirement  of  judges,  iii,  209 

— of  military  and  naval  officers,  iii,  209 
Retroactive  legislation,  impairment  of  contract,  i, 

457 

— and  separation  of  powers,  iii,  297 

— iii,  210 

Returning  boards,  iii,  210 
Returns,  can't  go  behind  the,  iii,  211 
Reuss,  ii,  80 

Revels,  Hiram  R..  and  Mississippi,  ii,  454 
Revenge,  and  criminology,  i,  523 
Revenue,  bills  for  raising,  iii,  211 

— bonds  in  public  debt,  i,  547 
— -cutter  service,  iii,  211 

— - in  financial  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  6 

— fines  as  sources  of,  ii,  17 

— forfeitures  as  a source  of,  ii,  39 

— internal,  iii,  212 

— - public,  collection  of,  iii,  214 
— • — sources  of,  iii,  215 

surplus,  iii,  217 

Review,  boards  of,  i,  139 

Reviewing  officer,  of  courts  martial,  i,  516 

Revised  laws,  see  Statutes,  state,  iii,  426 

— statutes,  iii.  218 

Revising  barrister  in  English  election  system,  i, 
654 

Revision,  council  of,  i,  406,  487 
Revisors  of  bills,  legislature  and  legislative  re- 
form, ii,  342 

Revolution,  American,  causes  of,  iii,  218 

— significance  of,  iii,  220 

• — - congresses  and  conventions  in  the,  i,  392 
— • economic  aspect  of,  i,  621 
— ■ man  of  the,  ii,  390 

— right  of,  iii,  223 

— state  governments  during  the,  iii,  391 
Revolutionary  diplomatic  correspondence,  iii,  117 

— pensions,  ii,  669 

— War,  iii,  649 

Re.vburn,  Mayor,  Philadelphia,  ii,  678 
Reynolds,  John  R.,  ii,  199 

— -vs.  United  States  (plural  marriages),  iii,  99 
Rhenish  League,  ii,  417 
Rhett,  R.  B.,  i,  373 

Rhode  Island,  colonial  corporation  of,  i,  317 

— see  also  Dorr,  T.  W.,  i,  607 

— see  King’s  Province,  ii.  280 

— and  Providence  Plantations,  iii,  224 
Rhodes,  law  of,  ii,  207,  213 

— - vs.  Iowa  (interstate  commerce),  ii.  220 
Ricardo  quoted  on  economic  cost,  i,  482 
— ■ economic  theory,  i,  627 
— • and  money,  theory  of.  ii,  461 
Richards,  John  K.,  i,  95 
Richardson,  William  A.,  iii,  641 
— ■ cabinet  officer,  i.  197  : iii,  566 

— and  Nebraska,  ii,  508 

Richardson.  ITenry  Hobson,  architectural  influence 
of.  iii,  90 

Richmond,  Virginia,  capitol,  iii,  90 
Rider,  on  bills,  iii,  226 

— and  veto  power,  iii,  613 
Riding,  in  Yorkshire,  iii,  226 
Riel,  Louis,  ii,  392 

Rifle  clubs,  ii,  432 

Right  in  political  theory,  ii.  725 

— of  deposit  (at  New  Orleans),  iii,  226 

— to  labor,  iii,  226 

— of  petition,  ii.  675 

— of  search,  in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii, 

30 

— of  visit,  iii.  226 

Rights,  bill  or  declaration  of,  i,  434,  439 


Rights  of  the  British  Colonies,  ii,  594 

Rights,  civil,  i,  281 

Rights  of  Man.  I’aine's,  ii,  599,  719 

Rights,  natural,  ii  496 

- — in  personam,  iii,  227 

— in  rem,  iii,  227 

— - and  remedies,  iii,  226 
Ring,  political,  iii,  228 
Ringing  platform,  ii,  696 

Rio  Grande  River,  boundary  of  the,  i,  150,  159 
Rio  de  Janeiro,  i,  171 

— Pan  American  Conference  at,  ii,  203 
Riot,  and  mob  rule,  ii,  458 

— act,  reading  the,  ii,  403 

— suppression  of,  iii,  228 
Riparian  rights,  iii,  228 

— and  the  police  power,  ii,  708 
Ripper  and  legislative  reform,  ii,  342 
— - bills,  iii,  229 

Risk,  assumption  of,  i,  91 
Ritchie,  D.  G.,  quoted  on  sovereignty,  iii,  364 
Ritchie  vs.  People  (women’s  labor),  ii.  303 
River  and  Harbor  Act,  ii,  305  ; iii,  601 
— - bills,  iii,  229 

as  pork  barrel,  ii,  758 

— • improvements,  see  Public  works,  iii,  113 
River  navigation,  ii,  36 

— traffic  of  United  States,  i,  333 
Rivers,  jurisdiction  over,  ii,  204  : iii.  229 
— • navigation  of  international,  ii,  502 
— • obstructions,  pollutions,  etc.,  ii,  25 

— and  harbors,  and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  693 
— • — and  National  Waterways  Commission,  ii,  494 
Rives-Sebastiana  Treaty,  ii,  43 

Road  districts,  i,  604  ; iii,  241 

— tax,  iii,  230 
Roads,  iii,  230 

— ■ bounties  for,  i,  167 
— • convict  labor  on,  i,  467 
— - expenditures  for,  i,  695 

— good,  movement,  ii.  86 

— see  Highway,  ii,  122 

— Office  of  Public  Roads,  i,  19 

— and  prison  industries,  iii,  59 

— restrictions  on,  i,  189 

— and  waterways,  in  transportation,  iii.  554 
Robbins  vs.  Shelby  County  Taxing  District  (inter- 
state commerce),  ii,  219 

Roberts,  Brigham  II..  election  of,  iii,  186 
— -Edmund,  i,  14;  iii,  567 
— ■ vs.  Reilly  (extradition),  ii,  65 
Robertson,  James,  iii,  529 

— Lord,  quoted  on  marriage,  ii.  399 

— vs  Baldwin  (Thirteenth  Amendment),  iii,  536 
Robeson,  George  M.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii,  506  ; 

iii,  649 

Robinson,  Governor  (Kansas),  ii,  274 

Rock  Creek  Park.  D.  C..  i,  602 

Rock  Island  arsenal,  and  ordnance,  chief  of,  ii,  588 

— and  military  prisons,  ii,  438 

Rockefeller,  John  D.,  gifts  for  public  purposes,  ii, 
84 

Rockfield  vs.  First  National  Bank  (uniform  legis- 
lation), iii,  591 
Rocky  Mountains,  ii,  690 

Rocky  Mountain  states,  and  sectionalism  in 
United  States,  iii,  281 
Rodbertus.  iron  law  of  wages  of.  i,  527 
Rodney.  Caesar  A.,  i.  95,  195,  554,  555 

— Daniel,  vote  for,  iii,  18 
Rogatory,  letters,  ii,  344 

Rogers,  John,  Secretary  of  Navy,  ii.  506 
Roller  towel  and  tuberculosis,  iii,  581 
Rolls  and  Library,  Bureau  of,  iii.  233 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  see  Diplomatic  agent,  i, 
591 

— and  public  schools,  i.  268 
— ■ religion,  in  Texas,  iii,  529 

Roman  Catholics,  see  American  party,  i,  37 
Roman  Empire,  Holy,  ii,  125 

— law  and  economic  theory,  i.  626 

— -lawyers,  and  political  theories,  ii.  717 

Rome,  influence  of,  on  modern  government,  iii,  233 

— - and  ochlocracy,  ii,  569 

— and  sovereignty  of  the  people,  iii,  362 
Roorback,  iii.  234 

Roosevelt.  Theodore,  back  from  Elba,  i,  99 

— biography,  iii,  234 

— as  Bull  Moose,  i,  186 

■ — his  charter  of  democracy,  iii,  200 

— and  crisis  of  1907,  i,  528 

— as  cowboy  president,  i.  517 

— and  executive  centralization,  i,  240 

— gag  order  of.  i,  285 

— on  government  expenditures,  i,  483 

— and  independent  movements  in  politics,  il,  157 

— and  irrigation,  ii,  239 

— • on  legislative  corruption,  i,  477 

— and  new  nationalism,  ii,  534 


768 


INDEX 


Roosevelt,  Theodore,  party,  111,  234 

— and  party  leadership,  ii,  630 
— - policies,  iii,  234 

— policies,  and  Republican  party,  iii,  199 

— and  political  conventions,  i,  465 

— and  Progressive  party,  iii,  74 

— on  recall,  iii,  158 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  198 

— and  Rough  Riders,  iii,  236 

— storage  dam.  ii,  243 

— on  swollen  fortunes,  iii,  494 

— see  Tennis  cabinet,  iii,  516 

— see  Third  term,  iii,  535 

— see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics,  iii, 

673 

— Vice-President,  iii,  616 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  41,  42,  45 
Rooster,  Democratic,  iii,  234 

Root,  Elihu,  in  Alaska  boundary  controversy,  i, 
28.  176 

— on  alternates,  i,  33 
— - biography,  iii,  235 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— ■ and  consular  service,  i,  448 

— on  contested  elections,  iii,  290 

— on  international  law,  ii,  206 

— and  Pan  American  congresses,  ii,  603 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 
Rough  Riders,  iii,. 236 

Roumania,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  508 

— Jewish  question  in  diplomacy  with,  ii,  252 
Rounder,  iii,  236 

Roundsmen,  ii,  703 

Rousseau,  and  majorities,  theory  of,  ii,  389 

— political  theories  of,  ii,  730 

— and  social  compact  theory,  iii,  325 

— and  sovereignty  of  the  people,  iii,  362 

— see  State,  theory  of.  iii.  407 

Rotary  mimeograph  case  (patents),  ii,  652 

Rotation  in  office,  iii,  235,  517 

Rotten  boroughs,  iii,  235 

— -see  also  State  assembly,  iii,  377 

Roscher,  quoted  on  functions  of  government,  i,  483 

- — and  sociology,  iii,  343 

Rose,  Sir  John,  in  Alabama  controversy,  i,  23 
Ross,  E.  A.,  quoted  on  applied  sociology,  iii,  348 

— George,  i,  554 
— -vote  for,  iii.  18 
Rostock,  ii.  109 

Rudd  vs.  Heart  (international  law  and  federal 
statute),  ii,  309 
Rule,  bringing  in  a,  iii.  236 

— of  war  of  1756,  i,  454 
Rules,  see  By-laws,  i,  191 

— committee  on,  in  House  of  Representatives,  ii, 

132 

— and  rules  of  Congress,  iii,  237 

— of  Congress,  iii,  236 

— of  order,  and  parliamentary  law,  ii,  616 

— of  legislative  bodies,  iii,  239 

— and  order  of  business,  committee  on,  in  politi- 

cal conventions,  i,  463 
— -of  state  legislatures,  iii,  240 
Rum,  and  the  slave  trade,  i.  620 
, — - Romanism  and  rebellion,  iii.  241 
Runkle  vs.  United  States  (powers  of  President  of 
United  States),  iii,  7 
Rupert’s  Land,  ii,  135 

Rural  district,  local  government  in  England,  ii, 
365 

— council,  in  British  local  government,  iii,  241 

— divisions,  minor,  iii,  241 

— free  delivery,,  iii,  242 

— see  Postal  system  of  United  States,  ii,  765 
■ — schools,  iii,  268 

— -and  urban  population  of  United  States,  ii,  748 

Rurales.  in  Mexico,  ii,  422 

Rush.  Benjamin,  biography,  iii,  242 

— and  Declaration  of  Independence,  i,  554 
Rush,  Richard,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  195 

— dinlomatic  instructions  of.  i,  592 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  466 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— - Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 

— vote  for,  iii,  18,  21 
Rush  hour  traffic,  iii,  551 
Rusk.  Jeremiah  M..  i,  20 

Ruskin,  John,  and  theory  of  government,  ii,  90 
Russell,  Earl,  in  Alabama  controversy,  i,  23 

— Jonathan,  and  Treaty  of  Ghent,  ii,  83 

— William  E..  ii.  413:  iii,  242 
Russia,  army  and  navy,  i,  76 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  243 

— fundamental  law  of  1900,  i,  435 

— Jewish  questions  in  diplomacy  with,  ii,  252 

— and  nihilism,  ii,  547 

— and  Oregon  country,  iii,  655 


Russia  and  party  system  in  Europe,  ii,  646 

— see  also  States,  classification  of,  iii,  417 
Russian  federation  of  emancipation,  and  nihilism. 

ii,  548 

— government,  and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  465 

— party  of  revolutionary  socialists,  and  nihilism, 

ii,  548 

Russo-American  Treaty  of  1824,  iii,  527 
Rutgers  College,  iii,  410 

— vs.  Waddington  (unconstitutionality),  i,  509 

— (military  occupation),  ii,  437 
Rutledge,  John,  iii,  244,  462 

— chief  justice,  i.  255 

— vote  for,  iii,  14 
Rutledge,  Edward,  i,  554 

St.  Albans,  capture  of.  i,  174 

St.  Augustine,  and  political  theories,  ii,  717 

St.  Clair,  Arthur,  iii,  246 

— and  northwest  territory,  ii,  562,  573 
St.  Clair  Flats  Canal,  i,  223 

St.  Cloud  Decree,  i,  453 

St.  Croix  River  and  boundaries  of  United  States, 
i.  155 

— as  a boundary,  ii,  97 

— and  northeastern  boundary  controversy,  ii,  560 
St.  Elias,  Mount,  i,  24 

St.  Elizabeth’s  hospital,  ii.  127 

St.  Helena,  Virginia,  training  station,  iii,  549 

St.  Ildefonso,  Treaty  of,  ii,  376 

St.  John,  Danish  West  Indies,  i,  539 

— • John  I’.,  and  Prohibition  party,  iii,  77 

vote  for,  iii,  36 

— political  parties,  Kansas,  ii,  274 

— Prince  Edward  Island,  iii,  57 
— • River,  navigation  of,  ii,  502 
St.  John's,  Newfoundland,  ii,  545 
St.  Lawrence,  boundaries  of,  i,  150 
— - navigation  of,  ii,  502 

— and  North  America,  ii,  555 

— River,  see  Canada,  i,  210 
St.  Louis,  iii,  245 

— civic  center  of,  i,  281 

— county  and  city  government,  concurrent  in,  i, 

489 

— I.  M.  & S.  R.  Co.  vs.  Taylor  (interstate  com- 

merce), ii,  221 

— school  of  social  economy,  iii,  259 

St.  Lusson,  Daumont  de,  and  Michigan,  ii,  425 
St.  Matthew  Islands,  and  boundaries  of  United 
States,  i,  150 

St.  Nicholas,  coaling  station,  i,  299 

St.  Paul,  apostle,  and  'political  theories,  ii.  717 

— Minnesota,  associated  charities  in,  i,  245 

— method  of  assessment,  i,  88 

St.  Peter,  and  political  theories,  ii,  717 
St.  Stephen’s  chapel,  Imndon.  ii,  628 
St.  Thomas,  Danish  West  Indies,  i,  539 
Ste.  Croix,  Danish  West  Indies,  i,  539 
Ste.  Mary's  River  and  boundaries  of  United 
States,  i,  155 

San  Clement’s  Islands,  within  boundaries  of 
United  States,  i,  150 
San  Domingo,  ii,  115  ; iii,  676 

— debt  of,  ii,  187 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  591 ; iii,  250 

— grant  and  annexation  of,  i.  201 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  468 

— protectorate  over,  iii,  84 

— and  Spain,  iii,  267 
San  Francisco,  iii,  251 

— county  and  city  government,  concurrent  in,  i, 

488' 

— Exposition,  i,  701 

— harbor,  ii,  110 

— and  parties,  state  and  local,  ii.  622 

— see  Physics  and  politics,  ii,  686 
San  Joaquin  River,  iii,  663 

San  Jose,  capital  of  California,  1,  204 
San  Juan  boundary,  i,  24 

— de  Fuca,  Straits  of,  and  boundaries  of  United 

States,  i,  157 

— Islands  and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  153 
— ■ water  boundary,  arbitration  of.  i,  68 

San  Marino,  as  a protectorate,  iii,  83 
San  Salvador,  iii.  249 

— in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  37 

Santa  Anna,  and  Mexico,  diplomatic  relations 
with,  ii,  424 

Santa  Barbara  Islands,  within  boundaries  of 
United  States,  i.  150 
Sabotage,  and  militarism,  ii,  433 
Sachems,  iii,  467 
Sacramento.  Cal.,  i,  204 

— River,  iii,  663 
Saddleback  district,  i,  55 

Safe  deposit  companies,  iii,  245 
Safety  Appliance  Act,  i,  3 ; ii,  229 

— appliances,  in  interstate  commerce,  ii,  221 

769 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Safety,  committees  of  (colonial),  i,  361 
- — devices,  see  Elevators,  i,  659 

and  transportation,  regulation  of,  iii,  557 

— • and  health,  ii,  290 

— legislation  for  labor,  ii,  298 

— and  police  power,  ii,  707 

— problem,  in  transit  in  cities,  iii,  551 

Sage,  Russell,  Foundation,  homes  company  at 
Forest  Ilills,  and  model  dwellings,  ii,  459 
Sage.  Mrs.  Russell,  gifts  for  public  purposes,  ii, 
84 

Sailors,  labor  contracts,  ii,  286,  301 

— legal  status  of,  iii,  350 

Sailors'  rights,  free  trade  and,  ii,  56 

Salaries  of  officers,  i,  667  ; iii,  246 

■ — ■ tables  of,  iii,  247 

Salary  grab,  iii,  249 

Sales  act,  uniform,  iii,  590 

Salisbury,  and  Tory  party,  i,  401 

Salmon  fishery  in  Alaska,  restrictions  upon,  ii,  23 

Saloons,  and  social  reform,  iii,  330 

— exclusion  of  women  from  labor  in,  ii,  302 
Salt  Lake  City,  iii,  602 

Salt  licks  and  lands,  iii,  249 

— and  monopolies,  ii,  4(36 

— in  resources  of  North  America,  iii,  205 

— River,  iii,  249 

project  in  Arizona,  ii,  243 

Salute,  in  diplomacy,  i,  590 

— legal  regulations  as  to,  ii,  26 
Salvador,  iii,  249 

— independence  of,  i,  236 
Salvation  Army,  ii,  432 
Samana  Bay,  iii.  250 

— (coaling  station),  i,  299 

Samlag,  law  of  1871  ( see  Gothenburg  system),  ii, 
87 

Samoa,  iii,  582 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  250 

— occupation  of,  i,  46 

— -and  Pacific  islands,  diplomatic  relations  with, 
ii,  596 

— ■ protectorate  over,  iii  83 
Samoan  controversy,  ii,  79 

— with  Germany,  ii,  79 

— Islands  and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  153 

— in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  38 
Sanction  of  the  law,  iii,  250 

Sand  lot,  iii,  252 

— meetings,  and  party  organization  in  California, 

ii,  631 

Sandiford,  Ralph,  and  slavery,  iii,  317 
Sands  vs.  Manistee  River  Imp.  Co.  (admission  of 
states),  iii,  415 

Sanford,  Nathan,  vote  for,  iii,  21 
Sanger,  William  W..  iii,  327 
Sanitary  laws,  iii,  252 

— Union,  Pan  American,  ii.  216 
Sanitation,  dispensaries,  free,  i,  597 
— • see  health,  ii,  117 

— see  Hospitals,  public,  ii,  127 

— see  also  under  Hygiene. 

- — see  Incurables,  public  care  of,  ii,  154 
• — insane,  public  care  of,  ii,  182 

— international,  ii,  216 

— see  Quarantine,  iii,  125 
Santiago,  Chile,  i,  260 

Sapphire,  The  (international  law),  ii,  208 
Sargent,  Winthrop,  ii.  562 
Saskatchewan,  iii,  253 
— Canadian  province  of.  i,  214 

— establishment  of,  i,  213 
Satirists,  political,  iii,  253 
Sault  Ste.  Marie,  i,  220 

— Canal,  i,  223 

Saunders,  Alvin,  and  Nebraska,  ii,  508 
Savarkar  case,  ii,  107 

Savigny,  Friedrich  Karl  von,  ii,  266,  731 
Savings  banks,  i,  120 

— deposits,  see  Taxation,  subject  of,  iii,  506 

— insurance,  iii,  253 

— see  also  under  Bank  deposits. 

— government  restrictions  as  to,  i,  190 

— postal,  ii,  764 
Saxe-Altenburg,  ii,  80 
Saxe-Coburg-Gotha,  ii,  80 
Saxe-Meiningen,  ii,  80 
Saxe-Weimar,  ii,  80 
Saxony,  ii,  80 

— plural  voting  in,  ii,  340 

— suffrage  in,  iii,  457 
Scab,  iii,  254 
Scalawags,  iii,  254 

■ — and  Republican  party,  iii,  196 
Scavenging,  iii.  436 

Scenery,  see  Real  estate,  government  ownership 
of.  iii,  153 

Schaffle,  Albert  E.  F.  von,  ii,  731 
Schaumburg-Lippe,  ii,  80 


Schedule,  iii,  254 
Schedules  of  tariff,  iii,  482 
Scheldt  dues  abolished,  i,  342 
Schelling,  ii,  731 
Schepens,  ii,  541 

Scherger,  G.  L.,  political  theories  of,  ii,  722 
Schleswig-IIolstein,  iii,  527 
Schmoller,  quoted  on  sociology,  iii,  346 
Schoffen,  and  municipal  government  in  continental 
Europe,  ii,  479 

Schofield,  John  M„  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  649 
Scholey  vs.  Rew  (direct  tax),  iii,  508 
Schollenberger  vs.  Pennsylvania  (interstate  com- 
merce), ii,  220 

Schoodic  confluent,  as  a boundary,  ii.  97 
School  attendance,  see  Truancy,  iii,  574 

— buildings,  iii,  254 

— directors,  iii,  254 

— districts,  iii,  241,  254 
— • extension,  iii,  255 

— finance,  iii,  255 

— funds,  state,  iii,  256 

— • grammar  and  the  grades,  iii,  259 

— hygiene,  iii,  257 

and  backward  pupils,  iii,  269 

and  truancy,  iii,  574 

— land,  public  ownership  of,  iii,  153 
— - Law,  Bennett,  i,  124 

— officials,  centralization  of,  ii,  364 

— property,  iii.  257 

— system,  in  cities,  ii,  329 

— township,  iii.  544 
Schoolhouse  building,  i,  551 
■ — campaign  of  1876.  i,  209 

— and  flag  of  United  States,  ii,  26 
Schools,  see  Boards,  municipal,  1,  136 

— and  colleges,  and  New  England,  ii,  525 
— • commissioner  of.  iii,  270 

— common,  iii,  258 

■ — continuation,  iii,  258 

— correspondence,  iii.  258 

— See  also  under  Education. 

— see  also  under  Educational  statistics,  i,  648 
- — high,  iii,  259 

■ commercial,  iii,  259 

• mechanic  arts,  iii,  260 

■ — • — township,  iii,  260 

— in  Indian  policy  of  the  United  States,  ii,  164 

— industrial,  iii,  260 

— medical  inspection  of,  iii,  262 

— and  municipal  government,  functions  of,  ii,  477 

— night,  iii,  262 

— open  air.  iii.  263 

— practical  arts,  iii,  263 

— primary,  iii.  263 

— public,  legal  rights  of  teachers  in,  iii,  264 
■ — • — normal,  ill,  264 

professional,  iii,  265 

required  subjects  in,  iii,  267 

system  and  problem  of,  iii.  267 

— see  Pupils  in.  legal  rights  of.  iii.  120 

— and  social  reform,  problems  of,  iii,  331 

— for  social  workers,  iii.  259 

— and  state  executive,  iii,  384 
— ■ summer,  iii,  269 

— superintendent  of,  i.  494:  iii,  270 

— see  also  Textbook  laws,  iii,  533 

— trade,  iii,  270 

— sec  also  Truancy,  iii,  573 
Schoon maker.  Augustus,  ii,  225 
Schout,  ii,  541 

Srhurman  Commission,  on  Philippines,  ii,  680 
Schurz.  Carl,  ii.  199  : iii,  272 

— cabinet  officer,  i.  197 

— ’and  Liberal  Republican  party,  ii,  344 

— and  patronage,  ii.  653 
Scbuvlkill  Canal,  i.  221 
Schwartzburg.  ii,  80 
Science,  political,  ii,  714 

— public,  iii.  272 

Scientific  Congress,  the  Pan  American,  ii.  216 
■ — literature,  T’nited  States  Bureau  of  the  Inter- 
national Catalogue  of,  iii,  323 

— management  of  business,  iii,  273 
Scio'o  comnany.  iii,  273 

Scire  fa'ias,  i.  473 

Scolia,  The  (maritime  usages),  ii,  213 
Scotland,  in  executive  svstem  of  Great  Britain,  i, 
689 

Scott  law  (Chinese  immigration',  i.  265 

— vs.  Sanford  (due  process  of  law),  i,  615 
(slavery),  i.  612 

— Sir  William,  influence  on  international  law,  ii, 

215 

— Winfield,  iii,  273 

— • — on  military  instructions,  ii,  185 

— —Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 

vote  for,  iii,  13,  27 

Scratching,  iii,  274 


770 


INDEX 


Scrip,  iii,  274 

Scrip,  and  public  debt,  i,  547 

Scrub  race  for  the  presidency,  iii,  274 

Scutin  de  iiste,  ii.  341 

— uninominal,  ii,  341 

Sea,  capture,  immunity  from,  ii,  204 

— exploration  of,  ii,  216 

— mistress  of  the,  and  mare  clausum,  ii,  395 

— power,  iii.  274 

— private  property  at,  iii,  65 
Seal  controversy,  i,  175 

— fisheries,  iii,  274 

— fur.  controversy,  ii,  66 
Sealed  orders,  ii,  186 

Sealer  of  weights  and  measures,  iii,  275 
Sealing  industry,  and  Japan,  ii,  249 
Seals,  public,  iii,  275 
Seaman,  benefit  fund  for,  ii,  188 

— status  of.  iii,  275 
Search,  right  of,  ii,  36 

Secession,  see  also  under  Civil  War,  i,  288 
Secession  controversy,  iii,  276 

— of  Georgia,  ii,  77 

— see  Quincy,  Josiah,  iii,  128 

— right  of.  see  State  sovereignty,  iii,  403 
Second  class  mail  matter,  iii.  278 

— term,  in  Hartford  Convention,  ii,  112 

for  President,  see  Qualifications  for  office, 

iii.  124 

see  Tenure  of  office,  iii.  517 

Secrecy,  see  Publicity,  iii,  118 

Secret  correspondence,  committee  of,  i,  593  ; ii,  378 

— service,  iii,  279 

— session,  iii,  279 

Secretaries,  in  diplomatic  service,  i,  593 

— heads  of  departments,  iii.  279 
Secretary  of  foreign  affairs,  iii,  567 

— of  the  Interior,  administrative  decisions  of,  i, 

11 

— of  legation,  iii,  279 

— to  the  President,  iii,  280 

— of  State,  influence  of  President  over,  iii,  4 
in  states,  iii,  279 

Sectarian  institutions,  iii,  439 
— -schools,  church  and  state  and,  i,  268 
Sectionalism,  see  Tennessee,  iii,  514 

— in  the  United  States,  iii,  280 
Sections,  in  surveying,  iii,  463 
Securities,  federal  commission  on,  iii,  285 
Security  Mutual  Life  Insurance  Go.  vs.  Prewitt 

(foreign  corporations),  ii,  231 
Sedden.  James  A.,  i,  372 
Sedgwick,  Theodore,  speaker,  i,  389  ; iii,  370 
Sedition  Act,  i,  30  : iii,  253 

— law,  and  freedom  of  speech,  ii.  58 
Seeds,  public  distribution  of,  iii,  285 
Segregation  of  prostitutes,  iii,  327 
Seidel.  Emil,  iii,  339 

— vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  46 
Seigniorage,  i.  309,  31 1 : iii.  286 

— and  mint  of  the  United  States,  ii,  451 
Seismological  Union,  the,  ii,  216 
Select  committees,  i,  358 

— council,  1.  364 
in  cities,  ii,  326 

- — vestry,  and  parish,  ii,  609 
Selectmen,  iii.  286 

— in  townships,  iii.  543 

Self  assessment  (income  tax),  iii,  493 
Self-construction  theory,  iii,  164 
Self-government,  iii,  287 

— local,  ii.  367 

Self-interest,  doctrine  of,  iii,  636 

Seligman.  E.  R.  A , quoted  on  assessments,  iii,  215 

— corporate  franchise  tax,  ii,  46 

— forms  of  competition,  i,  365 

— franchise  tax.  i.  475 

— taxation,  iii,  505 

Selkirk  Company,  Manitoba,  ii,  392 

— Range,  ii.  690 
Sellinp  of  Joseph,  iii,  317 
Seminole  Indians  in  Florida,  ii,  27 
Seminole  War.  iii.  652 

Seminoles,  and  Indian  policy  of  the  United  States, 
ii.  163 

— in  Indian  territory,  ii,  168 
Semi-sovereign  states,  iii,  573 
Senate,  amendments  in,  i,  384 

— committee  on  foreign  relations,  iii,  152 

• on  public  expenditures,  i,  387 

— committees  of.  i.  356 

— confirmation  bv  the.  i,  380 

— as  a council,  in  ratification  of  treaties,  iii,  151 

— courtesy  of  the,  iii.  287 

— Journal  of  the  executive  proceedings  of.  iii.  117 

— and  negotiation  of  treaties  by  the  United  States, 

ii.  512 

— and  nominating  systems,  ii,  549 

— and  parliament,  Canadian,  ii,  615 


Senate,  and  party  organization  in  legislative  bod- 
ies, ii,  633 

— see  Patronage,  ii,  653 

— see  President  pro  tempore,  iii,  7 

— see  also  Publicity,  iii,  118 

— representation  in  the,  i,  382 

— and  revenue,  bills  for  raising,  iii,  211 

— see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  248 
— - see  Secret  session,  iii,  279 

— state,  iii,  292 

— see  also  State  legislature,  iii,  398 
— -of  the  United  States,  iii,  287 

— in  tariff  legislation,  framing  of,  iii,  474 

— vacancies  in,  iii,  604 

Senatorial  courtesy  in  appropriations,  i,  62 

— leadership,  in  sure  states,  ii,  649 
Senators,  iii,  292 

■ — direct  election  of,  opinion,  iii,  104 

— election  of,  iii,  293 

— • popular  election  of,  iii ; 294 

— resignation  of,  iii,  204 

— instructions  to,  ii,  186 

— qualifications  for,  iii,  124 

— and  state  parties,  ii,  621 
Seneca,  and  political  theories,  ii,  717 
Senior,  quoted  on  economic  cost,  i,  482 

— on  rent,  iii,  180 
Sentence,  indeterminate,  ii,  157 
Separation  of  powers,  ii,  256  ; iii.  295 

— see  Checks  and  balances,  i.  250 

— in  congressional  government,  i.  393 

— in  European  constitutions,  i,  9 

— of  executive  and  Congress,  i,  680 

— Montesquieu  quoted  on,  ii,  730 

— objections  to,  ii,  722 

— in  political  theory,  iii,  721 

— see  also  State  executive,  iii,  384 
Sequestation  and  confiscation,  i,  380 
Sere  vs.  Pitot  (territorial  status),  iii,  523 
Serfdom,  and  negro  problem,  ii,  515 
Sergeant,  John,  vote  for,  iii,  21 
Sergeant-at-arms,  iii,  298 

Servants,  indentured,  ii,  155 
Service,  iii,  298 

— the,  iii,  298 

— pensions,  ii.  670 
Services,  in  production,  iii,  71 
Servitude,  iii.  299 

— involuntary,  ii,  237 

— of  persons,  iii,  299 

— see  Slaughter  house  cases,  iii,  314 
Servitudes,  international,  iii,  299 
Session  laws,  iii,  426 

— of  legislative  bodies,  iii,  299 
Settlement  houses  and  social  reform,  iii,  330 

— laws,  of  Massachusetts,  ii,  734 
Settlements,  college,  iii,  300 
Seven  ranges,  iii,  463 

— and  Ohio,  ii,  573 
Seventeenth  Amendment,  iii,  300 

— and  Senators,  election  of.  iii,  294 
Sevier,  John,  ii,  48  : iii,  529 

Sewell,  Arthur,  and  Populist  party,  ii,  757 

— and  Silver  party,  iii,  312 
— - vote  for,  iii,  39 

Sewall.  Samuel,  on  quoted  slavery,  iii,  317 
Seward.  Frederick  W..  and  San  Domingo,  iii,  250 

— William  Henry,  in  Alaska,  i,  24 

and  Alaskan  annexation,  i,  25 

biography,  iii.  301 

— —cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
during  Civil  War,  i,  290 

and  Confederate  commissioners,  i,  371 

see  Higher  law,  ii,  122 

and  irrepressible  conflict,  ii.  239;  iii,  191 

— - — and  Republican  party,  iii.  191 

Secretary  of  State,  iii.  402 

quoted  on  Trent  affair,  iii,  571 

— - — West  Indies,  iii,  676 

— Whigs,  iii,  300 

Sewers  and  sanitation,  expenditures  for,  i,  695 

— and  sewage  disposal,  iii.  301 
Seymour,  Horatio,  biography,  iii,  302 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  570 
— -vote  for,  iii,  13.  31 
‘‘Shadow’  cabinet,”  ii,  632 
Shaftsbury,  Earl  of,  ii,  299 
Shakers,  i,  364 

Shaman,  in  Indian  government,  ii,  162 
Shanks  vs.  Dupont  (allegiance),  i,  31 
Sharkey,  Judge,  ii,  454 

Shaw,  Leslie  M„  cabinet  officer,  i,  198  ; iii,  566 

— Mrs.  Quincy  A.,  ii,  280 

— Samuel,  i.  260 

— William,  ii,  494 

Shays’  Rebellion,  ii.  194,  196;  iii,  159,  302 

— and  the  Confederation,  i,  378 
Shellfish  cultivation,  ii,  20 
Shepherd,  Alexander  R.,  i,  602 


771 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Sheridan,  Philip  H , ii,  361 
Sheriff,  iii,  302 

— as  county  officer,  i,  494 

— deputy,  legal  authority  of,  i,  586 

— and  fee  system,  i,  728 

— in  Great  Britain,  iii,  307 

— see  also  State  judiciary,  iii,  397 
Sherman,  James  S.,  Vice-President,  iii,  616 

— vote  for,  iii,  44,  45 
Sherman,  John,  biography,  iii,  304 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  1 147 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 

— and  war  with  Spain,'  iii,  368 
Sherman,  Roger  (biography),  iii,  304 

— and  Declaration  of  Independence,  i,  554 

— in  Federal  Convention,  i,  713 
Sherman  William,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— on  Mississippi  River,  iii,  672 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 
Sherman  Anti-trust  Act,  iii,  580 

— Addyston  pipe  case,  i,  7 

— judicial  interpretation,  iii,  303 

— and  Northern  Securities  case,  ii,  560 

— see  President  of  United  States,  authority  and 

influence  of,  iii,  4 

— and  restraint  of  trade,  iii,  155 
Sherman  Silver  Act,  iii,  305 

— coinage  under,  i,  310 

— - and  Democratic  party,  i,  574 

— and  gold  reserve,  ii,  85 

— and  silver  coinage  controversy,  iii,  310 
Shimonoselti,  peace  negotiations  of,  i,  262 

— Strait,  ii,  248 
Shin-plasters,  i,  536 ; iii,  305 
Ship  canals,  ii,  494 

— subsidies,  i,  167 

Shipbuilding,  regulation  and  public  aid  of,  iii,  305 
Shipping  commissioners,  iii,  306 
- — and  navigation,  regulation  of,  ii,  503 
Shipping  reciprocity  of  1815,  iii,  160 

— registry  of,  iii,  175 

— regulation  of,  iii,  306 
— - subsidies  to,  iii,  440 
Ships,  asylum  on,  i,  91 

— free,  make  free  goods,  ii,  52 
Ship’s  manifest,  iii,  611 
Shlras,  George,  Jr.,  iii,  462 
Shire  moots,  iii,  542 

— in  Great  Britain,  iii,  307 

— reeve,  iii,  302 

Shirt  sleeve  diplomacy,  iii,  308 
Shoe-string  districts,  i,  55  ; ii,  82  ; iii,  308 
Shop  trades,  for  criminals,  ii,  659 
Short  Ballot  Organization,  i,  104 

— and  direct  primary,  iii,  54 

— and  separation  of  powers,  iii,  296 

— and  suffrage,  iii,  448 
Short  hairs,  iii,  308 
Short,  William,  ii,  519 
Shoshone  (irrigation),  ii,  243 
Shoshonean  Indians,  i,  2 
Shufeldt  Treaty,  i,  84 
Shuster,  W.  Morgan,  iii,  244 

Siam,  diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  84 

— extraterritorially  in,  i,  706 
Sic  semper  tyrannis,  iii,  308 
Side  judges,  iii,  308 
Sidewalks,  iii,  308,  435 

Siebold,  Ex  parte  (concurrent  powers),  I,  369 

Sierra  Leone,  ii,  346 

Sierras,  ii,  690 

Sieves,  Abbe,  ii,  731 

Signal  corps,  iii,  309 

Signet,  iii,  275 

Silent  panic,  i,  528 

Silk,  duties  on,  iii,  488 

— • stockings,  iii,  309 

Silver,  see  RIand-Allison  Act,  i,  134 

— as  bullion,  i,  186 

— certificates,  iii,  309 

and  notes,  United  States,  ii,  563 

— — and  paper  monev  in  the  United  States,  ii, 

606 

and  public  debt,  i,  545 

— coinage,  see  Banks  and  banking  acts,  national, 

i,  116 

controversy,  iii,  309 

—  and  Democratic  party,  i,  572 

— dollar  of  our  daddies,  i,  606 

and  crises,  economic,  i,  528 

in  political  convention,  i,  465 

—  crime  of  ’73,  i,  519 

see  West  as  a factor  in  American  politics, 

iii,  672 

legal  tender,  ii,  324 

— grays,  iii.  312 

— notes,  and  notes,  United  States,  ii,  563 

— party,  iii,  312 


Silver,  see  Poor  man’s  dollar,  ii,  735 

— and  Populist  party,  ii,  757 

— Republicans,  iii,  312 

— in  resources  of  North  America,  iii,  205 

— see  Trade  dollar,  iii,  547 
Silviculture.  See  Forestry. 

Similitude  section  of  tariff  act,  iii,  471 
Simms,  John  D.,  Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 
Sinews  of  war,  iii,  312 

Single  house,  in  revolutionary  period,  iii,  392 

— tax,  iii,  496 

— - — labor  organizations  and,  ii,  291 

sec  also  Reform  movements,  iii,  172 

and  socialism,  iii,  312 

Sinking  fund,  iii,  312 

— in  redemption  of  public  debt,  i,  551 

— and  public  debt,  i,  547 
Siouan  Indians,  i,  2 

Sioux  City  and  Pacific,  and  Pacific  railroads,  ii, 
596 

— Falls  constitution,  South  Dakota,  iii,  361 

— war  with,  ii,  652 
Sixteen  to  one,  iii,  313 

— see  Bimetallism,  i,  131 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  197 

— See  also  under  Silver. 

Sixteenth  Amendment,  iii,  313 

— see  also  Tax,  income,  iii,  492 

Skagway  in  Alaska  boundary  controversy,  i,  27 
Skinner,  St.  John  B.  L.,  postmaster-general,  ii, 
767 

Slander,  ii,  57 

— anl  libel,  civil  liability  for,  ii,  57 
Slashes,  mill-boy  of  the,  ii,  441 
Slate,  the,  in  caucus,  i,  233 

— and  direct  primaries,  iii,  52 
Slaughter  house  cases,  i,  272  ; iii,  313 

— civil  rights  under,  i,  282 

— and  double  citizenship,  i,  608 

— and  Fourteenth  Amendment,  ii,  41 

— (privileges  and  immunities  of  citizens),  iii,  68 
Slaughter  houses.  See  Abattoirs. 

— inspection  of,  ii,  183 
Slave  trade,  i,  14  ; iii,  314 

— Asiento  Treaty  on,  i,  84 

— and  colonization,  i,  326 

— constitutional  compromise  as  to,  i,  419 
— - see  Cruising  convention,  i,  531 

— and  liquor  traffic,  African,  ii,  216 

— restrictions  on,  i,  190 

— rum  and  the,  i,  620 

— suppression  of  the,  ii,  234 
Slavery  controversy,  iii,  316 

— and  the  churches,  iii,  276 

— -in  Compromise  of  1820,  i,  366 

— in  Compromise  of  1850,  i,  366 

— in  Confederate  States,  i,  372 

— Creole  case,  i,  519 

— see  Democratic  party,  i,  566 

— see  Dough-face,  i,  608 

— and  economic  history  of  United  States,  i,  623 
— - Emancipation  Proclamation,  i,  663 

— and  the  Federal  Convention,  i,  716 

— see  Finality  men,  i,  732 

— see  Fire-eaters,  ii,  18 

— see  Fourteenth  Amendment,  ii,  40 

— see  Free  Soil  party,  ii,  52 

— see  Freedmen’s  Bureau,  ii,  57 

— see  Freedom,  personal,  ii,  59 

— and  Freeport  Doctrine,  ii,  59 

— -and  the  frontier  in  American  development,  ii, 
63 

— - gag  laws,  ii,  67 

— Giddings’  Resolutions,  ii,  83 

— -and  Hartford  Convention,  ii,  112 

— and  higher  law,  ii,  122 

— and  irrepressible  conflict,  ii,  239 

— see  Kansas-Nobraska  Bill.  ii.  276 

— see  Kansas  struggle,  ii,  276 
— ■ as  a labor  system,  iii,  315 

— legal  discussion  of,  iii,  321 

— and  Liberty  party,  ii,  348 

— -in  Massachusetts,  1641,  ii,  170 

— and  Missouri  Compromise,  ii,  457 

— - in  Missouri,  in  the  Era  of  good  Feeling,  1,  580 

— and  negro  problem,  ii,  513 

— non-interference  with,  ii.  553 

— and  Omnibus  Bill,  ii,  580 

— and  Ordinance  of  1787,  ii,  586 

— see  Personal  liberty  laws,  ii,  673 

— see  also  Physics  and  politics,  ii,  686 
— -and  popular  sovereignty,  ii,  738 

— see  also  Proslavery,  iii,  82 

— see  also  Redemptioner.  iii.  170 

— see  also  Servitude  of  persons,  iii,  299 
> — in  South  Carolina,  iii.  358 

— ■ see  also  Territories  of  United  States,  iii,  520 

— in  Texas,  iii,  529 

— see  Thirteenth  Amendment,  iii,  536 


772 


INDEX 


Slavery,  Turner  Insurrection,  ill,  582 

— see  Underground  railroad,  iii,  585 

— in  the  United  States  (map),  iii,  318 

— Wilmot  Proviso,  iii,  688 
Slaves,  L’Amistad  case,  ii,  305 
Slaves,  direct  taxes  on,  ii,  508 

— fugitive,  ii,  64 

and  Whig  party,  iii,  684 

— value  of,  in  Confederate  States,  i,  373 
Sleeping  cars,  iii,  321 

Slidell,  John,  iii,  322 

— and  Mexico,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  424 
Sloyd,  manual  training,  ii,  392 

Small  Holdings  Act  (England),  i,  491 

— state  party,  in  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 
Smith,  Adam,  quoted  on  economic  cost,  i,  482 

— quoted  on  economic  theory,  i,  4327 

— and  individualism,  theory  of,  ii,  173 

— and  theorv  of  government,  ii,  90 

Smith  vs.  Alabama  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  218 

— Caleb  B„  ii,  199 

— - — cabinet  officer,  i,  197;  ii,  7 67 

— Gerritt,  ii,  175 

Liberty  League,  ii,  347 

— Green  C.,  and  Prohibition  party,  iii,  77 
vote  for,  iii,  34 

— Hoke,  ii,  199 

— • — cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— Isaac  S.,  ii,  368 

— James,  i,  554 

judge  of  commerce  court,  i,  499 

— John,  iii,  322 

Smith,  John,  Secretary  of  War,  iii,  648 

— Joseph,  iii,  322 

— vs.  Moore  (office,  obligation  to  accept),  ii,  570 
— - Munroe,  ii,  265 

on  the  nature  of  law,  ii,  265 

— - Robert,  cabinet  officer,  i,  195 

Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 

— vs.  Whitney  (courts  martial),  i,  517 

— William,  vote  for,  iii,  21 

Smithson,  James,  and  public  science,  in,  272 
Smithsonian  Institution,  iii,  323 

— and  museums,  public,  ii,  490 
Smoke,  public  regulation  of,  iii,  323 
Smothering  of  bills,  ii,  343 
Smuggling,  iii,  323 

— fines  from,  as  sources  of  revenue,  n,  17 

— forfeitures  for,  ii,  39 

— as  a fraud  on  the  treasury,  ii,  51 

— and  passengers’  baggage,  duties  on,  ii,  650 

— in  West  Indian  trade,  i,  341 

Smythe  vs.  Ames  (due  process  of  law)  i,  616 

— (prices  and  rates),  iif,  49 

— (property,  rights  of),  iii,  79 

— (railroad  valuation),  iii,  141 

— (valuation  of  public  utilities),  m,  606 
Snake  River,  iii,  663 

Snappers,  iii,  324 
Soap,  iii,  324 

Social  betterment,  debt  for,  i,  550 

— center,  i,  281 ; iii,  324 
and  social  reform,  iii,  331 

— compact  theory,  iii,  324,  408 

— contract,  see  Political  theories,  ii,  725 
Social  Democratic  party,  iii,  339 

— Workingmen’s  party  of  North  America,  ii,  296 

— Democrats,  iii,  326 
Social  economics,  iii,  348 

— economy,  St.  Louis  senool  of,  iii,  259 

— ethics,  democracy  and,  i,  563 

— evil  see  also  Police,  ii,  705 

— evil,  regulation  of  the,  iii,  326 

— insurance,  iii,  700 

— justice,  i,  563 

— politics,  iii,  348 

— process,  the,  iii,  345 

— reform,  and  economy,  i,  564 

— — problems  of,  iii,  328 

— settlements,  iii,  300 

— state,  the,  iii,  416 

— technology,  iii,  341 

— welfare,  insurance  and,  ii,  188 

— workers,  and  playgrounds,  ii,  698 
schools  for,  iii,  259 

training  schools  for,  i,  245 

Socialism,  iii,  331 

— and  constitutional  basis  of  taxation,  iii,  498 

— Christian,  i,  266 

— in  economic  theory,  i,  628 

— and  international  workingmen’s  association,  ii, 

217 

— and  labor  organizations,  ii,  291 

— municipal,  iii,  336 

— political,  and  social  reform,  iii,  330 

— and  political  theories,  ii,  723 

— in  political  theory,  ii,  727 

— «ee  also  Reform  movements,  iii,  172 


Socialism  and  Rousseau,  ii,  730 

— state,  iii,  336 

Socialist  Democratic  Party,  and  nihilism,  ii,  548 

— Labor  party,  ii,  296  ; iii,  338 
of  North  America,  ii,  296 

— party,  iii,  339 

see  also  Third  parties,  iii,  534 

— theory  of  government,  ii,  91 
Socialists,  Fabian,  i,  708 
Socialization  of  religion,  i,  564 
Societary  sciences,  iii,  342 
Societies,  legal  status  of,  iii,  340 
Society,  iii,  341 

— to  encourage  studies  at  home,  iii,  258 
Society  of  the  Holy  Trinity  for  the  Redemption  of 

Captives,  i,  121 

Society  and  state,  distinguished,  iii,  342 
Sociology,  iii,  341 

— appled,  iii,  347 

— ■ and  economy,  in  political  theories,  ii,  723 
— ■ and  political  science,  ii,  715 
Socius,  the,  iii,  345 

Soft  money  and  Greenback  party,  ii,  101 
Softs,  iii,  350 

— in  Democratic  party,  i,  568 
Soils,  Bureau  of,  i,  18  : iii,  350 

Soldiering,  and  scientific  management,  iii,  273 
Soldiers,  and  labor  contracts,  ii,  286,  301 

— quartering  of,  iii,  351 

— and  sailors,  bounties  to,  i,  168 

— - — relation  of  the  state  to,  ii,  301 

legal  status  of,  iii,  350 

Soldiers’  homes,  iii,  351 

— orphans,  i,  258  ; iii,  351 

— vote  in  Civil  War.  iii,  30 
Solicitor  of  Department  of  State,  iii,  379 

— general,  iii,  352 

Department  of  Justice,  ii,  271 

— for  the  navy,  ii,  254 
Solicitors,  public  official,  iii,  352 
Solid  South,  iii,  352 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  572 

— and  party  organization,  ii,  638 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  196 
Somers  system,  of  assessment,  i,  88 

"Son  or  grandson”  suffrage  clause,  iii,  446 

Sons  of  Liberty,  i,  51  : ii,  281 

— -and  Stamp  Act  agitation,  iii,  375 

Sons  of  Temperance,  iii,  513 

Soo  Canal,  i,  223 

Sorehead,  iii.  352 

Soudan,  iii,  527 

SouU>,  Pierre,  i.  533 

Sound  dues,  i,  342,  539 

— See  also  Danish  Sound  dues. 

— in  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  36 
Sound  money,  iii,  198 

South,  iii,  352 

South  Africa,  Union  of,  iii,  354 

— America,  iii,  354 

diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  356 

— Carolina,  iii,  358 

acts,  and  nullification  controversy,  ii,  566 

constitutional  amendment  in,  i,  436 

eight  ballot  box  law,  i,  650 

Exposition,  ii,  565 

— - — and  nullification  controversy,  ii,  565 

see  Rutledge,  John,  iii,  244 

— ■ — -party  organization,  ii,  639 
— ■ — See  also  South,  iii,  353 

— Dakota,  iii,  360 

legislation,  direct,  ii,  332 

— — vs.  North  Carolina  (Eleventh  Amendment), 

i,  660 

— (states  as  parties  to  suits),  iii,  415 

South,  Lower,  iii.  671 

— party  organization  in  the,  ii,  638 

— representation  in  Republican  national  conven- 

tion of  1916,  iii,  201 

— and  sectionism  in  the  United  States,  iii,  281 
Southard,  Samuel  L.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196 ; ii, 

506 

— Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 
Secretary  of  War,  iii,  648 

Southern  Pacific,  and  Pacific  railroads,  ii,  596 

— Railway  and  California  politics,  i,  206:  iii.  384 

— Railway,  and  machine,  political,  ii,  384,  597 
Southern  people,  and  particularism,  ii,  620 

— Rights  party,  in  Georgia,  ii,  77 
Southgate,  James  H.,  and  National  party,  ii,  493 

— Vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  40‘ 

Southwest,  and  sectionalism  in  the  United  States, 

iii,  281 

“Sovereign”  see  Virginia  and  Kentucky  resolutions, 
iii,  621 

Sovereigns,  extraterritoriality  of,  i,  705 

— of  industry,  ii,  654 
Sovereignty,  attributes  of,  ii,  365 

— of  commonwealths,  i,  433 

773 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Sovereignty,  division  of,  between  state  and  fed- 
eral governments,  iii,  386 
— see  Federal  state,  i,  719 
— -and  impairment  of  contract,  i,  458 

— location  of,  see  United  States  as  a federal  state, 

iii,  595 

— of  the  people,  iii,  362 

- — in  political  theory,  ii,  729 
— - popular,  ii,  738 

— squatter,  iii,  374 

— state,  iii,  402 

— theory  of,  iii,  363 
Sozialpolitik,  iii.  341 
Spain,  army  and  navy,  i,  76 

— commercial  policy  and  relations  with  the  United 

States,  i,  340 

— see  Diplomacy,  i,  590 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  366 

— see  Right  of  deposit,  iii,  226 

— payment  to,  and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  692 
— treaty  with,  1795,  iii,  567 

— - — 1898,  and  cession  of  territory,  ii,  209 

and  negotiation  of  treaties  by  the  United 

States,  ii,  512 

— see  also  Virginias  episode,  iii,  622 

— war  with,  iii,  653 

— - — -and  Democratic  party,  i,  575 

effect  on  United  States  as  a world  power, 

iii,  701 

and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  691 

influence  on  commercial  policy,  i.  343 

see  Maine,  ii,  388 

methods  in,  iii,  638 

and  military  and  naval  expenditures,  ii,  435 

pensions  for,  ii,  670 

and  public  debt,  i,  546 

and  revenue  act  ( legacies),  iii,  494 

taxes  for,  see  Revenue,  internal,  iii,  213 

Sparks,  E.  E.,  quoted  on  Halifax  Commission  and 
awards,  ii,  108 

Speaker  of  assembly,  and  parliamentary  law,  ii, 
617 

— in  Congress  of  United  States,  i,  386 

— and  growth  of  Constitution,  i,  421 

— of  the  House,  ii,  131  ; iii,  369 

■ and  committee  system,  i,  356 

and  party  organization  in  legislative  bodies, 

ii.  633 

— sec  Recognition,  iii,  161 

— see  also  Rules  of  Congress,  iii,  237 

— of  the  Senate,  iii,  1 

— in  state  legislatures,  iii,  369 
Special  agents,  division  of,  iii,  371 

— assessments,  i,  89 

— commissioners,  in  diplomacy,  i,  589 

— legislation,  i.  274 

and  legislative  reform,  ii,  341 

— orders,  of  committee  on  rules,  iii.  238 

— sessions,  of  Congress,  i,  385 

Specie  circular,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  566 

— payments,  iii.  371 

in  political  platforms,  iii,  696 

• resumption  of,  iii,  209 

suspension  of.  iii,  372 

Specific  duties,  i,  618 

— see  Tariff  rates,  iii.  482 

— in  Underwood  Tariff,  iii.  586 
Specific  performance  in  equity,  i,  674 
Speculating  in  stocks,  iii,  430 

Speech,  freedom  of,  and  of  the  press,  ii,  57 
Speed,  James,  i.  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

Speed,  in  transit,  in  cities,  iii,  550 
Spellbinders,  iii,  372 

Spencer,  Herbert,  quoted  on  coinage,  i,  311 

— and  individualism,  theory  of,  ii,  173 

— and  organic  theory  of  the  state,  ii,  591 

— political  theories  of.  ii,  727 

— and  sociology,  iii.  343 

— and  theory  of  government,  ii,  90 
Spencer.  John  C..  iii,  566 

cabinet  officer,  i,  196;  iii,  649 

Speyer,  James,  and  militarism,  ii,  432 
Spheres  of  government,  iii,  372 

— of  influence,  i,  585.  iii,  527 

— of  interest,  iii,  527 
Spinoza,  Baruch,  ii,  730 
Spirit  of  Laws,  ii,  730 

Spirits,  see  Revenue,  internal,  iii,  213 

— wines  and  malt  liquors,  duties  on,  iii,  488 
Spoils  system,  iii.  372 

— see  Ross  and  the  boss  system  of  party  govern- 

ment, i,  146 

— civil  service  and,  i,  284 

— and  civil  service,  state,  i,  286 

— clean  sweep  in,  i.  294 

— see  Patronage,  ii,  652 

— and  political  corruption,  i,  479 

— see  Removal  of  public  officials,  Hi,  177 


Spoliation  claims.  French,  ii,  43 

Sponge  fishery,  relations  of  government  to,  ii,  23 

Spooner  Amendment,  and  I’hilippines,  ii,  680 

Spotted  fever,  i,  18 

Spottiswood,  Alexander,  i,  35 

Sprague,  William,  iii,  641 

Springbok  (continuous  voyages),  i,  454 

Springer  vs.  United  States  (direct  tax),  iii,  508 

Springfield  armory,  ii,  588 

Sprinklers,  automatic,  ii,  20 

Squatter  associations,  ii,  62 

— constitutions  in  Iowa,  ii,  237 
— -sovereignty,  iii,  374 

and  Democratic  party,  i,  568 

Squatters,  on  public  lands,  iii,  98 
Staaienbund,  iii,  374 
Stadtbolder,  and  monarchy,  ii,  459 
Stadtrate,  and  municipal  government  in  conti- 
nental Europe,  ii,  479 

Stadtverordnetcn,  and  municipal  government  in 
continental  Europe,  ii,  479 

— Versammlung,  ii,  415 
Staff,  chief  of.  iii,  375 

— college,  i,  639 
Stalwarts,  iii.  375 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  196 
Stamp  Act  agitation,  iii,  375 

— Congress,  iii,  375 

— and  Revolution,  American,  causes  of,  iii,  220 
significance  of,  iii,  221 

Stamp  duties,  see  Taxation,  subjects  of,  iii,  506 

— tax,  iii,  375 

— taxes,  and  revenue,  internal,  iii,  213 
Stampede,  iii,  376 

Stanberry,  Henry,  i,  95 
— - cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
Stand  pat,  iii,  376 

— policy,  iii,  75 

Standard  of  living,  and  immigration,  ii,  144 
— - money,  iii,  376 

— and  money,  theory  of,  ii,  461 
— ■ multiple,  ii,  474 

Standard  Oil  Co.,  see  Corporations,  Bureau  of,  1, 
474 

— dissolution  of.  i,  473 

— vs.  United  States  (restraint  of  trade),  iii,  208 

— companies,  iii,  579 
Standard  time,  iii,  376 
Standards.  Bureau  of,  i.  366  : iii,  376 
see  also  Weights  and  measures,  iii,  667 

■ — -of  exchange,  government  restrictions  on,  i,  190 

— government  fixing  of,  ii,  183 
Standerat,  of  Switzerland,  iii.  465 
Standing  rules,  parliamentary  law.  ii,  616 
Stanley.  Ex  parte  (trials),  iii,  573 
Stanton.  Edwin  M,  attorney  general,  i,  95 

— biography,  iii,  377 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196.  197 

— and  impeachment  of  Johnson,  ii,  149 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii.  649 

— Supreme  Court  United  States,  iii,  462 

— quoted  on  War  Department,  iii.  644 
Stanwood,  E.,  quoted  on  tariff  policy  of  United 

States,  iii,  479 
Star  route  trials,  iii,  377 
Star  Spangled  Banner,  i,  105 

— Order  of  the,  see  Know nothing  party,  ii,  281 
Stare  decisis,  i,  231  ; iii.  377 

Stark,  John,  and  New  Hampshire,  ii,  529 
State  account  system  of  convict  labor,  i,  466 

— architect,  iii,  90 
— -assembly,  iii,  377 

State  Bank  vs.  Bilstad  (uniform  legislation),  Iii, 
591 

— banks,  i,  114 

— board  of  agriculture,  iii,  575 

— — of  education,  iii,  575 

— boards  of  health,  ii,  118 

— bonds,  income  tax  on,  iii,  492 

— boss,  i,  208 

— business  manager,  i,  684 

— citizenship,  privileges  and  immunities  of,  iii,  68 

— committees,  party,  i,  363 
— - constabulary,  i,  402 

— Department  of.  iii,  378 

Appointments,  Bureau  of,  1,  52 

archives  of,  i,  69 

Consular  Bureau,  i,  445 

and  diplomacy  and  diplomatic  usage,  i,  589 

— — form  of  request  for  official  action  of,  i.  292 
— - — Indexes  and  Archives,  Bureau  of,  ii,  158 

Rolls  and  Library,  Bureau  of,  iii,  233 

see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  247 

solicitor  of,  ii,  270 

— — of  Trade  Relations.  Bureau  of,  iii,  547 
— - departments,  heads  of,  iii,  381 

— deposit,  the,  iii.  88 

— dispensary  in  South  Carolina,  iii.  360 
— - essential  attributes  of  the,  iii,  366 


INDEX 


State  examiners,  iii,  382 

— excise  commissioner,  ii,  356 

— executive,  iii,  382 
boards,  i,  140 

— farm  colony,  for  criminals,  ii,  659 

system  of  convict  labor,  i,  467 

— vs.  Frear  (investigations,  legislative),  ii,  236 

— freight  tax  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  221 

— -governments,  characteristics  of,  iii,  380 
centralization  in,  i,  240 

during  the  Revolution,  iii,  391 

— vs.  Guilbert  (investigations,  legislative),  ii,  236 

— vs.  J.  J.  Newman  Lumber  Co.  (labor,  hours  of), 

ii,  290 

— judiciary,  iii,  394 

— legislators,  apportionment  of,  i,  56 

— legislature,  iii,  398 

assembly,  ii,  336 

committees  of,  i,  359 

-and  party  organization,  ii,  634 

rules  of,  iii,  240 

— libraries,  iii,  401 

— licenses  on  interstate  commerce,  ii,  219 

— militia,  in  riots,  suppression  of,  iii,  228 

— and  nation  distinguished,  ii.  492 

— of  nature,  in  political  theories,  ii,  717 

— organic  theory  of  the,  ii,  591 

— police  power,  and  interstate  commerce,  ii,  220 

— vs.  Powell  (constitutional  amendments),  i,  436 

— prison,  ii,  661 

— public  school,  i,  259 

— publications,  iii,  117 

— railroad  commissions,  iii,  134 

— referees,  retired  judges  as,  iii,  209 

— regulation  and  taxation,  restrictions  of,  i,  338 

— rights,  iii,  402 

Calhoun  and,  i,  203 

in  Confederate  States,  i,  372 

party,  in  Georgia,  ii,  77 

see  United  States  as  a federal  state,  iii,  596 

— secretaries  of,  iii,  402 
place  in  cabinet,  i,  200 

— — (in  states),  iii,  38l 

and  statutes,  state,  iii,  426 

— senate,  iii,  292 

— socialism,  iii,  336 

— sovereignty,  iii,  277 
-iii,  402 

— — see  also  State  rights,  iii,  402 

gee  Constitutions,  classified,  i,  433 

and  nullification  controversy,  ii,  567 

see  Political  theories,  ii,  720 

see  Virginia  and  Kentucky  Resolutions,  ill, 

620 

— steal,  Maine,  ii,  388 

— suicide,  theory  of,  iii,  164 

— systems  of  finance,  ii,  3 

— tax  on  railroad  gross  receipts,  ii,  221 

— theory  of  the.  iii.  406 

— universities,  iii,  409 
table  of,  iii,  411 

. — use  system  of  convict  labor,  i,  466 

of  prison  industries,  iii,  59 

— - what  is  the.  iii,  342 

State's  attorney,  see  District  attorney. 

— evidence,  iii.  419 

— right,  Johnson  quoted  on.  iii,  195 
States,  admission  of.  iii.  413 

— see  individual  states  by  name,  iii,  414 

— classification  of.  iii.  416 

— compacts  between,  iii.  418 

— constitutional  prohibitions  upon,  the,  l,  423 

— equality  of,  iii.  418 

— General  of  Holland,  iii,  595 

— as  parties  to  suits,  iii,  415 

— restrictions  upon,  iii,  419 

— in  the  Union,  iii,  419 

Statesman  and  boss,  distinguished,  i,  146 
Statesmanship,  see  Party  leadership,  ii.  630 
Staten  Island,  and  New  York  City,  ii,  539 
Station  houses,  iii,  420 

Statistical  Abstract  of  Treasury  Department,  iii,  89 
Statistics,  iii,  420 

— Bureau  of.  i,  334  ; iii.  424 
and  crop  reports,  i,  529 

— financial,  ii.  1 01 

— -official  collection  of.  iii.  423 

— and  political  science,  ii,  714,  715 
Status,  of  persons,  privileged,  iii,  67 

— quo,  ante  helium,  iii.  425 
Statute,  curative,  i,  535 

— declaratory,  i,  557 

— of  enrollments,  ii,  307 
- — of  labor,  ii,  299 

— of  laborers,  great,  ii,  299 

— law,  ii,  314 

— of  limitations,  ii,  213 

— making  of  a,  iii,  400 

— of  York,  ii,  299 


Statutes,  amendments  to,  iii,  426 
— -constitutionalization  of  nullified,  iii,  158 
— - construction  and  interpretation,  i,  445 
— - declaratory,  i,  557 

— directory,  i,  596 

— drafting  of,  i,  609;  ii,  338 

— of  laborers,  ii,  286 

— at  large,  i,  5 

— multiplicity  of,  ii,  336 

— nullified,  ii],  158 

— revised,  i,  5 ; iii,  218 

— revision  of,  iii,  389 

— state,  iii,  425 

Statutory  rules  and  orders  (England),  i,  688 
Stay  laws,  iii,  426 

Steam  Engineering,  Bureau  of,  iii,  426 

— power,  ii,  770 

— roller,  iii,  426 

— vessels,  ii,  394 

Steamboat  inspection,  ii,  394  ; iii,  427 
— • Inspection  Service,  i.  4,  336 

and  navigation,  regulation  of,  ii,  503 

Steamship  accidents,  i,  3 

Stearn  vs.  Minnesota  (admission  of  states),  iii,  415 
Steel  cars,  and  transportation,  regulation  of,  iii, 
557 

— products,  specific  duties  on,  i,  618 
— - rails,  tariff  on,  iii,  482 
Steering  committee,  i,  379 

— of  Congress,  i,  387 

Steigleder  vs.  McQuesten  (domicile),  i,  607 
Stephens,  Alexander  H.,  ii,  77 

— biography,  iii,  427 

— Confederate  States,  Vice-President  of,  i,  371 

— quoted  on  state  sovereignty,  iii,  403 
Sterilization,  and  social  reform,  iii,  331 
Steuerverein,  ii,  79 

Steunenberg,  Governor,  ii,  293 
Stevens,  Isaac,  iii,  656 

— John  I-’.,  and  Panama  Canal,  ii,  600 

— Thaddeus,  biography,  iii,  427 
— - — and  party  leadership,  ii,  630 
— - — and  Republican  party,  iii,  195 
Stevenson,  Andrew,  speaker,  i,  390;  iii,  370 

— Adlai  E.,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  574 
and  Populist  party,  ii,  758 

Vice-President,  iii,  616 

vote  for.  iii,  38,  41 

Stewart,  Gideon  T.,  vice-presidential  candidate,  iii, 
34 

Still  Hunt,  ii,  51  : iii,  427 

Stimson,  Henry  Lewis,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198  ; iii, 
649 

Stipendiaries,  ii,  258 

Stock  and  bonds,  of  railroads,  iii,  135 

— issues,  regulation  of.  iii,  428 

— transfer  law,  iii,  428,  590 

— watering,  iii,  428 

— jobbing,  iii,  430 

— - — as  gambling,  ii,  68 
Stockholders,  legal  status  of,  iii,  429 
Stocks  and  bonds,  iii,  431 

— -see  Securities,  federal  commission  on,  iii,  285 
Stockton,  Richard,  i,  554 
— ■ vote  for,  iii,  1 8 

Stock  watering,  and  capitalization,  i,  226 
Stoddert.  Benjamin,  cabinet  officer,  i,  195;  ii,  506; 
iii,  648 

Stoec-ki,  Baron,  i,  26 

Stone,  Miss,  and  brigands,  ii,  508 

— vs.  Mississippi  (police  power),  ii,  709 

— Thomas,  i,  554 

Stonv  Mountains,  and  boundaries  of  United  States, 
1,  155 

Store  pay,  iii,  431 

Story,  Joseph,  biography,  iii,  431 

— Supreme  Court  United  States,  iii,  4G2 

— law,  civil,  in  America,  ii,  313 

Stowell,  Lord,  quoted  under  continuous  voyages, 
i,  454 

Straight  Democrats,  iii,  431 

— ticket,  iii,  432 

Straits,  jurisdiction  over,  ii,  264 
Stralsund,  ii,  109 
Strategos,  ii,  100 
Straus,  Oscar  S.,  iii,  432 
— - cabinet  officer,  i,  198,  333 
Straw  bail,  iii,  432 

— in  night  court,  i,  502 
Straw  vote,  i,  210  ; iii,  432 

Stream  measurements,  maps  of.  ii,  74 
Street  car  strike,  in  city,  iii,  552 

— commissions  and  commissioners,  iii,  432 

— pavements,  iii,  433 

— railway  tracks,  ii,  655 

— railways,  and  municipal  ownership,  ii,  486 

— signs,  iii,  435 

— widening  in  city  planning,  i,  280 

Streeter,  Alson  J.,  and  Union  Labor  party,  iii,  593 

775 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Streeter,  Alson  J.,  vote  for,  iii,  37 
Streets,  iii,  434 

— in  cities,  iii,  550 

— construction  and  maintenance  of,  ii,  476 

— sec  Pavements,  ii,  655 
Strict  construction,  i,  445 

— constructionist,  Calhoun  as  a,  i,  203 
Strikebreakers,  and  contract  labor  law,  i,  459 

— legislation,  i,  478 

— legislative,  ii,  342  ; iii,  436 

— see  Lockouts,  ii,  368 

— street  car,  iii,  552 
Strikes,  iii,  436 

— and  insurrections,  ii,  196 

— see  Picketing,  ii,  691 

— see  Pinkerton  men,  ii,  692 
Strong,  William,  iii,  462 
Stuart,  Alexander  H.,  ii,  199 
— -cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

Stubbs  quoted  on  representative  government,  iii, 
184 

Student  interpreters,  i,  450 

Stump,  going  on  the,  iii,  439 

Sturgeon  Bay  Canal,  i,  223 

Sturges  vs.  Crowninshield  (bankruptcy),  i,  115 

— (concurrent  powers),  1,  369 
Stuyvesant,  Peter,  ii,  530 
Suarez,  Francisco,  ii,  729 

— quoted  on  states,  equality  of,  iii,  418 
Subjugation  of  territory,  iii,  528 
Submarine  cables,  protection  of,  ii,  216 

— regulation  of,  iii,  439 
Submarines,  and  naval  vessels,  ii,  500 
Subpoena,  iii,  439 

Subsidiary  motions  in  parliamentary  law,  ii,  618 
Subsidies,  mail,  ii,  386 

— and  Navigation,  Bureau  of,  ii,  502 

— to  private  institutions,  iii,  439 

— to  shipping,  iii,  306,  440 

Subsidy  of  the  press,  and  second  class  mail  matter, 
iii,  278 

Substitute,  military,  iii,  441 

Subtreasury  system,  Iii,  441 

Subway  railroads,  iii,  140 

Subways  and  tunnels  for  city  transit,  iii,  442 

Succession  duties,  iii,  443 

— and  international  law,  private,  ii,  211 

— presidential,  iii,  47 

— tax,  iii,  493 
Sucre,  i,  141 
Suez  Canal,  iii,  443 

— neutralization  of,  ii,  522 
Suffolk  system  (banking)  i,  118 
Suffrage,  iii,  443 

— basis  of,  iii,  694 

— and  citizenship  in  the  United  States,  1,  272 

— in  college  towns,  i,  604 

— conditions  in  the  United  States,  iii,  449,  456 

— constitutional  restrictions  upon,  i,  439 

— in  democracy,  history  of,  i,  561 

— see  Domicile  and  residence,  i,  607 

— in  European  countries,  iii,  457 

— extension  of.  iii,  417 

— floaters,  ii,  26 

— see  Grandfather  clause,  ii,  94 

— see  Kentucky,  ii,  279 

— in  Europe,  ii,  340 

— manhood,  iii,  458 

— negro,  ii,  516 

— party  (Rhode  Island),  iii,  458 

— during  the  Revolution,  iii,  393 

— woman,  in  New  Jersey,  ii.  531 

— see  also  Woman  suffrage,  iii,  694 
Sugar  Act,  i,  5 

— see  Bounties,  i,  167 

— bounties,  and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  692 

— convention,  ii,  216 
■ — frauds,  iii,  458 

— molasses  and  confectionery,  duties  on,  iii,  487 

— plantations,  i,  621 

— scandals  of  1894,  ii,  235 
- — ■ tariff  on,  iii,  483 

— and  taxation  on  raw  materials,  iii,  503 

— trust,  iii.  579 

— trust  case,  i,  7 

— in  Underwood  Tariff,  iii,  587 
Suits,  states  as  parties  to,  iii,  415 
Sulu  Archipelago,  iii,  459 
Summary  court  martial,  i.  516 
Summer  schools,  i.  642  ; iii,  269 

Summer.  Charles,  quoted  on  Alabama  controversy, 
i,  23 

— biography,  iii,  459 

- — and  the  caucus,  i,  232 

— quoted  on  impeachment,  iii,  289 

— and  Senate  committee  on  foreign  relations,  iii, 

290 

— quoted  on  state  suicide,  iii,  164 

Sumter  plan  of  commission  government,  i,  346 


Sun  Yat  Sen,  i,  262 

Sunday  legislation,  iii,  459 

— ■ observance  and  church  and  state,  i,  269 

— School  Assembly  at  Chautauqua  Lake,  iii, 

269 

Sundry  Civil  Bill,  iii,  460 
"Sunset”  Cox,  i,  517 
Superannuation,  in  civil  service,  ii,  666 
Superintendent  of  finance,  iii,  563 

— of  public  instruction,  i,  644 

— of  schools,  i,  633 

— of  streets,  iii,  432 
Superintendents  of  schools,  iii,  270 
Superior  courts,  in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 
Supervising  architect  of  the  Treasury,  iii,  115,  460 
Supervisor  of  municipal  concerts,  ii,  612 
Supervisors,  iii,  460 

— boards  of,  i,  490,  496 

■ — ■ — in  county-precinct  system,  i,  497 

Supplemental  credits,  i,  558 

Supplies  and  Accounts,  Bureau  of,  iii,  461 

— purchase  of  public,  iii,  120 
Supply,  i,  678 

— and  demand,  iii,  461 

Supreme  Association  of'the  Patrons  of  Industry,  i, 
711 

— Court  cases,  iii,  182 

in  state  judiciary,  iii,  395 

of  the  United  States,  iii.  461 

— - — - — on  injunctions,  ii,  181 

jurisdiction  of,  i,  515 

and  reconstruction,  iii,  168 

— — — see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  248 
Surgeon  general,  iii,  462 

Surinam,  ii,  104 
Surplus,  and  capital,  i,  226 

— revenue,  iii,  217 

loan  of  1837,  see  School  funds,  state,  iii,  256 

Surrogate  jurisdiction,  law,  civil,  ii,  313 
Surrogate’s  court,  i,  504,  517 
Surtax,  set  Income  tax.  iii,  493 
Surveyor  of  customs,  iii,  462 
— - county,  i,  494 

— general,  land  office  oPthe  United  States,  ii,  307  ; 

iii,  463 

Surveyors,  official,  iii,  463 

Surveys,  see  American  government  and  geography, 
i,  35 

— - early  national,  ii,  75 

— of  land,  iii,  463 

— - and  maps,  geographical,  ii,  73 

Suspensive  veto,  iii,  388 

Susquehanna  River,  canals  along  the,  1,  221 

Suzerainty  of  protected  states,  i,  584  ; iii,  463 

Swallow  tails,  iii,  464 

Swallow-,  Silas  C.,  vote  for,  iii,  42 

Swamp  lands,  ii,  306  ; iii,  464 

— grants,  iii,  95 

see  School  funds,  state,  iii,  256 

— or  overflowed  lands,  iii,  161 
Swayne,  Charles,  impeachment  of,  ii,  150 
— - Noah  H.,  iii,  462 

Sweatshops,  iii,  464 

— building  laws  as  to,  i,  186 

— ■ relation  of  the  state  to,  ii,  301 
Sweden,  army  and  navy,  i,  76 

— and  Norway,  i,  584 
Sw'eeny,  Peter  B.,  iii,  468 

Swift  vs.  United  States  (anti-trust  act),  iii,  304 
Swinging  around  the  circle,  iii,  464 
Swinton,  John,  ii,  296 
Sw'iss  constitution  federate,  i,  718 
Switzerland,  army,  i,  76 

— diplomatic  relation  with,  iii,  464 

— federal  government  of,  iii,  465 

— -and  non-partisan  political  organizations,  ii,  553 

— party  system  in  Europe,  ii.  647 

Sydenham,  Lord,  quoted  on  responsible  govern- 
ment in  Canada,  iii,  207 
Sydney,  Algernon,  ii,  724 
Syllabus,  in  law  reports,  iii,  183 
Symmes,  John  Cleves,  and  northwest  territory,  ii, 
562 

— - and  public  lands,  iii,  94 
— • purchase,  iii,  466 

and  Ohio,  ii,  573 

Sympathetic  strikes,  iii,  437 

Syndic,  in  Italian  municipal  government,  li,  416, 
479 

Syndicalism,  iii,  466 

— and  Socialist  Labor  party,  iii,  339 
System,  the,  iii,  466 

Tabula  amalfitana,  ii,  213 
Taft,  Alphonso,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer  i,  197  : iii,  649 
Taft  board,  and  coast  defense,  i,  300 

— commission  on  economy  and  efficiency  of,  i,  354 
and  public  accounts,  iii,  89 


776 


INDEX 


Taft  commission  and  purchase  of  supplies,  iii,  121 
and  uniform  accounting,  iii,  592 

— — on  Philippines,  ii,  680 

Taft,  William  Howard,  biography,  iii,  467 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

— as  a candidate,  i,  224 

— in  Cuba,  i,  534 

— quoted  on  courtesy  of  the  Senate,  iii,  287 

injunction  in  labor  disputes,  ii,  180 

judges,  recall  of,  iii,  158 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  468 

— in  Philippines,  ii,  680 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  200 

- — and  Russian  commercial  treaty,  iii,  244 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 

— and  tariff  legislation,  iii,  475 

— and  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  480 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  44,  45 
Tai  Ping  Revolt,  i,  261 

Talleyrand,  see  Diplomatic  relations  with  France, 

ii,  42 

Tamanend,  iii,  467 
Tammany,  iii,  467 

— brave,  i,  170 

— see  Bucktails,  i,  179 

— see  under  Tweed,  iii,  582 

— Hall,  ii,  542 

• and  parties,  state  and  local,  ii,  620 

see  votes,  canvass  of,  iii,  631 

Taney,  Roger  B.,  biography,  iii,  469 

— as  attorney  general,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— chief  justice,  i,  255 

— and  growth  of  Constitution,  i,  420 

— and  judicial  centralization,  i,  239 

— quoted  on  privileges  and  immunities  of  citizens, 

iii,  68 

— and  removal  of  deposits,  iii,  177 

— Secretary  of  Treasurer,  iii,  566 

— Secretary  of  War,  iii,  649 

— Supreme  Court  United  States,  iii,  462 
Tarble's  case  (habeas  corpus),  ii,  106 

— (martial  law),  i,  685 

Tariff  of  Abominations,  iii,  474,  476 

— Act,  McKinley,  ii,  383 

— ad  valorem  duties,  i,  617 

— administration,  iii,  470 

— — appraisers  of  duties,  i,  57 
bonded  warehouses,  i,  141 

appraisers,  general  board  of,  i,  58 

— board  of  1910,  iii.  472 

in  tariff  legislation,  framing  of.  iii,  475 

and  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  480 

— boss  system  and,  i,  147 

— Canadian,  i,  213 

— see  Collector  of  customs,  i,  313 

— see  also  Commercial  policy  of  United  States,  i, 

344 

— commissions,  iii,  472 

and  public  science,  iii,  272 

— and  cost  of  living,  i,  485 

— and  crisis,  economic,  i,  528 

— and  Democratic  party,  i.  573 

— in  financial  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  6 

— see  Free  trade  and  protection,  ii,  53 

— infant  industry  and,  ii,  176 

— and  internal  revenue  laws,  ii,  394 

— legislation,  framing  of,  iii,  473 
Senate  in,  iii,  288 

— as  a local  issue,  iii,  472 

— maximum  and  minimum,  iii,  476 

— mercantile  appraisers,  ii,  418 

— minimum,  iii.  476 

— Morrill,  ii,  471 

— and  nullification  controversy,  ii,  565 

— see  Passengers’  baggage,  duties  on,  ii,  650 

— Payne-Aklricb,  ii,  656 

— see  also  Platform,  political,  ii.  695 

— policy  of  the  United  States,  iii,  476 

— pop-gun  bills  and,  i,  574 

— preferential,  iii,  481 

— See  also  under  Protection, 

— protective,  constitutionality  of,  iii,  481 

— rates,  iii,  482 

— reform,  iii,  484 

— for  revenue  only,  iii,  473 

— statistics,  iii.  485 

— threat,  iii,  587 

— see  Undervaluations,  iii.  585 

— see  Valuation  of  imported  goods,  iii,  606 
Tattooed  man.  iii,  489 

Tax  appeal  courts,  i.  507 

— commission,  in  Michigan,  i,  89 

— commissioner,  iii,  489 

— commissioners,  board  of,  i.  139 
in  state  systems  of  finance,  ii,  5 

— and  debt  limits,  city  and  state  in  fixing,  i,  274 

— dodging,  iii,  490 

and  tax,  property,  personal,  iii,  496 


Tax,  dog,  iii,  490 

— duplicate,  iii,  490 
see  Grand  list,  ii,  94 

— habitation,  iii,  490 
— - income,  iii,  490 

graduated,  iii,  493 

— ■ inheritance,  iii,  493 

— inquisitors,  i,  89 

— land  and  real  estate,  iii,  495 

— loans  in  public  debt,  i,  547 

— property,  general,  iii,  495 
personal,  iii,  496 

— qualification  for  suffrage,  in  Europe,  iii,  457 

— rate,  in  cities,  ii,  328 

— single,  iii,  496 

— tonnage,  iii,  497 

Taxation,  assessed  valuations,  comparative,  i,  85 

— see  under  Assessment. 

— - assessment  of  taxes,  i,  87 

— see  Boards  of  Review,  i,  139 

— constitutional  basis  of,  iii,  497 

— of  corporation  charters,  i,  473 

— of  corporations,  i,  474 

— double,  iii,  498 

and  personal  property  tax,  iii,  496 

— • of  domestic  industry  in  financial  policy  of 
United  States,  ii,  6 

— of  domestic  industry  of  corporate  accounts,  iii, 

119 

— - exemption  of  church  property,  i,  268 

— exemptions  from,  iii,  498 

— see  Excise  taxes,  i,  679 
— - exclusions  from,  iii,  499 

— of  exports,  iii,  501 

— federal,  ii,  8 

— of  franchises,  ii,  46 

— and  impairment  of  contract,  i,  459 

— sec  Imposts,  ii,  153 

— insurance  companies,  ii,  190 

— limitations  on,  iii,  499 

— ■ of  land,  limit  upon  in  Tennessee,  iii,  514 

— mortgage,  iii,  500 

— and  national  wealth,  iii,  604 

— principles  of,  iii,  503 

— progressive,  iii,  505 

— public  purposes  of,  iii,  505 

— and  public  use,  iii,  112 

— of  railroads,  iii,  501 

— of  raw  materials,  iii,  502 

— and  religious  liberty,  iii,  176 

— without  representation,  and  Revolution,  Ameri- 

can, causes  of,  iii,  220 
— - state  systems  of,  ii,  4 

— see  also  Stock  transfer  law,  iii,  428 

— subject  of,  iii,  499,  505 
Taxes,  apportionment  of,  iii,  507 

— assessors  of,  i,  90 

— back,  iii,  507 

— classification  of,  iii,  506 
— - collection  of.  iii,  214 

— direct,  iii,  507 

— - dooming  of,  iii,  509 

— equalization  of,  iii,  509 
— - indirect,  iii,  509 

— see  Revenue,  public,  sources  of,  iii,  215 

— unpaid,  forfeitures  for,  ii,  39 
Taxing  power  and  tariff,  iii.  481 
Taxpaying  and  suffrage,  iii,  445 
Taylor.  Frederick  W.,  i,  650 

— F.  M.,  quoted  on  standard  money,  iii,  376 
— • George,  i,  554 

— John,  iii.  509 

and  state  sovereignty,  iii,  402 

— J.  W.,  speaker,  i.  389 

— William  S.,  ii.  279 

— -Zachary,  biography,  iii,  510 

and  Whig  party,  iii.  683 

vote  for.  iii,  13,  26 

— vs.  Place  (separation  of  powers),  iii,  298 
Tazewell,  L.  W.,  vote  for,  iii,  24 

Tea  Act,  and  Revolution,  American,  causes  of,  iii, 
220 

— tariff  on,  iii,  484 
Teachers,  certificates  to.  i.  241 

— legal  qualifications  of,  iii,  510 

— qualifications  for,  iii,  125 

— pensions  for,  ii.  668 

— • in  schools,  public,  legal  rights  of,  iii,  264 
— statistics  of,  i,  648 

— too  few,  in  public  schools,  iii,  268 
Telegraph  Company  vs.  Texas,  ii,  221 

— (telegraphs),  iii,  511 

Telegraph  and  telephone  companies,  and  eminent 
domain,  i.  665 

Telegraphic  Union,  the,  ii,  216 
Telegraphs,  regulation  of,  iii,  510 
Telephones,  regulation  of,  iii,  511 
Teller,  Henry  M.,  ii.  199 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 


777 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Teller  resolutions,  ili,  513 
Telfair,  Edward,  vote  for,  ili,  14 
Temperance  agitation,  iii,  513 

— and  school  hygiene,  iii,  257 

— movement,  liquor  legislation,  ii,  356 

— lobby  of,  ii,  362 

— societies,  exemption  from  taxation,  iii,  499 
Temporary  chairman,  iii,  513 

Tender,  legal,  ii,  322 

— cases,  ii,  322 

Tenement  house  inspection,  ii,  120 

— legislation,  i,  185 

— regulation,  iii,  513 

— laws,  and  municipal  housing,  ii,  486 

— and  social  reform,  iii,  329 

Tenements,  and  municipal  ownership,  ii,  486 

— and  municipal  trading,  ii,  488 
Ten-forties  in  public  debt,  i,  546 
Ten-hour  day,  iii,  514 
Tennessee,  iii,  514 

— cigarette  legislation  in,  iii,  100 

— vs.  Davis  (federal  question),  i,  717 

— and  public  lands,  iii,  96 

— River,  iii,  663 

— see  also  South,  iii,  353 

— see  also  Territory  south  of  the  Ohio,  iii,  529 
Tennis  cabinet,  iii,  516 

Ten  per  cent  plan  of  reconstruction,  iii,  165,  194 
Tenure  of  office,  iii,  516 

— Act,  iii,  517 
of  1867,  i,  200 

— and  removals  by  President,  iii,  2 

— see  Removal  of  public  officials,  iii,  179 

— and  Senate,  iii,  289 

Ten  Years’  War  in  Cuba,  i,  533 
Terminal  and  municipal  government,  ii,  476 
Terms  of  public  officers,  iii,  517 
Terrell  election  law  (Texas),  iii,  532 
Territorial  courts,  iii,  526 

— delegates,  i,  561 

— jurisdiction  of  the  United  States  within  the 

states,  iii,  518 

— leases,  iii,  527 

— legislatures,  see  also  Territories  of  United 

States,  iii,  520 

Territories,  acquired,  status  of,  ili,  522 

— see  also  Dependencies  of  United  States,  i,  583 

— of  the  United  States,  organized,  iii,  519 
Territory  annexed,  see  War,  iii.  648 

— constitutional  questions  of,  iii,  525 

— incorporation  of,  ii,  154 

— Indian,  ii,  168 

— • in  international  law,  iii,  527 

— south  of  the  Ohio,  iii,  529 

— of  the  United  States,  see  Insular  cases,  ii,  187 
northwest  of  the  River  Ohio,  see  Northwest 

territory,  ii,  562 
Tertium  quid,  iii,  529 
— • see  Randolph,  John,  iii,  151 
Texas,  iii,  529 

— annexation  of,  i,  566 

— bank  deposits,  guaranty  of,  in,  i,  109 

— boundaries  of.  i.  157 

— boundary  controversy  (map),  ii.  423 

— commission  government  in,  i,  345 

— and  Compromise  of  1850,  i,  366 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  467 

— and  Pacific,  and  Pacific  railroads,  11,  596 

— protectorate  over,  iii,  84 

— question  and  war,  ii,  423 

— railroad  valuation  in,  iii,  141 

— see  also  South,  iii,  353 

— state-owned  railroad  in,  iii,  148 

— see  also  Territory,  constitutional  questions  of, 

iii,  525 

— vs.  White  (reconstruction),  iii,  168,  532 
— • — (secession),  ii,  157 

Textbook  laws,  iii,  533 
Thacher,  Oxenbridge,  iii,  702 
Thames  conservancy,  ii,  370 
Thanksgiving  proclamation,  iii,  71 

— church  and  state  and,  i,  268 
Theatres,  building  laws  as  to,  i,  185 

— regulation  of,  i,  40 
Theocracy,  iii,  538 

— and  monarchy,  ii,  459 
Theodosius,  code  of,  i,  302 
Theological  schools,  iii,  266 
Third  chamber,  ii,  362 

— house,  iii,  583 

lobby  as  the,  i,  478 

— parties,  iii,  533 

— party  movements  and  presidential  elections,  111, 

12 

platforms,  ii,  697 

— terms,  iii,  535 
Thirteenth  Amendment,  iii,  536 

— and  enforcement,  i,  669 

— prohibitions  of  the,  i,  423 


Thirteenth  Amendment,  and  reconstruction,  iii,  165 
Thirty  Hogsheads  of  Sugar  vs.  Boyle  (inter- 
national law),  ii,  207 

Thomas  Gibbons  (prize  law  and  courts),  iii,  70 
Thomas,  Lorenzo,  ii,  149 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  649 
Thomas,  Philip  F.,  iii,  566 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 
Thompson,  Charles,  i,  451 

— Jacob,  ii,  199 

— — cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— Richard  W„  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii,  506 

— Smith,  iii,  462 

cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; ii,  506 

— H.  A.,  vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  35 

— vs.  Utah  (ex  post  facto  law),  i,  700 
Thornton,  Matthew,  i,  554 

Thorington  vs.  Smith  (de  facto  government),  i,  557 

— (revolution,  right  of),  iii,  223 
Three-fifths  compromise,  i,  419 

— in  Federal  Convention,  i,  716 
Three  Friends  (insurgency),  ii,  192 
Three*  hundred  and  six,  iii,  536 
Three-mile  limit,  iii,  536 

— in  International  fisheries,  ii,  21 
Three  Rivers,  and  New  France,  ii,  527 
Thurman,  Allen  G.,  biography,  iii,  537 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  574 

— vote  for,  iii,  37 
Thurman  Act,  iii,  537 

Tibbies,  Thomas  H.,  and  Populist  party,  ii,  758 ; 
iii,  43 

Ticknor,  Anna  Elliott,  iii,  258 
Tidal  wave,  iii,  537 
Tiffin,  Edward,  ii,  574 
Tilden,  Samuel  J.,  biography,  iii,  537 

— and  Canal  Ring,  i,  218 

— and  cipher  dispatches,  i,  269 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  572 

— and  electoral  commission,  i,  657 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  34 
Tillman,  Benjamin  R.,  iii,  537 

— and  rules  of  the  Senate,  iii,  290 
Tillmanites,  iii,  360 

Timber  Act  and  public  lands,  iii,  95 
— -land  and  conservation,  i>  399 

— lands,  iii,  538 

— and  Stone  Act  of  1878,  iii,  538 
Time,  standard,  iii,  376 

Tindal  vs.  Wesley  (states  as  parties  to  suit),  ili, 
416 

Tippecanoe,  campaign  of,  iii,  651 

— and  Tyler  too,  iii,  538 
Tissue  ballots,  iii,  538 
Titles  of  nobility,  ii,  548 
Tobacco,  duties  on,  iii,  488 

— and  health,  public,  ii,  120 
— -inspection  of,  ii,  184 

— legislation  against,  iii,  100,  538 

— and  monopolies,  ii,  463 

— -and  revenue,  internal,  iii,  214 

— see  Taxation,  subjects  of,  iii,  506 
— - see  Warehouse  system,  iii,  654 
Tocqueville,  Alexis,  Comte  de,  biography,  iii,  539 

— political  theories  of,  ii,  731 

— quoted  on  British  constitution,  i,  403 
Tod,  David,  iii,  641 

— war  governor,  iii,  644 
Todd,  Thomas,  iii,  462 
Token  coinage,  iii,  539 
Toledo,  transfer  of,  i,  163 

— War,  and  Michigan,  ii,  426 
— - — - and  Ohio,  ii,  574 
Toleration  party,  i,  397 
Toll-roads,  iii,  539 

Tolls  question,  see  Canal  diplomacy,  i,  218 
Tombigbee  River,  iii,  663 

— canalization  of,  i,  220 

Tompkins,  Daniel  D.,  Vice-President,  iii,  616 
— -vote  for,  iii,  18 

Tonga,  and  Pacific  islands,  diplomatic  relations 
with,  ii,  596 

Tonnage,  calculation  of,  iii,  175 

— duties,  abolished,  i,  343 
reciprocity  in,  iii,  305 

— no  state  duty  on,  i,  338 

— tax,  iii,  497 

Toombs,  Robert  A.,  biography,  iii,  539 
— • as  Confederate  cabinet  officer,  i,  372 

— proslavery,  iii,  81 

Tordesillas,  Treaty  of  (1494),  ii,  680 
Tories,  iii,  540 

— in  England,  ii,  345  ; iii,  540 
Torpedo  flotillas,  ii,  500 
Torrens  system,  ii,  307  ; iii.  540 

— and  recorder  of  deeds,  iii,  169 
Tort,  iii,  540 

Tory  party  in  England,  i,  401 
Toryism  in  England,  iii,  104 

778 


INDEX 


Total  Abstinence.  See  Temperance  agitation,  iii, 
513 

Toucey,  Isaac,  i,  95 

— - cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; ii,  506  ■ iii,  566 
Tousig,  Simon,  ii,  282 

Towne,  Charles  A.,  and  Democratic  party,  i,  575 

— and  Populist  party,  ii,  758 
Town  clerk,  iii,  541 

— committee,  and  party  organization  in  Massa- 

chusetts, ii,  635 

— county  system,  iii,  541 

— meeting,  iii,  542 

limited,  and  Newport  system  of  city  govern- 
ment, ii,  546 

in  New  England,  ii,  525 

— planning.  See  City  planning. 

Towns  and  townships,  iii,  543 

— by-laws  of,  iii,  546 
Townshend  Act,  iii,  546 

— and  Revolution,  American,  causes  of,  iii,  220 
Township,  iii,  546 

— board,  iii,  546 

— in  county  precinct  system,  i,  498 

— see  also  State  government,  characteristics  of, 

iii,  387 

Townsmen,  iii,  287 
Toynbee  Hall,  iii,  300 
Trackless  trolleys,  iii,  138 
Traction  lines,  iii,  547 

Tracy,  Benjamin  F.,  Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
Trade,  Acts  of,  i,  5 

and  Revolution,  American,  iii,  219 

— agreements,  and  strikes,  iii,  437 

— balance  of,  i,  100 

— boards  of,  i,  139 

— See  also  under  Commerce. 

— dollar,  i,  310 ; iii,  547 

— follows  the  flag,  iii,  547 

— lords  of,  ii,  371 

Trade  mark,  ii,  651  ; iii,  547 

— and  monopolies,  ii,  463 

— and  flag  of  United  States,  ii,  26 

— and  Patent  Office,  ii,  650 

— municipal,  i,  483 

— Relations,  Bureau  of,  iii,  547 

— restraint  of,  iii,  208 

— schools,  i,  641  ; iii,  270 

— unions.  See  Trades  unions. 

Traders  on  Indian  reservations,  li,  167 
Trades  assembly,  ii,  290 

— offensive,  ii,  120 

— in  politics,  iii,  548 

— school  instruction  in,  iii,  268 

— unions,  iii,  548 

and  boycotts,  i,  169 

effect  of,  on  immigrants,  ii,  145 

incorporation  of,  ii,  229 

national,  ii,  290 

relation  of  state  to,  ii,  301 

and  social  reform,  iii,  330 

Traffic  agreements,  iii,  548 

— will  bear,  charging  what  the,  iii,  555 

— and  rates,  in  interstate  commerce  legislation, 

ii,  227 

— see  Streets,  iii,  435 
Trails  and  portages,  iii,  548 
Training  and  industrial  schools,  iii,  261 

— ships,  iii,  549 

— stations,  iii,  549 

Trainmen,  hours  of  labor  of,  i,  4, 

Tramps,  iii,  604 

— and  vagrants,  and  fee  system,  i,  727 
Transcontinental  Freight  Bureau,  ii,  59 
Transit  in  cities,  problems  of,  iii,  549 
Transitory  civil  actions,  ii,  211 
Trans-Missouri  Freight  Association,  iii,  548 

— case  (restraint  of  trade),  iii,  15o 
Transportation.  See  also  under  Canals. 

— in  economic  history  of  United  States,  i,  622 

— economic  problems  of,  iii,  553 

— freight,  classification  of,  ii,  59 

— by  government,  iii,  553 

— and  public  service  commissions,  iii,  109 

— rebates  in,  iii,  156 

— regulation  of,  iii,  556 

— restrictions  as  to  profits  on,  i,  190 
Transvaal,  iii,  354 
Transylvania,  iii,  559 

— Company,  ii,  277 

see  also  Clark,  G.  R.,  1,  293 

Treason,  iii,  559 

— and  impeachment,  ii,  150 

— law,  in  criminal,  ii,  318 

— and  mob  rule,  ii,  458 

— misprision  of,  ii,  452 
Treasurer,  city,  i,  281 

— county,  i,  494 

— in  local  government,  iii,  560 

— state,  iii,  381,  560 

147 


Treasurer  in  state  accounts,  iii,  89 
systems  of  finance,  ii,  5 

— of  the  United  States,  iii,  560 
Treasury  board  (colonial),  i,  140 

— Comptroller  of  the,  i,  62 

— Department,  iii,  560 

— ■ — Appointments,  Division  of,  i,  52 
— - — archives  of,  i,  69 
— - — auditor  of  the,  i,  95 

Bookkeeping  and  Warrants,  Division  of,  1, 

143 

chart  of  organization  of,  iii,  562 

comptroller  of  the  currency,  i,  367 

— - — -comptroller  of  the  treasury,  i,  368 
Customs,  Division  of.  i,  537 

— — Engraving  and  Printing,  Bureau  of,  i, 

670 

estimates  of,  i,  181,  359,  675 

see  Expenditures,  federal,  i,  690 

— - — - see  Financial  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  8 

— — and  health,  public,  ii,  117 

and  law,  administrative,  ii,  310 

— — life-saving  service,  ii,  352 

loans  and  currency,  division  of,  ii,  362 

— - — on  maritime  commerce  during  war,  iii,  645 
— ■ — -and  paper  money  in  the  United  States,  ii, 
606 

— — see  Public  accounts,  iii,  87 
Public  Money,  Division  of,  iii,  99 

— ■ — -Printing  and  Stationery,  Division  of,  iii,  58 

register  of  the  treasury,  iii,  174 

see  Removal  of  deposits,  iii,  177 

— - — revenue  cutter  service,  iii,  211 

see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  247 

— — solicitor  of,  ii,  271 

Special  Agents.  Division  of,  iii,  371 

-supervising  architect,  office  of,  iii,  115.  460 

tariff  legislation,  in  framing  of,  iii,  473 

— — treasurer  of  the  United  States,  iii,  560 
Treasury,  federal,  iii,  564 

— frauds  on  the,  ii,  51 

— notes,  iii,  565 

and  paper  money  in  the  United  States,  ii, 

605 

-in  public  debt,  i,  545 

and  legal  tender  controversy,  ii,  323 

and  notes,  United  States,  ii,  563 

in  party  government  in  Great  Britain,  li, 

628 

in  public  debt,  i,  545 

— secretaries  of,  iii,  565 

— Secretary  of,  and  Federal  Reserve  Act,  iii, 

203 

and  import  trade,  iii,  124 

— - — -salary  of,  iii,  247 

— of  the  United  States,  available  funds  in  the, 

ii,  14 

— warrants  and  public  debt,  i,  547 
Treaties,  abrogation  of,  iii,  569 

— existing,  and  neutrality,  ii,  521 
— - Indian,  ii,  168 

— in  international -law,  ii,  214;  iii,  569 

— as  the  law  of  the  land,  iii,  566 

— most  favored  nation  clause  in,  ii,  473 

— negotiation  of,  by  the  United  States,  ii,  511 

— ratification  of,  by  the  United  States,  iii,  151 

— revenue  clauses  in,  iii,  211 

— Senate  ratification  of,  i,  384 
— -of  the  United  States,  iii,  567 
Treaty  of  Berlin,  1878.  i,  368 

— 1803  (boundaries),  ii,  98 

— 1818  (fisheries),  i,  174;  ii,  99 

and  Newfoundland  fisheries  dispute,  ii,  545 

— - 1854,  and  Newfoundland  fisheries  dispute,  li, 
545 

— - Fort  Stanwix,  i,  319 
— - Guadalupe  Hidalgo,  i,  203,  207  ; ii,  102 

— Indian  reservations,  ii,  167 

— - making  power  of  executive,  i,  688 

— Paris.  1763,  i,  212 

(1856,  blockades),  i,  135 

— of  peace,  ii,  657 

— of  Peking  (1881).  i,  262 

— with  Spain  (1819,  Florida),  iii,  523 
1898,  and  cession  of  territory,  ii,  209 

— system,  in  Indian  policy  of  the  United  States, 

ii,  165 

— 1794  (commercial  policy  of  United  States),  i, 

340 

— Tordesillas  (1493),  iii,  527 

— Utrecht,  i,  213 

-on  balance  of  power,  i,  99 

— • Wanghia,  i,  261 

— Washington,  1871,  i,  157,  174;  ii,  98 
Tree  claims  to  public  lands,  iii,  571 
Trenholm,  G.  A.,  i,  371 

Trent  affair,  iii,  571 

Trevett  vs.  Weeden  (unconstitutionality),  i,  509; 

iii,  572 


779 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Trial,  law,  criminal,  ii,  319 

— right  to  counsel  at,  i,  487 
Trials,  ill,  572 

Trianon  Decree,  1,  453 
Tribe,  in  state,  theory  of,  iii,  409 
Tribunals  of  conciliation  in  Indiana,  ii,  160 
Tribunals,  administrative,  i,  505 
Tribunaux  administratifs,  i,  505 
Tribune,  New  York,  and  Republican  party,  iii, 
192 

Tributary  states,  iii,  573 
Trimble,  Robert,  iii,  462 
Trimmer,  the,  i,  366 
Tripoli,  i,  121 

— and  near  east,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii, 

507 

— negotiations  with,  i,  13 

— • war  with,  i,  122  ; iii,  651 

Trist,  N.  P.,  California,  cession  of,  and,  i,  207 

— diplomatic  instructions  of,  i,  592 

— - and  Guadalupe  Hidalgo,  Treaty  of,  ii,  102 

— and  Mexico,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  424 
Trochas,  In  Cuba,  i,  534 

Trolley  roads,  iii,  138,  573 
Troppau,  Congress  of,  11,  125 

— Treaty  of,  ii,  203 
Troup,  George  M.,  ii,  77 

Troy,  New  York,  steam  roads  of,  iii,  148 
Truancy,  i,  636  ; iii,  573 
Truant  officers,  iii,  70 
Truckee-Carson  (irrigation),  ii,  243 
Trumbull,  Jonathan,  as  Brother  Jonathan,  i,  178 
— ■ speaker,  i,  388 

Trumbull,  Lyman,  quoted  on  coercion  of  states, 
iii,  278 

— Liberal  Republican  party,  ii,  344 

— and  Republican  party,  iii,  189 
Trust  companies,  iii.  245,  575 

- — and  crisis  of  1907  i,  528 

Trustees  and  regents  of  state  educational  insti- 
tutions, iii,  575 
Trusts,  iii,  576 

— and  cost  of  living,  i,  485 

— in  equity,  i,  674 

— and  restraint  of  trade,  iii,  155 

— and  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  480 
Tryon,  Governor,  ii,  194 

Tuberculosis,  care  and  regulation  of,  iii,  581 

— in  Philippine  Islands,  ii,  683 
— • see  Schools,  open  air,  iii,  263 
Tuck,  Amos,  ii,  529 

Tucker  Act,  i,  169 

— St.  George,  political  theories  of,  ii,  720 
Tudor  monopolies,  ii,  464 

Tungsten  lamps,  ii,  353 

Tunis,  diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  13,  122 ; ii, 
507 

— protectorate  of,  iii,  83 
Tunnels  and  subways,  iii,  442 
Tupper,  Sir  Charles,  ii,  583 
Turbines,  ii,  771 

Turgenieff,  Ivan,  and  nihilism,  ii,  547 
Turgot,  ii,  731 

Turkey,  army  and  navy,  i,  76 

— emigrants  from,  ii,  508 

— extraterritoriality  in,  i,  706 ; ii,  507 

— treaty  with,  1830,  iii,  567 

Turkish  empire,  diplomatic  relations  with,  ii,  507 

— recognition  of,  iii,  162 
Turkish  capitulations,  i,  228 

Turner,  George,  in  Alaskan  boundary  dispute,  i, 
28,  176 

Turner  Insurrection  of  1831,  ii,  195 ; iii,  582 

— vs.  Maryland  (taxation  of  exports),  iii,  501 
Turnpike  companies,  iii,  230,  539 

Tuskegee  Institute,  iii,  658 
Tutuila,  iii,  250,  582 

— annexation  of,  i,  46 

— as  dependency  of  United  States  i,  582 

— and  naval  stations,  ii,  499 
Tweed,  William  M.,  iii,  582 

— and  middle  states,  ii,  428 

— see  Tammany,  iii,  468 

— ring,  i,  183:  iii,  582 
Twelfth  Amendment,  iii,  583 

— and  presidential  electors,  iii,  8 
Twelve  tables  of  Roman  law,  1,  434 
Twentv-eight  hour  law  (live  stock  legislation),  ii, 

361 

Twenty-second  joint  rule  (presidential  elections), 
iii,  10,  584 

Twilight  zone,  iii,  584 
— -see  House  of  governors,  ii,  129 

— and  new  nationalism,  ii,  534 

Twin  City  Bank  vs.  Nebeker  (revenue  bills),  iii, 
211 

Twining  vs.  New  Jersey  (due  process  of  law),  i, 
616 

Twopenny  Act,  and  Parsons’  cause,  ii,  620 


Two-thirds  rule,  iii,  584 
— - and  Democratic  party,  i,  566 
Tyler,  John,  biography,  iii,  584 

— and  the  corporal's  guard,  i.  470 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  566 

— Vice-President,  iii,  616 

— vot#  for,  iii,  21,  24 

— and  Whig  party,  iii,  681 
Tyler,  Wat,  ii,  286 

Tyner,  James  M.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 ; ii,  767 
Typhoid  fever,  see  Sewers,  iii,  301 

— and  water  supply,  iii,  660 
Tyrannicide,  ii,  717,  724 

Tyranny,  see  States,  classification  of,  iii,  417 
Tyranny  Unmasked,  iii,  509 

Uffici,  ii,  341 

Uhl,  Edwin  F.,  Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 
Ulpian  and  political  theories,  ii,  717 
Ultra  vires,  iii,  585 

— and  corporation  charters,  i,  472 
Unanimity  of  verdict,  ii,  270 
Unanimous  consent,  in  Congress,  iii,  237 

— in  state  legislatures,  iii,  240 
Unclassified  (civil)  service,  i,  285 
Uncle  Sam,  iii,  585 

Uncompahgre  project  (irrigation),  ii,  243 
Unconstitutional  law,  ii,  316 

— in  England,  France  and  the  United  States,  ii, 

316 

Unconstitutionality,  see  Constitution  making  in 
United  States,  i,  406 

■ — see  Law,  constitutional,  American,  ii,  317 
• — of  statutes,  see  also  State  judiciary,  iii,  397 
see  Trevett  vs.  Weeden.  iii,  572 
“Under  the  Oaks”  (Republican  party),  iii,  190 
Underground  railroad,  iii,  585 

— and  fugitive  slaves,  ii,  65 

Undervaluation  as  a fraud  on  the  Treasury,  ii,  51 

— in  tariff  administration,  iii,  471 
Undervaluations,  iii,  585 
Underwood,  Oscar  W.,  iii  585 
Underwood-Simmons  Tariff  Act,  iii,  585 
Underwood  Tariff,  iii,  481,  585 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  576 
Unearned  increment,  iii,  587 

— tax  on,  iii,  498 

■ — in  financial  system  of  Europe,  ii,  2 
Unemployment,  iii,  588 
Unfair  list,  iii,  589 
Ungava,  i,  214 

Uniform  marriage  and  marriage  license  act,  ii,  399 

— state  laws,  i,  304  ; iii,  589 
Uniformity  of  public  accounts,  iii,  592 

— railroad  accounting,  iii,  592 
Unilateral  declaration  of  war,  iii,  645 
Union,  iii,  593 

— Act  (Canada),  i,  212 

-of  1840,  and  Ontario,  ii,  581 

— calendar,  i,  356 

— label,  ii.  294 

— labor,  iii,  593 

— - — party,  ii,  296 ; iii,  593,  595 
— • — iii,  593 

— — and  party  organization  in  California,  ii,  631 

— League,  see  Ku  KIux  Klan,  ii,  282 

— League  Club,  ii,  711 

— Pacific,  and  Pacific  railroads,  ii,  596 
railroad,  grants  to,  iii,  145 

— i — - — bribery  in  building  of,  i,  171 

— party,  iii,  593 

— — in  Georgia,  ii,  77 

— for  the  publication  of  customs  tariffs,  ii,  216 
— - recognition  of  the,  and  strikes,  iii,  437 

— - saver,  iii,  594 

Union  Trust  Co.  vs.  McGinty  (uniform  legisla- 
tion), iii,  594 
— • of  Utrecht,  iii,  594 
Unions,  international,  ii,  215 
Unit  rule,  iii,  594 
— • in  political  conventions,  i,  463 
Unitarianism,  and  federal  state,  i,  718 
Unitary  state,  iii,  594 
United  Christian  party,  iii,  41 

— Confederate  veterans  and  militarism,  ii,  432 
— - Labor  party,  ii,  296  ; iii,  594 

— Netherlands,  iii,  594 

— Provinces  of  Central  America,  i,  237 
- — ■ Reform  party,  iii,  41 

— • States,  area  of,  i,  71 

■ vs.  Delaware  and  Hudson  Co.  (interstate 

commerce),  ii.  221  r 

vs.  Addyston  Pipe  Co.  (anti-trust  act) , iii,  304 

vs.  Anthony  (woman  suffrage),  iii,  696 

— - — assistant  engineers,  iii,  114 
vs.  Baltimore  and  Ohio  R.  R.,  i,  273 

— — vs.  Barker  (piracy),  ii,  693 

— — -boundaries  of,  i,  150 

claims  against,  payment  of,  1,  292 


INDEX 


United  States  vs.  Cruikshank  (civil  rights),  i,  282 
‘ (societies),  iii,  341 

— — vs.  E.  C.  Knight  Co.  (sugar  trust  case),  i,  7 ; 

iii,  155,  303 

— • — as  a federal  state,  iii,  417,  595 
- — ■ — vs.  Ferreira  (separation  of  powers),  iii,  298 

— — Gazette,  i,  577 

•  geographical  position  of,  ii,  684 

vs.  Germaine  (employees),  i,  667 

— Gettysburg  Ry.  Co.  (eminent  domain),  i,  666 
■ vs.  Hartwell  (employees),  i,  667 

—  (officials),  ii,  573 

vs.  Hendee  (employees),  i,  667 

— — vs.  Holiday  (Indian  reservations),  iii,  519 

vs.  James  (revenue,  bills  for  raising),  iii,  211 

vs.  Jones  (eminent  domain),  i,  6o6 

vs.  J u Toy  (due  process  of  law),  i,  616 

vs.  Kagama  (Indian),  ii,  172 

marine  hospital,  iii,  276 

vs.  Maurice  (employees),  i,  667 

•  military  bounty  lands,  and  Ohio,  ii,  573 

vs.  Mouat  (employees),  i,  667 

— — — (officials),  ii,  573 
national  museum,  iii,  323 

notes,  and  paper  money  in  the  United  States, 

ii.  606 

vs.  Perkins  (officers),  ii,  176 

vs.  Peters  (Eleventh  Amendment),  iii,  598 

physical  map  of,  ii,  688 

physiography  of,  see  also  Canals  and  other 

artificial  waterways,  i,  220 

vs.  Rice  (military  occupation),  ii,  437 

— (territorial  status),  iii,  523 

vs.  Smith  (public  officers),  iii,  101 

Steel  Corporation.  Carnegie  and  the,  i,  229 

as  a territorial  expression,  iii,  597 

vs.  Texas  (Eleventh  Amendment),  i,  600 

vs.  Trans-Missouri  Freight  Association, 

(anti-trust  act),  iii,  304 

— i — vs.  United  States  Express  Co.  (admission  of 
states),  iii,  415 

vs.  Williams  (exclusion  of  anarchists),  i,  41 

— ■ — vs.  Wong  Kim  Ark  (naturalization),  i,  271; 

ii,  496,  498 

as  a world  power,  iii,  700 

Universal  mercantile  schedule,  ii,  18 

— postal  union,  ii,  216 

Universities  and  colleges,  endowed  and  private,  iii, 
598 

— -national  association  of  state,  i,  559 

— state,  iii,  409 

University  electors,  in  England,  ii,  129 

— extension,  iii,  599 

— ■ — see  also  State  universities,  iii,  413 

— settlement,  iii,  300 

— of  North  Carolina  vs.  Foy  (due  process  of  law), 

i.  615 

Unreconstructed,  iii,  600 
Unwritten  law,  ii,  309  ; iii,  600 

— and  public  opinion,  iii,  104 

Upland  southerners  and  sectionalism  in  United 
States,  iii,  283 

Upper  Canada,  and  Ontario,  ii,  581 

Upshur,  Abel  P.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196 ; ii,  506 ; 

iii,  402 

Urban  district  council,  iii,  601 

— local  government  in  England,  ii.  365 

— growth  of  United  States,  ii,  745 

— population,  ii,  33  : iii,  601 

— and  rural  population  of  United  States,  ii,  748 
Uruguay,  iii,  601 

— River,  iii,  356 

Usage,  in  international  law,  ii,  213 
Usher,  John  P.,  ii,  199 
— - cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
Usselinx,  William,  iii.  316 

— and  New  Sweden,  ii,  535 
Usury,  i,  190 ; ii,  460 
Utah,  iii.  601 

«—  Civil  War,  in,  iii,  652 

• — see  Deseret  i,  586 

— -federal  troops  in.  ii.  197 

Uti  possidetis,  iii,  603 

— - (territory),  iii,  529 

Utilitarianism,  ii,  724 

Utilities,  public,  iii,  112 

Utility  and  distribution,  economic,  i,  599 

— notion,  in  political  theories,  ii,  717 
Utopia,  ii,  724 

— and  democracy,  history  of,  1,  562 
Utrecht,  Treaty  of,  ii.  208 

— Hudson  Bay  and  the.  i.  213 

— see  also  New  Brunswick,  ii,  524 
and  Newfoundland,  ii,  545 

— and  Nova  Scotia,  ii,  564 

— Union  of,  iii,  594 

Van  Brocklin  vs.  Tennessee  (jurisdiction  of  Unit- 
ed States),  iii,  519 


Van  Brocklin  us.  Tennessee  (states,  admission  of), 
iii,  415 

Van  Buren,  Martin,  ii,  361 

— biography,  iii,  607 

— ■ cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  565,  567 
— - and  Free  Soil  party,  ii,  52 

— and  middle  states,  ii,  428 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— see  Third  term,  iii,  535 

— Vice-President,  iii,  616 

— vote  for,  iii,  13,  21,  23,  24,  26 

— and  Whig  party,  iii,  681 

— - see  Wizard  of  Kinderhook,  iii,  693 

— as  Young  Hickory,  iii,  704 
Van  Devanter,  William,  iii,  462 
Van  Valkenburg  (Japan),  i,  248 

— -vs.  Brown  (woman  suffrage),  iii,  696 
Vacancies  in  office,  iii,  604 
Vaccination,  compulsory,  iii,  604 

— and  health,  public,  ii,  120 
Vaccines,  antitoxins  and  serums,  ii,  118 
Vacuum  tube,  lighting,  electric,  ii,  353 
Vagrancy,  iii,  604 

Valentinian,  code  of,  i,  302 
Vallandigham,  Clement  L.,  ii,  281  ; iii,  605 
Vallejo,  i,  204 

Valuation  of  imported  goods,  iii,  606 

— of  physical  property  of  railroads,  iii,  285 
— • public  utilities,  iii,  600 

— property  and  debt  limits,  i,  544 
Valuations,  assessed,  comparative,  i,  85 
Value,  iii.  606 

— labor  theory  of,  iii,  335 

— ■ of  service  in  interstate  commerce,  ii,  225 
Vancouver  Island,  i,  173 

Vander  I’loeg  vs.  Van  Zunk  (uniform  legislation), 
iii.  591 

Varnum,  J.  B.,  speaker,  i,  389 
— - James  M.  and  northwest  territory,  ii,  562 

— see  Trevett  vs.  Weeden,  iii,  572 
Vassar  College,  i,  640 

Vattel,  Emer  de.  ii.  729 

— quoted  on  constitutions,  i.  509 

Vavasseur  vs.  Krupp  (extraterritoriality),  I,  706 
Veaz.v,  Wheelock  G.,  ii,  225 
Vehmgericbt.  ii.  380 

Veiller,  Lawrence,  on  congestion  in  New  York 
City,  i,  318 
Vendetta,  i.  523 
Venezuela,  iii.  607 

— boundary  dispute  between  British  Guiana  and, 

ii.  467 

— diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  356 

— see  Diplomatic  relations  with  Germany,  ii,  80 
— -and  Drago  Doctrine,  i,  610 

— and  foreign  policy  of  United  States,  ii,  37 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii.  467 
Venice,  and  mare  clausum,  ii,  395 
Ventilation,  and  health,  public,  ii,  121 
Venue,  iii,  608 

Verdict,  unanimity  of,  ii.  270 
Verein  fur  Sozialpolitik,  iii,  343 
Vermont,  iii,  608 
- — boundaries  of,  i,  163 

— constitutional  conventions  in,  i,  426 

— council  of  censors,  i,  426 

— - and  New  Hampshire  grants,  ii,  529 
Verendrye,  iii,  702 
Verona,  Congress  of,  i,  14 
— • Treaty  of,  ii,  203 

Verordungen.  legislative  power,  ii,  337 
Verplanck.  Gulian  C..  i,  467 

Vesey  Insurrection  in  South  Carolina,  ii,  195  ; iii,  358 
Vessels,  iii,  610 

— entry  and  clearance  of,  iii,  611 

— and  extraterritoriality,  i,  706 

— manifests  of.  ii,  391 

Vested  interests  and  interstate  commerce  decis- 
ions. ii.  226 

— rights  and  the  police  power,  ii,  709 

— rights,  protection  of,  iii.  612 

and  retrospective  legislation,  iii,  210 

Vestry  in  England,  ii.  609 

— local  government,  iii,  612 
Vestrymen,  ii,  609 
Veterinary  medicine,  iii,  266 

Veto,  see  Constitution-making  in  United  States,  i, 
406 

— council  of  revision  and.  i,  487 

— and  nullification  controversy,  ii,  567 

— power,  iii,  613 
of  mayor,  ii,  413 

— • — President  of  United  States,  iii,  3 

— see  also  State  legislature,  iii,  399 

— see  also  State  executive,  iii.  384 
Vice  commission  of  Chicago,  iii,  327 

— investigations,  iii,  615 
Vice-consuls,  i,  450 


781 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Vice-President,  iii,  616 

— election  of,  iii,  289 

— as  presiding  officer  of  Senate,  i,  386 

— see  also  Twelfth  Amendment,  iii,  583 
Vico,  ii,  730 

Victoria,  British  Columbia,  i,  173 

— See  under  Australia. 

Vidal,  vs.  Girard  (public  policy),  iii,  105 
Vienna,  city  planning  in,  i,  278 

— Congress  of,  i,  14,  589  ; ii,  202 
and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  465 

— rules  of,  as  to  diplomatic  service,  i,  593 

— Treaty  of,  ii,  202 

and  navigation  of  international  rivers,  ii,  502 

Vigilance  committee,  ii,  380 ; iii,  616 
Vigol  and  Mitchell  cases,  1794,  ii,  196 
Vilas,  William  F.,  ii,  199 

— postmaster  general,  ii,  767 
Village  marshal,  ii,  710 

- — in  New  York,  ii,  539 

— incorporated,  iii,  616 
Villages,  presidents  of,  iii,  47 

— proprietary,  iii,  81 

— see  also.  State  government,  characteristics,  of 

iii,  387 

Villeinage,  ii,  286 

— labor,  relation  of  the  state  to,  ii,  299 
Vincennes,  Indiana,  ii,  158 

Vincent,  John  H.,  iii,  599 
Yindiciw  contra  tyrannos,  ii,  728 
Virginia,  iii.  617 

— dynasty,  iii,  622 

— bill  of  rights,  i,  128 

- — cession  of  lands  in,  iii,  93 

— Company,  i,  318 

— conservatives  in,  i,  402 
. — • constitutional  conventions  in.  i,  426 

— and  Kentucky  Resolutions,  iii,  620 
- — loyal  state  government  of,  ii,  196 

— military  bounty  lands,  and  Ohio,  ii.  573 

— plan  in  Federal  Convention,  iii,  150 
. — and  reconstruction,  iii,  164 

— as  a royal  province,  iii,  85 

— see  also  South,  iii,  353 

, — see  States,  admission  of,  iii,  413 

— vs.  Tennessee  (compacts  between  states),  iii, 

418 

(interstate  law),  ii,  233 

— University  of,  iii,  410 
Jefferson  and  the,  ii,  250 

— vs.  West  Virginia  (compacts  between  states), 

iii.  418 

Virginias  episode,  iii,  368,  622 

— in  Cuban  diplomacy,  i,  533 
Vital  statistics,  iii,  421 

— Bureau  of  health,  public,  and,  ii,  11T 

— uniform,  iii,  425 

— of  the  United  States,  iii,  623 
Vivisection  Act  of  1876,  i,  530 
Vocational  education,  i.  641  ; iii,  268 
Voeux  (Hague  conferences),  ii,  203 
Volk,  ii,  671 

Voltaire,  political  theories  of,  ii,  730 
Volunteer,  iii,  625 
Vote,  iii,  626 

— of  censure,  and  cabinet  government,  i,  194  ■ 

— ’Credit  (British  Budget),  i,  180 

— see  Election  system,  i,  652 

— of  political  parties,  see  Tables,  iii,  13  et  seq. 

— popular,  iii,  627 

. — popular,  on  legislative  questions,  in,  629 
Voters,  challenge  of,  iii.  629 

— colonization  of,  ii,  369  ; iii,  629 

— personation  of.  ii,  674 

■ — -registration  of,  iii,  630 
Voters’  league  of  Chicago,  ii,  488 
Voters,  canvass  of,  iii,  631 
Voting,  abstention  from,  i,  3 

— in  the  air,  iii.  633 

— compulsory,  iii,  631 

— cumulative,  iii.  632 

— independent,  iii,  632 

— in  legislative  bodies,  iii,  632 

— machines,  iii.  633 

— and  parliamentary  law,  ii,  618 

— preferential,  iii,  633 

— trusts,  iii,  578 

Wabash,  St.  Louis  & Pacific  Ry.  Co.  vs.  Illinois 
(interstate  commerce),  ii.  220 
Wade.  Beniamin  F.,  biography,  iii,  635 
. — and  Middle  West,  ii,  430 

— and  presidential  succession,  iii,  7 

— Davis  Manifesto,  iii,  635 
— , . — , plan  of  reconstruction,  iii,  194 
Wage  demands,  and  strikes,  iii,  437 
earners  made  preferred  creditors,  iii,  635 

— fair,  i,  708 

— fund  theory,  iii,  635 


Wage,  living,  ii,  361 

— minimum,  ii,  445 

— slavery  and  socialism,  iii,  335 
Wages,  iii.  635 

— distribution,  economic,  i,  597 

— effect  of  immigration  on,  ii,  145 

- — fixation  of,  in  fifteenth  century,  ii,  299 

— high,  and  protection,  ii,  54 

— • iron  law  of,  i,  527,  628  ; iii,  636 

— labor,  relation  of  the  state  to,  ii,  300 

— living,  see  Sweatshops,  iii,  464 

— and  production,  iii,  72 

— protection  of,  ii,  301 

— regulation  of,  iii,  636 

— of  seamen,  iii,  276 

— theory  of  labor  and,  ii,  284 

— and  wealth,  national,  iii,  665 
Wagner  sleeping  cars,  iii,  321 
Wahlmanner,  ii,  340 
Waif-saving  Congress,  i,  500 
Waite,  Morrison  R.,  iii,  462 

— chief  iustice,  i,  255 
Waitt,  William  S.,  ii,  175 
Waiver,  iii,  637 

Wake  Island,  iii,  637 
- — annexation  of,  i,  46 

— and  boundaries  of  United  States,  i,  153 
Wakefield,  vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  37 
Waldeck,  ii,  80 

Wales  Island,  i,  27 
Walker,  Aldace  F.,  ii,  225 

— Felix,  i,  187 

— • Francis  A.,  i,  235 

— - — quoted  on  rent,  iii,  180 

and  silver  coinage  controversy,  iii,  311 

— James  B.,  i,  37 

— i — vote  for,  iii,  34 

— L.  Pope,  i,  372 

— Robert  J.,  iii,  637 

cabinet  officer,  i,  196  ; iii,  566 

— ■ — -and  tariff  policy  of  United  States,  iii,  479 

— William,  i,  237 

and  canal  diplomacy,  i,  216 

— expedition,  i,  731 

— ■ commission,  1901.  ii,  547 

— Tariff,  iii,  474,  479 

Walker’s  amendment,  in  Compromise  of  1850,  i, 
367 

Walking  delegate,  iii,  638 

Wallace,  John  F.,  and  Panama  Canal,  ii,  600 
Walsh  Commission  Act,  and  New  Jersey,  ii,  533 
Walter  Reed  general  hospital,  ii,  127 
Walton.  George,  i,  554 
Wampum,  i,  621 

Wanamaker,  John,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii,  767 
Wanghia.  Treaty  of,  i,  261 
Wapentake,  iii,  542 
War,  armistice,  i,  77 

— armories,  public,  i,  77 

— See  also  under  Army. 

— ’army  regulations,  i,  78 
- — i army  standing,  i,  78 

— articles  of,  i,  83 

— ’ see  Belligerency,  i,  123 

— blockade,  i,  134 

— • captures  at  sea,  ii,  204 

— carrying  on,  iii,  638 

— cartel,  i,  230 

— casus  belli,  i.  232 

— class,  and  socialism,  iii,  334 
— ■ coast  defence  in,  i,  300 

— codification  of  laws  of,  ii,  205 

— colleges,  i,  639  : iii,  640 

— commander-in-chief,  i,  330 

— conquest,  right  of,  i,  398 

— < conscription  and  draft,  i.  398 

— continuous  voyages,  i,  454 
— • contraband,  i,  455 

— ■ and  cost  of  government,  i,  484 

-of  living,  i,  485 

■ — -and  crises,  economic,  i,  528 

— debt,  i,  550 

— declaration  of,  i,  556,  iii,  646 
— . Democrats,  iii,  640 

— — and  Democratic  party,  i,  569 

— Department  of.  iii,  641 

— . — adjutant  general  of  the  United  States,  i,  8 
— (—archives  of,  i,  69 

army  transport  service,  iii.  553 

chart  of  organization  of,  iii,  642 

. commissary  general,  i.  344 

- — • — engineer  corps,  i,  670 

-and  expenditures,  federal,  i,  691 

and  health,  public,  ii.  117 

inspector-general,  ii,  185 

, Insular  Affairs.  Bureau  of,  ii,  186 

— — ordinance,  chief  of,  ii.  588 
— . — paymaster  general,  ii,  656 
see  Salaries,  tables  of,  iii,  248 


INDEX 


War,  Department  of,  see  Soldiers  and  sailors,  legal 
status  of,  iii,  350 
surgeon  general,  iii,  462 

— disarmament,  i,  596 

— of  1812,  ii,  97  ; iii,  651 

— — economic  aspect  of,  i,  620 

— embargo,  i,  663 

— enlistment,  i,  670 

— see  also  Extraterritoriality,  i,  706 

— fortifications,  ii,  39 

— governors,  the,  i,  290  ; iii,  644 

— guerrillas,  ii,  103 

— and  habeas  corpus,  ii,  105 

— see  Hague  conferences,  ii,  203 

— see  Impressment,  ii,  153 

— instructions  to  military  and  naval  authorities 

in,  ii,  185 

- — and  insurgency,  ii,  192 

— and  internal  revenue,  iii,  212 

— international  relations  during,  iii,  644 

— invasion,  ii.  235 

— and  law,  administrative,  ii,  310 

— maritime,  ii,  397 

— marque  and  reprisals,  ii,  398 

— martial  law,  ii,  402 

— and  militarism,  ii,  431 

— See  also  under  Military. 

— see  Military  commission,  ii,  436 

— and  military  law,  ii,  437 

— see  Military  music,  ii,  490 

— see  Militia,  reserve,  iii,  203 

— and  neutral  trade,  principles  of,  Ii,  520 
• — Office  (British  l,  i,  689 

— Pacific  blockade,  ii,  596 

— paper  blockade,  ii,  605 

— power,  constitutional,  iii,  646 

— powers  of  the  President,  iii,  648 

— President  of  United  States,  military  powers  of, 

iii,  2 

— - prisoners  of,  iii,  62 

— private  property  at  sea,  iii,  65 

— privateers,  iii,  66 

— see  under  Prize,  iii,  70 

— prize  cases,  iii,  70 

— protection  to  American  citizens  abroad,  iii,  82 

— Red  Cross  conventions,  iii,  169 

— right  of  search,  iii,  226 

— rules  of,  iii,  647 

— see  also  Sea  power,  iii,  274 

— Secretary  of,  and  public  works,  iii,  114 

— secretaries  of.  iii,  648 

— see  also  Subsidies  to  shipping,  iii,  441 

— supplies,  as  public  property,  iii,  107 

— see  Vessels,  iii,  610 

— volunteer,  iii,  625 
Ward.  John,  iii,  253 

— John  E„  i,  261 

— Lester  F.,  quoted  on  sociology,  iii,  344 

— Nathaniel,  i.  397 
Ward  committee,  ii,  635 

— heelers,  i,  147 

and  machine  political,  ii,  384 

— vs.  Racehorse  (admission  of  states),  Iii,  415 
Warden,  iii,  654 

— of  a borough,  i,  143 

— of  penitentiary,  ii,  661 

— in  prison  discipline,  iii,  59 

— of  villages,  iii.  47 
Wards  in  cities,  iii,  654 

— in  Louisiana,  i,  498 

— of  the  nation,  iii,  654 

Ware  vs.  Hylton  (recognition  of  new  states),  ii, 
207  ; iii,  162 

Warehouse  Receipt  Act,  iii,  590 

— system,  iii,  654 

• — ■ — in  tariff  administration,  iii,  471 
Warehouses,  as  public  utilities,  iii,  113 
Waring  vs.  Clark  (maritime  law),  i,  12 
Warming  their  toes,  iii,  654 
Warner  Bill  and  Democratic  party,  i,  572 
Warrants,  iii.  654 

— general,  iii.  655 

• — • in  public  debt,  i,  545 

Warrington,  Lewis,  Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 
Warrior  River,  iii,  663 
■ — • canalization  of,  i,  220 
Wars  of  the  United  States,  iii,  649 
Wartman  vs.  Philadelphia  (markets,  public),  ii, 
398 

Warwick,  the  king  maker,  iii,  655 
Washburne,  Elihu  B..  biography,  iii,  655 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  402 

— and  Middle  West,  ii,  430 
Washington,  Booker  T.,  ii,  518 : iii,  658 

■ — Bttshrod,  Supreme  Court,  United  States,  iii,  462 

— (state),  iii,  655 

— • — railroad  commission,  iii,  606 

— (District  of  Columbia),  i.  227  ; iii,  658 

< city  planning  of,  i,  279 


Washington,  see  District  of  Columbia,  i,  601 

— — navy  yard,  ii,  507 

see  Real  estate,  public  ownership  of,  iii,  153 

— George,  as  the  American  Fabius,  i,  35 
biography,  iii,  658 

cabinet  of,  i,  198 

' and  Conway  Cabal,  i,  467 

— ■ — Fabian  policy  of,  i,  708 

farewell  address,  i,  711 

— ■ — as  father  of  his  country,  i,  712 
i—  — and  federal  Constitution,  i,  713 
— ■ — and  Jay  Treaty,  ii,  179,  250 

as  President,  iii,  2 

and  Senate,  iii,  288 

— ■ — vote  for,  iii,  13,  14,  15 
1 — < — quoted  on  centralization,  i,  377 

-declaration  of  neutrality  (1793),  ii,  521 

and  Federalist  party,  i,  722 

— — and  neutral  trade  during  the  Napoleonic 

wars,  ii,  519 

see  also  Third  term,  iii,  535 

— Treaty  of,  i,  614 

— • — and  Newfoundland  fisheries  dispute,  ii,  545 

northwestern  boundary  controversy,  ii,  562 

and  international  law,  ii,  215 

Washingtonian  societies  (temperance),  iii,  513 

Wastes,  removal  of  the  city’s,  ii.  476 

Wat  Tyler,  ii,  286 

Watch  dog  of  the  treasury,  iii,  658 

Water  borne  traffic,  i,  332 

- — boundaries,  iii,  658 

— cure,  iii,  659 

— districts,  i,  604 

— power,  ii,  770 

— control  of,  iii,  659 

— —and  national  waterways  commission,  ii,  494 
— ■ — and  conservation,  i,  400 

— in  resources  of  North  America,  iii,  205 

— supply,  iii,  659 

and  health,  public,  ii,  119 

see  also  Irrigation,  iii,  229 

— * — and  public  property,  iii,  107 

— territory  in  international  law,  iii,  527 
Watered  stock,  iii,  428 

Waterloo,  iii.  661 

Waters,  in  international  law,  iii,  527 
— ■ jurisdiction  over,  ii,  263 

— navigable,  ii,  501 
Watertown  arsenal,  ii,  588 
Watervliet  arsenal,  ii,  588 
Waterway,  Lakes  to  the  Gulf,  ii,  304 
Waterways,  see  under  Canals,  i,  220 

— Commission,  Inland,  ii,  181 

— — national,  ii,  494 

— internal,  map  of,  iii,  662 

— natural,  regulation  of,  iii,  661 

— ■ in  resources  of  North  America,  iii,  205 

— restrictions  on,  i,  189 

— see  also  River  and  harbor  bills,  iii,  229 

— and  roads,  in  transportation,  iii,  554 
Watkins,  Aaron  S.,  vice-presidential  candidate,  iii, 

45,  46 

Watson,  Tom  E.,  biography,  iii,  664 

— and  Populist  party,  ii,  757 

— vote  for,  iii,  39,  42,  44 

Wayne,  Anthony,  and  northwest  territory,  II, 
573 

— James  M.,  iii,  462 

Ways  and  means,  committee  of,  i,  357 
Wealth,  effect  of  immigration  on  distribution  of,  ii, 
145 

— see  Financial  statistics,  ii,  10 
— - national,  iii,  664 

— in  production,  iii,  71 

— relation  of.  to  cost  of  government,  i,  483 
Weather,  i,  298 

— -Bureau,  i,  15;  iii,  666 
maps  of,  ii,  74 

— signal  service,  iii,  666 

Weaver,  James  B.,  and  Greenback  Labor  party, 
ii,  101 

— and  party  finance,  ii.  625 

— and  Populist  party,  ii,  757 
— vote  for,  iii,  35,  38 

Webster,  Daniel,  quoted  on  absolutism,  i,  2 
— - biography,  iii,  666 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— and  Compromise  of  1850,  i,  367 

— in  Dartmouth  College  case,  i,  540 

— as  expounder  of  the  Constitution,  i,  701 
— - quoted  on  Huelsemann  episode,  ii,  136 

— — on  law  of  the  land,  ii,  319 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 

— quoted  on  territory,  acquired,  status  of,  ill, 

523 

— vote  for,  iii,  23 

— and  Whig  party,  iii,  681 
Wednesday,  calendar,  i,  202 

Weed,  Thurlow,  biography,  iii,  667 


783 


CYCLOPEDIA  OF  AMERICAN  GOVERNMENT 


Weed,  Thurlow,  and  middle  states,  ii,  428 
Weeds,  and  health,  public,  ii,  119 
Weems  vs.  United  States  (punishments),  iii,  120 
Wei  Hai  Wei,  iii,  527 

Weights  and  measures,  first  international  confer- 
ence on,  ii,  203 

— government  restrictions  upon,  i,  190 

— see  Metric  system,  ii,  420 

— sealer  of,  iii,  275 
— - standard,  iii,  667 
Welfare  clause,  general,  ii,  72 

— systems,  iii,  668 

— work  and  social  reform,  iii,  329 
Welles,  Gideon,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 
— -and  Department  of  Navy,  ii,  503 

— Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 
Wellington,  Duke  of,  cabinet  of,  i,  194 

— Arthur  M.,  quoted  on  traffic  costs,  iii,  554 
Wells  vs.  Bain  (constitutional  conventions),  i,  429 

— David  A.,  quoted  on  war  internal  revenue,  iii, 

212 

and  tariff  commission,  iii,  472 

quoted  on  whiskey  frauds,  iii,  687 

— Ex  parte  (pardon),  ii,  608 

Welsh  tract,  of  Pennsylvania,  ii,  662 

Welton  vs.  Missouri  (interstate  commerce),  ii,  219 

Wentworth,  Benning,  and  New  Hampshire  grants, 

ii,  529 

Wergeld,  i,  523 

West,  Alanson  M.,  i,  50 

— • A.  M.,  vice-presidential  candidate,  iii,  36 
West,  far,  i,  710 

■ — as  a factor  in  American  politics,  iii,  668 

— - Florida,  iii,  675 

— — in  diplomatic  relations  with  Spain,  iii,  367 

— India  trade,  iii,  676 

— Indies,  colonization  in,  i,  322 

diplomatic  relations  with,  iii,  676 

trade  with,  in  colonial  times,  i,  340 

— Jersey,  and  New  Jersey,  ii,  531 

— vs.  Louisiana  (due  process  of  law),  5,  616 

— Point,  see  Education,  military  and  naval,  i,  639 

— ■ — and  experts  in  American  government,  i,  699 
military  academy  at,  ii,  433 

• -and  public  science,  iii,  272 

West  Publishing  Company,  as  codifiers,  i,  302 
> — R.  and  Central  Gold  Mining  Co.  vs.  Rex  (in- 
ternational law),  ii,  207 

West,  the.  and  sectionalism  in  the  United  States, 

iii,  281 

— Virginia,  iii,  678 

city  and  state  in,  i,  275 

— ■ — and  reconstruction,  iii,  164 

— — -separation  of,  i,  163 
— ■ — see  also  South,  iii,  353 
Western  Federation  of  Miners,  ii,  293 

■ — highlands  of  United  States,  ii,  690 

— Labor  Union,  ii,  293 

— Reserve,  iii,  680 

and  sectionalism  in  United  States,  iii,  281 

— — -transfer  of,  i,  163 

— Union  Telegraph  Company,  iii,  512 

vs.  Commercial  Milling  Co.  (interstate  com- 
merce), ii,  220 

vs.  Kansas  (foreign  corporations),  ii,  231 

— -(interstate  commerce),  ii,  221 

Western  world,  men  of  the,  iii,  281 
Westminster,  Treaty  of,  ii,  524 
Westphalia.  Treaty  of,  influence  of  Grotius  upon, 
ii,  207 

— (states,  equality  of),  iii,  418, 

— =■  (usages i ii,  213 

Wet,  iii,  680 

Weyler.  General,  i,  534 

Wharton,  Francis,  iii,  680 

— Secretary  of  State,  iii,  402 
Wheat  corners,  i,  469 
Wheaton.  Henry,  iii,  568 

- — in  diplomatic  relations  with  Germany,  ii,  79 

— quoted  on  neutrality,  ii,  521 
Wheeler,  Fortieth  Parallel  Survey,  i,  36 

— William  A..  Vice-President,  iii,  016 
-vote  for,  iii,  34 

1 and  Electoral  Commission,  i,  657 

Whig  opposition,  in  Democratic  party,  i,  566 
— • lyurty.  iii,  680 

— and  Republican  parties,  ii,  592 
— ■ vote,  iii,  13  et  seq. 

Wh,igs.  in  American  Revolution,  iii,  685 
— i British,  i.  402:  ii.  345;  iii,  686 
— • liberals,  British,  ii,  345 
Whip,  party,  iii,  686 

Whippers-in,  the,  and  party  government  in  Great 
Britain,  ii.  628 
Whipple.  William,  i,  554 
Whips,  in  Congress,  i.  387 
— • in  Great  Britain  ii,  628 

— in  legislative  bodies,  ii,  633 
Whiskey  frauds  on  the  revenue,  iii,  686 

— see  Revenue,  internal,  iii,  213 


Whiskey  Insurrection,  ii,  195;  iii,  687 
— ■ and  militia,  ii,  197 

— as  a rebellion,  iii,  156 

— see  Revenue,  internal,  iii,  212 

— and  Federal  party,  i,  723 
Whiskey,  moonshine,  ii,  51 

— Ring,  iii,  687 

and  Democratic  party,  i,  571 

White,  Edward  D.,  chief  justice,  i,  255 

— supreme  court  United  States,  iii,  462 
White,  Hugh  L.,  and  Whig  party,  iii,  681 

— vote  for,  iii,  23 
White,  John,  iii,  687 

— speaker,  i,  390 

White  vs.  Hart  (reconstruction),  iii,  168 

— House,  iii,  90,  687 

— League,  see  Ku  Klux  Klan,  ii,  283 

— - Sea,  and  international  fisheries,  ii,  22 

— slave  trade,  repression  of  the,  ii,  216 ; iii,  326 
White-capping,  iii,  104 

Whitewash,  iii,  688 
Whitman,  Marcus,  iii,  656  , 

Whitney,  William  C.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— and  Department  of  Navy,  ii,  503 

— Secretary  of  Navy,  ii,  506 

Whitney  vs.  Robertson  (revenue  bills),  iii,  211 
Whitten  as.  Tomlinson  (habeas  corpus),  ii,  106 
Wickersham,  George  W.,  i,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

Wickliffe,  Charles  A.,  cabinet  officer,  i 196  ; ii,  767 
Widows,  exemption  from  taxation,  iii,  499 

— pensions  for,  ii,  594 

p.lan,  and  old  age  pensions,  ii,  579 

Wiesef,  on  rent,  iii,  181 

Wigwam,  iii,  688 

Wildcat  bankers,  i,  230 

Wilderness  turnpike,  ii,  277  ; iii,  230 

Wilkerson  vs.  Utah  (punishments),  iii,  120 

Wilkes,  Charles,  iii,  571 

— John,  i,  704 

Wilkins,  William,  cabinet  officer,  i,  196 ; iii,  649 

— vote  for,  iii,  21 

Willamette  I.  B.  Co.  vs.  Hatch  (admission  of 
states),  iii,  415 

— River,  iii,  663 

Willcox  vs.  Consolidated  Gas  Co.  (valuation  of 
public  utilities),  iii,  606 
William,  The  (continuous  voyages),  i,  454 
William  and  Mary  College,  iii,  410 

— of  Ockham,  ii,  717,  724 
Williams,  David  L.,  ii,  297 

— Ezekiel,  ii,  294 
— ■ George  H.,  i,  95 
cabinet  officer,  i,  197 

— John,  i,  319 

— John  Sharp,  biography,  iii,  688 

— Roger,  ii,  718  ; iii,  688 

and  Rhode  Island,  iii,  224 

and  slavery,  iii,  317 

— Samuel  W.,  and  Populist  party,  ii,  758 

— William,  i,  554 

— - vs.  Bruffy  (de  facto  government),  i.  557 

— vs.  Mississippi  (suffrage),  iii.  446 

— vs.  Suffolk  Insurance  Co.  (political  power),  ii, 
713 

— vice-presidential  candidate,  iii.  45 
Williamson  free  school  of  mechanical  trades,  iii, 

271 

— Hugh,  and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 

— vs.  United  States  (parliamentary  privilege), 

iii,  66 

Willis,  Judge,  iii,  207 
Williston,  Samuel,  iii,  590 

Willoughby  Westel  Woodbury,  political  theories 
of,  ii,  721 

— quoted  on  separation  of  powers,  iii,  297 
Wills,  register  of.  iii,  174 

— ■ (uniform  law  as  to),  iii,  592 
Willson  vs.  Black-Bird  Creek  Marsh  Co.  (inter- 
state commerce),  ii,  219, 

Wilmot  proviso,  iii.  688 
— - California  and  the,  i,  207 

— and  Compromise  of  1850,  i.  366 

— and  Democratic  party,  i,  567 

— and  independent  movements  in  polities,  ii,  lo6 


Wilson  Act,  ii,  229 

— Bill  (original  package),  ii,  593 

— vs . City  Bank  (bankruptcy),  i.  114 

— Ex  parte  (infamous  crime),  ii,  176 

— G.  G.,  quoted  on  recognition  of  new  states,  m, 

162 

— Gorman  Tariff,  iii,  480,  688 

— Henry,  Vice-President,  iii,  616 
_ — vote  for,  iii,  32 

— James,  i,  20  554 

— — biography,  iii,  689. 

cabinet  officer,  i.  198 

_ — -and  direct  election  of  Senators,  in,  293 

—  and  Federal  Convention,  i,  714 


784 


INDEX 


Wilson,  James,  political  theories  of,  ii,  7X9 
- — vs.  Shaw  (executive  order),  i,  (385 

— supreme  court  United  States,  iii,  462 

• — Tariff  Bill  and  Democratic  party,  i,  574 

— W.  B.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198 

— William  L.  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; ii,  767 

— Woodrow,  addresses  to  Congress,  i,  7 
biography,  iii,  689 

— - — and  Democratic  party,  i,  576 

and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  468 

The  State,  ii,  722 

and  tariff  legislation  iii,  475 

vote  for,  iii,  13,  45 

Windom,  William,  cabinet  officer,  i,  197  ; iii,  566 

— and  silver  coinage  controversy,  iii,  310 
Wing,  Simon,  ii,  296  ; iii,  338 

— vote  for,  iii,  38 
Winnipeg,  ii,  392 

Winthrop,  John,  biography,  iii,  689 

— governor  of  Connecticut,  i,  397 
Winthrop,  Robert  C.,  iii  689 

— speaker  i,  390  ; iii,  370 

Wireless  equipment  of  vessels,  i,  4 ; iii,  690 

— telegraphy,  iii,  690 
Wire-pulling,  iii,  690 
Wirt,  William,  i,  49,  95 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196 

— vote  for,  iii,  22 

Wisby,  and  the  Hanseatic  league,  ii,  110 
Wisconsin,  iii,  690 
- — Bennett  School  Law  in,  i,  124 

— board  of  public  affairs  of,  i,  139 

— capitalization  of  public  utilities  in,  i,  226 

— civil  service  in,  i,  286 

— and  Middle  West,  ii.  429 

— street  railroad  franchises  in,  iii,  149 

— University  of,  iii,  412 

and  correspondence  tuition,  iii,  259 

Wise,  John,  ii,  718 

Wismar  (Hanseatic  League),  ii,  109 

— vs.  First  Nat.  Bk.  of  Galitzin  (uniform  legis- 

lation), iii,  591 
Witenagemot,  ii,  314,  735 
Witherspoon.  John,  i,  554 
Witnesses,  iii,  693 
Wizard  of  Kinderhook,  iii,  693 
Wolcott,  Oliver,  i,  554  ; iii,  693 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  195  ; iii,  566 
Wolfe,  James,  i,  212 

Wolff,  Johann  Christian,  ii,  729 
Woman  suffrage,  iii,  444,  694 

— see  also  Reform  movements,  iii,  171 

— in  Kansas,  ii,  275 

— legislation,  direct,  ii,  335 
Woman’s  Rights  party,  iii,  698 

Women  and  children,  labor,  hours  of,  ii,  289 

— in  dangerous  trades,  ii,  300 

— education  of,  i,  640  , 

— labor  and  freedom  of.  ii,  289 
protection  to,  ii,  297 

relation  of  the  state  to,  ii,  300 

— legal  rights  of,  iii,  698 

— and  the  police  power,  ii,  709 

— prisons  for,  iii,  64 

- — see  Qualifications  for  office,  iii,  124 
— - tax  exemptions  of,  iii,  499 
Women’s  Christian  Temperance  Union,  iii,  513 
Women’s  labor,  legislative  control  of,  ii,  301 

— rights,  see  Woman  suffrage,  iii,  694 
Wood,  Fernando,  ii,  428  ; iii,  468 

— ■ Leonard,  biography,  iii,  699 

in  Cuba,  i,  534, 

and  Rough  Riders,  iii,  236 

Wood's  Appeal  (constitutional  conventions),  i,  429 
Woodbury,  Levi,  iii,  462 

— cabinet  officer,  i,  196;  ii,  506 

— and  New  Hampshire,  ii,  529 
Woods,  William  B.,  iii,  462 

Wool,  duty  on,  i,  617 ; iii,  483,  487,  586 

— and  Democratic  party,  i.  575 
Wool  and  woolen  act  of  1867,  iii,  480 

— and  taxation  of  raw  materials,  iii,  502 
Woolev,  John  G.,  vice-presidential  candidate,  iii, 

42 

- — vote  for,  iii,  41 

Woolman,  John,  and  slavery,  iii,  317 

Woolsey,  Theodore  D.,  iii,  699 

— quoted  on  privateers,  iii,  66 
Worcester  Free  Institute,  iii,  260 


Worcester  vs.  Georgia  (Indians),  ii,  171;  iii,  519, 
699 

Workers,  and  machine,  ii,  384 

— political,  iii,  700 
Workhouse,  ii,  134 

— England,  ii,  734 

— test,  i,  246 
Working  day,  ii,  289 

— for  women,  ii,  302 

Working  out  the  (road)  tax,  iii,  230 
Workingmen’s  Association,  international,  ii,  217 
— - insurance,  ii,  188 ; iii,  700 

— party,  ii,  294 

Workmen's  compensation,  iii,  700 

— Act,  and  due  process  of  law,  i,  616 
— - — (English),  ii,  189 

— and  labor,  relation  of  the  state  to,  ii,  300 
World  power.  United  States  as  a,  iii,  700 
Wright,  Luke  E.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198;  iii,  649 
Wright,  Silas,  ii,  248 

Writ  of  error,  i,  241  ; iii,  702 

— review,  i,  241 

Writs  of  assistance,  iii,  702 
and  Revolution,  American,  iii,  220 

— common  law,  iii,  702 

Written  and  unwritten  constitution,  i,  432 
— - law,  ii,  325 
Wurttemberg,  ii,  80 
— - treaty  with,  ii,  79 
Wyandotte  constitution,  iii,  702 
Wycliffe,  John,  ii,  724 

Wynehamer  case  (due  process  of  law),  i,  615 
Wynne,  Robert  J.,  cabinet  officer,  i,  198  ; ii,  767 
Wyoming,  iii.  702 
Wythe,  George  i,  554 

X Y Z,  iii,  703 

— correspondence,  r,  578 

— disclosures,  Alien  and  Sedition  acts  and,  i,  30 
— • see  Millions  for  defense,  but  not  one  cent  for 

tribute,  ii,  442 

Yakima  (irrigation),  ii,  243 
Yale  College,  iii,  410 
Yancey,  William  L.,  i,  373 
Yankee,  iii,  704 
Yankton,  iii,  360 

Yards  and  Docks,  Bureau  of,  iii,  704 
Yates,  Richard,  iii,  644 

— and  Federal  Convention,  i,  713,  714 
Yazoo  frauds,  iii,  704 

Yeas  and  nays,  voting  by,  iii,  633 
Yellow  fever,  ii,  118,  120 

— peril,  i,  262 
Yellowstone  River,  Ii,  243 
Yeomans,  James  I).,  ii,  225 

Yerba  Buena  training  station,  iii.  549 
Yick  Wo  vs.  Hopkins  (persons),  ii,  673 
Yokohama,  coaling  stations,  i,  299 
York,  ii,  581 

Young,  Brigham,  iii,  704 

— and  Deseret,  i,  586 

— see  Utah,  iii,  602 

Young,  McClintock,  Secretary  of  Treasury,  iii,  566 

— Ex  parte  (state  officer),  i,  685 
Young  Hickory,  ii,  704 

— Ireland  movement,  ii.  494 

— Men's  Christian  Association,  exemption  from 

taxation,  iii,  499 
Yuan  Shih-kai,  i,  262, 

Yucatan,  in  Guatemala,  ii,  103 

— and  Monroe  Doctrine,  ii,  467 
Yukon,  i,  214  ; iii,  704 

Yuma  project  (irrigation),  ii,  243 

Zanzibar,  diplomatic  relations  with,  i,  14 

— protectorate  of,  iii,  83 
Zaragosa,  Treaty  of  (1529),  ii.  680 
Zeno,  and  political  theories,  ii,  716 
Zollverein,  i.  537  ; ii,  56 

— and  commercial  treaties  with  Germany,  ii,  79 

— dispute,  i,  342 

Zone  plan,  in  city  planning,  i,  278 

Zoological  park,  national,  iii,  323 

Zozaya,  Jos£  Manual,  ii,  423 

Zubly.  against  republican  government,  iii,  392 

Zuni  Indians,  i,  584  ; ii,  172 

Zwingli,  Ulrich,  political  theories  of,  ii,  728 

Zylstra’s  case  (due  process  of  law),  i,  614 

(1) 


■ 


\ 

\ 


